PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 31, 2008
Utah National Guard Readiness Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to convey, without consideration, to the state of Utah all interest of the United States in and to certain lands that are located within the boundaries of the public lands currently withdrawn for military use by the Utah National Guard and known as "Camp Williams" for the purpose of permitting the Utah National Guard to use such conveyed land.
Revokes a specified Executive Order only insofar as it affects the lands identified for conveyance.
Provides for the reversion to the United States of the lands conveyed if the Secretary determines that the land, or any part of such land, is sold or attempted to be sold, or that it or any part of it is used for non-National Guard or non-national defense purposes. Requires that any such determination be made in consultation with the Secretary of Defense and the Governor of Utah and on the record after an opportunity for comment.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the state, with respect to any part of the land conveyed that the Secretary determines is subject to reversion and if the Secretary also determines that the part contains hazardous materials, to pay the United States the fair market value of that part of the conveyed land. Bars the application of the reversionary interest to that part of the land.
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.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1785)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1785)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3651.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1785-1786)
Mr. Abercrombie moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 337.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-554.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-554.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural 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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.3651 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.3651 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.3651 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.3651 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.