H.R. 1366 (119th)Bill Overview

Mining Regulatory Clarity Act

Environmental Protection|Environmental ProtectionGovernment trust funds
Cosponsors
Support
Lean Republican
Introduced
Feb 14, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 25 - 17.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The bill (Mining Regulatory Clarity Act) amends federal mining law to allow operators to locate multiple hardrock mining mill sites on public land within an approved plan of operations, defines terms and limits (including a five-acre cap per mill site), and clarifies that mill sites convey no mineral rights and are not patentable. It creates an Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund in the Treasury to receive claim maintenance fees collected on those mill sites, and directs the Fund to finance projects under section 40704 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

Why people may split

Progressives emphasize environmental footprint and cleanup adequacy

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects substantive legal changes by amending mining statute language to authorize multiple mill sites and by creating a dedicated Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund; it is well integrated with existing law and supplies concrete operational definitions and limits.

The bill (Mining Regulatory Clarity Act) amends federal mining law to allow operators to locate multiple hardrock mining mill sites on public land within an approved plan of operations, defines terms and limits (including a five-acre cap per mill site), and clarifies that mill sites convey no mineral rights and are not patentable.

It creates an Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund in the Treasury to receive claim maintenance fees collected on those mill sites, and directs the Fund to finance projects under section 40704 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

The bill includes savings clauses preserving federal regulatory authority and prohibiting creation of new rights on lands withdrawn from location under general mining laws.

Passage45/100

Narrow, technical bill with some built-in compromises and a remediation funding hook, but potential environmental objections and Senate procedural hurdles lower odds.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects substantive legal changes by amending mining statute language to authorize multiple mill sites and by creating a dedicated Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fund; it is well integrated with existing law and supplies concrete operational definitions and limits. The bill is less detailed on implementation sequencing, fiscal estimates, and oversight/reporting requirements.

Contention70/100

Progressives emphasize environmental footprint and cleanup adequacy

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Permitting process · Local governmentsFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitProvides regulatory clarity allowing multiple mill sites within a single approved plan of operations.
  • Permitting processMay reduce permitting delays and legal uncertainty for mining operators planning waste and tailings placement.
  • Local governmentsCould support mining-sector jobs and local economic activity by enabling more efficient mine layouts.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenAuthorizing multiple mill sites may increase disturbance footprint on public lands and environmental risks.
  • Potential burdenExpending fund amounts without further appropriation reduces future Congressional control over those specific revenues.
  • Federal agenciesAgency workload could increase due to more complex plan-of-operations reviews and oversight responsibilities.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives emphasize environmental footprint and cleanup adequacy
Progressive25%

Likely skeptical overall.

The bill expands authorized hardrock mining support infrastructure on public lands, which raises environmental and public-land protection concerns despite safeguards.

The dedicated reclamation fund is a positive but possibly insufficient mitigation.

Likely resistant
Centrist65%

Pragmatic but cautious.

The bill reduces regulatory ambiguity for operators and creates a reclamation funding mechanism, while keeping existing federal authorities intact.

Support hinges on implementation details and program funding adequacy.

Split reaction
Conservative85%

Generally favorable.

The bill enhances certainty for miners by allowing necessary mill sites within approved plans and protects claimants' rights.

The fund uses industry fees for cleanup, avoiding new general-fund spending.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood45/100

Narrow, technical bill with some built-in compromises and a remediation funding hook, but potential environmental objections and Senate procedural hurdles lower odds.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • Absent formal cost estimate or CBO scoring
  • Potential opposition from environmental advocacy groups
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

HOUSE · Dec 18, 2025
Final passage✓ PassedClose voteParty-line

The House passed this bill. It now goes to the other chamber, and eventually to the President for signature.

What is a final passage?

The final vote on whether the bill becomes law (pending the other chamber and the President).

Yes 53% No 47%
Showing a quick cross-section of legislators, with followed members first when available.
HOUSE · Dec 18, 2025
Send back to committee✗ FailedClose voteParty-line

The attempt to send the bill back to committee failed. The bill continues moving forward.

What is a send back to committee?

A motion to recommit sends a bill back to committee, often as a last-ditch attempt to stop it.

Yes 49% No 51%
Against party line
Showing a quick cross-section of legislators, with followed members first when available.
06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives emphasize environmental footprint and cleanup adequacy

Narrow, technical bill with some built-in compromises and a remediation funding hook, but potential environmental objections and Senate pro…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects substantive legal changes by amending mining statute language to authorize multiple mill sites and by creating a dedicated Abandoned Hardrock Mine Fun…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis