To provide for a memorandum of understanding to address the impacts of a certain record of decision on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund.
- Bill Number
- H.R. 1001
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Water Resources Development
- Status
- Passed House
- Latest Action
- 2025-05-14: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2026-07-10T17:13:48Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This legislation, H.R. 1001, aims to require federal agencies to create a formal agreement to study and address how a specific environmental decision affects funding for water and power operations in the Upper Colorado River Basin. The decision in question is a 2024 update to a long-term management plan for Glen Canyon Dam, which manages water releases to balance environmental protection, hydropower generation, and other uses.
Key Provisions
- Mandated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU): The Secretary of the Interior (via the Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner) and the Secretary of Energy (via the Western Area Power Administration Administrator) must enter into an MOU as soon as possible after the bill's enactment. This will be done in consultation with the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group (a group of experts and stakeholders advising on dam operations).
- Focus of the MOU: The agreement must explore and mitigate the effects of the July 2024 "Supplement to the 2016 Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan Record of Decision" (a formal administrative decision on dam management) on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund (a fund supporting water infrastructure and operations in the region).
- Required Plan Within the MOU: Using data from existing hydropower contracts, the MOU must establish a plan covering:
- Effects on the Fund's responsibilities, such as day-to-day operations, maintenance, and upgrades to essential water and power infrastructure.
- Impacts on electricity production at Glen Canyon Dam, including costs to replace lost power and risks to the stability of the electrical grid.
- Identification of effects on species protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (a federal law that safeguards animals and plants at risk of extinction, like certain fish in the Colorado River).
- Savings Clause: The bill does not override or interfere with rights under the Administrative Procedure Act (a law that governs how federal agencies make and challenge rules and decisions).
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This bill introduces no direct amendments to prior laws but mandates new collaborative actions in response to the 2024 record of decision. It builds on existing frameworks like the 2016 Glen Canyon Dam management plan and the Endangered Species Act by requiring a targeted MOU to address potential unintended consequences, without altering core legal obligations.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The Departments of the Interior and Energy will face requirements to collaborate and develop plans, potentially increasing administrative workload and coordination with stakeholders. This could lead to adjusted funding priorities for the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund to cover maintenance and power replacement costs.
- On Citizens: Residents in the southwestern U.S., particularly in states relying on Colorado River water and hydropower (e.g., for electricity and irrigation), may see efforts to maintain reliable power and water services. However, it could indirectly affect energy costs if hydropower production declines.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though the Colorado River's management involves shared U.S.-Mexico water obligations under a 1944 treaty; any changes to dam operations could influence cross-border water flows if environmental protections intensify.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agencies: Bureau of Reclamation (Interior Department) and Western Area Power Administration (Energy Department), responsible for implementing the MOU.
- Advisory Group: Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group, which includes representatives from environmental organizations, tribes, states, and power utilities.
- Regional Interests: Upper Colorado River Basin states (Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico), tribal nations with water rights, hydropower customers (e.g., utilities serving homes and businesses), and environmental groups focused on endangered species protection.
- Broader Public: Communities dependent on affordable hydropower and stable water supplies in the arid Southwest.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: The savings clause preserves the ability to challenge the 2024 record of decision through standard court processes under the Administrative Procedure Act, avoiding any perception of congressional overreach. It promotes compliance with the Endangered Species Act by explicitly requiring analysis of wildlife impacts.
- Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's authority to direct executive agencies on public lands and resource management (Article IV), without infringing on separation of powers.
- Political: Highlights ongoing tensions in Western water policy between energy production, environmental conservation, and infrastructure funding; the bill's referral to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources suggests potential bipartisan interest in balancing these priorities amid climate-driven water shortages.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large]
Cosponsors (2)
Rep. Maloy, Celeste [R-UT-2], Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4]
Recent Actions
- 2025-05-14: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- 2025-05-13: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- 2025-05-13: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1972)
- 2025-05-13: Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1972)
- 2025-05-13: DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1001.
- 2025-05-13: Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1972-1973)
- 2025-05-13: Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 2025-04-17: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 38.
- 2025-04-17: Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-61.
- 2025-04-17: Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-61.
- 2025-02-12: Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
- 2025-02-12: Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- 2025-02-05: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-02-05: Introduced in House
- 2025-02-05: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- An Act To provide for a memorandum of understanding to address the impacts of a certain record of decision on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund. — issued 2025-05-13 — PDF (4 pages)
- To provide for a memorandum of understanding to address the impacts of a certain record of decision on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund. — issued 2025-02-05 — PDF (3 pages)
- An Act To provide for a memorandum of understanding to address the impacts of a certain record of decision on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund. — issued 2025-05-14 — PDF (3 pages)
- To provide for a memorandum of understanding to address the impacts of a certain record of decision on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund. — issued 2025-04-17 — PDF (6 pages)