PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Dec 30, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Act of 2011 - Amends the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to expand requirements for the operation and maintenance of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, Colorado, to require the Secretary of the Interior to take any action necessary to maintain the structural integrity of the Tunnel to maintain public safety and to prevent an uncontrolled release of water from the tunnel portal. Makes the Secretary responsible for the operation and maintenance of the water treatment plant, including authorized sludge disposal. Authorizes the Secretary to offer to enter into one or more contracts with any appropriate individual or entity for the conduct of any required service.
Includes within the Tunnel any surface water diverted into it and water collected by the dewatering relief well installed in June 2008. Authorizes the Secretary: (1) to enter into an agreement with any other entity or government agency to provide funding for an increase in any operation, maintenance, replacement, capital improvement, or expansion cost that is necessary to improve or expand the Treatment Plant; and (2) upon entering into an agreement, to make any necessary capital improvement to or expansion of the water treatment plant.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to consult with the Secretary regarding each feature of the proposed new or amended Record of Decision for operable unit 6 of the California Gulch National Priorities List Site that may require any alteration to, or otherwise affect the operation and maintenance of, the Tunnel or the water treatment plant. Authorizes the Secretary to implement any improvement to the Tunnel or expansion of the plant as a result of a new or amended Record of Decision for operable unit 6 only upon entering into an agreement with the EPA Administrator or other entity or agency to provide funding for the improvement or expansion.
People & committees
Sen. Udall, Mark [D-CO] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S8552-8556; text as passed Senate: CR S8553-8554)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S8552-8556; text as passed Senate: CR S8553-8554)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 284.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman under authority of the order of the Senate of 12/17/2011 without amendment. With written report No. 112-122.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman under authority of the order of the Senate of 12/17/2011 without amendment. With written report No. 112-122.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 112-129.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (text of measure as introduced: CR S3228)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3227-3228)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.1047 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 S.1047 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 S.1047 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 S.1047 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.