[House Report 107-580]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
107th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 107-580
======================================================================
LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT
ACT OF 2001
_______
July 16, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Hansen, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 2990]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 2990) to amend the Lower Rio Grande Valley Water
Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 to authorize
additional projects under that Act, and for other purposes,
having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Lower Rio Grande Valley Water
Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2001''.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL PROJECTS UNDER THE LOWER RIO GRANDE
VALLEY WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT
ACT OF 2000.
Section 4(a) of the Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources
Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-576; 114 Stat.
3067) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(5) In the United Irrigation District of Hidalgo County,
Texas, a pipeline and pumping system as identified in the
Sigler, Winston, Greenwood, Associates, Incorporated, study
dated January 2001.
``(6) In the Cameron County, Texas, Irrigation District No.
2, proposed improvements to Canal C, as identified in the
February 8, 2001, engineering report by Martin, Brown, and
Perez.
``(7) In the Cameron County, Texas, Irrigation District No.
2, a proposed Canal C and Canal 13 Inner Connect, as identified
in the February 12, 2001, engineering report by Martin, Brown,
and Perez.
``(8) In Delta Lake Irrigation District of Hidalgo and
Willacy Counties, Texas, proposed water conservation projects,
as identified by the AW Blair Engineering report of February
13, 2001.
``(9) In the Hidalgo and Cameron County, Texas, Irrigation
District No. 9, a proposed project to salvage spill water using
automatic control of canal gates as identified in the AW Blair
Engineering report dated February 14, 2001.
``(10) In the Brownsville Irrigation District of Cameron
County, Texas, a proposed main canal replacement as outlined in
the Holdar-Garcia & Associates engineering report dated
February 14, 2001.
``(11) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation District No.
16, a proposed off-district pump station project as identified
by the Melden & Hunt, Incorporated, engineering report dated
February 14, 2001.
``(12) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation District No.
1, a proposed canal replacement of the North Branch East Main,
as outlined in the Melden & Hunt, Incorporated, engineering
analysis dated February, 2001.
``(13) In the Donna (Texas) Irrigation District, a proposed
improvement project as identified by the Melden & Hunt,
Incorporated, engineering analysis dated February 13, 2001.
``(14) In the Hudspeth County, Texas, Conservation and
Reclamation District No. 1, the Alamo Arroyo Pumping Plant
water quality project as identified by the engineering report
and drawings by Gebhard-Sarma and Associates dated July 1996
and the construction of a 1,000 acre-foot off-channel
regulating reservoir for the capture and conservation of
irrigation water, as identified in the engineering report by AW
Blair Engineering dated June 2002.
``(15) In the El Paso County, Texas, Water Improvement
District No. 1, the Riverside Canal Improvement Project Phase I
Reach A, a canal lining and water conservation project as
identified by the engineering report by AW Blair Engineering
dated June 2002.
``(16) In the Maverick County, Texas, Water Improvement and
Control District No. 1, the concrete lining project of 12 miles
of the Maverick Main Canal, identified in the engineering
report by AW Blair Engineering dated June 2002.
``(17) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation District No.
6, rehabilitation of 10.2 miles of concrete lining in the main
canal between Lift Stations Nos. 2 and 3 as identified in the
engineering report by AW Blair Engineering dated June 2002.
``(18) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation District No.
2, Wisconsin Canal Improvements as identified in the Sigler,
Winston, Greenwood & Associates, Incorporated, engineering
report dated February 2001.
``(19) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation District No.
2, Lateral `A' Canal Improvements as identified in the Sigler,
Winston, Greenwood & Associates, Incorporated, engineering
report dated July 25, 2001.''.
SEC. 3. AMENDMENTS TO THE LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCES
CONSERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2000.
The Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and
Improvement Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-576; 114 Stat. 3065 et seq.) is
further amended as follows:
(1) Section 3(a) is amended in the first sentence by striking
``The Secretary'' and all that follows through ``in
cooperation'' and inserting ``The Secretary, acting through the
Bureau of Reclamation, shall undertake a program under
cooperative agreements''.
