PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-439.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 3, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on September 15, 2004. 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. Increases the ceiling (from $750,000 to $1.25 million) on the amount that may be obligated for dam modifications prior to 30 calendar days from the date that the Secretary of the Interior has reported on the safety of the existing dam to Congress.
Directs the Secretary: (1) during the construction of a modification of a structure under such Act, to consider cost containment measures recommended by a project beneficiary that has elected to consult with the Bureau; (2) to provide to project beneficiaries periodic notice regarding the costs and status of the modification; (3) upon identifying a Bureau facility for modification, to provide to the project beneficiaries written notice describing the need for and the process for identifying and implementing the modification and summarizing administrative and legal requirements; (4) to provide project 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 such consultation; (5) prior to submitting required reports, to consider any alternative submitted by a project beneficiary that has elected to consult with the Bureau; and (6) to provide to the project beneficiary a timely written response of proposed actions to address the recommendation. (Requires that the Secretary's response be included in the required reports.)
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Secretary to waive one or more of the requirements of this Act upon determining that implementation of the requirement could have an adverse impact on dam safety or security.
People & committees
Sen. Domenici, Pete V. [R-NM] · R–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-439.
Became Public Law No: 108-439.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9836)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9836)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 1727.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9836-9837)
Mr. Gibbons moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S9339-9340; text as passed Senate: CR S9339-9340)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9339-9340; text as passed Senate: CR S9339-9340)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 615.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 108-296.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 108-296.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 108-539.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S12543)
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.1727 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.1727 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.1727 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.1727 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.