PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 19, 2001
Salmon Planning Act - Directs the Secretary of Commerce to enter into an arrangement with the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) providing for peer review of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) biological opinion regarding the Operation of the Federal Columbia River power system, issued December 21, 2000, and any subsequent modification of it (opinion) and submission of a report on the results.Directs: (1) the Secretary of Commerce to publish a determination of whether implementation of the salmon recovery measures in the opinion are sufficient to achieve recovery, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, of the salmon and steelhead populations; and if not, whether partially removing the four lower Snake River dams (the dams) are necessary to restore Snake River salmon and steelhead populations; (2) the Secretary of the Interior to publish a determination of whether partially removing the dams are necessary to meet treaty obligations; and (3) the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to publish a determination of whether partially removing the dams are necessary to meet Federal Water Pollution Control Act requirements. Directs the Comptroller General to study the potential effects of partially removing the dams.Authorizes the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Corps of Engineers, to partially remove the dams if the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of the Interior, or the EPA Administrator finds that such action is necessary to meet the aforementioned requirements. Directs the Secretary of the Army to undertake such preliminary engineering, design, construction, and other activities as necessary to remove the dams.
People & committees
Rep. McDermott, Jim [D-WA-7] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Received from Commerce.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior, Commerce.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1393-1394)
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.2573 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.2573 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.2573 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.2573 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.