PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Environmental Improvement Act of 2008

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 110-494.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 28, 2008

Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Environmental Improvement Act of 2008 - Amends the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 to repeal provisions requiring construction of a water treatment plant to treat effluent discharged from the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, Colorado, and authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to investigate water pollution sources and impacts attributed to development in the Upper Arkansas River basin, develop corrective action plans, and implement corrective action demonstration projects.

Requires the Secretary to operate and maintain the Tunnel in a manner that protects human health and the environment.

Directs the Secretary, in cooperation with the state of Colorado, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and other federal agencies, to: (1) investigate the Tunnel, groundwater and surface water affected by any blockage of the Tunnel, and the upper Arkansas River Watershed (study area); and (2) submit to the state, the Administrator, and Congress annual reports on how any blockages in the Tunnel affect water quality and aquatic life in the study area.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Requires the Secretary, in conjunction with the Administrator, to take actions to: (1) reduce the water level in the mine pool associated with the Tunnel to prevent the risk of a catastrophic rupture and flood; and (2) maintain the water level in the mine pool at a safe level and prevent further mine pool migration.

Directs the Secretary, in conjunction with the Administrator and the state, to implement those portions of the remedy selected by the Administrator, dated September 2003, for the California Gulch Superfund Site that pertain to managing the Tunnel and related mine pool.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Sen. Salazar, Ken [D-CO] · D–CO

Committees

  • Energy and Natural Resources Committee
0 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

    Actions

    A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

    1. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 110-494.

    2. Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

    3. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1386-1387)

    4. Introduced in Senate

    Bill text & related measures

    Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

    Related bills identified by Congress.gov

    Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

    Explore the bill from different angles

    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.

    Neutral evidence review

    Objective

    Analyze S.2680 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Fairness and public impact

    Progressive lens

    Examine S.2680 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Institutions and government scope

    Conservative lens

    Examine S.2680 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.

    View full prompt & sources
    Individual rights and government power

    Liberty lens

    Examine S.2680 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.

    View full prompt & sources