Home

Blog

How People Voted

21% For, 79% Against

Take Action

Alert Your Friends and Colleagues
Write Your Representative in Congress
Save & Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Google
Reddit
Yahoo!

S. 1929, The Sierra Vista Subwatershed Feasibility Study Act

  • This item is from the 110th Congress (2007-2008) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.

Comparing revision saved on August 3, 2007, 03:20:42 (webmaster), with revision saved on August 29, 2007, 18:47:26 (webmaster):

S. 1929 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to conduct a feasibility study of water augmentation alternatives in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed.

== Detailed Summary ==

<summary>
(Log in to editSierra Vista Subwatershed Feasibility Study Act - Authorizes the wiki and beSecretary of the firstInterior, through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to providecomplete a detailed summaryfeasibility study of alternatives to augment water supplies in the bill!)Sierra Vista Subwatershed, Arizona, that are identified as appropriate for further study in an appraisal report dated June 2007.

Directs the Secretary, in evaluating the feasibility of alternatives, to: (1) include any required environmental reviews, the construction, operations, maintenance, and replacement costs for each alternative, and the economic feasibility of each alternative; (2) take into consideration the ability of government and private sources to fund such costs; (3) establish the basis for any cost-sharing allocations and any anticipated repayment of federal contributions; and (4) perform a cost-benefit analysis.

</summary>

<!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->

== Status of the Legislation ==

<status>
Latest Major Action: 8/1/2007: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
</status>

<!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. -->

== Points in Favor ==

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->

== Points Against ==

(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)
<!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! -->

« Return to Revision History.


Cost per :

Visitor Comments Comments Feed for This Bill

There are currently no comments for this bill.

RSS Feeds for This Bill

Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)