PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Oct 24, 2000
Small Watershed Rehabilitation Act of 2000 - Amends the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to provide financial assistance to an eligible local organization to cover a portion of the total costs incurred for the rehabilitation of structural measures originally constructed as part of a covered water resource project. Limits the amount of Federal funds that may be made available for construction of a particular rehabilitation project to 65 percent of the total rehabilitation costs, but not to exceed 100 percent of actual construction costs incurred, and makes the local organization responsible for resource rights costs and all Federal, State, and local permits.Authorizes the Secretary, acting through the Natural Resources Conservation Service, to provide technical assistance to planning, designing, and implementing rehabilitation projects should such an organization request such assistance.Prohibits any assistance authorized from being used to perform operation and maintenance activities.Outlines assistance application requirements. Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish a system of approving rehabilitation assistance requests from eligible organizations equitably; and (2) give requests made for decommissioning the same priority as requests made for other forms of rehabilitation.Authorizes appropriations for FY 2001 through 2005 to provide financial and technical assistance. Earmarks funds authorized for the first two fiscal years for an assessment by the Secretary of the rehabilitation needs of covered projects. Requires: (1) the Secretary to maintain a database to track the benefits derived from rehabilitation projects and expenditures and report annually to Congress on the status of activities conducted; and (2) eligible local organizations that received assistance to report to the Secretary on the status of rehabilitation efforts after the completion of the specific projects for which assistance was provided.
People & committees
Sen. Coverdell, Paul [R-GA] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Held at the desk.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S10944)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S10944)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S10943-10944)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 798.
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Reported by Senator Lugar without amendment. With written report No. 408.
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Reported by Senator Lugar without amendment. With written report No. 408.
Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture. (text of measure as introduced: CR S13016-13019)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S13016)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. 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.1762 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.1762 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.1762 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.1762 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.