[DOCID: f:sr384.110]
From the Senate Reports Online via GPO Access
[wais.access.gpo.gov]
Calendar No. 816
110th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 110-384
======================================================================
MADERA WATER SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT ACT
_______
June 16, 2008.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bingaman, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 1855]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the Act (H.R. 1855) to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation to enter
into a cooperative agreement with the Madera Irrigation
District for purposes of supporting the Madera Water Supply
Enhancement Project, having considered the same, reports
favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that the Act
do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE
The purpose of H.R. 1855 is to authorize the Secretary of
the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation to enter
into a cooperative agreement with the Madera Irrigation
District for purposes of supporting the Madera Water Supply
Enhancement Project.
BACKGROUND AND NEED
It is estimated that the aquifer on which the Madera Water
District (District) relies is being depleted at a rate that
surpasses the rate of recharge by 100,000 acre-feet per year
(af/y). The District contends that these withdrawals have
resulted in lower water tables, requiring wells to be drilled
deeper in order to maintain the same level of productivity. In
order to address the reliance on groundwater, historically used
for agricultural purposes, the District is developing the
Madera Water Supply Enhancement Project.
The Project contemplates the creation of a water bank. The
District would store water in an aquifer underlying the Madera
Ranch which could be withdrawn for use during drought years.
Proponents of the Project maintain that the geology of the
ranch is ideal for aquifer storage, allowing water deposited on
the surface to quickly percolate to the underlying aquifer
therein creating a water bank. Water contained in the water
bank could then be withdrawn during years of water shortages,
providing a reliable source of water for the District. Based on
the District's estimates, approximately 250,000 af could be
stored in the aquifer beneath the Madera Ranch, of which 55,000
af/y could be withdrawn annually.
The proposed Project would require the upgrading of
existing water conveyances, constructing facilities on Madera
Ranch on which surface water could be deposited for aquifer
recharge, and groundwater wells and pumps that would withdraw
water stored in the aquifer for use by the District. The
Project would help address water supply and environmental
issues in the San Joaquin River basin.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
H.R. 1855 was introduced by Representative George
Radanovich on March 30, 2007 and referred to the House
Committee on Natural Resources. Under suspension of the rules,
H.R. 1855 passed the House of Representatives on October 22,
2007, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources. A companion measure, S. 1473 was introduced on May
24, 2007 by Senator Feinstein and referred to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources. The Subcommittee on Water and
Power held a hearing on S. 1473 and H.R. 1855 on February 28,
2008. At its business meeting on May 7, 2008, the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources ordered H.R. 1855 favorably
reported.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open
business session on May 7, 2008, by voice vote of a quorum
present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R. 1855.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1 provides the short title of the Act.
Section 2 defines terms used in the Act.
Section 3(a) declares the Project feasible as described.
Section 3(b) states that the Secretary shall implement the
Act in accordance with applicable Federal law.
Section 4 declares that activities authorized by the Act
shall be undertaken pursuant to a cooperative agreement between
the Secretary and the District which addresses specific items.
Section 5(a) authorizes the Secretary, pursuant to Federal
reclamation laws, to enter into a cooperative agreement with
the District to provide support for the Project.
Section 5(b) declares that the total cost for determining
the Federal cost share shall not exceed $90,000,000.
Section 5(c) states that the Federal share of the Project's
capital costs shall not exceed 25 percent of the total cost,
and that certain costs incurred by the District prior to
enactment would be considered as part of the non-Federal cost
share.
Section 5(d) states that the District shall receive credit
toward the non-Federal share of the Project's cost for in-kind
services and other identified items.
Section 5(e) declares that the Secretary shall not provide
funds for operation and maintenance of the Project.
Section 5(f) requires the Secretary to work cooperatively
with the District and, to the extent possible, use any existing
plans, designs, and analyses prepared by the District.
Section 5(g) declares that nothing in the section transfers
title, responsibility, or liability for the Project to the
United States.
Section 5(h) authorizes appropriations in the amount of 25
percent of the total project cost, up to a maximum of
$22,500,000.
Section 6 provides that the authority in the Act shall
terminate 10 years from the date of enactment.
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The Congressional Budget Office estimate of the costs of
this measure has been requested, but was not received at the
time the report was filed. When the Congressional Budget Office
completes its estimate, it will be posted on the Internet at
www.cbo.gov.
REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION
In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in
carrying out H.R. 1855. The bill is not a regulatory measure in
the sense of imposing Government-established standards or
significant economic responsibilities on private individuals
and businesses.
No personal information would be collected in administering
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal
privacy.
Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the
enactment of H.R. 1855, as ordered reported.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
H.R. 1855, as reported, does not contain any
congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits,
or limited tariffs benefits as defined by rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The testimony provided by the Bureau of Reclamation at the
Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources subcommittee
hearing on companion measure, S. 1473 follows:
Statement of Robert J. Quint, Director of Operations, Bureau of
Reclamation, Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Robert
J. Quint, Director of Operations, Bureau of Reclamation. I am
pleased to present the Department of the Interior's views on S.
1473, the Madera Water Supply Enhancement Act. While
Reclamation has been an active partner with the Madera
Irrigation District and other entities in studying this
project, the Department does not support S. 1473.
Reclamation and the state of California have studied the
Madera Water Supply Enhancement Project. The purpose of this
project is to reduce the overdraft of the area's groundwater
aquifer and improve water supply reliability. In March 2007,
Reclamation published an appraisal report for this project and
transmitted it to Congress. Appraisal reports are based upon
existing information to determine whether additional studies to
determine Federal feasibility are warranted.
Reclamation's March 2007 appraisal report identified
several alternatives, including delineation of groundwater
recharge areas; engineered recharge basins on the Madera Ranch;
and direct recharge from the San Joaquin and Fresno Rivers. The
cost for the project is estimated at approximately $91 million,
and section 5(b) of the legislation commits the Federal
government to paying 25 percent of project costs. The total
storage space is 250,000 acre-feet. However, it is important to
note that while a maximum of 55,000 acre-feet can be moved to
and from storage in any given year, the average annual water
yield is estimated to be 20,000 acre-feet per year. Altogether,
an appraisal level estimate is that this project would provide
water at a cost of $420 per acre-foot.
Although the bill lists eighteen studies that have been
completed relating to this project, none of these studies meet
Reclamation's feasibility study criteria. Because Reclamation
has not completed a feasibility study of the Madera Water
Supply Enhancement Project, it is premature to authorize
Federal implementation at this time. Moreover, this project
would directly compete for funding with other currently
authorized projects in the CVP service area, including several
storage studies authorized under the CALFED Program (PL 108-
361).
Reclamation continues to emphasize completion of ongoing
projects and the safe and effective maintenance of its aging
infrastructure. Reclamation must prioritize its program
activities to ensure that the most worthy projects receive
funding. In light of these needs, Reclamation allocates funds
to projects and programs based on objective and performance-
based criteria to most effectively implement Reclamation's
programs and its management responsibilities for the water and
power infrastructure in the West.
The Administration appreciates local efforts to address
current and future water issues. However, in light of the
concerns expressed above, the Department does not support S.
1473.
That concludes my prepared remarks. I would be pleased to
answer any questions.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no
changes in existing law are made by the bill H.R. 1855, as
ordered reported.
<all>