Congress embeds firearms rule and study restrictions in $47B water-energy bill
H.R. 9022 — Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2027 · Filed by Chuck Fleischmann (R-TN) · Introduced May 22, 2026 · Reported out
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This is a $47+ billion appropriations bill funding energy, water, and related infrastructure for fiscal year 2027. It allocates money to the Army Corps of Engineers for river, harbor, and flood control projects; the Interior Department's Bureau of Reclamation for water management and dam operations; and the Department of Energy for nuclear weapons, civilian energy research, power marketing, and environmental cleanup. The bill includes routine operational funding and some policy riders, including a provision allowing firearms at Corps water projects and restrictions on certain water studies.
Why we flagged it
The bill is primarily a routine annual appropriations measure for water and energy infrastructure, but it carries several policy riders (firearms at water projects, restrictions on water studies, amendments to prior law) that extend beyond pure funding allocation.
- Section 108 prohibits the Secretary of the Army from enforcing regulations that bar individuals from possessing firearms at Corps water projects, if state law permits. Unrelated to appropriations.
- Section 106 prohibits funds from being used for water supply reallocation studies at Wolf Creek Dam, Kentucky. Restricts executive discretion on a specific project.
3 unrelated provisions were flagged in total.
What the text implies
- Section 108 (firearms at water projects) may create liability exposure for the Corps if a firearm is used to harm someone at a project, and may complicate emergency response and security protocols at dams and reservoirs.
- Section 106 (Wolf Creek Dam study restriction) prevents the Corps from studying water supply reallocation, potentially locking in current allocation patterns even if climate change or regional demand shifts warrant reconsideration.
The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
construction and engineering contractors (Corps projects); water utilities and agricultural water users (Reclamation projects); nuclear weapons contractors (NNSA weapons activities)