PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 356.
Congressional Research Service
Version 18 · Reported to House amended, Part I · May 30, 2012
Bonneville Unit Clean Hydropower Facilitation Act - (Sec. 3) Declares that, in order to facilitate hydropower development on the Diamond Fork System (Utah), a certain amount of reimbursable costs allocated to project power in the Power Appendix of the October 2004 Supplement to the 1988 Bonneville Unit Definite Plan Report shall be considered final costs, as well as specified costs in excess of the total maximum repayment obligation, subject to the same terms and conditions.
(Sec. 4) States that: (1) this Act does not obligate the Western Area Power Administration to purchase or market any of the power produced by the Diamond Fork power plant, and (2) none of the costs associated with development of transmission facilities to transmit power from the Diamond Fork power plant shall be assigned to power for the purpose of Colorado River Storage Project ratemaking.
(Sec. 5) Prohibits any hydroelectric power generation or transmission facility on the Diamond Fork System from being financed or refinanced with any obligation: (1) whose interest enjoys federal tax-exempt status, or (2) which enjoys certain federal tax credits.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 6) Directs the Secretary of the Interior to report to certain congressional committees if hydropower production on the Diamond Fork System has not commenced 24 months after enactment of this Act, stating the reasons such production has not commenced, and presenting a detailed timeline for future hydropower production.
(Sec. 7) Provides that the budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You Go Act of 2010, shall be determined by reference to the latest statement titled "Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation" for this Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, provided that such statement has been submitted prior to vote on passage.
(Sec. 8) Prohibits the use of Western Area Power Administration borrowing authority under the Hoover Power Plant Act of 1984 to fund any study or construction of transmission facilities developed as a result of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Chaffetz, Jason [R-UT-3] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 356.
Committee on The Budget discharged.
Committee on The Budget discharged.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-503, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-503, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Water and Power Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, 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 Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, 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.
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.460 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.460 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.460 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.460 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.