[House Report 106-1018]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Rept. 106-1018
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session Part 1
======================================================================
CALFED EXTENSION ACT OF 2000
_______
October 30, 2000.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
DISSENTING VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 5130]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill
(H.R. 5130) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
provide cost sharing for the CALFED water enhancement programs
in California, 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 ``CALFED Extension Act of 2000''.
SEC. 2. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this Act is to authorize interim funding for the
Secretary of the Interior to continue the implementation of ecosystem
protection programs, and development of water supply enhancement
projects critically needed to achieve increased yield and environmental
benefits as well as improved water system reliability, water quality,
water use efficiency, watershed management, water transfers, and levee
protection for California. This authorization will ensure that the
CALFED Program emphasizes well-grounded, sound science for decisions
and actions.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
As used in this Act:
(1) The term ``Bay-Delta solution area'' means the Bay-Delta
watershed, the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
Estuary, and the areas in which diverted/exported water is
used.
(2) The term ``Bay-Delta watershed'' means the waters
entering and supplied by the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valley
watershed and the lands within the watershed.
(3) The term ``CALFED Agencies'' means both the Federal
Agencies and the State Agencies.
(4) The term ``Congressional Committees'' means the Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, the Senate
Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development,
the House Resources Committee, and the House Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development.
(5) The term ``Environmental Water Account'' means the CALFED
Agencies sponsored water account established to provide water
for the protection and recovery of fish beyond water available
through existing regulatory actions, at no uncompensated water
cost to the water users, in the Bay-Delta watershed and export
areas.
(6) The term ``Federal Agencies'' means the Federal Agencies
as identified in the CALFED Bay-Delta Record of Decision.
(7) The term ``Federal ESA Regulatory Agencies'' means the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine
Fisheries Service.
(8) The term ``Record of Decision'' means the Federal record
of decision issued August 28, 2000, pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for the CALFED Bay-Delta
Program Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement.
(9) The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary of the
Interior.
(10) The term ``State Agencies'' means the State agencies as
identified in the CALFED Bay-Delta Program Record of Decision.
(11) The term ``yield'' means a quantity of water supply,
either derived from recycling existing sources, stored in a
reservoir, or by other means that is reliably available in
critically dry years. Conservation, land retirement, transfers,
groundwater, increased delta pumping and other water management
tools that generate additional or new water supplies shall be
considered in characterizing yield.
SEC. 4. WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS.
(a) In General.--The Federal Agencies, acting through the CALFED
Program, shall develop a balanced and timely program designed to
achieve increased yield and environmental benefits as well as improved
water system reliability, water quality, water use efficiency,
watershed management, water transfers, and levee protection. In meeting
the need for balance, funding for water supply enhancements and
environmental benefits shall proceed concomitantly so that adequate
progress is made in each area.
(b) Water System Improvements.--The Federal Agencies are directed to
ensure that Federal participation in the CALFED Program results in
continuous, measurable, and significant benefits to achieve increased
yield and environmental benefits as well as improved water system
reliability, water quality, water use efficiency, watershed management,
water transfers, and levee protection for agricultural and urban uses
throughout the Bay-Delta solution area. In developing such water supply
benefits, funding for water storage development and conveyance
facilities located in the Central Valley and Bay-Delta, will occur
together. However, nothing in this Act shall be construed to implicitly
or explicitly authorize the Hood Diversion or any Peripheral Canal
substitute. In developing water supply options the Federal Agencies
shall consider all potential storage alternatives and utilize a cost/
benefit analysis in conjunction with environmental criteria to ensure
that proposals are selected which address environmental issues and are
economically viable.
(c) Water Deliveries.--In consultation with interested parties, the
Secretary is directed to develop water supply rule curves that can be
used to describe increased water delivery in varying water years. To
the extent that the 2001 water year is a normal water year, the
Secretary is directed to deliver the water supply improvements targeted
in the CALFED Framework for Action, dated June 9, 2000, for
agricultural and urban uses. If the 2001 water year is not a normal
water year, the Central Valley Project shall be operated pursuant to
the water supply rule curves identified above, to ensure that the water
supply of south-of-the-Delta Central Valley Project agricultural
contractors is increased in a manner comparable with the targeted
normal-year supply improvements. The increased supply for south-of-the-
Delta Central Valley Project agricultural contractors shall be
accomplished without affecting deliveries to other water users. For
purposes of this section, ``normal-year'' shall mean a water year in
which precipitation, runoff, and storage, projected on April 1 using a
50-percent exceedance, are within 5 percent of the long-term average.
(d) Water Supply Studies.--The Secretary, acting through the Bureau
of Reclamation, is authorized and directed to conduct studies of
available water supplies and existing demand within the respective
units of the Central Valley Project.
