79–006

106TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 106–836

REAUTHORIZATION AND AMENDMENT OF RECLAMATION

SAFETY OF DAMS ACT OF 1978

SEPTEMBER 12, 2000.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed

Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H.R. 3595]

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill

(H.R. 3595) to increase the authorization of appropriations for the

Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978, and for other purposes,

having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an

amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.

The amendment is as follows:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof

the following:

SECTION 1. INCREASED AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE RECLAMATION

SAFETY OF DAMS ACT OF 1978.

The Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978 is amended—

(1) in section 4 (43 U.S.C. 508)—

(A) in subsection (a), by striking ‘‘or from nonperformance of reasonable

and normal maintenance of the structure by the operating entity’’;

(B) in subsection (c), by—

(i) inserting after ‘‘1984’’ the following: ‘‘and the additional $380,000,000 further authorized to be appropriated by amendments to

that Act in 2000’’;

(ii) striking paragraph (2) and redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4)

as paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively; and

(iii) in the first sentence of paragraph (3), as so redesignated, inserting ‘‘irrigation,’’ after ‘‘Costs allocated to the purpose of’’, and inserting

‘‘without regard to water users’ ability to pay’’ before the period at the

end; and

(C) in subsection (d), by inserting before the period at the end the following: ‘‘: Provided further, That the Secretary is authorized to expend payments of such reimbursable costs made pursuant to a repayment contract

at any time prior to completion of construction’’;

(2) in section 5 (43 U.S.C. 509), by—

(A) inserting after ‘‘levels)’’ the following: ‘‘and, effective October 1, 1997,

not to exceed an additional $380,000,000 (October 1, 2000, price levels)’’;

2

(B) striking ‘‘$750,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$1,200,000 (October 1, 2000, price

levels), plus or minus such amounts, if any, as may be justified by reason

of ordinary fluctuations in construction costs as indicated by engineering

cost indexes applicable to the types of construction involved herein,’’; and

(C) striking ‘‘sixty days (which’’ and all that follows through ‘‘day certain)’’ and inserting ‘‘30 calendar days’’; and

(3) in section 2 (43 U.S.C. 506), by inserting ‘‘(a)’’ before ‘‘In order to’’, and

by adding at the end the following:

‘‘(b) Prior to selecting a Bureau of Reclamation facility for modification, the Secretary shall notify project beneficiaries in writing of such selection and solicit their

interest in participating in evaluating the facility for modification. If requested by

the project beneficiaries, the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, is authorized to negotiate an agreement with project beneficiaries for the cooperative oversight of planning, design, cost containment, procurement, construction, and management of the modifications. Prior to submitting the

modification reports required by section 5, the Secretary shall consider, and where

appropriate implement, alternatives recommended by project beneficiaries. Within

30 days after receiving such recommendations, the Secretary shall provide to the

project beneficiaries a written response detailing proposed actions to address the

recommendations. The Secretary’s response to the project beneficiaries shall be included in the modification reports required by section 5.

‘‘(c) Following submission of the reports required by section 5, project beneficiaries

who wish to receive regular information concerning the status and costs of modifications shall notify the Secretary in writing. During the construction phase of the

modifications, the Secretary shall keep such beneficiaries informed of the costs and

status of such modifications. The Secretary shall consider, and where appropriate

implement, alternatives recommended by project beneficiaries concerning the cost

containment measures and construction management techniques needed to carry

out such modifications.’’.

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of H.R. 3595 is to increase the authorization of appropriations for the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978, and

for other purposes.

BACKGROUND

The Bureau of Reclamation spends approximately $60 million

per year for dam safety purposes and estimates that the existing

$650 million ceiling contained in the Reclamation Safety of Dams

Act of 1978 will be exceeded in fiscal year 2001. Existing law requires the Bureau of Reclamation to send a dam modification report to Congress for dam safety work costing more than $750,000.

The report must rest before Congress for 60 legislative days prior

to the Bureau of Reclamation obligating funds for dam safety construction. H.R. 3595 would raise the threshold for a Congressional

report to $1.2 million and reduce to 30 calendar days the time required for a dam safety modification report rest before Congress

prior to Reclamation commencing dam safety repair work.

In addition to increasing the ceiling and shortening the review

period, the legislation would make additional changes to the program. Under existing law, irrigators are required to pay a portion

of the dam safety costs within 50 years without interest. The bill

would amend the statute to charge interest on the dam safety costs

allocated for irrigation purposes. This makes irrigation repayment

terms for dam safety activities consistent with municipal and industrial water supply repayment. The criteria for allocating costs

for irrigators under this bill would be equalized throughout the 17

western states. Although this legislation would also charge interest

on the modification project costs allocated for irrigation purposes

for the first time, the National Water Resources Association stated

3

in a March 6, 2000, letter that its members in the 17 western

states ‘‘consider the added expense a worthy investment’’.

