Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
The bill prohibits breaching federally operated dams or retiring federally operated hydropower sources when specified negative impacts exceed 5 percent thresholds. It requires the Army Corps (or Interior for Reclamation) to consult relevant federal and state agencies when assessing carbon emissions, navigability, and shipping price impacts, and to study dam acreage.
Environmental restoration goals vs protecting hydropower generation
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that prescribes prohibitions and numeric thresholds governing the breaching of federally operated dams and the retirement of federally operated hydropower, and it includes administrative requirements (consultations and a study).
The bill prohibits breaching federally operated dams or retiring federally operated hydropower sources when specified negative impacts exceed 5 percent thresholds.
It requires the Army Corps (or Interior for Reclamation) to consult relevant federal and state agencies when assessing carbon emissions, navigability, and shipping price impacts, and to study dam acreage.
It bars retirement of federally operated hydropower if it would raise electricity rates over 5 percent or reduce reliability by over 5 percent in specified Western states, and mandates replacement of 100% of baseload generation within 30 days of retirement.
Narrow but substantive limits on federal agency discretion create opposition; no funding offset or broad compromise elements; Senate hurdle significant.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that prescribes prohibitions and numeric thresholds governing the breaching of federally operated dams and the retirement of federally operated hydropower, and it includes administrative requirements (consultations and a study). It specifies responsible agencies and some deadlines but leaves key measurement, funding, and enforcement details unspecified.
Environmental restoration goals vs protecting hydropower generation
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Environmental restoration goals vs protecting hydropower generation
Likely critical.
Would worry the bill blocks river restoration and species recovery by making dam removal effectively difficult.
Also skeptical that the 30-day, 100% baseload replacement requirement is realistic and may preserve fossil backup.
Mixed and cautious.
Values protecting reliability and commerce but concerned about blunt thresholds and tight timelines.
Would want clearer definitions, cost estimates, and broader stakeholder processes.
Generally supportive.
Sees the bill as protecting critical water, energy, and agricultural interests from risky dam removals and ensuring continued hydropower and navigation benefits.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow but substantive limits on federal agency discretion create opposition; no funding offset or broad compromise elements; Senate hurdle significant.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Environmental restoration goals vs protecting hydropower generation
Narrow but substantive limits on federal agency discretion create opposition; no funding offset or broad compromise elements; Senate hurdle…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that prescribes prohibitions and numeric thresholds governing the breaching of federally operated dams and the retirement of federally…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.