PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 3, 2009
Requires the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation to initiate (and conclude within 90 days) consultation with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Commerce on the existing and proposed operations of the Central Valley Project and the California State Water Project, including regarding all endangered, threatened, and candidate species listed under the Endangered Species Act affected by such proposed operations.
Requires the Secretaries to: (1) identify, analyze, and describe all factors, other than operations of the Projects, affecting the survival and recovery of such species and the effect of invasive species and wastewater discharges on food availability on the survival and recovery of such species; (2) quantify the relative effect of each factor affecting the survival and recovery of the subject species; (3) rank each such factor in the order of its effect on the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species; and (4) identify the specific, additional incremental effect of existing and proposed discretionary operations of the Projects on the survival and recovery of the species in relation to all other factors affecting such survival and recovery.
Requires the Secretaries: (1) to issue a statement setting forth their opinion detailing how existing and proposed operations of such Projects affect such species or their critical habitat; (2) if they include in the statement reasonable and prudent alternatives to discretionary project operations, to describe the increased species abundance they estimate will result from such alternatives and limit the measures required by the alternatives to no more than the proportionate effects of those discretionary project operations in relation to the factors affecting the species; and (3) to identity and recommend actions or measures that are not within the jurisdiction of the Bureau but are necessary to address any factors that are jeopardizing such species or adversely modifying their critical habitat.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Declares that any consultation conducted or statement issued before this Act's enactment with respect to the existing and proposed operations shall have no force or effect after the statement is issued under this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Cardoza, Dennis A. [D-CA-18] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 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.3999 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.3999 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.3999 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.3999 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.