[House Report 106-814]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-814
======================================================================
AMENDMENT OF THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL ACT
_______
September 6, 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 S. 1211]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(S. 1211) to amend the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control
Act to authorize additional measures to carry out the control
of salinity upstream of Imperial Dam in a cost-effective
manner, having considered the same, report favorably thereon
without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of S. 1211 is to amend the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act to authorize additional measures to carry
out the control of salinity upstream of Imperial Dam in a cost-
effective manner.
Background
Salinity in the Colorado River increases dramatically as
the River makes its way along its 1,450-mile journey. In its
downstream journey, the River picks up over 9 million tons of
salt. Almost half of the salinity is naturally occurring (the
erosion of high-salt soils and thermal springs with discharge
flowing into the river). In addition, return flows from
agricultural lands pick up salt from the soil. Public domain
lands under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management
also contribute an estimated 700,000 tons of salt annually. If
the salinity of the River is left to accumulate, water quality
for drinking and agriculture is severely reduced.
To address the salinity problem, the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Act was enacted in 1974. Title I of the Act
addressed the Mexican Treaty obligations by authorizing the
Yuma Desalting Plant, the Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and
Drainage District irrigation drainage reduction program,
concrete lining of the Coachella Canal in California (allowing
the United States to use the conserved water to replace
drainage water bypassed to Mexico), and a well field in Arizona
known as the Protective and Regulatory Pumping Unit. Title II
of the Act, which was amended in 1995, directed the Bureau of
Reclamation to conduct a $75 million pilot program to award
grants, on a competitive-bid basis, for salinity control
projects. Cost savings under this pilot program have far
exceeded expectations--down to about $30 per ton of salt
control, from the previous average of about $80 per ton.
Central to the success of the new program is the concept of
local ownership of the proposal and completed project. Unlike
old projects, new salinity control projects are funded by a
one-time grant that is limited to the sponsor's competitive
bid. Once constructed, the facilities are owned, operated,
maintained, and replaced by the sponsors at their own expense.
The following is a list of accepted projects with some
financial information:
Committee Action
S. 1211 was introduced on June 10, 1999, by Senator Robert
Bennett (R-UT). Companion legislation, H.R. 2619, was
introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman Chris
Cannon (R-UT). On November 19, 1999, the Senate passed S. 1211
with an amendment by unanimous consent. In the House of
Representatives, the bill was referred to the Committee on
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on
Water and Power. On May 11, 2000, the Subcommittee met to mark
up the bill. No amendments were offered and the bill was then
ordered favorably reported to the Full Committee by voice vote.
On May 24, 2000, the Full Resources Committee met to consider
the bill. No amendments were offered and the bill was then
ordered to be reported to the House of Representatives by voice
vote.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Amendment of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act
This section raises the program ceiling authorization of
appropriations from $75,000,000 to $175,000,000.
Section 2. Report
This section requires the Secretary of the Interior to file
a report on the status of the implementation of the program
designed to minimize salt entering the Colorado River from
Bureau of Land Management lands.
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, June 7, 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 S. 1211, an act to
amend the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act to
authorize additional measures to carry out the control of
salinity upstream of Imperial Dam in a cost-effective manner.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Rachel
Applebaum (for federal costs), and Marjorie Miller (for the
state and local impact).
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
S. 1211--An act to amend the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act
to authorize additional measures to carry out the control of
salinity upstream of Imperial Dam in a cost-effective manner
Summary: S. 1211 would authorize the appropriation of $175
million for a program to control the salinity of the Colorado
River upstream of the Imperial Dam. Under current law, the
Congress has authorized the appropriation of $75 million for
this activity. The legislation would direct the Secretary of
the Interior to prepare a report by June 30, 2000, on the
status of the comprehensive program for minimizing salt
contributions to the Colorado River.
Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing S. 1211 would cost $17 million over
the 2000-2005 period. Enacting this legislation would not
affect direct spending or receipts, so pay-as-you-go procedures
would not apply. S. 1211 contains no intergovernmental or
private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA). State and local governments might incur some
costs to match the federal funds authorized by this
legislation, but these costs would be voluntary.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of S. 1211 is shown in the following table. Of
the $75 million authorized under current law about $36 million
has been appropriated through fiscal year 2000. Assuming that
annual appropriations for this program continue near the 2000
level of $12 million, as anticipated by the Department of the
Interior, the balance of the existing $75 million authorization
would not be exceeded until fiscal year 2004. Thus, CBO
estimates that the additional $100 million authorized by S.
1211 would be appropriated in 2004 and in the following years.
We estimate that the report required by S. 1211 would cost less
than $500,000 in fiscal year 2000. The costs of this
legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources
and environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Spending Under Current Law:
Estimated Authorization Level \1\..................... 12 12 12 12 2 0
Estimated Outlays..................................... 12 12 12 12 6 1
Proposed Changes:
Estimated Authorization Level......................... (\2\) 0 0 0 10 12
Estimated Outlays..................................... (\2\) 0 0 0 6 11
Spending Under S. 1211:
Estimated Authorization Level \1\..................... 12 12 12 12 12 12
Estimated Outlays..................................... 12 12 12 12 12 12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2000 level is the amount appropriated for the Colorado River salinity control program for that year. The
estimated levels for fiscal years 2001 through 2004 represent the use of the remaining authorization under
current law.
\2\ Less than $500,000.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 1211
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA. State and local governments might incur some
costs to match the federal funds authorized by this
legislation, but these costs would be voluntary.
Previous CBO estimate: On October 5, 1999, CBO transmitted
a cost estimate for S. 1211 as ordered reported by the Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on September 22,
1999. The two versions of the legislation are nearly identical,
and the cost estimates are the same, except CBO's estimate for
the Senate version only included estimated spending for fiscal
years 2000 through 2004.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Rachel Applebaum;
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie
Miller; Impact on the Private Sector: Natalie Tawil.
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 XII 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):
SECTION 208 OF THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL ACT
Sec. 208. (a) * * *
* * * * * * *
(c) In addition to the amounts authorized to be
appropriated under subsection (b), there are authorized to be
appropriated [$75,000,000 for subsection 202(a)] $175,000,000
for section 202(a), including constructing the works described
in [paragraph 202(a)(6)] paragraph (6) of section 202(a) and
carrying out the measures described in such paragraph.
Notwithstanding subsection (b), the Secretary may implement the
program under [paragraph] section 202(a)(6) only to the extent
and in such amounts as are provided in advance in
appropriations Acts.