PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 82 · Passed Senate without amendment · Oct 18, 2011
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on October 3, 2011. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Hoover Power Allocation Act of 2011 - (Sec. 1) Amends the Hoover Power Plant Act of 1984 (HPPA) to modify, commencing October 1, 2017, certain statutory schedules governing contracts for delivery of hydroelectric power generated at Hoover Dam to specified localities in Arizona, California, and Nevada.
(Sec. 2) Directs the Secretary of Energy to: (1) create, from certain apportioned allocations of contingent capacity and firm energy, a resource pool equal to 5% of the full rated capacity of 2.074 million kilowatts and associated firm energy; (2) offer Schedule D contingency capacity and firm energy to new allottees not receiving contingent capacity and firm energy for delivery commencing October 1, 2017; and (3) allocate through the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) for delivery, commencing October 1, 2017, 66.7% of Schedule D contingent capacity and firm energy to specified new allottees located within the marketing area for the Boulder City Area Projects.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires each contract offered under HPPA to: (1) authorize and require WAPA to collect from new allottees a pro rata share of Hoover Dam repayable advances paid for by contractors before October 1, 2017, and to remit such amounts to the contractors that paid such advances in proportion to the amounts paid by them as specified in a certain Implementation Agreement; (2) permit transactions with an independent system operator; and (3) contain the same material terms included in those long-term contracts for purchases from the Hoover Power Plant that were made in accordance with HPPA and are in existence on the date of enactment of this Act.
Subjects the contractual obligation of the Secretary to deliver contingent capacity and firm energy under HPPA to the availability of the water needed to produce such contingent capacity and firm energy.
Continues through FY2067 the requirements of HPPA as the exclusive method for (in effect, congressional oversight of) the disposal of capacity and energy from Hoover Dam.
People & committees
Rep. Heck, Joseph J. [R-NV-3] · R–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-72.
Became Public Law No: 112-72.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6692)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6692)
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 185.
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 H6476-6479)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6476-6479)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 470.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6476-6480)
Mr. Bishop (UT) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 104.
Committee on The Budget discharged.
Committee on The Budget discharged.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-159, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 112-159, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported 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.470 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.470 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.470 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.470 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.