Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge Settlement Act of 2002
Latest action. Placed on Senate legislative calendarThe list of measures reported out of committee and eligible for floor action. Being on the calendar is not a promise of a vote.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) under General Orders. Calendar No. 461.
Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge Settlement Act of 2002 - Prohibits the Secretary of the Interior from entering into an agreement with the State of Utah for the transfer of lands or interests in land within the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge unless the agreement requires: (1) the State to support the U.S. application to add an enlarged Hyrum Reservoir or another storage facility as an alternate place of storage under the Refuge's existing 1000 cubic feet per second State certified water right, contingent upon demonstration by the United States that no injury to water rights shall occur; (2) the State, if it prevails in a suit against the United States challenging the validity of the deed issued pursuant to such agreement, to pay the United States for property improvements, such as water control structures and buildings, and to repay amounts paid to the State by the United States pursuant to the agreement or because of U.S. ownership of the land; and (3) the Secretary to agree to pay $15 million to the State upon delivery of a quitclaim deed that meets Justice Department standards and covers all lands and interests claimed by the State within the Refuge, subject to the condition that the State use such payment for the purposes and in the amounts specified below. Requires the State to deposit $10 million into the Wetlands and Habitat Protection Account. Authorizes the Executive Director of the Utah Department of Natural Resources to use the interest on such amount for wetland or open space protection and for enhancement and acquisition of wildlife habitat in and near the Great Salt Lake. Authorizes the use of $5 million for: (1) the development, improvement, and expansion of motorized and non-motorized recreational trails on public and private lands (with priority given to providing trail access to the Lake as part of the proposed Shoshone and Ogden-Weber trail systems); and (2) preservation, reclamation, enhancement, and conservation of streams. Requires the Executive Director to maximize the use of such funds through coordination with nonprofit organizations, Federal agencies, other agencies of the State, and local governments, giving priority to those projects that include Federal, State, or private matching funds. Authorizes appropriations for such payment.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Passed House amended" stage on April 9, 2002. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on June 27, 2002: Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 461.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the House
- Passage by the Senate
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 107th Congress (2001-02), 377 of the 9,126 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 4.1 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
JAMES HANSEN (R-UT) introduced it on March 13, 2002. No cosponsors are recorded.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on March 13, 2002, 8995 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 8889 days ago, on June 27, 2002.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 107th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2003 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseIn committee, no floor vote yet
- SenateAwaits House passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers