PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 395.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · May 13, 2008
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Title I: The San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act - (Sec. 101) San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act - Directs the Secretary of the Interior (the Secretary), in cooperation with the state of California, to implement the Stipulation of Settlement dated September 13, 2006, in Natural Resources Defense Council, et al. v. Kirk Rodgers, et al., United States District Court, Eastern District of California. Directs the Secretary to: (1) enter into agreements with California to facilitate or expedite Settlement implementation; and (2) identify impacts and measures to mitigate impacts on adjacent and downstream water users and landowners. Provides that Settlement implementation and the reintroduction of Chinook salmon shall not result in the involuntary reduction in contract water allocations to Central Valley Project long-term contractors apart from Friant Division contractors.
(Sec. 105) Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) purchase property needed to implement the Settlement from willing sellers; and (2) dispose of such property and deposit proceeds into the San Joaquin River Restoration Fund.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 107) Declares that the Settlement satisfies and discharges the Secretary's obligations under the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992.
(Sec. 109) Requires the costs of implementing the Settlement to be covered by payments or in kind contributions made by Friant Division contractors and other non-federal parties, with specified costs shared by California. Directs the Secretary to enter into agreements with California to fund or implement improvements on a project-by-project basis.
(Sec. 110) Directs the Secretary to convert specified long-term contracts to provide for the repayment of construction costs.
(Sec. 111) Provides for the reintroduction of Chinook salmon into the San Joaquin River, contingent upon the Secretary of Commerce finding that a permit for such reintroduction may be issued under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
(Sec. 112) Directs the Secretary to establish a conservation of resources fee for non-producing federal oil and gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico, revenues from which shall be treated as offsetting receipts.
Title II: Study to Develop Water Plan; Report - (Sec. 201) Directs the Secretary: (1) acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to provide direct financial assistance to the California Water Institute to study coordination and integration of sub-regional integrated regional water management plans into a unified Integrated Regional Water Management Plan; and (2) to ensure that a report containing the results of the Plan is submitted to specified congressional committees within 24 months after financial assistance is made available to the Institute. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Costa, Jim [D-CA-20] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 395.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-633.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-633.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 25 - 15.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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: Aug 14, 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.4074 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.4074 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.4074 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.4074 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.