PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 6, 2025
Basin Fund Preservation Act
This bill directs the Bureau of Reclamation and the Western Area Power Administration, in consultation with the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive Management Work Group, to enter into a memorandum of understanding to explore and address the impact that the 2024 record of decision entitled Supplement to the 2016 Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan Record of Decision has on the Upper Colorado River Basin Fund. The memorandum of understanding must include a plan to (1) address the effects that the decision may have on the fund's obligations, (2) address the impact that the decision has on hydropower production at Glen Canyon Dam, and (3) identify impacts that the decision has had on species listed as threatened or endangered species.
By way of background, Reclamation published a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for the Glen Canyon Dam Long-Term Experimental and Management Plan (LTEMP) in 2024. The SEIS revises the 2016 LTEMP Record of Decision to address two issues: (1) responding to the threat of the invasive smallmouth bass below Glen Canyon Dam, and (2) incorporating the latest sediment science to assess when high-flow experiments should be conducted in order to protect the endangered humpback chub.
People & committees
Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Introduced in Senate
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 S.887 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 S.887 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 S.887 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 S.887 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.