[House Report 106-260]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session 106-260
======================================================================
CARLSBAD IRRIGATION PROJECT ACQUIRED LAND CONVEYANCE ACT
_______
July 26, 1999.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 1019]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 1019) to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey
lands and interests comprising the Carlsbad Irrigation Project
to the Carlsbad Irrigation District, New Mexico, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment
and recommend that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 1019 is to direct the Secretary of
Interior to convey lands and interests comprising the Carlsbad
Irrigation Project to the Carlsbad Irrigation District, New
Mexico.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION
Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) facility transfers has been of
particular interest to the Congress, local irrigation
districts, and the Administration in recent years. Facility
transfers represent an effort to shrink the federal government
and shift the responsibilities for ownership into the hands of
those who can more efficiently operate and maintain them. As a
result of the National Performance Review (Reinventing
Government II), BOR, which is part of the Department of the
Interior, initiated a program in 1995 to transfer ownership of
some of its facilities to non-federal entities. However, to
date, the Administration has not presented a legislative
proposal for project transfers. During the 105th Congress, two
legislatively initiated BOR transfers bills were signed into
law that directed the Secretary of the Interior to convey all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to
specified project facilities.
Much of the momentum for these transfers comes from local
irrigation districts that are seeking title to these projects.
The federal government holds title to more than 600 BOR water
projects throughout the West. A growing number of these
projects are now paid out and operated and maintained by local
irrigation districts. The districts seek to have the facilities
transferred to them since many of the districts now have the
expertise needed to manage the systems and can do so more
efficiently then the federal government. BOR has already
transferred operation and maintenance responsibilities for
about 400 of the projects to local irrigation districts. Under
the provisions of Section VI of the Reclamation Act of 1902,
title to project facilities remain with the United States
unless otherwise provided by Congress, even if project
beneficiaries have completed their repayment obligation.
Section VI of the Reclamation Act of 1902 states:
The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized
and directed to use the reclamation fund for the
operation and maintenance of all reservoirs and
irrigation works constructed under the provisions of
this act: Provided, That when the payments required by
this act are made for the major portion of the lands
irrigated from the waters of any of the works herein
provided for, then the management and operation of such
irrigation works shall pass to the owners of the lands
irrigated thereby, to be maintained at their expense
under such form of organization and under such rules
and regulations as may be acceptable to the Secretary
of the Interior: Provided, That the title to and the
management and operation of the reservoirs and the
works necessary for their protection and operation
shall remain in the Government until otherwise provided
by Congress.
32 Stat. 389; 43 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 491, 498
Many of these projects were constructed in remote locations
and at a time when there were no local communities and
utilities near the BOR project. Furthermore, many of the States
in which the projects were built did not have a sufficient tax
base to fund them. However, as the West became more populated,
and with the urbanization of these areas, the BOR now owns and
operates public facilities that would be owned, operated, and
funded by private corporations or local government agencies if
they were constructed today.
Legislative initiatives to transfer the title of BOR
facilities have been in play for many years. Two bills enacted
during the 105th Congress and signed into law directed the
Secretary of Interior to convey all right, title, and interest
of the United States in and to selected project features to the
Burley Irrigation District and the Canadian River Project. See
Public Law 105-351 and Public Law 105-316. In addition, Title
XIV of Public Law 102-575 directed the Secretary to transfer
the Rio Grande Project in New Mexico to the local irrigation
district, once the local irrigation district consented to amend
a contract.
Background of the Carlsbad Irrigation Project
The Carlsbad Project is a paid-out, single purpose
irrigation project delivering stored water to approximately
25,000 acres of farm land in southeastern New Mexico. The
original Carlsbad Project was authorized by the Secretary of
the Interior on November 28, 1905. Sumner Dam was authorized
for construction by the President on November 6, 1935, initial
funds having been approved on August 14, 1935, under the
Emergency Relief Appropriations Act of 1935. Section 7 of the
Flood Control Act of August 11, 1939, declared Sumner Dam and
Lake Sumner were to be used first for irrigation, then for
flood control, river regulation, and other beneficial uses.
Mineral leases for the acquired lands in the project were
issued under the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands, and
until the project indebtedness was repaid in 1991, were
credited toward indebtedness on the project. These receipts
continue to be paid into the Reclamation Fund and exist as
credits to the Carlsbad Project.
It is contemplated that the Carlsbad project facilities
transferred by this legislation would be maintained and managed
after the transfer so that there would be no significant
changes in operation and maintenance or in land and water use
in the reasonably foreseeable future. Once transfer takes
place, the future management of the facility will be the
responsibility of the new owners with any changes made pursuant
to all then applicable laws.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 1019 was introduced on March 4, 1999, by Congressman
Joe Skeen (R-NM). The bill was referred to the Committee on
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on
Water and Power. On March 11, 1999, the Subcommittee met to
mark up the bill. No amendments were offered and the bill was
ordered favorably reported to the Full Committee by voice vote.
