Interior to study invasive-species fix at Glen Canyon Dam—at taxpayer expense
S. 3743 — A bill to direct the Secretary of the Interior to carry out a feasibility study on a selective water withdrawal system at Glen Canyon Dam, and for other purposes. · Filed by Mike Lee (R-UT) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Jan 29, 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 bill directs the Interior Department to study whether a selective water withdrawal system (or thermal curtain) at Glen Canyon Dam could reduce invasive species while maintaining hydropower generation. If the study finds the system feasible, the Interior Secretary may proceed with design and construction. The study must be completed within 18 months, with costs paid from existing federal appropriations and not reimbursed to the government.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is a directed study of a specific water management technology at a named federal dam, with conditional authority to proceed to design and construction if feasibility is established. This is a standard infrastructure authorization, not a deregulation, subsidy, or commemorative measure.
What the text implies
- The bill does not appropriate funds explicitly; it directs the Secretary to identify funding from existing sources within 90 days. This may shift budget priorities within Interior/Reclamation without new congressional appropriation.
- Costs are designated 'nonreimbursable and nonreturnable,' meaning they will not be recovered from power contractors or water users—a subsidy to the study borne by general taxpayers rather than beneficiaries.
- The study's scope includes 'policy actions allowable under reclamation laws,' which may authorize operational changes to Glen Canyon Dam beyond the physical infrastructure, with downstream effects on water allocation and power generation.
- The 5-year sunset on authority means the study must be completed and a decision made within that window, creating time pressure that may favor proceeding even if feasibility is marginal.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The bill funds a study addressing a genuine environmental problem (invasive species in the Colorado River system) and hydropower efficiency, which benefits the public through both ecosystem health and energy production. However, the study's outcome and actual implementation costs are uncertain, and the bill does not guarantee that findings will result in action or that costs will not eventually be passed to ratepayers or taxpayers.
Who stands to gain
- Colorado River Storage Project power contractors (potential hydropower optimization)
- Western Area Power Administration (consulted on hydropower/rate impacts, may benefit from efficiency
- Engineering and construction firms (if feasibility leads to design/build contracts)
Named in the bill
Secretary of the Interior, Commissioner of Reclamation, Secretary of Energy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Geological Survey, Colorado River Basin States, Colorado River Storage Project, Western Area Power Administration, Glen Canyon Dam, Grand Canyon Protection Act of 1992, Colorado River Basin Project Act
Where it stands
1 cosponsor: 1 Republicans.
- Jan 29, 2026 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
- Jan 29, 2026 — Referred to Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources”
- Mar 17, 2026 — Hearing held · Congress.gov: “Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power. Hearings held”
- Jun 10, 2026 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a…”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
3 lobbying clients named this bill on 4 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $130,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 12 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 61% of bills with at least one filing.
Mike Lee, the sponsor, reported $241,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Massachusetts Medical Society — $90,000 on 2 filings
- Colorado River Energy Distributors Association — $20,000 on 1 filing
- Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems — $20,000 on 1 filing
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (5,152 characters) on Jun 8, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Interior to study invasive-species fix at Glen Canyon Dam—at taxpayer expense” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/s3743 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.