To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design and construction of the Riverside-Corona Feeder in cooperation with the Western Municipal Water District of Riverside, California.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 1, 2005
Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the Western Municipal Water District, to participate in a project to plan, design, and construct the Riverside-Corona Feeder, which includes 20 groundwater wells and 28 miles of pipeline in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, California. Limits the Federal share of the cost to: (1) plan, design, and construct the project to the lesser of 35 percent of the project's total cost or $50 million; and (2) complete the necessary planning study associated with the project to 50 percent of the total study cost. Directs that in-kind services performed by the District be considered a part of the local cost share to complete the project.
Amends the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary to participate in the design, planning, and construction of: (1) projects to treat impaired surface water, reclaim and reuse impaired groundwater, and provide brine disposal within the Santa Ana Watershed, in cooperation with the Yucaipa Valley Water District; and (2) a project to reclaim and reuse wastewater, including degraded groundwaters, within and outside of the service area of the City of Corona Water Utility, in cooperation with the City of Corona Water Utility. Limits the Federal share of each of the project costs to 25 percent.
Prohibits the Secretary from using or providing funds under this Act for project operation or maintenance.
Source last updated: Mar 26, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.1008 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.1008 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.1008 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.1008 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.