SEC. 5. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT.
(a) Long-Term Solution.--Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to
diminish the Federal interest in, and responsibility for, working with
the State of California through the CALFED Program in developing,
funding, and implementing a balanced, long-term solution to achieve
increased yield and environmental benefits as well as improved water
system reliability, water quality, water use efficiency, watershed
management, water transfers, and levee protection in the Bay-Delta
solution area. The long-term solution shall be provided by
congressional action authorized subsequent to this Act, and shall be
based on the equitable allocation of program costs among beneficiary
groups. The authorization herein provided for the Federal Agencies
shall expire January 1, 2002.
(b) CALFED Governance.--It is the intent of Congress that the Federal
Government and the State of California will work together to develop a
joint structure for managing CALFED operations. To achieve that goal,
the Federal Agencies are directed to participate with the State
Agencies to develop a proposed structure that will be authorized by
both Congress and the California legislature prior to becoming
effective. In developing such a proposal, the CALFED Agencies are
directed to make such a recommendation to Congress and the California
Legislature by May 31, 2001. The Federal Agencies are directed to take
steps that will encourage broad public, tribal, and local government
involvement in developing the CALFED governance proposal. Whenever
feasible, meetings of multiple CALFED Agencies to develop program goals
or determine operational criteria shall be open to the public.
SEC. 6. ENVIRONMENTAL WATER MANAGEMENT.
(a) Management of Environmental Water Account.--The Federal Agencies
are directed to manage the Environmental Water Account so that actions
taken to avoid jeopardy to ESA listed species, enhance species
recovery, and protect fish by reducing incidental take related to
Central Valley Project, State Water Project, or other water user
operations, are accomplished with no annual net loss of water delivered
by those projects, as compared to the water that would otherwise be
delivered. In their operation of the Environmental Water Account, the
Federal Agencies are directed to minimize water quality impacts
associated with Environmental Water Account operations.
(b) Avoiding Jeopardy to Species.--If, by December 31, 2000, the
Environmental Water Account water purchase targets have not been met,
the Federal Agencies are directed to continue their efforts to meet the
water purchase targets as well as cooperate with the State Agencies to
operate the Environmental Water Account to avoid jeopardy to listed
species and to avoid reductions in Central Valley Project, State Water
Project, or other water user deliveries due to the application of take
limits. The CALFED Agencies shall make use of the variable
Environmental Water Account assets and all amounts of purchased water
actually acquired.
(c) Water Delivery Reductions.--On or before January 30, 2001, the
Federal ESA Regulatory Agencies, in cooperation with all CALFED
Agencies, shall determine if there is likely to be jeopardy to listed
species from the lack of water in the Environmental Water Account. Only
after--
(1) full utilization of the available Environmental Water
Account assets;
(2) the use of other water, measures, and resources available
to the CALFED Agencies, that would not reduce deliveries to
water users; and
(3) a determination by the Federal ESA Regulatory Agencies
that jeopardy is likely;
shall water deliveries be reduced. In that event, the reductions shall
be the minimum required to avoid jeopardy. In carrying out their duties
under this subsection the Federal Agencies shall consider all available
information, seek and consider the views of the ``independent science
panel'' (as defined in the Record of Decision), and prepare a written
response to the views of the panel.
(d) Tier 3 Water.--The Federal Agencies shall also follow the
procedures set forth in subsection (c) if it is determined that ``Tier
3'' water (as defined in the Record of Decision) is not available or
may be insufficient to avoid jeopardy to existing or future listed
species under the Federal or California endangered species Acts.
SEC. 7. LAND ACQUISITION.
Prior to acquiring land as part of the CALFED Program, the CALFED
Agencies shall first determine that Federal or State owned land is not
available to achieve identified CALFED Program objectives. If private
lands are proposed for acquisition, the Federal Agencies shall ensure
that all payments in lieu of taxes on existing Federal lands within the
county where the land is to be acquired are currently paid. In
determining whether to acquire additional lands for the CALFED Program,
the CALFED Agencies shall consider the cumulative impact on the local
government and communities of transferring the property into government
ownership and mitigate such impacts. The Federal Agencies shall, no
later than January 1, 2001, develop an assurances program in
cooperation with the State Agencies. Under this program, the CALFED
Agencies shall partner with landowners and local agencies to develop
cooperating landowner commitments that will meet co-equal objectives to
achieve local economic and social goals and to implement the ecosystem
restoration goals in the Record of Decision.
SEC. 8. LIST OF PROPOSED FEDERAL EXPENDITURES.
