PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 300.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Jun 3, 2004
Utah Test and Training Range Protection Act - States that nothing in this Act or the Wilderness Act shall: (1) preclude low-level overflights and operations of military aircraft, missiles, or unmanned aerial vehicles over the Utah Test and Training Range (Range), including the Dugway Proving Ground; (2) preclude the designation of new or expansion of existing units of special use airspace or the use or establishment of military training routes over such Range; (3) prevent any required maintenance of existing communications, instrumentation, or electronic tracking systems in the Range or the addition of communications, instrumentation, or equipment necessary for effective testing and training to meet military requirements in wilderness study areas located beneath special use airspace of the Range, upon specified determinations by the Secretary of the Interior; (4) preclude the continuation of a current memorandum of understanding between the Departments of the Interior and Air Force with respect to emergency access and response within the Range; or (5) permit ground military operations in covered wilderness of the Range, unless such operations are otherwise permissible under Federal law and consistent with the Wilderness Act.
Directs the Secretary to develop, maintain, and revise land use plans for Federal lands located in the Range, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense. Limits the issuance of rights-of-way in the Range.
Designates certain Federal lands in Tooele County, Utah, as the Cedar Mountain Wilderness Area. Withdraws such lands from all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws, including mining and mineral and geothermal leasing. Authorizes fish and wildlife management and livestock grazing within such areas, as appropriate. Releases the Browns Springs Cherrystem area from its status as a wilderness study area.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to identify approximately 640 additional acres of Bureau of Land Management lands in Utah to be administered in trust for the benefit of the Skull Valley Band of Goshutes.
People & committees
Rep. Bishop, Rob [R-UT-1] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 300.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-521.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-521.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Recreation and Public Lands.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2909 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2909 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2909 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2909 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.