S. 398: A bill to direct the Secretary of the Army to provide for modification of certain Federal water resources development projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, and for other purposes.

S. 398: A bill to direct the Secretary of the Army to provide for modification of certain Federal water resources development projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, and for other purposes.

115th Congress · introduced 2017-02-15 · Water Resources Development · Latest: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.

federal

Follow this bill, step by step

Where it came from: introduced 2017-02-15 · official record
Who proposed it: Sen. Nelson, Bill [D-FL] · what a sponsor is
What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
Where it stands now: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.

What does this mean?

Official title

A bill to direct the Secretary of the Army to provide for modification of certain Federal water resources development projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, and for other purposes.

Plain summary

This bill directs the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to operate the federal water resources projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia in a manner that ensures the maintenance of freshwater flows. The term "freshwater flows" is defined as the quality, quantity, timing, and variability of freshwater flows required to: (1) support and reestablish the ecological integrity of the rivers, commercial and recreational fisheries dependent on freshwater flows into Apalachicola Bay and adjacent waters, and thriving and diverse fish, wildlife, and plant populations similar to those found prior to construction of the projects; (2) restore and recover species that are endangered, threatened, or at risk; and (3) prevent significantly harmful adverse impacts to the Chattahoochee and Apalachicola River ecosystems. The Corps of Engineers must enter into an arrangement for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to conduct a study that evaluates existing data related to freshwater flows and provides recommendations on how to maintain such flows. The Corps shall not issue a final water control manual based on the final environmental impact statement titled "Update of the Water Control Manual for the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River Basin in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia and a Water Supply Storage Assessment," dated December 2016, but shall: (1) issue revised water control manuals for such projects that ensure the maintenance of freshwater flows, considering the findings of NOAA's study; (2) ensure that operational modifications needed to maintain freshwater flows are achieved while providing system-wide balance in conservation storage through the maintenance of water levels in the same action zone for each of the project reservoirs; (3) enter into an arrangement for the National Academy of Sciences to carry out an independent peer review of each revised manual; and (4) obtain written approval from the Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, NOAA, and the U.S. Geological Survey of each manual developed before a final manual may be issued.

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.

What a vote does

A “Yea” vote

If it passes both chambers and is signed, it becomes law.

A “Nay” vote

If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.

PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).

What does this mean? (plain words)

Official text

A bill to direct the Secretary of the Army to provide for modification of certain Federal water resources development projects on the Apalachicola, Chattahoochee, and Flint Rivers, and for other purposes.

Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)

AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text

No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.

Limited to a few requests an hour per person.

The strongest published arguments

Arguments for (supporters)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Arguments against (opponents)

Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

Alternatives

Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.

How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes

Officials and money

Sponsor: Sen. Nelson, Bill [D-FL] · 0 cosponsors

Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.

No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.

Words on this page, explained (1)

Bill: A proposed law. It becomes law only if it passes the legislature and is signed by the president or governor (or a veto is overridden).

Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.

Sources

Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in Senate)
Congress.gov
Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-115s398.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/115/s>

Record fed-us-cong115-s398 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong115 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong115