POWER Act

Bill Number

H.R. 2074

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Water Resources Development

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-03-11: Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.

Last Updated

2026-03-06T20:45:52Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The Protecting Our Water Energy Resources Act (POWER Act), H.R. 2074, aims to restrict the removal or "breaching" of federally operated dams and the retirement of hydropower generation from these dams. It prioritizes protecting energy reliability, electricity affordability, navigation, and economic interests by imposing strict conditions on such actions.

Key Provisions

• Prohibition on Breaching Federally Operated Dams (Section 2):
• The Secretary of the Army cannot breach (remove or dismantle) a federally operated dam if it would:
• Increase carbon emissions by more than 5% (consult with Secretary of Energy).
• Reduce navigability (ease of travel for boats and ships) for commercial purposes on the affected waterway (consult with Secretary of Transportation).
• Raise the price of shipped products, including farm goods, by at least 5% (consult with Secretaries of Agriculture and Commerce).
• Require a replacement energy source that uses at least 5% more land than the dam currently occupies.
• Before considering a breach, the Secretary of the Army must conduct a study (with the Secretary of the Interior) on the dam's land use.
• All decisions require consultation with relevant state agencies where the dam is located.
• This rule overrides other existing laws.

• Prohibition on Retiring Hydropower Generation (Section 3):
• The Secretary of the Interior (for dams run by the Bureau of Reclamation) or Secretary of the Army (for dams run by the Army Corps of Engineers) cannot retire (shut down) hydropower from a federally operated dam if it would:
• Increase customer electricity rates by more than 5%.
• Reduce energy reliability (steady power supply) by more than 5% in parts of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, or California, compared to the prior 12 months (as assessed by the Bonneville Power Administration, a federal agency managing power in the region).
• Within 30 days of retiring any hydropower source, the secretaries must replace 100% of the "baseload generation" (the minimum constant power needed for the electrical grid).
• Definitions clarify terms: "Energy generation source" means a federal dam producing hydropower; "Secretary" refers to the appropriate federal official based on the operating agency.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Introduces absolute prohibitions on dam breaching and hydropower retirement under specified thresholds (e.g., 5% limits on emissions, costs, reliability, or land use), which take precedence over any conflicting laws.
• Mandates new consultations across federal agencies (Energy, Transportation, Agriculture, Commerce) and with states, adding procedural hurdles not previously required.
• Requires a land-use study for potential breaches and full baseload replacement within 30 days of retirement, creating new analytical and replacement obligations.
• Focuses protections on hydropower in the Pacific Northwest and California, potentially limiting environmental or restoration efforts that might otherwise proceed under laws like the Endangered Species Act or Clean Water Act.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: Restricts the Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation from pursuing dam removals or hydropower shutdowns without extensive analysis and inter-agency coordination, increasing administrative burdens and costs for the Departments of the Army, Interior, Energy, Transportation, Agriculture, and Commerce. The Bonneville Power Administration gains a formal role in reliability assessments.
• On Citizens: Could stabilize electricity rates and supply for residents in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and California by preventing disruptions from dam-related changes, but might delay environmental cleanups or fish habitat restorations that could benefit local ecosystems and communities.
• On International Relations: No direct impacts mentioned, as the bill focuses on domestic federal dams and regional U.S. energy systems.
• Broader Economic Effects: Protects commercial shipping and agriculture by maintaining navigable waterways and stable transport costs, potentially benefiting farmers, exporters, and businesses reliant on river transport.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Federal Agencies: Army Corps of Engineers, Bureau of Reclamation, Departments of Energy, Transportation, Agriculture, and Commerce, and Bonneville Power Administration (directly involved in decisions and consultations).
• State Governments: Officials in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and California (required for input on dams in their jurisdictions).
• Energy Consumers and Utilities: Residents and businesses in the listed states, who could see more stable power rates and reliability.
• Commercial and Agricultural Interests: Shipping companies, farmers, and exporters using affected waterways, protected from cost increases.
• Environmental and Tribal Groups: Potentially disadvantaged if dam removals for ecological reasons (e.g., salmon migration) are blocked, though not explicitly addressed.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: The "notwithstanding any other provision of law" clause could create conflicts with environmental statutes (e.g., those promoting dam removal for wildlife), leading to potential lawsuits over federal authority and economic vs. ecological priorities. The 5% thresholds introduce quantifiable standards that courts might scrutinize for arbitrariness.
• Constitutional: Reinforces federal control over interstate waters and energy infrastructure under the Commerce Clause (regulating navigation and trade) but may face challenges if seen as unduly limiting executive discretion in resource management.
• Political: Positions the bill as a defense of traditional hydropower and economic stability in the West, potentially appealing to rural and agricultural constituencies while drawing opposition from conservation advocates; introduced by representatives from dam-heavy states, it reflects regional priorities in national energy policy debates.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4]

Cosponsors (3)

Rep. Baumgartner, Michael [R-WA-5], Rep. Fulcher, Russ [R-ID-1], Rep. Bentz, Cliff [R-OR-2]

Recent Actions

• 2025-03-11: Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
• 2025-03-11: Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
• 2025-03-11: Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
• 2025-03-11: Introduced in House
• 2025-03-11: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Protecting Our Water Energy Resources Act — issued 2025-03-11 — PDF (4 pages)