99–006

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ! 2d Session 107–638

BURNT, MALHEUR, OWYHEE, AND POWDER RIVER BASIN 

WATER OPTIMIZATION FEASIBILITY STUDY ACT OF 2001

SEPTEMBER 4, 2002.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State 

of the Union and ordered to be printed 

Mr. HANSEN, from the Committee on Resources, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 238] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill (S. 

238) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility 

studies on water optimization in the Burnt River basin, Malheur 

River basin, Owyhee River basin, and Powder River basin, Oregon, 

having considered the same, report favorably thereon without 

amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of S. 238, is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies on water optimization in the 

Burnt River basin, Malheur River basin, Owyhee River basin, and 

Powder River basin, Oregon. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Watershed Councils in the Malheur, Owyhee, Powder, and Burnt 

River basins bring together local farmers, ranchers, and other landowners; organized agricultural, industrial, environmental interests; 

and resource management agencies to develop action plans to implement measures that will improve the health of streams and 

make improvements to the overall environment of the areas while 

maintaining a viable economy. 

Multi-purpose irrigation facilities located in the Malheur, 

Owyhee, Powder, and Burnt River basins were developed by the 

Bureau of Reclamation but are now operated by the local water 

users. Reclamation is involved with the Councils in these basins to 

help develop, review, and update action plans; perform construction 

2

design and survey work; conduct congressionally authorized feasibility analysis for structural action plan items; and participate in 

public involvement activities. 

The Councils are interested in involving Reclamation with smallscale construction projects to address resource management issues 

they tackle on a regular basis. Congressional authorization is necessary for Reclamation to participate and develop the feasibility reports necessary to submit to Congress for any work that would require construction authorization for federal assistance with these 

projects. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

S. 238 was referred to the Committee on Resources on September 

5, 2001 and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Water 

and Power. On July 10, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met 

to consider the bill. By unanimous consent the Subcommittee was 

discharged from further consideration of the bill. The bill was then 

ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives, without amendment, by unanimous consent. 

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. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 

feasibility studies on water optimization in the Burnt River basin, 

Malheur River basin, Owyhee River basin, and Powder River basin, 

Oregon. 

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 ComVerDate Sep 04 2002 20:21 Sep 09, 2002 Jkt 099006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR638.XXX HR638
3

mittee 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, July 18, 2002. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 283, the Burnt, Malheur, 

Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water Optimization Feasibility 

Study Act of 2001. 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie Middleton. 

Sincerely, 

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director). 

Enclosure.

S. 238—Burnt, Malheur, Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water 

Optimization Feasibility Study Act of 2001

S. 238 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies for optimizing water use in the Burnt River, Malheur 

River, Owyhee River, and Powder River basins in Oregon. The bill 

would authorize the appropriation of funds necessary to complete 

those feasibility studies. CBO estimates these studies would cost about $1.3 million. 

Based on information from the Bureau of Reclamation, however, 

CBO expects the federal government would share this cost with the 

State of Oregon, local counties, and certain irrigation districts. Assuming appropriation of the necessary funds, CBO estimates that 

implementing S. 238 would cost about $650,000 over the 2003–07 

period. S. 238 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 impose no costs on 

state, local, or tribal governments. 

On May 22, 2001, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 238, 

Burnt, Malheur, Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water Optimization Feasibility Study Act of 2001, as ordered reported by the 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on May 16, 

2001. On March 1, 2002, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

1883, Burnt, Malheur, Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water Optimization Feasibility Study Act of 2001, as ordered reported by the 

House Committee on Resources on February 27, 2001. 

All three versions of this legislation are identical, except for 

minor wording differences. Based on new information from the Bureau of Reclamation, however, CBO increased its estimate of federal costs from $250,000 to $650,000 for completing the feasibility 

studies outlined in H.R. 1883 and S. 238 as ordered reported by the 

House Committee on Resources. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Julie Middleton. This 

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. 

4

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.

Æ

2

design and survey work; conduct congressionally authorized feasibility analysis for structural action plan items; and participate in 

public involvement activities. 

The Councils are interested in involving Reclamation with smallscale construction projects to address resource management issues 

they tackle on a regular basis. Congressional authorization is necessary for Reclamation to participate and develop the feasibility reports necessary to submit to Congress for any work that would require construction authorization for federal assistance with these 

projects. 

COMMITTEE ACTION

S. 238 was referred to the Committee on Resources on September 

5, 2001 and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on Water 

and Power. On July 10, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met 

to consider the bill. By unanimous consent the Subcommittee was 

discharged from further consideration of the bill. The bill was then 

ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives, without amendment, by unanimous consent. 

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. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 

clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or objective 

of this bill is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct 

feasibility studies on water optimization in the Burnt River basin, 

Malhuer River basin, Owyhee River basin, and Powder River basin, 

Oregon. 

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 ComVerDate Sep 04 2002 16:38 Sep 09, 2002 Jkt 099006 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR638.XXX HR638
3

mittee 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, July 18, 2002. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 283, the Burnt, Malheur, 

Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water Optimization Feasibility 

Study Act of 2001. 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie Middleton. 

Sincerely, 

BARRY B. ANDERSON

(For Dan L. Crippen, Director). 

Enclosure.

S. 238—Burnt, Malheur, Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water 

Optimization Feasibility Study Act of 2001

S. 238 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies for optimizing water use in the Burnt River, Malheur 

River, Owyhee River, and Powder River basins in Oregon. The bill 

would authorize the appropriation of funds necessary to complete 

those feasibility studies. CBO estimates these studies would cost about $1.3 million. 

Based on information from the Bureau of Reclamation, however, 

CBO expects the federal government would share this cost with the 

State of Oregon, local counties, and certain irrigation districts. Assuming appropriation of the necessary funds, CBO estimates that 

implementing S. 238 would cost about $650,000 over the 2003–07 

period. S. 238 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 impose no costs on 

state, local, or tribal governments. 

On May 22, 2001, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 238, 

Burnt, Malheur, Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water Optimization Feasibility Study Act of 2001, as ordered reported by the 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on May 16, 

2001. On March 1, 2002, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

1883, Burnt, Malheur, Owyhee, and Powder River Basin Water Optimization Feasibility Study Act of 2001, as ordered reported by the 

House Committee on Resources on February 27, 2001. 

All three versions of this legislation are identical, except for 

minor wording differences. Based on new information from the Bureau of Reclamation, however, CBO increased its estimate of federal costs from $250,000 to $650,000 for completing the feasibility 

studies outlined in H.R. 1883 and S. 238 as ordered reported by the 

House Committee on Resources. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Julie Middleton. This 

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. 

4

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.

Æ