PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 5, 1993
National Topsoil Preservation Act of 1993 - Establishes a National Land Resources Protection Commission which shall establish standards for stockpiling and replacing topsoil on lands where federally assisted projects are carried out. Directs the Commission to establish minimum standards to assure that projects will not pollute existing streams, cause landslides or flooding, or substantially change the water volume carried by the natural waterways adjoining the immediate construction area. Authorizes the Commission to require a plan, a compliance bond for a project prior to any earth moving, or both. Requires the Commission to report annually to the Congress. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Neal Edward [D-IA-4] · D–IA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA, Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Environment, Credit and Rural Development.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 26, 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.363 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.363 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.363 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.363 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.