PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 1, 2017
Thompson Divide Withdrawal and Protection Act of 2017
This bill withdraws the Thompson Divide Withdrawal and Protection Area in Colorado from: (1) entry, appropriation, and disposal under the public land laws; (2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and (3) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, and geothermal leasing laws.
In exchange for the relinquishment of all of the North Thompson Divide leases or South Thompson Divide leases of a leaseholder, the Department of the Interior may issue to such leaseholder credits for bid, royalty, or rental payments due under federal oil and gas leases on federal land in Colorado. Upon relinquishment, such leases shall be permanently canceled and shall not be reissued.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
As a condition for relinquishing South Thompson Divide leases, a leaseholder must permanently relinquish, transfer, and otherwise convey to Interior all of its Wolf Creek Storage Field development rights, excluding any storage rights or related activities within the area.
Interior shall: (1) complete, or shall collaborate with state agencies or institutions of higher education in Colorado to complete, an inventory of all significant methane emissions in the North Fork Valley, including emissions from active, inactive, and abandoned coal mines; (2) carry out a program to lease federal methane from such mines; and (3) enter into discussions to develop a program to facilitate the sale and delivery of such methane that has not been leased to at least one rural electric utility, municipal utility, or energy cooperative with service area boundaries within 100 miles of Paonia, Colorado, to demonstrate the feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and environmental benefits of producing electrical power from methane collected from coal mines.
People & committees
Sen. Bennet, Michael F. [D-CO] · D–CO
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.
Introduced in Senate
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 S.481 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 S.481 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 S.481 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 S.481 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.