PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 27, 2006
Douglas County, Washington, PUD Conveyance Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, if the Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas County, Washington (PUD), submits to the Secretary an offer to acquire certain public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for the appraised value, to convey to the PUD all interest of the United States in and to such public land.
Instructs the Secretary complete an appraisal of the public land, which shall be conducted in accordance with specified standards. Requires the PUD to pay to the Secretary an amount equal to the appraised value of such land.
Requires any costs related to the conveyance to be paid by the PUD.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Provides for the deposit of the proceeds from the sale of the public land in the working capital fund of BLM.
Withdraws the public land from: (1) all forms of entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws, and all amendments thereto; (2) location, entry, and patenting under the mining laws, and all amendments thereto; and (3) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, and geothermal leasing laws, and all amendments thereto. Terminates this amendment two years after enactment of this Act or upon the completion of the conveyance, whichever is earlier.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Doc [R-WA-4] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Received in the Senate.
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 H7653)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7653)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 4789.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7653-7654)
Mr. Pearce moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 374.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-634.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-634.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.4789 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.4789 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.4789 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.4789 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.