The bill requires the Secretary to provide written notice to

project beneficiaries prior to selecting a Reclamation facility for

modification. The intent of the language is to give project beneficiaries a ‘‘place at the table’’ when decisions concerning the need

to modify a structure are under consideration. This will allow

project beneficiaries an opportunity to submit their views and recommendations regarding the planning, design, and other details regarding modifications proposed for Reclamation facilities. Project

beneficiaries are those entities that have existing contracts for repayment or water service and/or operation and maintenance with

the Bureau of Reclamation.

The Committee stresses that maintaining public safety is the

Secretary’s paramount concern in implementing the Reclamation

Safety of Dams Act. The United States is liable for the facilities

and the Secretary is the ultimate decision maker regarding dam

safety. The bill provides project beneficiaries opportunities to voice

their concerns to the Bureau of Reclamation and to make recommendations regarding modifications to project facilities, and

gives the Secretary the authority to negotiate an agreement that

sets forth the details of the ‘‘cooperative oversight’’ the Secretary

may receive from the project beneficiaries. The bill does not diminish the Secretary’s authority to take corrective action the Secretary

deems necessary to protect life and property, pursuant to the Secretary’s responsibilities under the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act.

Finally, the Secretary is required to keep project beneficiaries informed of the costs and status of dam safety modifications, if the

project beneficiaries notify the Secretary in writing of their interest

in this information. The Secretary shall consider recommendations

provided by the project beneficiaries regarding cost containment

and construction management techniques, and implement appropriate recommendations. The Committee believes that project beneficiaries should be informed of the plans and progress and be provided the opportunity to suggest ways to control dam safety modification costs. However, the Committee again stresses that the Secretary is the ultimate decision maker in all aspects of maintaining

dam safety and performing modifications. A project beneficiary may

suggest an alternative approach to a dam safety modification, but

the Secretary is not required to implement such recommendation.

COMMITTEE ACTION

H.R. 3595 was introduced on February 8, 2000, by Congressman

George Miller (D–CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on

Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on

Water and Power. On June 15, 2000, the Subcommittee met to consider the bill. Congressman John Doolittle (R–CA) offered an

amendment to increase the project beneficiaries’ ability to participate in the planning and cost containment of any proposed dam

safety modification. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.

The bill, as amended, was then ordered to be reported to the Full

Committee by voice vote. On June 21, 2000, the Full Resources

Committee met to consider the bill. Congressman Miller offered an

amendment to further address the water users’ ability to participate in the planning process. Congressman Doolittle offered an

4

amendment to the Miller amendment that made additional technical clarifications to the language. The Doolittle amendment

passed by unanimous consent and the Miller amendment, as

amended, was adopted by voice vote. The bill, as amended, was

then ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by

voice vote.

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Increased authorization of appropriations for the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978

This section reauthorizes the dam safety program. It raises the

authorized ceiling on expenditures of the dam safety program. It

also requires interest to be placed on the irrigation component and

eliminates the ability-to-pay provision in existing law.

The section also requires the Secretary to solicit more participation from project beneficiaries prior to selecting a Bureau of Reclamation facility for modification.

COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII

of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Resources’ oversight findings and recommendations are reflected in

the body of this report.

CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT

Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United States

grants Congress the authority to enact this bill.

COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of

the House of Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) of that rule provides

that this requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) of rule

XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section

308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this bill does not

contain any new budget authority, credit authority, or an increase

or decrease in tax expenditures. According to the Congressional

Budget Office, enactment of this bill would result in an increase in

direct spending of approximately $5 million over the 2001–2005

time period. In addition, the bill would result in increased offsetting receipts of $12 million over a ten year period.

3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause 3(c)(4)

of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the Committee has received no report of oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform on this

bill.

4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause

3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and

5

section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has received the following cost estimate for this bill from the

Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

U.S. CONGRESS, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE, Washington, DC, September 8, 2000.

Hon. DON YOUNG, Chairman, Committee on Resources,

House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 3595, a bill to increase

the authorization of appropriations for the Reclamation Safety of

Dams Act of 1978, and for other purposes.

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel Applebaum.

Sincerely,

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).

Enclosure.

H.R. 3595—A bill to increase the authorization of appropriations for

the Reclamation Safety of Dams Act of 1978, and for other purposes

Summary: H.R. 3595 would authorize the appropriation of $380

million (plus additional amounts to account for inflation), and raise

the total authorization level for the Dam Safety Program from its

current ceiling of $650 million. H.R. 3595 also would authorize the

government to spend repayment receipts from beneficiaries of new

dam safety projects while a project undergoes construction, require

the Bureau of Reclamation to charge interest on new capital costs

attributed to irrigation needs, and make other changes to the Dam

Safety Program.

