[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 160 (Monday, October 24, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H6995-H6996]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    ALLOWING PREPAYMENT OF FEDERAL CONTRACTS WITH THE UINTAH WATER 
                         CONSERVANCY DISTRICT.

  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and 
pass the bill (H.R. 818) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to 
allow for prepayment of repayment contracts between the United States 
and the Uintah Water Conservancy District.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 818

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. PREPAYMENT OF CERTAIN REPAYMENT CONTRACTS BETWEEN 
                   THE UNITED STATES AND THE UINTAH WATER 
                   CONSERVANCY DISTRICT.

       The Secretary of the Interior shall allow for prepayment of 
     the repayment contract no. 6-05-01-00143 between the United 
     States and the Uintah Water Conservancy District dated June 
     3, 1976, and supplemented and amended on November 1, 1985, 
     and on December 30, 1992, providing for repayment of 
     municipal and industrial water delivery facilities for which 
     repayment is provided pursuant to such contract, under terms 
     and conditions similar to those used in implementing section 
     210 of the Central Utah Project Completion Act (Public Law 
     102-575), as amended. The prepayment--
       (1) shall result in the United States recovering the net 
     present value of all repayment streams that would have been 
     payable to the United States if this Act was not in effect;
       (2) may be provided in several installments to reflect 
     substantial completion of the delivery facilities being 
     prepaid, and any increase in the repayment obligation 
     resulting from delivery of water in addition to the water 
     being delivered under this contract as of the date of 
     enactment of this Act;
       (3) shall be adjusted to conform to a final cost allocation 
     including costs incurred by the Bureau of Reclamation, but 
     unallocated as of the date of the enactment of this Act that 
     are allocable to the water delivered under this contract;
       (4) may not be adjusted on the basis of the type of 
     prepayment financing used by the District; and
       (5) shall be made such that total repayment is made not 
     later than September 30, 2022.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Alaska (Mr. Young) and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. 
Napolitano) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alaska.


                             General Leave

  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all 
Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Alaska?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  H.R. 818 would allow a local water district in Utah to prepay its 
loan obligations to the Federal Government. Prepayment can benefit 
local water utilities because it relieves them of interest costs and 
some regulatory burdens.

                              {time}  1640

  This concept is similar to giving a family an option to prepay its 
mortgage and to save compounded interest cost. It's also in the best 
interest of the American taxpayer since it will facilitate the revenues 
to the U.S. Treasury.
  I urge adoption of this measure, and I reserve the balance of my 
time.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mrs. NAPOLITANO asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)

[[Page H6996]]

  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 818, sponsored by our friend and 
colleague Congressman Matheson, would allow the Uintah Water 
Conservancy District of Uintah County, Utah, to prepay--that means to 
pay ahead of time for anybody who really understands the prepay--the 
debt owed to the Federal Government for the construction of the Jensen 
Unit.
  At a time when our country is watching our dollars and cents, H.R. 
818 is legislation that does make very credible sense. The water 
district would have the option to pay its loan early--what a novel 
concept--and translate the interest savings into lower rates for its 
customers--again, quite an interesting concept. The Federal Government, 
in turn, would benefit from the accelerated repayment of the debt to 
the Treasury and be able to use that for debt reduction or whatever 
else is needed.
  I do commend Congressman Matheson of Utah for his efforts in moving 
this legislation. Identical legislation passed the House unanimously in 
the 111th Congress, so I ask my colleagues to support this bill.
  With that, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Matheson).
  Mr. MATHESON. I rise in support of H.R. 818, which would direct the 
Secretary of the Interior to allow for the prepayment of repayment 
contracts between the United States and the Uintah Water Conservancy 
District.
  I would very much like to thank Chairmen Hastings and McClintock and 
Ranking Members Markey and Napolitano for their support in moving this 
bill through the Natural Resources Committee.
  This is a commonsense bill that encourages and promotes fiscal 
responsibility at all levels of government. Allowing the Uintah Water 
Conservancy District to pay its debt obligations back early and in a 
timely manner is what we like to call a ``win-win'' in that it's 
finally beneficial to the local government and Federal Government 
alike.
  It provides local government the ability to responsibly self-govern, 
giving it the flexibility to pay its loan off early and save hundreds 
of thousands of dollars in future interest payments. This savings will 
result in lower costs to the water users, which is very important as we 
continue to grow out of the current economic recession and look for 
additional ways to support much needed economic development in rural 
communities. Likewise, allowing for prepayment results in a significant 
payment to the Federal Treasury.

  As Congress continues to look for ways to trim the Federal budget and 
encourage best practices and good government policies, allowing for 
prepayment is a good model to follow. In addition, I believe this 
legislation provides a good opportunity to help rural communities 
prioritize and implement best practices to utilize scarce resources in 
an effort to meet rural water demands in a cost-effective and fiscally 
responsible manner.
  I would also like to point out that there is precedence for allowing 
the prepayment of repayment contracts. H.R. 818 is similar to 
legislation used by the Central Utah Water Conservancy District, which 
allowed for the prepayment of the repayment contracts for the 
Bonneville Unit. This effort saved hundreds of thousands in taxpayer 
dollars and allowed for project managers to consider time and cost 
savings through a balanced approach to managing an important resource 
in my State.
  H.R. 818 is the same bill that passed the House unanimously in the 
111th Congress. It has also in this Congress been reintroduced in the 
Senate by my counterparts in the Utah delegation, Senators Hatch and 
Lee. I urge my colleagues to join me in passing this bill once again.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. As I have no further requests for time, I would urge 
my colleagues to vote for this very important piece of legislation.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. YOUNG of Alaska. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Alaska (Mr. Young) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 818.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________