PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 1, 2012
Saving Our Dams and New Hydropower Development and Jobs Act of 2012 - Amends the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 to authorize small conduit hydropower development. Designates the Power Resources Office of the Bureau of Reclamation as the lead office of small conduit hydropower policy and procedure-setting activities.
Requires the Administrators of the Bonneville Power Administration, the Western Area Power Administration, the Southwestern Power Administration, and the Southeastern Power Administration to include in monthly billings sent to customers estimates and reports of costs related to compliance with federal environmental laws impacting fish and wildlife.
Authorizes the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation to partner or enter into an agreement with local joint power authorities to complete planning and feasibility studies authorized by Congress for water storage projects.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits the Bureau of Reclamation and other federal agencies from bypassing hydroelectric turbines if a state in which the affected facilities are located has declared a drought emergency or if such bypass could result in harming endangered fish, unless such bypasses are necessary for flood control purposes.
Exempts from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or impact statement an electricity right-of-way holder, including a Power Marketing Administration, that applies to remove insect-infected trees or other hazardous fuels within 500 feet of the right-of-way.
Prohibits: (1) federal funds from being used to implement a new program, project, activity, or action required by or proposed in a March 16, 2012, memorandum from Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy, to the Power Marketing Administrators, until a report justifying the implementation of such program, project, activity, or action is submitted to Congress; (2) federal funds from being used to remove, breach, or study the removal or breaching of any hydroelectric-producing dam unless explicitly authorized by Congress; (3) federal funds or funding from congressionally chartered organizations that provide grants impacting federal land and fish and wildlife from being used for mitigation activities related to hydroelectric-producing dam removal unless explicitly authorized by Congress; and (4) federal agencies or congressionally chartered organizations that provide grants impacting federal land and fish and wildlife from funding any nongovernmental organization that is or was involved in litigation that would negatively impact hydropower generation during the preceding 10 years.
People & committees
Rep. Hastings, Doc [R-WA-4] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Power.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 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 Energy and Commerce, 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: Aug 14, 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.6247 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.6247 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.6247 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.6247 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.