Loading bill breakdown…
Loading bill breakdown…
Sponsored by Rep. Harriet M. Hageman (R-WY) · 2 active : 2 Republicans
Latest action: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
This bill directs the Bureau of Reclamation and the Western Area Power Administration, in consultation with the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group, to enter into a memorandum of understanding to explore and address the impact that the 2024 record of decision entitled
Supplement to the 2016 Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan Record of Decision
has on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund. The memorandum of understanding must include a plan to (1) address the effects that the decision may have on the fund's obligations, (2) address the impact that the decision has on hydropower production at Glen Canyon Dam, and (3) identify impacts that the decision has had on species listed as threatened or endangered species.
By way of background, Reclamation published a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) in 2024. The SEIS revises the 2016 LTEMP Record of Decision to address two issues: (1) responding to the threat of the invasive smallmouth bass below Glen Canyon Dam, and (2) incorporating the latest sediment science to assess when high-flow experiments should be conducted in order to protect the endangered humpback chub.
Members fall into . 2 representatives don’t have enough data yet and are marked “insufficient data”. Non-voting delegates are not counted. The bill is not before the House right now; these scores show where members would stand.
Bars show each input from 0 to 100: ideology gap, scorecard gap, , and the . is the seat’s partisan lean, and shows how much of the input data a score has.
Loading similar votes
These members have less than half of the model’s inputs, so their scores are not banded or ranked.
Ideology is each member’s score. The cluster low on the chart includes the bill’s 3 sponsor and cosponsors in the House: they have already committed, so they score as entrenched. 2 representatives without a DW-NOMINATE score or with insufficient data are not plotted.
Not applicable in the House. There is not enough similar voting history (weight 0.5 of 5.0 needed), so this input is left out of the score rather than counted as missing.
