PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Dec 12, 2017
Promoting Closed-Loop Pumped Storage Hydropower Act
(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Federal Power Act to authorize the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to establish an expedited licensing process for issuing and amending licenses and preliminary permits for closed-loop pumped storage projects (in which the upper and lower reservoirs do not impound or directly withdraw water from navigable waters, or that are not continuously connected to a naturally flowing water feature).
In establishing the expedited process, FERC shall convene an interagency task force with appropriate federal and state agencies and Indian tribes to coordinate the regulatory process associated with the authorizations required to construct and operate closed-loop pumped storage projects.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
FERC must assess the safety of existing dams and other structures related to the project before issuing any license for a closed-loop storage project.
FERC must hold a workshop to explore potential opportunities for development of storage projects at abandoned mine sites.
FERC must also establish criteria that a project shall meet to qualify as a closed-loop pumped storage under this bill, including requiring that the project cause little to no change to existing surface and groundwater flows and uses and that the project is unlikely to adversely affect species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
(Sec. 3) Licensees are not required to pay an annual charge for administrative expenses until construction commences.
People & committees
Rep. Griffith, H. Morgan [R-VA-9] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9812)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9812)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2880.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9812-9814)
Mr. Upton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 340.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-458.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H. Rept. 115-458.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote .
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.2880 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.2880 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.2880 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.2880 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.