PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 23, 2023
Northwest Energy Security Act
This bill requires Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) operations to be consistent with a specified decision. The system includes dams in the Columbia and Snake rivers in the Pacific Northwest.
Specifically, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Bonneville Power Administration, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must operate the FCRPS consistent with the Columbia River System Operations Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision dated September 2020. The preferred alternative outlined in that decision would allow specified dams in the lower Snake River to remain in place.
The decision may be amended if each agency determines that (1) changes are necessary for public safety or electrical grid reliability, or (2) certain requirements in the decision are no longer necessary.
Further, the bill requires statutory authorization for any structural modification, action, study, or engineering plan that (1) restricts FCRPS hydroelectric dam generation; or (2) limits navigation on the Snake River in Washington, Oregon, or Idaho.
People & committees
Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID] · R–ID
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 Environment and Public Works.
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.966 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.966 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.966 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.966 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.