PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Oct 1, 1998
King Cove Health and Safety Act of 1998 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, if the King Cove Corporation offers to transfer specified lands to the United States, to accept the transfer of the offered lands and grant the Aleutians East Borough a perpetual right-of-way of 60 feet in width through specified lands in Seward Meridian, Alaska, for the construction, operation, and maintenance of certain utility-related fixtures and of a public road between the cities of Cold Bay and King Cove, Alaska. Requires the lands transferred to the United States to be managed in accordance with the Alaska National Lands Conservation Act. Directs the Secretary and the Borough to jointly prepare a plan setting forth: (1) the times of the year a road may reasonably be constructed when there are not high concentrations of migratory birds in Kinzarof Lagoon; and (2) limitations on nonemergency road traffic during periods of the year when there are high concentrations of migratory birds in that Lagoon. Provides that, if the Secretary and the Borough fail to mutually agree within 24 months of the offer on a final land exchange and grant of right-of-way, and on the right-of-way specifications and terms and conditions of use set forth in this Act, the Borough shall have the right to select a 60 foot right-of-way for the construction, operation, and maintenance of certain utility-related fixtures and of a public road from specified lands, and to identify logistical staging areas and construction material sites within the right-of-way. Grants the right-of-way to the Borough if an agreement is not reached within six months after the Borough notifies the Secretary of its selection.
People & committees
Sen. Murkowski, Frank H. [R-AK] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 59-38. Record Vote No: 294.
Senate roll call 294 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 59-38. Record Vote No: 294.
Senate roll call 294 · Individual votesMeasure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S11239-11269)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 218.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 105-113. Minority views filed.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 105-113. Minority views filed.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources received executive comment from Department of the Interior.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested executive comment from Federal Aviation Administration, Department of the Interior, and Office of Management and Budget.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 105-278.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8365-8366)
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.1092 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.1092 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.1092 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.1092 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.