Assuming appropriation of the authorized level, CBO estimates

that implementing H.R. 3595 would cost $168 million over the

2001–2005 period, and an additional $257 million after 2005. CBO

expects that enacting H.R. 3595 would increase direct spending by

about $5 million over the 2001–2005 period. Because H.R. 3595

would affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures would

apply.

H.R. 3595 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).

Some state and local governments would probably incur additional

costs as a result of the bill’s enactment, but these costs would stem

from voluntary contractual agreements with the federal government.

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 3595 is shown in the following table. The costs

of this legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources

and environment).

6

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION

Spending Under Current Law:

Estimated Authorization Level 1 ..................................................................... 63 65 6 0 0

Estimated Outlays .......................................................................................... 62 64 29 8 1

Proposed Changes:

Estimated Authorization Level ....................................................................... 0 0 62 70 72

Estimated Outlays .......................................................................................... 0 0 37 61 70

Spending Under H.R. 3595:

Estimated Authorization Level ....................................................................... 63 65 68 70 72

Estimated Outlays .......................................................................................... 62 64 66 69 71

CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDING

Estimated Budget Authority .................................................................................... 0 0 1 2 2

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................................... 0 0 1 2 2

1 The 2001–2003 levels are CBO’s estimates of the bureau’s use of its remaining authority under the Dam Safety Program.

Basis of estimate: CBO expects that the current authorization

ceiling for the Dam Safety Program of $650 million will be met in

fiscal year 2003, and that appropriations for additional amounts

that would be authorized by the bill would begin in fiscal year

2003. Estimates of discretionary outlays are based on information

from the Bureau of Reclamation and the historical spending pattern of this program.

Because H.R. 3595 would authorize the bureau to spend all repayment receipts while new projects undergo construction. CBO estimates that enacting the bill would increase direct spending.

Based on information from the bureau, CBO expects that about 25

percent of project beneficiaries would choose to prepay their obligations as a result of the bureau’s new authority to spend repayments

during construction. (This may allow construction of some projects

to be completed faster.) These prepayments would change the timing of total repayment receipts to the federal government, increasing receipts in the short term and decreasing receipts in the long

term. Including these prepayments along with regular scheduled

repayments, CBO estimates that the authority to spend all new

project repayments would cost $36 million over the next 10 years.

H.R. 3595 would require the bureau to charge interest on capital

costs attributed to irrigation needs, so we estimate that enacting

the bill also would increase offsetting receipts by about $12 million

over the same 10-year period. These estimates are based on information from the bureau, and assume that project beneficiaries

repay their obligations over a 25-year period. According to the bureau, about 15 percent of these projects’ capital costs are repaid by

project beneficiaries, and irrigation users contribute 59 percent of

this repayment.

Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. The net change in outlays that are subject to pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the

following table. For the purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go procedures, only the effects in the current year, the budget year, and the

succeeding four years are counted.

7

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars—

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Changes in outlays ................................................... 0 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5

Changes in receipts ................................................. Not applicable

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 3595 contains

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in

UMRA. As a result of this legislation, amounts paid by irrigators

to reimburse the federal costs of dam safety projects would include

interest. Some of these beneficiaries would be public entities. The

additional costs, however, would stem from voluntary contractual

agreements with the Bureau of Reclamation.

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Rachel Applebaum. Impact

on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller. Impact

on the Private Sector: Sarah Sitarek and Patrice Gordon.

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104–4

This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or tribal law.

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW MADE BY THE BILL, AS REPORTED

In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of the

House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill,

as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italic,

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman):

RECLAMATION SAFETY OF DAMS ACT OF 1978

AN ACT To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to construct, restore, operate,

and maintain new or modified features at existing Federal reclamation dams for

safety of dams purposes

* * * * * * *

SEC. 2. (a) In order to preserve the structural safety of Bureau

of Reclamation dams and related facilities the Secretary of the Interior is authorized to perform such modifications as he determines

to be reasonably required. Said performance of work shall be in accordance with the Federal reclamation laws (Act of June 17, 1902,

32 Stat. 388, and Acts amendatory or supplementary thereto).

(b) Prior to selecting a Bureau of Reclamation facility for modification, the Secretary shall notify project beneficiaries in writing of

such selection and solicit their interest in participating in evaluating the facility for modification. If requested by the project beneficiaries, the Secretary, acting through the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, is authorized to negotiate an agreement with

project beneficiaries for the cooperative oversight of planning, design, cost containment, procurement, construction, and management

of the modifications. Prior to submitting the modification reports required by section 5, the Secretary shall consider, and where appropriate implement, alternatives recommended by project beneficiaries.