For fiscal year 2002, the Secretary shall transmit to the
Congressional Committees, by no later than the submission of the budget
for the fiscal year under section 1105 of title 31, United States Code,
a report for the proposed projects to be carried out with the Federal
portion of the funds to be appropriated pursuant to this Act for the
upcoming fiscal year. The report shall separately specify all projects
supported by Federal funding. For such projects the Secretary shall
provide a summary of the recommendations provided by the Bay-Delta
Advisory Committee, the Ecosystem Roundtable, and other members of the
public commenting on the projects. No project shall proceed without the
concurrence of the Congressional Committees.
SEC. 9. ANNUAL REPORTS.
(a) State Reports.--On January 1, 2001, the Governor of California
shall account for all moneys received by the State of California from
the Federal fiscal year 2000 appropriations in a written report to the
Secretary. The report shall include a description of all projects and
activities receiving funds under this Act, as well as any unexpended
funds.
(b) Report to Congress.--On February 1, 2001, the Secretary shall
provide to the Congressional Committees a report regarding CALFED
Program expenditures and accomplishments in achieving increased yield
and environmental benefits as well as improved water system
reliability, water quality, water use efficiency, watershed management,
water transfers, and levee protection.
SEC. 10. PROGRAM FUNDING.
(a) Authorization of Appropriations.--For fiscal year 2001 there is
authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary $60,000,000. Funds
appropriated pursuant to this Act may remain available until expended.
(b) Treatment of Funds.--Funds authorized to be appropriated pursuant
to this Act to those Federal Agencies that are currently or
subsequently become participants in the CALFED Program shall be in
addition to the baseline funding levels established for currently
authorized projects and programs under the Central Valley Project
Improvement Act (title XXXIV of Public Law 102-575) and other currently
authorized Federal programs for the purposes of Bay-Delta ecosystem
protection and restoration and water system improvement.
SEC. 11. PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES.
(a) Coordination.--To the extent not otherwise authorized, those
agencies and departments that are currently or subsequently become
participants in the CALFED Program are hereby authorized to undertake
the activities and programs for which Federal cost sharing is provided
by this Act. CALFED Agencies shall ensure that all relevant Federal
programs authorized under this Act and other preexisting authorities
coordinate goalsetting, funding, and implementation so as to ensure the
most efficient and effective expenditure of Federal funds and resources
for CALFED related activities. The United States shall continue
coordinated consultations and negotiations with the State of California
pursuant to the cost sharing agreement required by section 78684.10 of
California Senate Bill 900, Chapter 135, Statutes of 1996, signed by
the Governor of California on July 11, 1996. In addition, the Federal
Agencies shall cooperate and undertake joint activities with local
public agencies, tribes, private water users, and landowners pursuant
to the CALFED Program. Such activities shall include, but not be
limited to, planning, design, technical assistance, construction for
ecosystem restoration programs and projects, and the development of a
peer review science program.
(b) Budget Crosscut.--By November 1, 2000, the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget (in this section referred to as ``OMB'') is
directed to submit to the Congressional Committees an interagency
budget crosscut report that displays the proposed Federal spending for
fiscal year 2001 on ecosystem restoration and other purposes in the
Bay-Delta region and identifies all expenditures within the State and
Federal Governments used to achieve the objectives identified within
the CALFED Program. The report shall be substantially in the form
transmitted by the Executive Director of CALFED on September 16, 1999,
to the Chairman of the House Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power.
OMB shall produce an update of the September 16, 1999, report by no
later than January 1, 2001, to display the actual expenditures that
were made for fiscal year 2000. As part of the submission of the budget
for fiscal year 2001 under section 1105 of title 31, United States
Code, OMB shall prepare a similar budget crosscut report itemizing the
proposed fiscal project level funding for year 2002.
(c) Performance Measures.--CALFED Agencies shall provide to the
Congressional Committees by January 1, 2001, a clear statement of goals
to achieve increased yield and environmental benefits as well as
improved water system reliability, water quality, water use efficiency,
watershed management, water transfers, and levee protection for
California. CALFED Agencies shall also provide ecological monitoring
plans and protocols to be used for gauging performance of projects
funded under this title relative to the stated ecological goals. Such
monitoring protocols shall be compatible with the Comprehensive
Monitoring Assessment and Research Program and incorporated into all
ecosystem projects, grants, and awards of funds appropriated pursuant
to this Act. CALFED Agencies shall collect, directly or through the
relevant agencies, all monitoring data and use it to assess the
effectiveness of the Ecosystem Restoration Program Plan implementation.
CALFED Agencies shall also ensure that monitoring data collected for
projects funded by the Central Valley Project Improvement Act
Restoration Fund and under other relevant authorities are compatible
and designed to measure overall trends in ecosystem health in the Bay-
Delta watershed.
(d) Objective Science.--The Federal Agencies shall ensure that all
aspects of the CALFED Program components use credible and objective
scientific review and ensure decisions are based on the best available,
independent peer-reviewed information.