On March 17, 1999, the Full Resources Committee met to consider
the bill. No amendments were offered and the bill was then
ordered favorably reported to the House of Representatives by
voice vote.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
The short title of the bill is the ``Carlsbad Irrigation
Project Acquired Land Conveyance Act.''
Section 2. Definitions
This section defines three terms used in the Act.
Section 3. Conveyance of project
With the Carlsbad Irrigation District's repayment
obligation completed, the bill directs the Secretary of
Interior to convey the acquired lands and the drainage and
distribution system from the BOR to the District.
The Committee expects that title transfer should occur in
an open and fair public process within the affected community.
The Committee does not want to establish a one size fits all
statutory procedure that would limit a State or community from
developing a process to address issues surrounding each
individual project, and how it should be conveyed. Furthermore,
it is not the intent of the Committee to use the National
Environmental Policy Act as a means to stall, or halt a project
from transferring to a local entity, as this action is
essentially a quiet title action. If environmental
documentation is needed to facilitate a conveyance, it is the
intent of the Committee to have it done in a timely manner. For
example, this H.R. 1019 provides that if no changes in Project
operations are expected following the conveyance of title then
the Secretary shall complete the conveyance expeditiously, but
not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of the
Act. If the District proposes to change Project operations as a
result of conveyance of the Project, the Secretary shall take
that into consideration and complete the conveyance within two
years. If the Secretary fails to meet the conveyance deadlines
the Committee expects the full costs of administrative action
and environmental compliance for the conveyance to be borne by
the Secretary. If the Secretary completes the conveyance before
the 180-day deadline, up to $200,000 of the post enactment/
prior conveyance mineral, grazing, licence and permit receipts
may be applied to pay the Secretary's and District's cost of
conveyance.
Section 4. Relationship to existing operations
The Committee expects the Secretary to allow the District
to continue its participation in programs which involve
Carlsbad Project lands and facilities that are not conveyed
under this Act.
Section 5. Relationship to certain contract obligations
This section clarifies the obligations of the District and
the United States regarding certain contract obligations.
Section 6. Lease management and past revenues collected from the
acquired lands
H.R. 1019 stipulates that the amounts existing in the
Reclamation Fund over $2,300,000, as of the date of enactment,
will be deposited into the Treasury. Thereafter, up to $200,000
of the receipts collected before conveyance will be set aside
to cover conveyance costs. Once conveyance is complete, future
revenues shall be made available to the District for
maintenance and improvements to the project facilities after
transfer.
The appropriate use of the existing funds in the
Reclamation Fund, as well as those which will continue to
accrue after transfer have been controversial issues with the
Administration. However, during 1998 the District and the BOR
came to an agreement on how to treat the Reclamation Fund. The
agreement remedies this problem by turning over the operation
and management of Sumner Dam, from the BOR to the District.
Section 7. Water conservation practices
This section clarifies that nothing in this Act shall limit
the ability of the District to voluntarily conserve water.
Section 8. Liability
Once title is conveyed, the responsibility for the conveyed
property fully resides with the District. For all decisions and
liabilities that may arise subsequently, the District assumes
all financial risks and benefits.
Section 9. Future reclamation benefits
After conveyance of the Project facilities to the District
under this Act, the District is no longer eligible for any
emergency loan from BOR for the maintenance or replacement of
any facility conveyed.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the
Committee on Resources' oversight findings and recommendations
are reflected in the body of this report.
CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT
Article I, section 8 and Article IV, section 3 of the
Constitution of the United States grant Congress the authority
to enact this bill.
COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII
1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the
Rules of the House of Representatives requires an estimate and
a comparison by the Committee of the costs which would be
incurred in carrying out this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B)
of that rule provides that this requirement does not apply when
the Committee has included in its report a timely submitted
cost estimate of the bill prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office under section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2)
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this
bill does not contain any new budget authority, credit
authority, or an increase or decrease in revenues or tax
expenditures. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that
enactment of this bill would reduce discretionary spending by
$100,000 over the 2000-2004 period and increase direct spending
by $200,000 a year beginning in 2000 based on the use of the
receipts collected for mineral and grazing leases by the Bureau
of Reclamation and later by the District.
3. Government Reform Oversight Findings. Under clause
3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives, the Committee has received no report of
oversight findings and recommendations from the Committee on
Government Reform on this bill.
4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause
3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives and section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act
of 1974, the Com-
mittee has received the following cost estimate for this bill
from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, March 18, 1999.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1019, the Carlsbad
Irrigation Project Acquired Land Conveyance Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Gary Brown
(for federal costs), and Majorie Miller (for the state and
local impact).
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson,
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 1019--Carlsbad Irrigation Project Acquired Land Conveyance Act
Summary: H.R. 1019 would direct the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation (the
bureau), to convey the irrigation and drainage system of the
Carlsbad Project, New Mexico, and related lands and property,
including most of the surface and mineral estates, to the
Carlsbad Irrigation District (the district).
