[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 147 (Thursday, October 15, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12645-S12646]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CBO PROJECT ANALYSES
Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, at the time the Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources filed its reports on H.R. 4079, to authorize the
construction of temperature control devices at Folsom Dam in
California, and H.R. 3687, the Canadian River Prepayment Act, the
analyses from the Congressional Budget Office were not available. Those
analyses have now been received. I ask unanimous consent that they be
printed in the Record for the advice of the Senate.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
H.R. 4079--An act to authorize the construction of
temperature control devices at Folsom Dam in California
Summary: H.R. 4079 would authorize the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to
construct devices for controlling and monitoring water
temperatures at Folsom Dam and certain nonfederal facilities.
Temperature control devices allow water to be diverted from a
higher point in the water column of a reservoir, thereby
preserving cool water for fish. The act would authorize the
appropriation of $7 million (in October 1997 dollars) for
construction and such sums as necessary for operating,
maintaining, and replacing the devices. A portion of these
amounts would be repaid by water and power users in the
region.
CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 4079 would result in
additional outlays of $7 million over the 1999-2003 period,
assuming the appropriation of the necessary amounts. H.R.
4079 would affect direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go
procedures would apply. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 4079
would decrease direct spending by about $400,000 over the
1999-2003 period. The legislation contains no
intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would have no
significant impact on the budgets of state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 4079 is shown in the following
table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget
function 300 (natural resources and environment).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal years, in millions of
dollars--
----------------------------------
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level........ 7 (\1\) (\1\) (\1\) (\1\)
Estimated Outlays.................... 5 1 1 (\1\) (\1\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Less than $500,000.
Basis of estimate: For purposes of this estimate, CBO
assumes that H.R. 4079 will be enacted by the beginning of
fiscal year 1999 and that the estimated amounts necessary to
implement the act will be appropriated each year.
Spending subject to appropriation
H.R. 4079 would authorize the appropriation of $5 million
for constructing a temperature control device and monitoring
apparatus at Folsom Dam and $2 million for constructing
similar mechanisms at nearby nonfederal facilities. Those
amounts are authorized in October 1997 dollars and may be
adjusted to reflect inflation, but such adjustments would not
be significant if funds are provided in fiscal year 1999 or
2000. Based on information provided by the bureau, CBO
expects that construction at Folsom Dam would be completed in
1999 and that construction at nonfederal facilities would be
completed by 2001, if the necessary appropriations are
provided. CBO estimates that the annual cost of operating,
maintaining, and replacing these devices over the 1999-2003
period would be negligible.
Direct spending
About $4 million of the cost of constructing the
temperature control device and monitoring apparatus at Folsom
Dam would be repaid by water and power users. (The costs of
devices at nonfederal facilities would not be repaid.) CBO
estimates that repayments would total $140,000 annually over
the 2001-2030 period. (Because water and power rates are set
one year in advance, there would be a one-year lag between
the year the project is completed, 1999, and the year that
repayment begins.)
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. CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 4079 would affect
direct spending but that there would be no significant impact
in any year. Enacting this legislation would not affect
governmental receipts.
Estimated intergovernmental and private sector impact: H.R.
4079 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates
as defined in UMRA and would have no significant impact on
the budgets of state, local, or tribal governments.
Previous CBO estimate: On August 10, 1998, CBO provided an
estimate for H.R. 4079, as ordered reported by the House
Committee on Resources on July 29, 1998. The two versions of
the legislation and their estimated costs are identical.
Estimate prepared by: Gary Brown.
Estimate approved by: Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
____
H.R. 3687--Canadian River Project Prepayment Act
Summary: H.R. 3687 would authorize prepayment by the
Canadian River Municipal Water Authority of amounts due for
the pipeline and related facilities of the Canadian River
Project in Texas. Current law provides for conveying title
for these elements to the authority once repayment is
complete.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3687 would slightly reduce
discretionary spending, and would yield a net decrease in
direct spending of $26 million over the 1999-2003 period.
That near-term cash savings would be offset on a present-
value basis, however, by the loss of currently scheduled
payments. Because H.R. 3687 would affect direct spending,
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply.
The act contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA). State and local governments might incur some costs as
a result of H.R. 3687's enactment, but these costs would be
voluntary.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 3687 is shown in the following
table. The costs of this legislation fall within budget
function 300 (natural resources and environment).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal years, in millions of
dollars--
-----------------------------------
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DIRECT SPENDING
Spending Under Current law: \1\
Estimated Budget Authority........ 0 0 -3 -3 -3
Estimated Outlays................. 0 0 -3 -3 -3
Proposed Changes:
Estimated Budget Authority........ -35 0 3 3 3
Estimated Outlays................. -35 0 3 3 3
Spending Under H.R. 3687:
Estimated Budget Authority........ -35 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays................. -35 0 0 0 0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The next payment from the Canadian River Municipal Water Authority
is not due until 2001.
Basis of estimate: CBO assumes that H.R. 3687 is enacted
near the beginning of fiscal year 1999 and that prepayment
will occur within this fiscal year. (The authority to prepay
would expire 360 days after enactment.)
Direct spending
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3687 would result in a
prepayment to the federal government of about $35 million in
1999. After prepayment, the authority would no longer make
the regularly scheduled payment of $3 million a year over the
2001-2022 period.
[[Page S12646]]
Spending subject to appropriation
The Canadian River Municipal Water Authority pays 100
percent of the cost of operating and maintaining the Canadian
River project dam, reservoir, pipeline, and related
facilities. The Bureau of Reclamation reimburses the
authority for about 26 percent of the cost of operating and
maintaining the project dam and reservoir. The 1998
appropriated amount for this purpose was about $30,000.
Enacting H.R. 3687 would eliminate this annual federal cost
as early as 1999.
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 changes 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 budget year and the succeeding four years are
counted. Enacting H.R. 3687 would not affect governmental
receipts.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal years, in millions of dollars--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Changes in outlays........................ -35 0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Changes in receipts....................... Not applicable
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments:
H.R. 3687 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined
in UMRA. The conveyance authorized by this legislation would
be voluntary on the part of the authority, and any costs
incurred as a result would be accepted by them on that basis.
As conditions of the conveyance, H.R. 3687 would require the
authority to prepay its outstanding obligations to the
federal government and to assume all responsibility for the
operations and maintenance costs of the project. The act
would impose no other costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated impact on the private sector: This act would
impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Gary Brown. Impact on
State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller.
Estimate approved by: Paul N. Van de Water, Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
____________________