Overview

Title

Providing for corrections in the enrollment of S. 4367.

ELI5 AI

S. CON. RES. 46 is a plan to fix some words and details in another law about taking care of rivers and harbors, making sure everything is clear and correct, like changing a wrong word from "food" to "flood."

Summary AI

S. CON. RES. 46 is a resolution that directs corrections to be made in the enrollment of S. 4367, an Act primarily focused on the improvement and conservation of U.S. rivers and harbors. These corrections involve revising specific sections of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, such as altering terminologies like replacing "maximum Federal cost" with "Federal share of the cost" and fixing typographical errors such as changing "food" to "flood." The resolution aims to ensure clarity and accuracy in the language of the Act.

Published

2024-12-18
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: SENATE
Status: Agreed to Senate
Date: 2024-12-18
Package ID: BILLS-118sconres46ats

Keywords AI

water resources development act enrollment corrections federal share of the cost flood management typographical errors project financial management financial responsibility pre-design planning costs terminology change u.s. rivers and harbors

Sources

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
1
Words:
396
Pages:
2
Sentences:
6

Language

Nouns: 97
Verbs: 32
Adjectives: 16
Adverbs: 0
Numbers: 37
Entities: 34

Complexity

Average Token Length:
3.72
Average Sentence Length:
66.00
Token Entropy:
4.33
Readability (ARI):
32.04

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

This congressional resolution, identified as S. Con. Res. 46, is focused on making corrections to the enrollment of a previous piece of legislation, S. 4367. The resolution highlights adjustments to specific sections of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, which pertains to the development and conservation of U.S. water resources, including its rivers and harbors. The modifications involve changes to terminology and language to clarify financial responsibilities and correct minor drafting errors.

Summary of Significant Issues

Several issues arise from the proposed corrections in this resolution:

  1. Financial Responsibility: The alteration from "maximum Federal cost" to "Federal share of the cost" suggests a significant shift in how financial responsibilities for water resource projects are to be defined. This change could have substantial implications for budget planning and cost-sharing agreements between federal entities and other stakeholders, such as state governments or private sectors.

  2. Planning and Budgeting Adjustments: The modification in section 1113(d), which replaces "Reconnaissance study" with "Pre-design planning costs," signals a redefinition of initial project phases. This change could influence how projects are evaluated and funded in their early stages, impacting timelines and resource allocations.

  3. Funding Source Ambiguity: Changing "United States funds" to just "United States" in section 204(c)(1) might introduce confusion regarding the exact nature of the funds being discussed; this could complicate budgeting and financial tracking within these federal projects.

  4. Error Corrections: A typographical correction is made by changing "food" to "flood" in section 1203(a)(1). Addressing such a typo is crucial as it could otherwise lead to misunderstandings concerning the objectives and funding context of the projects involved, particularly in distinguishing between flood management and unrelated matters like food distribution.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

  1. Broad Public Impact: The corrections aiming for clarity in legal texts can help ensure that taxpayer funds are used appropriately and according to the intended purposes of federal water resource projects. By specifying financial terms and correcting errors, the resolution seeks to mitigate potential misinterpretations that can lead to costly delays and inefficiencies.

  2. Impact on Specific Stakeholders:

  3. Federal Agencies: These entities may need to adjust their project planning and financial management processes in response to clarified funding responsibilities and project planning terminology.
  4. State and Local Governments: They might experience changes in cost-sharing dynamics and require recalibration of budgets to align with the newly defined federal financial contributions.
  5. Environmental Organizations: Such groups might be concerned with how these terminological and procedural changes influence environmental management and conservation strategies, particularly if there are perceived shifts in funding or regulatory burdens.
  6. Engineering and Construction Firms: Companies involved in federal water resource projects could see changes in contract scopes or terms of reference, affecting project execution.

Overall, S. Con. Res. 46 represents a technical initiative aimed at refining legislative language to ensure that the implementation of water resources projects is aligned with the precise intentions of the law. While the resolution itself does not introduce new policies, its implications on existing and future projects underscore the importance of clear and precise legislative language.

Issues

  • The terminology change from 'maximum Federal cost' to 'Federal share of the cost' in section 203(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2231(d)) might lead to ambiguity regarding financial responsibility and potential cost-sharing between federal and other entities. This change could impact funding allocations and project financial management by altering perceived or actual fiscal responsibilities. [Section 203(d)]

  • Replacing 'Reconnaissance study' with 'Pre-design planning costs' in section 1113(d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 alters the scope, focus, or financial implications of preliminary phase project activities. This change could affect how projects are planned and budgeted, potentially increasing or decreasing the initial funding allocated for these activities. [Section 1113(d)]

  • The amendment altering 'United States funds' to 'United States' in section 204(c)(1) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2232(c)(1)) may introduce ambiguity regarding the source and type of funding and could affect accountability and tracking of financial operations within federal projects. [Section 204(c)(1)]

  • The correction of the word 'food' to 'flood' in section 1203(a)(1) addresses a potential typographical error that could significantly alter the legal text's meaning and intent, impacting project descriptions and funding requisites related to flood management rather than food distribution or safety. [Section 1203(a)(1)]

  • The use of legal references, such as those to sections of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, while necessary for legal accuracy, may be challenging for the general public to comprehend without additional context, potentially limiting transparency and public engagement in legislative developments. [Varied references throughout]

Sections

Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.

(1) Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section outlines corrections to S. 4367, a bill related to U.S. water resources development, specifying changes to terminology and language in various sections to accurately describe financial responsibilities and clarify text related to planning and flood management.