PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 25, 2002
Reclamation Recreation Management Act of 2002 - Amends the Federal Water Project Recreation Act to allow fees to be collected under a project for recreation or fish and wildlife enhancement (project) and retained and used by the participating non-federal entities for operation, maintenance, and replacement of recreation facilities on project lands and waters being managed by such entities. Requires excess revenues to be credited to the Reclamation Fund.Repeals provisions limiting the modification of such projects. Authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to: (1) investigate, plan, construct, replace, manage, operate, maintain, or otherwise provide for public use and enjoyment of project lands, facilities, and water areas in a manner coordinated with other project purposes; and (2) modify or expand existing facilities.Requires: (1) amounts collected for admission to or recreation use of project land and waters to be deposited into a special account in the Fund; and (2) at least 60 percent of such amounts to be used at the site from which the fees were collected.Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) investigate, plan, design, construct, replace, manage, operate, and maintain recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement facilities and services; and (2) acquire or otherwise make available adjacent lands or interests for public recreation or fish and wildlife use.Authorizes the Secretary to: (1) enter into agreements with other non-federal entities for recreation and concession management at Bureau of Reclamation projects; and (2) make available to the public information about Bureau programs.Directs the Secretary to construct recreational facilities at Lost Creek Reservoir, Utah.
People & committees
Rep. Calvert, Ken [R-CA-43] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6867-6868)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6867-6868)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5460.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6867-6869)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.5460 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.5460 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.5460 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.5460 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.