(2) Section 3(b) is amended to read as follows:
``(b) Project Review.--Project proposals shall be reviewed and
evaluated under the guidelines set forth in the document published by
the Bureau of Reclamation entitled `Guidelines for Preparing and
Reviewing Proposals for Water Conservation and Improvement Projects
Under P.L. 106-576', dated June 2001.''.
(3) Section 3(d) is amended by inserting before the period at
the end the following: ``, including operation, maintenance,
repair, and replacement''.
(4) Section 3(e) is amended by striking ``the criteria
established pursuant to this section'' and inserting ``the
guidelines referred to in subsection (b)''.
(5) Subsection (f) of section 3 is amended by striking ``to
prepare'' and all that follows through the end of the
subsection and inserting ``to have the Secretary prepare the
reports required under this section. The Federal share of the
cost of such preparation by the Secretary shall not exceed 50
percent of the total cost of such preparation.''.
(6) Section 3(g) is amended by striking ``$2,000,000'' and
inserting ``$8,000,000''.
(7) Section 4(b) is amended--
(A) in the first sentence by striking ``costs of any
construction'' and inserting ``total project cost of
any project''; and
(B) in the last sentence by inserting ``the actual''
before ``funds''.
(8) Section 4(c) is amended by striking ``$10,000,000'' and
inserting ``$47,000,000 (2001 dollars)''.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of H.R. 2990 is to amend the Lower Rio Grande
Valley Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000
to authorize additional projects under the Act.
Background and Need for Legislation
The Rio Grande has been severely impacted by drought
conditions during the last decade. There are more than seven
million people residing on both sides of the Rio Grande in the
Lower Valley, with approximately one million of those living in
the United States. Twenty-nine water districts are located in
the United States below the International Falcon-Amistad
Reservoir System, which supplies nearly 95% of their water
needs. The Lower Valley is one of the fastest growing areas
with projected populations more than doubling by the year 2050.
Implementation of significant improvements to irrigation canal
delivery systems, aggressive water conservation programs, and
improved water management are critical needs which must be
addressed in the next few years.
On December 28, 2000, the President signed into law the
Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and
Improvement Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-576). The legislation
authorized the Bureau of Reclamation to develop a program to
investigate and identify opportunities to improve the water
supply for selected counties along the Texas-Mexico border, and
to provided funding authorization for engineering work,
infrastructure construction and improvements for several
projects.
H.R. 2990 amends Public Law 106-576 by adding 14 new water
conservation projects, modifying some of the criteria for water
supply studies, increasing the authorization for carrying out
the studies from $2 million to $8 million, and increasing the
authorization for construction of facilities from $10 million
to $47 million.
Committee Action
H.R. 2990 was introduced on October 2, 2001, by Congressman
Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX). The bill was referred to the Committee
on Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on
Water and Power. The Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill on
May 3, 2002. On June 26, 2002, the Full Resources Committee met
to consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Water and Power was
discharged from further consideration of the bill by unanimous
consent. Mr. Calvert offered a technical amendment which makes
several changes to correct dates of studies. The amendment was
adopted by unanimous consent. No further amendments were
offered and the bill, as amended, was ordered favorably
reported to the House of Representatives, by unanimous consent.
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 of the Constitution of the United
States grants 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, spending
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in
revenues or tax expenditures.
3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or
objective of this bill is to amend the Lower Rio Grande Valley
Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 to
authorize additional projects under the Act.
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 Committee 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, July 15, 2002.
Hon. James V. Hansen,
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. 2990, the Lower
Rio Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and Improvement
Act of 2001.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie
Middleton.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 2990--Lower Rio Grande Valley Water Resources Conservation and
Improvement Act of 2001
Summary: H.R. 2990 would amend the Lower Rio Grande Valley
Water Resources Conservation and Improvement Act of 2000 to add
14 new water conservation projects to those eligible for
federal assistance under that act. The bill also would increase
the funds authorized for studies of these projects--from $2
million to $8 million--and for construction of projects in the
Lower Rio Grande Valley--from $10 million to $47 million.
