PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.4784 / 103rd Congress

Mountain Park Project Act of 1994

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 449.

Official summary

Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Oct 3, 1994

Mountain Park Project Act of 1994 - Adds environmental quality activities to the list of activities of the Mountain Park Reclamation Project, Oklahoma. Directs the Secretary of the Interior to: (1) conduct investigations to determine environmental quality activities that could be carried out for the Project; and (2) make an appropriate reallocation of Project costs to accommodate such activities. Requires the Secretary, in conducting such investigations, to examine the benefits to natural environmental resources achievable from an environmental quality activity that requires reallocating water using facilities or land of the Project. Requires the Secretary, upon completion of investigations, to: (1) prepare a proposed reallocation of Project costs; and (2) negotiate with the Mountain Park Master Conservancy District to amend the contract to adjust the obligation of the District to repay Project costs to reflect the reallocation of nonreimbursable Project costs. Requires Project costs associated with an environmental quality activity to be nonreimbursable. Authorizes the Secretary to accept prepayment of the repayment obligation of the District for reimbursable construction costs allocated to municipal and industrial water supply for the cities of Altus, Frederick, or Snyder, Oklahoma, or any combination thereof, and reduces the District's obligation by the amount of such costs upon receipt of prepayment. Directs the Secretary of the Treasury: (1) to determine the interest rate in accordance with the guidelines set forth in Circular A-129 issued by the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Treasury Financial Manual; and (2) in determining such rate, to consider the price of the District's obligation if it were to be sold on the open market to a third party. Provides that title to the Project facilities shall remain with the United States. Repeals provisions of existing law regarding prepayment by the District for Project costs.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. McCurdy, Dave [D-OK-4] · D–OK

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 449.

    2. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-803.

    3. Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 103-803.

    4. Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.

    5. Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.

    6. Late Referral to the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations (Nov 30, 94).

    7. Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

    8. Introduced in House

    9. Introduced in House

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    Source last updated: Feb 7, 2024. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze H.R.4784 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine H.R.4784 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine H.R.4784 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine H.R.4784 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.

    View full prompt & sources