PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1857-1858)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 14, 2013
Mississippi River Navigation Sustainment Act - Directs the Chief of Engineers to carry out a study of the Mississippi River Basin to: (1) improve the coordinated and comprehensive management of water resource projects in the greater Mississippi River Basin relating to extreme weather conditions, and (2) evaluate the feasibility of modifications to those projects and develop new projects to improve the reliability of navigation and more effectively reduce flood risk.
Directs the Chief to improve forecasting on the Mississippi River by: (1) updating forecasting technology deployed on the River and its tributaries, (2) constructing additional sedimentation ranges on the River and tributaries, and (3) deploying additional automatic identification system base stations at river gage sites. Requires the Chief to prioritize the sections of the River on which additional and more reliable information would have the greatest impact on maintaining navigation.
Authorizes the Chief to: (1) construct, operate, and maintain ingress and egress paths to docks, loading facilities, fleeting areas, and other critical locations outside of the authorized navigation channel on the Mississippi River upon determining such actions to be critical to maintaining safe and reliable navigation; and (2) mitigate, through dredging, any incidental impacts to loading or fleeting areas outside of such channel that result from operation and maintenance of the channel.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Chief: (1) in accordance with the project for navigation, Mississippi River between the Ohio and Missouri Rivers (Regulating Works), Missouri and Illinois, to carry out a 10-year pilot program to restore and protect fish and wildlife habitat in the middle Mississippi River; and (2) as part of such program, to conduct activities necessary to improve navigation through such project while restoring and protecting fish and wildlife habitat.
People & committees
Sen. Durbin, Richard J. [D-IL] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. (text of measure as introduced: CR S1857-1858)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1856-1857)
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.565 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.565 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.565 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.565 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.