Hence, the bill would increase the existing authorization of
appropriations by a total of $43 million.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing H.R. 2990 would cost $38 million
over the 2003-2007 period and an additional $5 million after
that period. H.R. 2990 would not affect direct spending or
receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
H.R. 2990 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. Enacting this legislation would benefit the state
of Texas and local governments in that state that would receive
the authorized federal assistance. Any costs incurred by those
governments to meet the conditions of the assistance would be
voluntary.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 2990 is shown in the following table.
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300
(natural resources and environment).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
--------------------------------------------
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated authorization level...................................... 6 10 10 10 7
Estimated outlays.................................................. 3 7 9 10 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R.
2990 will be enacted by the start of fiscal year 2003. The bill
would increase the current amount authorized to be appropriated
for the Lower Rio Grande Water Conservation and Improvement
Program from $12 million to $55 million. To date, no funds have
been appropriated to implement the program. Appropriated funds
would pay for the construction of pending authorized projects
as well as the planning, design and construction of the new
projects included in H.R. 2990.
Based on information from the Bureau of Reclamation and the
Harlington Irrigation District in Texas, CBO estimates that
implementing H.R. 2990 would cost $38 million over the 2003-
2007 period and an additional $5 million after that period,
assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 2990
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments. Enacting this legislation would benefit the
state of Texas and local governments in that state that would
receive the authorized federal assistance. Any costs incurred
by these governments to meet the conditions of the assistance
would be voluntary.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Julie Middleton;
impact on state, local, and tribal governments: Marjorie
Miller; impact on the private sector: Cecil McPherson.
Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, 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 Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is
proposed is shown in roman):
LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT
ACT OF 2000
* * * * * * *
SEC. 3. LOWER RIO GRANDE WATER CONSERVATION AND IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.
(a) In General.--[The Secretary, acting pursuant to the
Reclamation Act of 1902 (Act of June 17, 1902, 32 Stat. 388)
and Acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto, shall
undertake a program in cooperation] The Secretary, acting
through the Bureau of Reclamation, shall undertake a program
under cooperative agreements with the State, water users in the
program area, and other non-Federal entities, to investigate
and identify opportunities to improve the supply of water for
the program area as provided in this Act. The program shall
include the review of studies or planning reports (or both)
prepared by any competent engineering entity for projects
designed to conserve and transport raw water in the program
area. As part of the program, the Secretary shall evaluate
alternatives in the program area that could be used to improve
water supplies, including the following:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
[(b) Program Development.--Within 6 months after the date of
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary, in consultation with
the State, shall develop and publish criteria to determine
which projects would qualify and have the highest priority for
financing under this Act. Such criteria shall address, at a
minimum--
[(1) how the project relates to the near- and long-
term water demands and supplies in the study area,
including how the project would affect the need for
development of new or expanded water supplies;
[(2) the relative amount of water (acre feet) to be
conserved pursuant to the project;
[(3) whether the project would provide operational
efficiency improvements or achieve water, energy, or
economic savings (or any combination of the foregoing)
at a rate of acre feet of water or kilowatt energy
saved per dollar expended on the construction of the
project; and
[(4) if the project proponents have met the
requirements specified in subsection (c).]
(b) Project Review.--Project proposals shall be reviewed and
evaluated under the guidelines set forth in the document
published by the Bureau of Reclamation entitled ``Guidelines
for Preparing and Reviewing Proposals for Water Conservation
and Improvement Projects Under P.L. 106-576'', dated June 2001.
* * * * * * *
(d) Financial Capability.--Before providing funding for a
project to the non-Federal project sponsor, the Secretary shall
determine that the non-Federal project sponsor is financially
capable of funding the project's non-Federal share of the
project's costs, including operation, maintenance, repair, and
replacement.
(e) Review Period.--Within 1 year after the date a project is
submitted to the Secretary for approval, the Secretary, subject
to the availability of appropriations, shall determine whether
the project meets [the criteria established pursuant to this
section] the guidelines referred to in subsection (b).
(f) Report Preparation; Reimbursement.--Project sponsors may
choose to contract with the Secretary [to prepare the reports
required under this section. All costs associated with the
preparation of the reports by the Secretary shall be 50 percent
reimbursable by the non-Federal sponsor.] to have the Secretary
prepare the reports required under this section. The Federal
share of the cost of such preparation by the Secretary shall
not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of such preparation.