8

Within 30 days after receiving such recommendations, the Secretary

shall provide to the project beneficiaries a written response detailing

proposed actions to address the recommendations. The Secretary’s

response to the project beneficiaries shall be included in the modification reports required by section 5.

(c) Following submission of the reports required by section 5,

project beneficiaries who wish to receive regular information concerning the status and costs of modifications shall notify the Secretary in writing. During the construction phase of the modifications, the Secretary shall keep such beneficiaries informed of the

costs and status of such modifications. The Secretary shall consider,

and where appropriate implement, alternatives recommended by

project beneficiaries concerning the cost containment measures and

construction management techniques needed to carry out such modifications.

* * * * * * *

SEC. 4. (a) Costs heretofore or hereafter incurred in the modification of structures under this Act, the cause of which results from

age and normal deterioration of the structure øor from nonperformance of reasonable and normal maintenance of the structure by the

operating entity¿ shall be considered as project costs and will be

allocated to the purposes for which the structure was authorized

initially to be constructed and will be reimbursable as provided by

existing law.

* * * * * * *

(c) With respect to the additional $650,000,000 authorized to be

appropriated in The Reclamation Safety of Dams Act Amendments

of 1984 and the additional $380,000,000 further authorized to be

appropriated by amendments to that Act in 2000, costs incurred in

the modification of structures under this Act, the cause of which results from new hydrologic or seismic data or changes in state-ofthe-art criteria deemed necessary for safety purposes, shall be reimbursed to the extent provided in this subsection.

(1) * * *

ø(2) Costs allocated to irrigation water service and capable

of being repaid by the irrigation water users shall be reimbursed within 50 years of the year in which the work undertaken pursuant to this Act is substantially complete. Costs allocated to irrigation water service which are beyond the water

users’ ability to pay shall be reimbursed in accordance with existing law.¿

ø(3)¿ (2) Costs allocated to recreation or fish and wildlife enhancement shall be reimbursed in accordance with the Federal

Water Project Recreation Act (79 Stat. 213), as amended.

ø(4)¿ (3) Costs allocated to the purpose of irrigation, municipal, industrial, and miscellaneous water service, commercial

power, and the portion of recreation and fish and wildlife enhancement costs reimbursable under the Federal Water Project

Recreation Act, shall be repaid within 50 years with interest.

The interest rate used shall be determined by the Secretary of

the Treasury, taking into consideration average market yields

on outstanding marketable obligations of the United States

with remaining periods to maturity comparable to the applicable reimbursement period during the month preceding the fisVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:20 Sep 13, 2000 Jkt 079006 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR836.XXX pfrm03 PsN: HR836
9

cal year in which the costs are incurred. To the extent that

more than one interest rate is determined pursuant to the preceding sentence, the Secretary of the Treasury shall establish

an interest rate at the weighted average of the rates so determined without regard to water users’ ability to pay.

(d) The Secretary is authorized to negotiate appropriate contracts

with project beneficiaries providing for the return of reimbursable

costs under this Act: Provided, however, That no contract entered

into pursuant to this Act shall be deemed to be a new or amended

contract for the purposes of section 203(a) of Public Law 97–293:

Provided further, That the Secretary is authorized to expend payments of such reimbursable costs made pursuant to a repayment

contract at any time prior to completion of construction.

SEC. 5. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated for fiscal

year 1979 and ensuing fiscal years such sums as may be necessary

and, effective October 1, 1983, not to exceed an additional

$650,000,000 (October 1, 1983, price levels) and, effective October

1, 1997, not to exceed an additional $380,000,000 (October 1, 2000,

price levels), plus or minus such amounts, if any, as may be justified by reason of ordinary fluctuations in construction costs as indicated by engineering cost indexes applicable to the types of construction involved herein, to carry out the provisions of this Act to

remain available until expended if so provided by the appropriations Act: Provided, That no funds exceeding ø$750,000¿

$1,200,000 (October 1, 2000, price levels), plus or minus such

amounts, if any, as may be justified by reason of ordinary fluctuations in construction costs as indicated by engineering cost indexes

applicable to the types of construction involved herein, shall be obligated for carrying out actual construction to modify an existing

dam under authority of this Act prior to øsixty days (which sixty

days shall not include days on which either the House of Representatives or the Senate is not in session because of an adjournment of more than three calendar days to a day certain)¿ 30 calendar days from the date that the Secretary has transmitted a report on such existing dam to the Congress. The report required to

be submitted by this section will consist of a finding by the Secretary of the Interior to the effect that modifications are required

to be made to insure the safety of an existing dam. Such finding

shall be accompanied by a technical report containing information

on the need for structural modification, the corrective action

deemed to be required, alternative solutions to structural modification that were considered, the estimated cost of needed modifications, and environmental impacts if any resulting from the implementation of the recommended plan of modification.

* * * * * * *

Æ