PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 118-162.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 23, 2024
This act transfers National Forest System land near the Salt River in Arizona to the Bureau of Reclamation to expand the area used for generating hydropower for the Salt River Federal Reclamation Project. Any facilities on the covered land constructed by the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District or the Salt River Valley Water Users’ Association must conform to Reclamation's standards. Once the facilities are substantially completed, Reclamation must take ownership of them. The district and the association must take responsibility for the facilities' operation and maintenance.
The act also exempts the land transfer from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. It also directs the Bureau of Reclamation to serve as the lead agency with respect to environmental compliance.
People & committees
Rep. Schweikert, David [R-AZ-1] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 118-162.
Became Public Law No: 118-162.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7079-7085)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 384 - 1 (Roll no. 599). (text: CR H5410)
House roll call 599 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 384 - 1 (Roll no. 599). (text: CR H5410)
House roll call 599 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5426)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1607.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5410-5411)
Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 213.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-264.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-264.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.1607 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.1607 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.1607 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.1607 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.