Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic River Study Act
Latest action · Nov 13, 2006 Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Progress
Where this bill reached, and when. A stage with no date was not reached; one that failed a vote and later carried shows the date it carried.
- IntroducedMar 16, 2005
- Passed HouseSep 25, 2006
- Passed SenateNot reached
- To the PresidentNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
Summary
Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic River Study Act - Amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate a specified segment of the lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook in Connecticut for study for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
Cosponsors 4
Members who signed on, in the order they did. All signed on Mar 16, 2005.
| Seat | Cosponsor | Signed on | |
|---|---|---|---|
| R-CT | Christopher Shays | Original | Mar 16, 2005 |
| D-CT | John B. Larson | Original | Mar 16, 2005 |
| R-CT | Rob Simmons | Original | Mar 16, 2005 |
| D-CT | Rosa L. DeLauro | Original | Mar 16, 2005 |
Committees 2
Where it was sent and what each committee and subcommittee did with it, in order.
| Chamber | Committee | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| House | Natural Resources Committee | Referred Mar 16, 2005 |
| Federal Lands Subcommittee | Referred Mar 23, 2005 | |
| Senate | Energy and Natural Resources Committee | Referred Nov 13, 2006 |
Actions 11
Everything that happened, newest first.
- Nov 13, 2006Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- Sep 26, 2006Received in the Senate.
- Sep 25, 2006Mr. Renzi moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- Sep 25, 2006Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6937-6938)
- Sep 25, 2006DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1344.
- Sep 25, 2006Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6937)
- Sep 25, 2006Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Mar 23, 2005Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks.
- Mar 23, 2005Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
- Mar 16, 2005Introduced in House
- Mar 16, 2005Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Research
What has been written about this bill: committee reports, cost estimates, the sponsor’s authority statement, printed hearings and the Congressional Research Service’s work.
Printed hearings 1
Hearings whose printed record names this bill, newest first: hearings on it, and wider hearings where it came up.
| Number | Hearing | Committee | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| S. Hrg. 109-213 | AMEND THE WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT IN CONNECTICUT AND NEW JERSEY; INCREASE PIPELINE IN DELAWARE; AMEND THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT; AND EVALUATE COASTAL REGION IN DELAWARE59 pages | Energy and Natural Resources Committee | Sep 22, 2005 |
Related bills 1
Companion bills and other measures the record links to this one.
| Bill | Title | Relationship | Latest action |
|---|---|---|---|
| S 435 | Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic River Study Act of 2005 | Related bill | Nov 27, 2006 |
Titles 3
Every title it has carried, official and short, at each stage.
- Official Title as Introduced
- To amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate a segment of the Farmington River and Salmon Brook in the State of Connecticut for study for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, and for other purposes.
- Short Titles as Introduced
- Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic River Study Act
- Short Titles as Passed House
- Lower Farmington River and Salmon Brook Wild and Scenic River Study Act
Subjects
Assigned by the Library of Congress. Policy area: Public Lands and Natural Resources.
Text 3
Each version as it was printed, newest first.
- Nov 13, 2006Referred in Senate
- Sep 25, 2006Engrossed in House
- Mar 16, 2005Introduced in House
Everything here is as published by Congress: the summary is the Congressional Research Service's, the action wording is the clerks', and the subjects are the Library of Congress's. How far it got is read from the actions themselves, taking the most recent one of each kind, so a bill that failed a vote and later passed is shown as having passed. Records come from this bill on Congress.gov and govinfo.gov; cost estimates are the Congressional Budget Office's, and the hearings are the printed hearings GovInfo publishes, which can appear months after the hearing.