Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />. . <br /> <br />. <br />diversion unit of the Missouri River Basin project. Section 4(b) <br />of that Act approves the requested. change in the interest rate, <br />as follows: <br /> <br />"'From and after July 1, 1965, the interest rate"on <br />the \lna=rtized balance of the investment allocated to <br />commercial power in facilities constructed or under <br />constt'Uction on June 30, 1965, by the Department of the <br />AnI1I1 in the Missouri River Basin, the commercial power frolll <br />which is lIIarketed by the Department of the Interior, and in .. <br />the transmission and marketing facilities associated therewith, <br />shall be 2-1/2 per centum per ann1JIll." (79 Stat. 435). . <br /> <br />The report of the House committee explained that this amendment of <br />applicable law showed congressional acceptance of the Secretary's <br />financial report: <br /> <br />"In addition to reauthorizing the initial stage of the <br />Garrison diversion unit. the approval of this legislation: <br />nil indicate acceptance by the Congress. of the Department's <br />recollllllendations with respect to the overall financial position <br />of the Missouri. R:l.ver Basin project. 1\bout:) years ago, the <br />co1llllti.ttee requested the Department of the Interior to study <br />ways and means of placing the Missouri River Basi.n project in <br />a sotmd financial position and to report its findings and' <br />recommendations to the Congress. A "sotmd financial position" <br />was interpreted to mean that commercial power and =icipal <br />and industrial water investll1ents would be repaid rith interest. <br />:In not to exceed 50 years and that irrigation invest.lllents ,-, <br />would be repaid within 50 years plus any aut.'lorized development <br />period, including that portion to be repaid from power revenues. "- <br />R.ll.. Rept. No. 282, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. 8 (1965). <br /> <br />Identical language appeared in the 1964 report, R. R. Rept. No. 1606, <br />88th Cong., 2d Sess. 8 (1964), The Senate committee report similarly <br />acknowledged that section 4(b) was enacted to carry out a major <br />reco1lllllendation of the Secretary's financial plan. S. Rept. No. 470 <br />(on S:' 34). 89th Cong., 1st Sess. 4 (1965). <br /> <br />To =c;lerstand the scope af the congressional purpose in enacting 4(b), <br />and therefore the limitation it places currently on administrative <br />discretion. it is necessary to understand the meaning and effect of <br />the terms employed. The cost allocation procedure used in the <br />Secretary's financial plan is essentially a two-step procedure. First, <br />project costs are allocated to project purposes on .the basis of the <br /> <br />3 <br /> <br />---- <br /> <br /> <br />. <br />