(g) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section
[$2,000,000] $8,000,000.
SEC. 4. LOWER RIO GRANDE CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION.
(a) Project Implementation.--If the Secretary determines that
any of the following projects meet the review criteria and
project requirements, as set forth in section 3, the Secretary
may conduct or participate in funding engineering work,
infrastructure construction, and improvements for the purpose
of conserving and transporting raw water through that project:
(1) * * *
* * * * * * *
(5) In the United Irrigation District of Hidalgo
County, Texas, a pipeline and pumping system as
identified in the Sigler, Winston, Greenwood,
Associates, Incorporated, study dated January 2001.
(6) In the Cameron County, Texas, Irrigation District
No. 2, proposed improvements to Canal C, as identified
in the February 8, 2001, engineering report by Martin,
Brown, and Perez.
(7) In the Cameron County, Texas, Irrigation District
No. 2, a proposed Canal C and Canal 13 Inner Connect,
as identified in the February 12, 2001, engineering
report by Martin, Brown, and Perez.
(8) In Delta Lake Irrigation District of Hidalgo and
Willacy Counties, Texas, proposed water conservation
projects, as identified by the AW Blair Engineering
report of February 13, 2001.
(9) In the Hidalgo and Cameron County, Texas,
Irrigation District No. 9, a proposed project to
salvage spill water using automatic control of canal
gates as identified in the AW Blair Engineering report
dated February 14, 2001.
(10) In the Brownsville Irrigation District of
Cameron County, Texas, a proposed main canal
replacement as outlined in the Holdar-Garcia &
Associates engineering report dated February 14, 2001.
(11) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation
District No. 16, a proposed off-district pump station
project as identified by the Melden & Hunt,
Incorporated, engineering report dated February 14,
2001.
(12) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation
District No. 1, a proposed canal replacement of the
North Branch East Main, as outlined in the Melden &
Hunt, Incorporated, engineering analysis dated
February, 2001.
(13) In the Donna (Texas) Irrigation District, a
proposed improvement project as identified by the
Melden & Hunt, Incorporated, engineering analysis dated
February 13, 2001.
(14) In the Hudspeth County, Texas, Conservation and
Reclamation District No. 1, the Alamo Arroyo Pumping
Plant water quality project as identified by the
engineering report and drawings by Gebhard-Sarma and
Associates dated July 1996 and the construction of a
1,000 acre-foot off-channel regulating reservoir for
the capture and conservation of irrigation water, as
identified in the engineering report by AW Blair
Engineering dated June 2002.
(15) In the El Paso County, Texas, Water Improvement
District No. 1, the Riverside Canal Improvement Project
Phase I Reach A, a canal lining and water conservation
project as identified by the engineering report by AW
Blair Engineering dated June 2002.
(16) In the Maverick County, Texas, Water Improvement
and Control District No. 1, the concrete lining project
of 12 miles of the Maverick Main Canal, identified in
the engineering report by AW Blair Engineering dated
June 2002.
(17) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation
District No. 6, rehabilitation of 10.2 miles of
concrete lining in the main canal between Lift Stations
Nos. 2 and 3 as identified in the engineering report by
AW Blair Engineering dated June 2002.
(18) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation
District No. 2, Wisconsin Canal Improvements as
identified in the Sigler, Winston, Greenwood &
Associates, Incorporated, engineering report dated
February 2001.
(19) In the Hidalgo County, Texas, Irrigation
District No. 2, Lateral ``A'' Canal Improvements as
identified in the Sigler, Winston, Greenwood &
Associates, Incorporated, engineering report dated July
25, 2001.
(b) Construction Cost Share.--The non-Federal share of the
[costs of any construction] total project cost of any project
carried out under, or with assistance provided under, this
section shall be 50 percent. Not more than 40 percent of the
costs of such an activity may be paid by the State. The
remainder of the non-Federal share may include in-kind
contributions of goods and services, and the actual funds
previously spent on feasibility and engineering studies.
(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to
be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out this section
[$10,000,000] $47,000,000 (2001 dollars).