PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.297 / 106th Congress

Lewis and Clark Rural Water System Act of 2000

Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 571.

Official summary

Version 36 · Passed House amended · May 23, 2000

Title I: Lewis and Clark Rural Water System - Lewis and Clark Rural Water System Act of 2000 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to make grants to the Lewis and Clark Rural Water System, Inc., a nonprofit corporation, for the planning and construction of a water supply project to provide service to specified counties in South Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa.(Sec. 104) Specifies that mitigation for fish and wildlife losses incurred as a result of the construction and operation of the water supply project be on an acre-for-acre basis, based on ecological equivalency, concurrent with project construction.(Sec. 105) Requires the Western Area Power Administration to make available, at the firm power rate, the capacity and energy required to meet the pumping and incidental operational requirements of the water supply project during the period beginning May 1, and ending October 31, of each year from power designated for future irrigation and drainage pumping for the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin program. Makes the portions of the water supply project constructed with assistance under this title eligible to receive firm power from the program for operation during such period of each year, for as long as the water supply system operates on a not-for-profit basis.(Sec. 106) Provides that this Act shall not: (1) limit the authorization for water projects in South Dakota, Iowa, and Minnesota; or (2) preempt State water rights. Specifies the Federal and non-Federal share of the cost. Requires the Secretary to provide funds for the city of Sioux Falls, South Dakota, equal to 50 percent of the incremental cost of its participation in the project.(Sec. 109) Authorizes the Secretary, at the request of the water supply system, to allow the Bureau of Reclamation to provide project construction oversight to the water supply project.(Sec. 110) Specifies that the water supply system shall retain title to all project facilities during and after construction and shall be responsible for all operation, maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation costs.(Sec. 111) Authorizes appropriations.Title II: Sly Park Unit Conveyance - Directs the Secretary of the Interior to convey the Sly Park Dam and Reservoir, the Camp Creek Diversion Dam and Tunnel, and conduits and canals as authorized under the American River Act (Sly Park Unit) to the El Dorado Irrigation District, California.Authorizes the Secretary to receive specified amounts from the District to relieve payment obligations and extinguish debts associated with specified contracts. Provides that upon such payment: (1) the amounts paid shall be credited toward repayment of capital costs of the Central Valley Project in an amount equal to the associated undiscounted obligation; and (2) the Unit shall no longer be a Federal reclamation project or a unit of the Central Valley Project and the District shall not be entitled to receive any further reclamation benefits.Title III: Treatment of Project Costs for Sly Park Unit - Authorizes the Secretary, to the extent costs associated with the Sly Park Unit are included as a reimbursable cost of the Central Valley Project, to exclude such costs in excess of those repaid by Unit beneficiaries from the pooled reimbursable costs of the Project until such time as the facility is operationally integrated into the water supply yield of the Project.Title IV: City of Roseville Pumping Plant Facilities - Directs the Secretary to credit up to a specified amount to the unpaid capital obligation of the city of Roseville, California, as such obligation is calculated in accordance with applicable Federal reclamation law and Central Valley Project rate setting policy, in recognition of future benefits to be accrued by the United States as a result of the city's purchase and funding of the installation of additional pumping plant facilities in accordance with a specified letter of agreement with the United States. Requires: (1) the Secretary to simultaneously add an equivalent amount of costs to the capital costs of the Central Valley Project; and (2) such added costs to be reimbursed in accordance with reclamation law and policy. Provides for the credited amount to take effect upon the date on which: (1) the city and the Secretary have agreed that the installation of the facilities has been completed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the letter of agreement; and (2) the Secretary has issued a determination that such facilities are fully operative as intended.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Thune, John [R-SD-At Large] · R–SD

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
2 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 571.

  2. The Clerk was authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, and cross references, and to make other necessary technical and conforming corrections in the engrossment of H.R. 297.

  3. Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.

  4. On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 400 - 13 (Roll no. 217). (text: CR H3538-3539)

    House roll call 217 · Individual votes
  5. Passed/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): 400 - 13 (Roll no. 217).(text: CR H3538-3539)

    House roll call 217 · Individual votes
  6. Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3581-3582, H3583)

  7. 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.

  8. DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 297.

  9. Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3538-3540)

  10. Mr. Doolittle moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.

  11. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-633.

  12. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 348.

  13. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 106-633.

  14. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.

  15. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

  16. Subcommittee on Water and Power Discharged.

  17. Executive Comment Requested from Interior.

  18. Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.

  19. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E40-41)

  20. Referred to the House Committee on Resources.

  21. Introduced in House

  22. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

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.297 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.297 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.297 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.297 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.

View full prompt & sources