PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Jul 15, 1998
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Title I: Salton Sea Reclamation Project Title II: Emergency Action To Improve Water Quality in the Alamo River and New River Sonny Bono Memorial Salton Sea Reclamation Act - Title I: Salton Sea Reclamation Project - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to undertake a project to reclaim the Salton Sea, located in Imperial and Riverside Counties, California. Outlines project requirements, including salinity reduction and stabilization, stabilizing surface elevation, restoring fish and wildlife resources, and enhancing recreational use and economic development. Directs the Secretary to initiate a feasibility study of various options for meeting such requirements and to develop a plan that implements the selected options. Requires an interim report on such study. Prohibits the inclusion of any option that develops or promotes an ongoing reliance on Colorado River water. Requires the Secretary to report to specified congressional committees on the chosen reclamation plan and required construction activities and to complete all necessary environmental compliance and permit requirements. Provides for plan review by such committees and requires the adoption of a resolution either approving or disapproving the recommended plan. Requires initiation of project construction upon approval of the reclamation plan and the availability of appropriations. Limits the Federal cost share to 50 percent of total construction costs. Prohibits construction unless the Secretary, the Governor of California, and the Salton Sea Authority have entered into a cost-sharing agreement. Prohibits the expenditure of Federal funds unless there are available from non-Federal sources amounts sufficient to pay the non-Federal share of the costs of the activity. Preserves all current rights and obligations concerning Colorado River water use. Provides for: (1) judicial review of activities undertaken or authorizations made under this Act; and (2) limitation of liability for various water districts with respect to actions undertaken under this Act. Authorizes appropriations for the feasibility study and project construction. Directs the Secretary to conduct, concurrently with the feasibility study, studies of hydrology, wildlife pathology, and toxicology relating to wildlife resources of the Salton Sea by Federal and non-Federal sources. Directs the Secretary to establish the Salton Sea Research Management Committee to select and manage such studies. Authorizes appropriations. Renames the Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge as the Sonny Bono Salton Sea National Wildlife Refuge. Prohibits Colorado River water from being diverted for Salton Sea restoration, except for certain currently authorized flood flows. Title II: Emergency Action to Improve Water Quality in the Alamo River and New River - Directs the Secretary to promptly conduct research and implement actions, including river reclamation and wetlands development, to create systems to improve water quality in the Alamo and New Rivers in Imperial County, California, by treating water in those rivers and irrigation drainage water that flows into those rivers. Directs the Secretary to establish a long-term monitoring program to maximize the effectiveness of any wetlands developed under this Act. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Hunter, Duncan [R-CA-52] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 105-372.
Became Public Law No: 105-372.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to without objection. (consideration: CR H11700-11701)
Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendments Agreed to without objection.(consideration: CR H11700-11701)
Mr. Solomon asked unanimous consent that the House agree to the Senate amendments.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3821 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 3821 proposed by Senator Gorton for Senator Kyl.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S12461-12462)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 200 (Roll No. 282).
House roll call 282 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 221 - 200 (Roll No. 282).
House roll call 282 · Individual votesThe previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
The House resumed consideration of the Miller of California amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Pursuant to the rule, the House proceeded with 1 hour of debate on the amendment.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate.
Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3267 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. In lieu of the amendment recommended by the Committee on Resources now printed in the bill, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order.
Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 500. (consideration: CR H5546-5564)
Rule H. Res. 500 passed House.
Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 500 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 3267 with 1 hour of general debate. Previous question shall be considered as ordered without intervening motions except motion to recommit with or without instructions. In lieu of the amendment recommended by the Committee on Resources now printed in the bill, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution shall be considered as adopted. Measure will be considered read. A specified amendment is in order.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 348.
Committee on Transportation discharged.
Committee on Transportation discharged.
Referred sequentially to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for a period ending not later than July 14, 1998 for consideration of such provisions of the bill and amendment as fall within the jurisdiction of that committee pursuant to clause 1(q), rule X.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-621, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 105-621, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Bur Reclamation.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Apr 7, 2025. 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.3267 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.3267 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.3267 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.3267 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.