PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 106-607.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 29, 1999
Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project Facilities Conveyance Act of 1999 - Directs the Secretary of the Interior, upon acceptance by the appropriate parties of required Federal obligations, to convey the respective portions of the Yellowstone Irrigation Project, the Intake Irrigation Project, and the Savage Unit (irrigation project) of the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program to the Intake Irrigation District (Montana), the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Districts No. 1 (Montana) and 2 (North Dakota), and the Savage Irrigation District (Montana). Directs the Secretary and the Western Area Power Administration to continue to provide Pick-Sloan power to each such District as long as the Districts and the Yellowstone Project continue to operate under Pick-Sloan. Requires each such conveyance within 180 days after enactment of this Act, with a two-year deadline if changes in operations are intended. Provides related requirements regarding environmental matters and recreation management.
People & committees
Sen. Burns, Conrad R. [R-MT] · R–MT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 106-607.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11643-11644)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
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.1659 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.1659 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.1659 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.1659 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.