```

[House Report 106-856]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

106th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     106-856

======================================================================

 
                 RECLAMATION REFORM REFUND ACT OF 2000

                                _______
                                

 September 18, 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. 4847]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 4847) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to refund 
certain amounts received by the United States pursuant to the 
Reclamation Reform Act of 1982, having considered the same, 
report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that 
the bill do pass.

                          PURPOSE OF THE BILL

    The purpose of H.R. 4847 is to direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to refund certain amounts received by the United 
States pursuant to the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Under the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982 (RRA), direct and 
indirect landowners and lessees (landholders) are required to 
file RRA forms prior to receiving irrigation water. Such forms 
are submitted to districts who control the actual delivery of 
irrigation water. The Bureau of Reclamation has wrestled with 
the question of whether it should curtail the delivery of 
irrigation water to landholders who do not have forms on file. 
To address the problem, the Bureau of Reclamation in 1988 
billed districts the full-cost rate for any of their 
landholders who were required to submit RRA forms, but did not 
file the form, and still received water for the period of the 
violation. Some districts, but not all, paid their bills.
    As a result of the Bureau's review of the issue and a rule 
making action, in March 1995, the Bureau of Reclamation began 
to impose an administrative fee to address violations of the 
RRA form requirements. In the case Orange Cove Irrigation 
District v. The United States, the judge ruled that ``it is 
clear from the legislative history of the R.A. (Reclamation 
Act) that Congress did not intend for the Bureau to assess 
monetary penalties or fines for failure to submit the required 
forms.'' After further review, the Bureau revised its position 
and attempted to refund part of the monies paid, but was 
advised that it did not have the legal authority to do so. This 
legislation directs and authorizes the Bureau of Reclamation to 
refund the fines the Bureau received, subject to the 
requirements in Section 2, (a) and the exception in (2)(b) of 
the bill.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 4847 was introduced on July 13, 2000, by Congressman 
Cal Dooley (D-CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on 
Water and Power. On July 26, 2000, the Resources Committee met 
to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Water and Power was 
discharged from further consideration of the measure by 
unanimous consent. No amendments were offered and the bill was 
ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by 
unanimous consent.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    The short title of the bill is the ``Reclamation Reform 
Refund Act of 2000''.

Section 2. Refund of certain amounts received under Reclamation Reform 
        Act of 1982

    As described above, this section authorizes appropriations 
of up to $3 million to be made available for refunds, and 
directs the Secretary of the Interior to make these funds 
pursuant to certain requirements.

            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, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    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 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, August 18, 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. 4847, the 
Reclamation Reform Refund Act of 2000.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Lisa Cash 
Driskill.
            Sincerely,
                                               Arlene Holen
                                    (For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 4847--Reclamation Reform Refund Act of 2000

    H.R. 4847 would authorize the appropriation of $3 million 
to refund certain payments made by water districts to the 
Bureau of Reclamation (bureau) before January 1, 1994. Until 
that time, the bureau charged the full cost of providing 
irrigation water, rather than a reduced rate, to those water 
districts whose customers failed to file the appropriate forms. 
Currently, the bureau assesses a $260 fee for failure to file 
such forms.
    This bill would authorize and direct the bureau to refund 
the difference between the full cost rate and the reduced rate 
for providing irrigation water, less a $260 fee, to certain 
districts with customers who did not complete the bureau's 
required paperwork prior to January 1, 1994. Based on 
information from the bureau, CBO estimates that about 80 
districts would be owed a total of about $650,000 under the 
refund formula specified in the bill. Hence, although the bill 
would authorize the appropriation of $3 million, we estimate 
that implementing the bill would cost about $1 million in 2001.
    H.R. 4847 would not affect direct spending or receipts; 
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply. The bill 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would benefit 
some water districts.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Lisa Cash 
Driskill. The estimate was 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

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing 
law.

                                  

```