[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 80 (Tuesday, May 13, 2025)]
[House]
[Pages H1972-H1973]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO ADDRESS POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF A CERTAIN
RECORD OF DECISION ON THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN FUND
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 1001) to provide for a memorandum of understanding to
address the impacts of a certain record of decision on the Upper
Colorado River Basin Fund.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 1001
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING TO ADDRESS POTENTIAL
IMPACTS OF A CERTAIN RECORD OF DECISION ON THE
UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN FUND.
(a) In General.--As soon as practicable after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, acting
through the Commissioner of Reclamation, and the Secretary of
Energy, acting through the Administrator of the Western Area
Power Administration, in consultation with the Glen Canyon
Dam Adaptive Management Work Group, shall enter into a
memorandum of understanding to explore and address the impact
that the record of decision entitled the ``Supplement to the
2016 Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management
Plan Record of Decision'' and dated July 2024 (referred to in
this section as the ``record of decision'') has on the Upper
Colorado River Basin Fund (referred to in this section as the
``Fund'').
(b) Required Plan.--The memorandum of understanding entered
into under subsection (a) shall, using information derived
from existing hydropower contracts, include the establishment
of a plan to--
(1) address the effects that the record of decision may
have on Fund obligations including routine operations,
maintenance, and replacement of critical infrastructure;
(2) address the impact that the record of decision has on
hydropower production at Glen Canyon Dam, including costs to
replace hydropower resources and grid reliability; and
(3) identify impacts that the record of decision has had on
species listed as a threatened species or an endangered
species under section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1533).
(c) Savings Clauses.--Nothing in this Act shall preempt
rights or obligations under subchapter II of chapter 5 of
title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the
``Administrative Procedure Act'').
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Hoyle)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.
General Leave
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
be given 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to
include extraneous material on H.R. 1001, the bill now under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
{time} 1630
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1001 sponsored by
Congresswoman Hageman. This bill requires the Bureau of Reclamation and
the Western Area Power Administration, or WAPA, to enter into a
memorandum of understanding aimed at addressing the impacts that bypass
flows at Glen Canyon Dam have had on the Upper Colorado River Basin
Fund.
These flows are an attempt to manage an invasive smallmouth bass
population that imperils the federally listed humpback chub below the
dam. While well-intentioned, this action comes at a steep cost.
In 2024, the bypass flows produced $20 million in lost hydropower
generation, which instead had to be replaced with power purchased on
the open market.
WAPA makes these purchases using the Basin Fund, which is funded by
hydropower revenues, not appropriations. In other words, utility
customers end up footing the very expensive bill to address the impacts
of predatory smallmouth bass.
The loss in revenues not only means higher electricity prices but
also negative impacts on the Colorado River system, as the Basin Fund
is the primary source of funding for operations and maintenance of the
system's critical infrastructure.
I want to be clear: H.R. 1001 does not prevent bypass flows. It does,
however, require the agencies to fully cooperate to minimize the
impacts of these flows on the grid and its customers. It also requires
coordination with hydropower customers and other stakeholders,
including the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group.
I support this legislation and reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. HOYLE of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 1001 would direct the Department of Energy and the
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies to
evaluate the potential impacts of the 2024 supplement to the 2016 Glen
Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan Record of
Decision on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund.
The Colorado River is an essential water resource, supplying water
for municipal and agricultural uses, energy production, and fish and
wildlife habitat. However, persistent drought, over-allocation of water
resources, and the escalating impacts of climate change have placed
unprecedented strain on the basin.
The record of decision was an important step in addressing species'
needs below the Glen Canyon Dam, and preliminary data showed promising
results in protecting native fish species.
As drought conditions worsen and water demand continues to increase,
it is more critical than ever to ensure water management appropriately
balances agricultural, municipal, industrial, and environmental needs.
This legislation will direct Bureau of Reclamation and the Western
Area Power Administration to analyze how the record of decision may
impact the fund's resources, hydropower generation at the Glen Canyon
Dam, and endangered species.
I hope to work with my colleagues across the aisle on advancing
meaningful legislation to safeguard environmental and cultural
resources while addressing the long-term challenges of drought and
climate change.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I reserve the balance
of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from
Wyoming (Ms. Hageman), the lead sponsor of this bill.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of my legislation, H.R.
1001, which requires the Bureau of Reclamation and the Western Area
Power Administration, or WAPA, to enter into a memorandum of
understanding to address the impacts that bypass flows at Glen Canyon
Dam have had on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund.
It is worth taking a moment to highlight why we are here today. Under
the Biden administration, the Bureau of Reclamation wanted to rush to
implement bypass flows to prevent smallmouth bass and other warm water
invasive nonnative fish from becoming established below the Glen Canyon
Dam outlet works.
This action, however, comes at significant costs as it would mean
foregoing hydropower generation for the majority of these releases.
The Bureau of Reclamation initiated its record of decision, or ROD,
over Glen Canyon Dam's long-term experimental management plan
supplemental EIS this past summer. It was signed on July 5, 2024, with
implementation beginning just 3 days later on July 8. Pretty doggone
quick.
[[Page H1973]]
The ROD calls for higher flows at the dam to combat the presence of
predatory smallmouth bass which threaten the federally protected
humpback chub. These higher flows bypass hydropower generators in order
to cool the river temperature below the dam in an attempt to disrupt
smallmouth bass downstream.
While this ROD was well-intentioned, it comes at a very serious cost
to communities and power customers. Due to the bypass requirements, the
lost hydropower generation must be replaced with power purchased on the
open market.
WAPA makes these purchases from the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund
which is funded by power revenues or, in other words, by the customers.
WAPA's preliminary estimate of energy replacement is about $20 million
more than it would have been without the bypass requirements. Going
forward, it projects the impact on customers to be even significantly
more.
The American people are fed up with these heavyhanded decisions by
the Federal Government that makes it increasingly difficult to get by
in this country, particularly if you are trying to raise a family.
Water is the interior West's most important resource.
For over 60 years, Glen Canyon Dam has been producing hydroelectric
power, providing reliable, flexible, low-cost, emission-free baseload
energy across the entire region. That is why this bill is important.
My bill requires the Bureau of Reclamation to acknowledge the effect
of the decision through a memorandum of understanding that measures the
economic, environmental, and reliability impacts of the action. I am
grateful that this important legislation is being considered today.
Ms. HOYLE of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the
legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, again, H.R. 1001 would bring WAPA, the
Bureau of Reclamation, and local stakeholders together to produce an
action plan to address the effects of the bypass flows on the Basin
Fund, as well as the impacts of diminished hydropower generation at
Glen Canyon Dam on grid reliability.
The plan will also require the Federal agencies to identify the
impacts of these actions on any species listed as threatened or
endangered under the Endangered Species Act.
I again thank Representative Hageman for tackling these important
issues.
I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1001.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________