CLAIM Act of 2025

Bill Number

H.R. 6674

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Energy

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-12-11: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Last Updated

2026-04-10T13:59:02Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The CLAIM Act of 2025 aims to update and strengthen rules for maintaining hardrock mining claims on federal lands by increasing fees for claims near protected areas, such as national parks and monuments. This encourages conservation of sensitive lands while funding mining administration and related programs. It amends the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, which originally set a flat fee for these claims.

Key Provisions

• Tiered Maintenance Fees: Replaces the previous flat fee of $100 per claim or site with a sliding scale based on distance from "covered areas" (national parks or monuments designated under the Antiquities Act):
• $1,100 for claims mostly inside a covered area.
• $1,000 for claims 0–10 miles from the boundary.
• $700 for 10–20 miles.
• $500 for 20–30 miles.
• $300 for more than 30 miles.
• Fee in Place of Work Requirements: Paying the maintenance fee replaces the need for "assessment work" (annual labor or improvements on the claim required by the 1872 Mining Law) and related filing rules under the 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
• Exemption for Small Miners: Small miners are exempt from fees and assessment work. A "small miner" is defined as an individual or related group holding no more than 10 claims/sites (up to 200 acres total), with annual gross income from mineral production under $50,000, and using claims only for "casual use" (light activities like hand panning that cause no significant land disturbance, excluding mechanized equipment or hazardous materials).
• Fee Adjustments: The Secretary of the Interior must adjust fees at least every 5 years (or more often if needed) based on inflation using the Consumer Price Index. Claimants get notice by July 1, and changes apply the next calendar year.
• User Fees: The Secretary can charge additional fees to cover administrative costs for processing claims.
• Use of Collected Fees:
• Primarily for administering U.S. mining laws.
• Any excess funds in a fiscal year are allocated as follows:
• 40% to a critical minerals supply chain program under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
• 20% to the Tribal Historic Preservation Program.
• 20% to states based on their share of mining claims.
• 10% to the Land and Water Conservation Fund (for land acquisition and recreation).
• 10% to the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund (for repairs and maintenance).
• Definitions: Clarifies terms like "hardrock mineral" (non-oil/gas/coal minerals locatable under mining laws, excluding those on tribal lands), "casual use," "Indian," "Indian Tribe," and "mineral activities" (exploration, mining, processing, or cleanup for hardrock minerals).

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• From Flat to Tiered Fees: Shifts from a uniform $100 fee to location-based pricing, making claims near protected areas much more expensive to discourage mining there.
• Small Miner Exemption: Introduces a new category exempting low-impact, small-scale operators, which did not exist before; previously, all claimants paid the flat fee.
• Fee Usage and Allocation: Adds detailed rules for spending fees, including new allocations to conservation, tribal, and state programs—previously, fees went solely to general Treasury funds.
• Simplifications and Removals: Eliminates redundant language (e.g., repeated mentions of the Secretary of the Interior), removes an old subsection on late payments, and explicitly ties fees to replacing assessment work requirements.
• Inflation Indexing: Formalizes periodic adjustments, which were not as structured before.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The Department of the Interior gains more revenue for mining oversight and can recover administrative costs via user fees. Excess funds support broader priorities like park repairs, tribal preservation, and state land management, potentially easing budget pressures.
• On Citizens: Small-scale hobbyists or low-income miners benefit from exemptions, allowing casual prospecting without fees. Larger mining operations face higher costs near protected areas, which could limit expansion and protect public lands from disturbance. States with many claims receive direct funding shares, aiding local economies.
• On International Relations: No direct impacts; the bill focuses on domestic federal land management and does not address foreign mining or trade.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Hardrock Miners: Large operators pay higher fees near sensitive areas, potentially reducing activity there; small miners gain exemptions for low-impact work.
• Department of the Interior: Responsible for fee collection, adjustments, and fund allocation; benefits from streamlined administration.
• States: Receive 20% of excess fees proportional to their mining claims, supporting local land and resource management.
• Tribal Nations: Get 20% of excess fees for historic preservation, aiding cultural resource protection on or near ancestral lands.
• Environmental and Conservation Groups: Indirectly supported through higher fees discouraging mining near parks/monuments and fund allocations to conservation programs.
• National Parks and Monuments: Protected by fee barriers to mining, with 10% of excess fees aiding legacy restoration.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Strengthens federal authority over mining on public lands under the 1872 Mining Law by using economic incentives (fees) rather than outright bans, potentially reducing legal challenges to claim validity. The small miner exemption may invite disputes over definitions (e.g., "related parties" or income thresholds), but ties fees to existing assessment work rules for consistency.
• Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's power to regulate federal lands (Property Clause of the Constitution), balancing property interests in mining claims with public welfare (conservation). No apparent free speech or due process issues, as fees apply uniformly with exemptions and notices.
• Political: Promotes a bipartisan balance between mining industry access and environmental protection, with revenue sharing appealing to states and tribes. Could face opposition from mining lobbies over cost increases but support from conservation advocates; the focus on "incompatible" areas highlights tensions in Western land-use debates.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1]

Cosponsors (1)

Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2]

Recent Actions

• 2025-12-11: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
• 2025-12-11: Introduced in House
• 2025-12-11: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Conserving Lands and Areas Incompatible with Mining Act of 2025 — issued 2025-12-11 — PDF (11 pages)