PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 635.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 30, 1994
Mountain Park Project Act of 1994 - Adds environmental quality activities to the list of activities of the Mountain Park Reclamation Project, Oklahoma. Directs the Secretary of the Interior to: (1) conduct investigations to determine environmental quality activities that could be carried out for the Project; and (2) make an appropriate reallocation of Project costs to accommodate such activities. Requires the Secretary, in conducting such investigations, to examine the benefits to natural environmental resources achievable from an environmental quality activity that requires reallocating water, using facilities or land of the Project. Requires the Secretary, upon completion of investigations, to: (1) prepare a proposed reallocation of Project costs; and (2) negotiate with the Mountain Park Master Conservancy District to amend the contract to adjust the obligation of the District to repay Project costs, to reflect the reallocation of nonreimbursable Project costs. Requires Project costs associated with an environmental quality activity to be nonreimbursable. Authorizes the Secretary to accept prepayment of the repayment obligation of the District for reimbursable construction costs allocated to municipal and industrial water supply for the cities of Altus, Frederick, and Snyder, Oklahoma, and reduces the District's obligation by the amount of such costs upon receipt of prepayment. Provides that title to the Project facilities shall remain with the United States. Repeals provisions of existing law regarding prepayment by the District for Project costs.
People & committees
Sen. Nickles, Don [R-OK] · R–OK
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. 635.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston with an amendment. With written report No. 103-381.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported to Senate by Senator Johnston with an amendment. With written report No. 103-381.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8106)
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.2253 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.2253 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.2253 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.2253 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.