Analyses / Public Summary / 119 · HR 7458 Public Summary

119-HR-7458 Journalist Public Summary

119 · HR 7458 Domestic ORE Act

A House bill would let companies start mineral exploration that disturbs up to 25 acres on certain public lands after filing a short notice and posting a bond, with only a 15‑day agency check—supporters see faster domestic mineral exploration; critics warn it could let larger drill programs proceed with limited up‑front review. (congress.gov)

Published
25 Feb 2026
Updated
25 Feb 2026
Tags
Public Summary · US Congress · Natural Resources
Unvetted
01 · Section

Headline Summary

Let exploration projects up to 25 acres on Bureau of Land Management and National Forest System lands proceed after a simple notice and a fast (15‑day) agency review, backed by financial assurance. (congress.gov)

02 · Section

What It Does

The Domestic ORE Act (H.R. 7458) would require companies to submit a notice at least 15 days before starting “exploration activities” that disturb no more than 25 acres on eligible public lands. Agencies then have 15 days to let work proceed (if information and bonding are adequate) or ask for missing details. It applies to Interior (BLM) and Agriculture (U.S. Forest Service) lands covered by the 1872 mining law. (congress.gov)

Maximum disturbance under notice
25acres
Notice lead time
15days before starting
Agency review window
15days
Bond/financial assurance
1required (adequate to agency)
03 · Section

Who’s For It

  • Rep. Harriet Hageman (R‑WY), the sponsor. (congress.gov)
  • House majority leaders flagged a Feb. 24, 2026 mining‑focused hearing that included H.R. 7458—signaling interest in advancing related measures. (majorityleader.gov)
  • Lawmakers who argue federal mine permitting is too slow (e.g., Sen. Lisa Murkowski and colleagues, in criticism of BLM metrics) tend to support streamlining as a theme. (murkowski.senate.gov)
04 · Section

Who’s Against It

  • Public Citizen and other advocacy groups opposed related mining‑streamlining bills at the same Feb. 24, 2026 hearing, arguing they weaken safeguards; critics are likely to raise similar concerns about H.R. 7458. (citizen.org)
  • BLM’s own guidance notes Tribes have raised concerns that notice‑level exploration (which typically lacks NEPA review) provides little early notice or consultation—concerns that could grow if the acreage threshold expands. (blm.gov)
05 · Section

What’s Next

Status as of February 25, 2026: Introduced on Feb. 10, 2026; referred to Natural Resources and Agriculture; sent to the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources on Feb. 17; and discussed in a legislative hearing on Feb. 24. No further votes or markups have been scheduled yet, and there are currently no listed co‑sponsors. Next likely step would be a subcommittee markup before any full‑committee vote. (congress.gov)

Discussion