PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Dec 13, 2005
(Sec. 2) Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior (the Secretary) to construct, operate, and maintain the Santa Margarita River Project in accordance with the final feasibility report and this Act.
Authorizes Project construction only after the Secretary determines that: (1) the Fallbrook Public Utility District, San Diego County (District), has entered into a contract to repay to the United States appropriate portions of the costs of constructing, operating, and maintaining the Project, with interest; (2) the authorized California officer or agency has granted water use permits to the Bureau of Reclamation for the benefit of the Department of the Navy and the District; (3) the District has agreed that it will not assert against the United States any prior right to water in excess of the quantity deliverable under this Act and will share water based on equal priority and a specified ratio; and (4) the Secretary has determined that the Project has economic, environmental, and engineering feasibility.
(Sec. 3) Shields the Department of the Navy (the Department) from responsibility for any costs in connection with the Project, except upon completion and then in reasonable proportion to its use of the Project under regulations agreed upon by the Secretary and the Secretary of the Navy.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 4) Permits operation of the Project by the Secretary, the District, or a third party consistent with this Act.
Requires the Department and the District to participate in the Project yield on the basis of equal priority, with 60% of the Project's yield allotted to the Navy Secretary and 40% allotted to the District. Provides that if the Navy Secretary certifies that the Department does not have immediate need for its portion, the administering official may enter into temporary contracts for the sale and delivery of excess water. Allows the rights and obligations of the United States and the District regarding the ratio or amounts of Project yield delivered to be modified by agreement between the parties. Requires moneys paid to the United States under such a contract to be deposited in the special account established for the Department.
(Sec. 5) Requires the District's general repayment obligation to be determined by the Secretary consistent with the Water Supply Act of 1958. Provides that there shall be no repayment obligation for water delivered to the District under a contract for delivery of excess water.
(Sec. 6) Authorizes the Secretary to transfer to the District or a mutually agreed upon third party the care, operation, and maintenance of the Project under conditions satisfactory to the Secretary and the District (and the Navy Secretary with respect to the portion located within the boundaries of Camp Pendleton). Entitles the District, if such a transfer takes place, to an equitable credit for the costs associated with the Secretary's proportionate share of the Project's operation and maintenance.
(Sec. 7) Provides that the basis, measure, and limit of all U.S. rights pertaining to the use of water shall be California law.
(Sec. 8) Requires, unless otherwise agreed by the Navy Secretary, that the Project be operated in a manner which: (1) allows the free passage of all of the water the United States is entitled to use under California law either as a result of its acquisition of the lands comprising Camp Joseph H. Pendleton and adjoining naval installations or through actual use or prescription; and (2) does not impair or deplete the quantities of water the United States would be entitled to use had the Project not been built.
(Sec. 9) Authorizes appropriations to construct, operate, and maintain the Project.
(Sec. 10) Directs the Secretary and the Navy Secretary to each report to Congress periodically regarding if and how the conditions for Project construction have been met.
(Sec. 11) Terminates the Secretary's authority to complete Project construction 10 years after this Act's enactment.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7626)
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S7626)
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H11441-11442)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H11441-11442)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 125.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H11441-11442)
Mrs. Drake moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 164.
Committee on Armed Services discharged.
Committee on Armed Services discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-297, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-297, Part I.
Subcommittee on Water and Power Discharged.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Readiness.
Executive Comment Requested from DOD.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
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 H.R.125 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 H.R.125 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 H.R.125 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 H.R.125 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.