PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 294.
Congressional Research Service
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Mar 2, 2010
Water Transfer Facilitation Act of 2009 - Provides that the following voluntary water transfers shall be considered to meet conditions specified for authorized transfers of Central Valley Project (CVP) water under the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992: (1) a transfer of irrigation water among CVP contractors from the Friant, San Felipe, West San Joaquin, and Delta divisions; and (2) a transfer from a long-term Friant Division water service or repayment contractor to a temporary or prior temporary water service contractor within the place of use in existence on the date of the transfer, as identified in the Bureau of Reclamation water rights permits for the Friant Division.
Directs the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the Commissioner of Reclamation, to initiate and complete on an expedited basis programmatic documentation to facilitate voluntary water transfers within the CVP.
Directs the Commissioner to submit to the appropriate congressional committees a report that: (1) describes the status of efforts to help facilitate and improve the water transfers under this Act; (2) evaluates potential effects of this Act on federal programs, Indian tribes, CVP operations, the environment, groundwater aquifers, refuges, and communities; and (3) provides recommendations on ways to facilitate and improve the process for water transfers within the CVP and water transfers between the CVP and other water projects in California. Requires the Commissioner to update the report by the end of the water year in which the report is submitted and each of the four water years thereafter.
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 294.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 111-144.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Bingaman with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 111-144.
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. 111-339.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10220)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10218-10220, S10220-10221)
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.1759 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.1759 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.1759 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.1759 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.