CBP estimates that implementing the bill would reduce
discretionary spending over the 2000-2004 period by $100,000,
assuming appropriations are reduced correspondingly. CBO
estimates that enacting H.R. 1019 would increase direct
spending by $200,000 annually beginning in 2000; therefore,
pay-as-you-go procedures would apply.
H.R. 1019 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA).
Local governments might incur some costs as a result of the
bill's enactment, but these costs would be voluntary.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: CBO estimates
that implementing the bill would reduce discretionary spending
by about $20,000 a year, assuming that appropriations are
reduced accordingly, and would increase direct spending by
$200,000 annually beginning in 2000. The costs of this
legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources
and environment).
Basis of estimate: For purpose of this estimate, CBO
assumes that the bill will be enacted by the end of fiscal year
1999. Under current law, about $20,000 is appropriated each
year to the Bureau of Reclamation for operation, maintenance,
and oversight of land and facilities that would be managed
solely by the district if H.R. 1019 is implemented. The bureau
would no longer incur these costs if the bill is enacted.
Conveying the lands and property to the irrigation district
would also affect federal receipts from mineral and grazing
leases at the Carlsbad Project. Direct spending would increase
beginning in 2000 because H.R. 1019 would allow the bureau to
use receipts collected after the bill is enacted but prior to
conveyance to offset the cost of conveying the project.
Additionally, the bill would transfer to the irrigation
district the right to all receipts after conveyance. As a
result, CBO estimates that additional outlays from direct
spending would total about $200,000 a year.
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. H.R.
1019 would not affect governmental receipts but would increase
outlays from direct spending by about $200,000 a year,
beginning in 2000.
Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal government:
H.R. 1019 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in
UMRA. The conveyance authorized by this bill would be voluntary
on the part of the district, and any costs incurred as a result
of the conveyance would be accepted on that basis. CBO
estimates that the additional costs incurred by the district
(about $20,000 per year) would be more than offset by the new
receipts (about $200,000 per year).
Estimated impact on the private sector: This bill contains
no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Previous CBO estimate: On March 10, 1999, CBO prepared an
estimate for S. 291, the Carlsbad Irrigation Project Acquired
Land Transfer Act, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee
on Energy and Natural Resources on March 4, 1999. The two bills
are similar and the estimates are the same.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Gary Brown. Impact on
State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie Miller.
Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
compliance with public law 104-4
This bill contains no unfunded mandates.
preemption of state, local or tribal law
This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or
tribal law.
changes in existing law
If enacted, this bill makes no changes in existing law.
ADDITIONAL VIEWS
There are several objectionable provisions in this bill:
This bill would set a precedent for privatization
of federal facilities that would bankrupt the Treasury if
applied nationwide. Rather than producing income to the
Treasury, H.R. 1019 would provide a sweetheart give-away to the
single-interest Carlsbad Irrigation District. The taxpayers
cannot afford such largesse.
In addition to practically giving away facilities
owned by the public, the bill would give away public lands,
public mineral rights, and even funds from the public Treasury.
And this entire give-away would be mandated without any advance
evaluation of the environmental impacts of such a transfer.
The bill clearly provides that the District is
``entitled to any receipts'' from oil and gas leases associated
with this project. The oil and gas leases associated with the
mineral rights that the Carlsbad Irrigation District wishes to
acquire currently provide a steady income to the Treasury that
is credited to the Reclamation Fund in accordance with the
terms of the Fact Finders Act of 1924. The money is held in the
Treasury, subject to appropriation for further capital
investment in the Carlsbad Project. Instead of giving the
receipts directly to the District as required by H.R. 1019, why
shouldn't we at least consider using this money as credit
toward continuing federal obligations for non-reimbursable
project purposes like fish and wildlife, flood control,
recreation and vegetation control?
H.R. 1019 mandates that these assets be
transferred without any review of the environmental impacts of
that mandate. Despite the fact that management of the Carlsbad
Project has significant effects on the local environment and
recreation, no environmental analysis will be required before
the Secretary transfers the project. Although there is no
express waiver of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),
the bill still leaves the Secretary of the Interior with no
alternative but to transfer the designated facilities. This
mandated, non-discretionary transfer significant weakens the
purposes of NEPA, by making the most significant choice--to
transfer the project--without the benefit of environmental
analysis. This dramatically constrains the Secretary's decision
making options.
However, existing legislative authorities available to the
Secretary of the Interior are not repealed by this legislation,
and we do not believe this bill totally circumscribes the role
of the Bureau of Reclamation in specifying mitigation
requirements, if appropriate. If the NEPA process is fairly
applied as the Carlsbad transfer is implemented, we expect the
Bureau will attach whatever conditions it believes are
appropriate to mitigrate environmental damaged and to ensure
compliance with applicable laws.
George Miller.
Peter DeFazio.