PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 118-246.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Jan 4, 2025
Klamath Basin Water Agreement Support Act of 2024
This act expands the Klamath Basin Water Supply Enhancement Act of 2000, including by authorizing the Bureau of Reclamation to implement restoration activities in the Klamath Basin watershed in Oregon and California.
Specifically, Reclamation may plan, construct, operate, and maintain projects in the basin watershed, including
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
facilities to reduce fish entrainment (i.e., the transport of fish along the flow of water, out of their normal habitat and into unnatural or harmful environments);
projects that reduce or avoid impacts on aquatic resources caused by diversion of water for irrigation; and
projects that restore basin watershed habitats, such as tribal fishery resources held in trust.
Reclamation may also
undertake studies and improvements to implement restoration activities in the basin watershed;
enter into contracts and agreements with state and local governments, tribes, and private parties to implement restoration activities; and
accept and expend nonfederal funds in order to facilitate the activities.
In addition, the act authorizes Reclamation to reimburse Tulelake Irrigation District for up to 69% of the costs for the operation and maintenance of the irrigation Pumping Plant D in Tulelake, California.
Further, the act provides statutory authorization for Reclamation to implement the 2016 Klamath Power and Facilities Agreement that directs Reclamation to take ownership and operation of the Keno Dam and operation of the Link River Dam.
People & committees
Rep. Bentz, Cliff [R-OR-2] · R–OR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 118-246.
Became Public Law No: 118-246.
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 S7214-7215)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 H7265)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7265)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 7938.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7265-7266)
Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 692.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-847.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-847.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries Discharged
Subcommittee Hearings Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife, and Fisheries.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jul 17, 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.7938 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.7938 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.7938 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.7938 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.