PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 469.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Oct 7, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Amends the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978 to increase funding levels for projects to preserve the structural safety of Bureau of Reclamation dams and related facilities.
Directs the Secretary of the Interior: (1) during the construction of a Bureau facility modification, to consider cost containment measures recommended by a project beneficiary (beneficiary) that has elected to consult with the Bureau; and (2) to provide to project beneficiaries periodic notice regarding the costs and status of the modification.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary: (1) upon identifying a Bureau facility for modification, to provide to the beneficiaries written notice describing the need and the identifying and implementing process for the modification and summarizing the administrative and legal requirements; (2) to provide beneficiaries an opportunity to consult with the Bureau on the planning, design, and construction of the proposed modification and to develop and provide time frames for the consultation; (3) prior to submitting required reports, to consider any alternative submitted in writing by a beneficiary that has elected to consult with the Bureau; and (4) to provide to the beneficiary a timely written response describing any proposed actions to address the recommendation. Requires the Secretary's response to be included in the required reports. Authorizes the Secretary to waive a requirement upon determining that its implementation could have an adverse impact on dam safety or security.
People & committees
Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-44] · R–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. 469.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-757.
Reported by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-757.
Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Water and Power Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
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.4893 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.4893 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.4893 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.4893 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.