Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                      Calendar No. 192
115th Congress      }                                    {      Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session        }                                    {     115-142

======================================================================



 
 A BILL TO FACILITATE CONSTRUCTION OF A BRIDGE ON CERTAIN PROPERTY IN 
           CHRISTIAN COUNTY, MISSOURI, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

                 August 2, 2017.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Barrasso, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 810]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 810) to facilitate construction of a 
bridge on certain property in Christian County, Missouri, and 
for other purposes, having considered the same, reports 
favorably thereon with an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.

                    GENERAL STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND

    Section 404 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and 
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170c) authorizes the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to contribute to the 
cost of measures that will reduce the risk of future damage 
from a major disaster. No structures may be built on any 
property purchased with such funds.
    The Riverside Bridge in Christian County, Missouri, is a 
100-year old, one lane bridge that is frequently closed due to 
flooding. The only location available to replace that bridge 
involves the use of land that was purchased using FEMA disaster 
mitigation funds. Unless Congress removes the restrictive 
covenant from that land, the County cannot replace the 
Riverside Bridge.

                     OBJECTIVES OF THE LEGISLATION

    The objective of S. 810 is to lift a restrictive covenant 
on the use of certain land.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Riverside Bridge Project

    Section 1 authorizes the Riverside Bridge Project 
notwithstanding any Federal restrictions under the Robert T. 
Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, subject 
to several conditions. The conditions on the authorization are: 
(1) no flood damage attributable to the project occurs, (2) if 
flood damage does occur the County (or the County's assignee) 
shall be liable for the damage, not the Federal Government, and 
(3) the property shall not be eligible for any future Federal 
disaster assistance.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    On April 4, 2017, Senator Blunt and Senator McCaskill 
introduced S. 810. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Environment and Public Works.
    On July 12, 2017, the Committee on Environment and Public 
Works met to consider an amendment in the nature of a 
substitute to S. 810 that made non-controversial changes to the 
bill. The bill, as amended, was ordered to be reported 
favorably by voice vote.

                                HEARINGS

    No committee hearings were held on S. 810.

                             ROLLCALL VOTES

    The Committee on Environment and Public Works met to 
consider S. 810 on July 12, 2017. The bill was ordered to be 
reported favorably by voice vote.

                      REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

    In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee finds that S. 810 
does not create any additional regulatory burdens, nor will it 
cause any adverse impact on the personal privacy of 
individuals.

                          MANDATES ASSESSMENT

    In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 
(Public Law 104-4), the Committee notes that the Congressional 
Budget Office found that S. 810 contains no intergovernmental 
or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates 
Reform Act (UMRA), and would impose no costs on state, local, 
or tribal governments.

                          COST OF LEGISLATION

    Section 403 of the Congressional Budget and Impoundment 
Control Act requires that a statement of the cost of the 
reported bill, prepared by the Congressional Budget Office, be 
included in the report, if available. That statement follows:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, August 2, 2017.
Hon. John Barrasso,
Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 810, a bill to 
facilitate construction of a bridge on certain property in 
Christian County, Missouri, and for other purposes.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Sarah Puro 
and Robert Reese.
            Sincerely,
                                             Mark P. Hadley
                                        (For Keith Hall, Director).

Enclosure.

S. 810--A bill to facilitate construction of a bridge on certain 
        property in Christian County, Missouri, and for other purposes

    S. 810 would provide Congressional authorization for the 
construction of a bridge in Ozark, Missouri. The bill would 
exempt the project from deed restrictions imposed on the 
proposed construction site by the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency (FEMA). The project would be built with a combination of 
funds from the Federal Highway Administration, FEMA, and the 
state of Missouri.
    Based on an analysis of information from the state and the 
affected agencies, CBO estimates that constructing the bridge 
would cost about $3 million with about $2 million of those 
amounts coming from federal sources. Thus, CBO estimates that 
implementing the bill would cost $2 million over the 2018-2022 
period; such spending would be subject to the availability of 
appropriated funds.
    Enacting S. 810 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. CBO 
estimates that enacting S. 810 would not increase net direct 
spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 
10-year periods beginning in 2028.
    S. 810 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Sarah Puro and 
Robert Reese. The estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                                  [all]