PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1071.
Congressional Research Service
Version 80 · Reported to Senate without amendment · Sep 24, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on October 29, 2007. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Dam Rehabilitation and Repair Act of 2007 - Amends the National Dam Safety Program Act to require the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to establish a program to provide grant assistance to states for use in rehabilitating publicly-owned dams that fail to meet minimum safety standards and pose an unacceptable risk to the public (deficient dams).
Sets forth provisions regarding procedures for grant awards and fund allocation. Requires: (1) states receiving grants under this Act to comply with standards applicable to financial contributions for emergency preparedness purposes under the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act; and (2) FEMA to develop a risk-based priority system for identifying deficient dams for which such grants may be made. Limits the federal share of rehabilitation costs to 65%. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Salazar, John T. [D-CO-3] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 1071.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. With written report No. 110-495.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Boxer without amendment. With written report No. 110-495.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 263 - 102 (Roll no. 1010). (text: CR H12123)
House roll call 1010 · 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): 263 - 102 (Roll no. 1010).(text: CR H12123)
House roll call 1010 · Individual votesAt 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. 3224.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H12123-12124, H12132)
Mr. Salazar moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 240.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-386.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Transportation. H. Rept. 110-386.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote .
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management.
Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
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.3224 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.3224 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.3224 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.3224 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.