H.R. 254: Bonneville Unit Clean Hydropower Facilitation Act

Introduced:
Jan 15, 2013 (113th Congress, 2013–2015)
Sponsor:
Rep. Jason Chaffetz [R-UT3]
Status:
Passed House

The bill’s title was written by the bill’s sponsor. H.R. stands for House of Representatives bill.

Track this bill
(About Ads | Advertise Here)
Status

This bill passed in the House on April 9, 2013 and goes to the Senate next for consideration.

Progress
Introduced Jan 15, 2013
Referred to Committee Jan 15, 2013
Reported by Committee Mar 20, 2013
Passed House Apr 09, 2013
Passed Senate ...
Signed by the President ...
Votes

House Vote on Passage
Apr 09, 2013 6:56 p.m.
Passed 400/4

Prognosis

43% chance of being enacted.

Only 28% of House bills that made it past committee in 2011–2013 were enacted. [show factors | methodology]

Cosponsors
none
Committees

House Natural Resources

↪ Water and Power

House Budget

The committee chair determines whether a bill will move past the committee stage.

Full Title

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to facilitate the development of hydroelectric power on the Diamond Fork System of the Central Utah Project.

Summary

No summaries available.

Text

Read Bill Text »

Last updated Apr 09, 2013.
6 pages

Primary Source

View on THOMAS (The Library of Congress)

GovTrack gets most information from THOMAS, which is updated generally one day after events occur. Activity since the last update may not be reflected here.

Citation

Click a format for a citation suggestion:

GovTrack’s Bill Summary

We don’t have a summary available yet.

Library of Congress Summary

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.

4/9/2013--Passed House without amendment.
Bonneville Unit Clean Hydropower Facilitation Act -
Section 2 -
Declares that, in order to facilitate hydropower development on the Diamond Fork System (Utah), a certain amount of reimbursable costs allocated to project power in the Power Appendix of the October 2004 Supplement to the 1988 Bonneville Unit Definite Plan Report shall be considered final costs, as well as specified costs in excess of the total maximum repayment obligation, subject to the same terms and conditions.
Section 4 -
States that: (1) this Act does not obligate the Western Area Power Administration to purchase or market any of the power produced by the Diamond Fork power plant; and (2) none of the costs associated with development of transmission facilities to transmit power from the Diamond Fork power plant shall be assigned to power for the purpose of Colorado River Storage Project ratemaking.
Section 5 -
Prohibits any hydroelectric power generation or transmission facility on the Diamond Fork System from being financed or refinanced with any obligation: (1) whose interest enjoys federal tax-exempt status; or (2) which enjoys certain federal tax credits.
Section 6 -
Directs the Secretary of the Interior to report to certain congressional committees if hydropower production on the Diamond Fork System has not commenced 24 months after enactment of this Act, stating the reasons such production has not commenced, and presenting a detailed timeline for future hydropower production.
Section 8 -
Prohibits the use of Western Area Power Administration borrowing authority under the Hoover Power Plant Act of 1984 to fund any study or construction of transmission facilities developed as a result of this Act.

House Republican Conference Summary

The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.

This summary can be found at http://www.gop.gov/bill/113/1/hr254.

Background

Under current law, the beneficiaries of Bureau of Reclamation projects are required to pay back the capital costs associated with construction of the projects, usually with interest, under a cost allocation formula created by the Bureau.  Under the current cost allocation formula, hydropower developers must pay $106 million to the U.S. Treasury as part of installing any hydropower infrastructure at Diamond Fork.  As a result, no development has taken place and the government has therefore not received any lease revenue, which is normally collected when a developer pays a charge for utilizing the Bureau’s infrastructure to generate hydropower.

By indefinitely deferring the $106 million in repayments, similar to deferrals made with respect to costs addressed within the Central Utah Project Completion Act (P.L. 575), H.R. 254 will remove a major hurdle to hydropower development and will allow the federal government to begin receiving revenue in the form of lease fees. CBO estimated in 2012 that lease fees could total about $600,000 per year, a much more economically viable situation for developers than the over $5 million per year that is required under current law.

Similar legislation, H.R. 2008, passed the House in the 111th Congress on June 8, 2010 by voice vote.

Summary

H.R. 254 helps to facilitate hydropower development in the Diamond Fork System, located within the Central Utah Projects’ Bonneville Unit, by removing significant administrative barriers.  H.R. 254 indefinitely defers the $106 million in payments required of developers, which to date has prevented any hydropower development within the Diamond Fork System, in order to make development economically feasible.  Developers will still be responsible for the costs of providing power and for making lease payments to the federal government.  The bill also specifies that the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) is not responsible for purchasing or marketing any of the power produced by the Diamond Fork plant and that the project is not eligible for funding under WAPA’s borrowing authority.

Cost

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 254 would generate $4 million of new revenue in the form of lease payments over the 2014-2023 period.  Enacting the bill would decrease direct spending; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do apply.

House Democratic Caucus Summary

The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.

So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.

We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.

The bill contains the following citations to other parts of U.S. law:

Slip Laws

Slip laws refer to enacted bills and joint resolutions in their original form as enacted by Congress, that is, before other laws amend them. Slip laws are cited as “Public Law XXX-YYY”, where XXX is the number of the Congress in which the bill or resolution was introduced.

United States Code

The United States Code is the compilation of permanent laws enacted by Congress. Temporary and other non-permanent laws do not appear in the United States Code. (About half of the United States Code is the law itself, called positive law. The other half is merely a compilation of the laws but has no legal significance.)