PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 29, 2009
Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Remediation Act of 2009 - Amends the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to repeal a provision requiring construction of a water treatment plant to treat effluent discharged from the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, Colorado.
Directs the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the implementation of the operable unit 6 remedy for the California Gulch Superfund Site, including, but not limited to, the following actions: (1) treating water behind any blockage or bulkhead in the Tunnel; and (2) managing and maintaining the mine pool behind such blockage or bulkhead at a level that precludes surface runoff and releases and minimizes the potential for Tunnel failure due to excessive water pressure.
Requires the Secretary to take necessary steps to repair or maintain the Tunnel's structural integrity to prevent Tunnel failure and to preclude uncontrolled release of water from the Tunnel.
People & committees
Rep. Lamborn, Doug [R-CO-5] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Received in the Senate.
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 H10007)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H10007)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3123.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10007)
Ms. Bordallo moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 206 - 191 (Roll no. 689).
House roll call 689 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 206 - 191 (Roll no. 689).
House roll call 689 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9302-9303)
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. 3123.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9294-9295; text of measure as introduced: CR H9294)
Mr. Grijalva moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
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.3123 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.3123 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.3123 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.3123 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.