SEC. 12. COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW.
In carrying out the provisions of this Act, the CALFED Agencies shall
operate in compliance with California water law. Nothing in this Act
shall be construed to invalidate or preempt State environmental, land
use, or water law.
PURPOSE OF THE BILL
The purpose of H.R. 5130 is to authorize the Secretary of
the Interior to provide cost sharing for the CALFED water
enhancement programs in California.
BACKGROUND
The California San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta (Bay-Delta) is the largest estuary on the West Coast. Its
varied ecosystem includes a maze of tributaries, sloughs, and
islands encompassing 738,000 acres. Lying at the confluence of
California's two largest rivers, the Sacramento and the San
Joaquin, the Delta includes 70,000 acres of wetlands and
supports over 120 fish and wildlife species.
The Delta is also the home for thousands of Californians
whose predecessors built an extensive system of levees and
reclaimed most of the Delta islands in the 1800s. It supports a
thriving rural economy based on agriculture, small businesses,
mineral extraction, and residences.
The Bay-Delta is also critical to California's economy as a
whole, because drinking water for two-thirds of California and
irrigation water for 200 crops (including 45 percent of the
Nation's produce) pass through the Delta. However, the system
no longer serves as a reliable source of high-quality water,
and the levees face an unacceptably high risk of breaching.
Several native species in the area have been listed as
endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
In the last two decades the population of California has
grown by over 30 percent while the water supply has increased
by a mere two percent. Much of the promised water deliveries
for cities and farms throughout California have not been met.
In the intervening years urban and rural water users have
adopted many water conservation measures to make up the
difference. The demands on the water system have stretched to
the point that new system yield is needed.
Over the last several years water users have had to curtail
water use in several parts of the State, not because of a
shortage of water, but because of ability to store and gain
access to the water. The State of California is in its sixth
consecutive ``wet'' year, yet the water-consuming public has
faced shortages based on regulatory redirection of water
supplies. It is clear that there will be severe, unmitigatable
impacts when the first year of the next drought occurs. In
California, it is rare for any 8-10 year period to pass without
experiencing at least one drought year. Usually there are about
as many drought years as wet years.
The lack of a reliable water supply yield in California to
meet all the needs of competing water uses led to the
development, in December 1994, of the Bay-Delta Accord, signed
by some of the state and federal regulatory agencies involved
in water and environmental management. The Accord was also
signed with the cooperation of various public interest groups.
The Accord created a state-federal coordination group to better
integrate the State Water Project and Central Valley Project.
The Accord led to the establishment of the CALFED Bay-Delta
Program in May 1995. The intent of the program was to develop a
long-term comprehensive plan to restore ecological health to
the Delta and enhance water supply, reliability, and quality
while honoring the water and private property rights of local
residents.
In September 1996, Congress enacted the California Bay-
Delta Environmental Enhancement Act, which authorized $143.3
million per year in additional federal funding for Bay-Delta
ecosystem restoration activities in 1998, 1999, and 2000. Since
its passage, the CALFED program has proven unresponsive to
members who have asked for information on CALFED activities in
their district or other areas of responsibility. The extension
of the CALFED program adopted by the Committee is designed to
make sure that there is adequate Congressional review as the
program meets the multiple goals of improved water supply,
environmental management, water quality, and system
maintenance. This authorization will also ensure that the
CALFED program emphasizes well-grounded, sound science for
decisions and actions.
Under the Bay-Delta Accord there was a general
understanding that the time had come to improve the
environment, establish reliable water supplies, and improve
water quality. Since its inception water users have actually
lost hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of water from the
system. Water quality remains a concern based on the operation
of the system. And while a great deal of money has been
appropriated for environmental restoration, the program lacks
the kind of good science, success measurement tools, and
coordinated operation which should be a foundation of this
effort.
California Governor Davis and Secretary of the Interior
Babbitt charted new ground in the Framework for Action by
proposing that the State and federal governments step up to the
plate to fund environmental protection so project delays and
misplaced financial burdens do not fall on the water consuming
public. H.R. 5130 builds on that principle and makes sure that
the Environmental Water Account (EWA) is pursued aggressively
and administered equitably. Beyond that, it provides a safety
net for the environment and water users if the financing
targets of the EWA are not fully realized.
This bill improves how the CALFED program is managed in
California. Specifically it: (1) addresses the need for
additional water yield options in the State of California; (2)
assures that federally-funded CALFED projects come before
Congress prior to appropriation of funds; (3) continues to
reduce the demand on Northern California water through the
development of water reuse and recycling; (4) requires federal
agencies to take steps to encourage broad public, tribal and
local government involvement in developing a CALFED governance
proposal; (5) assures that the regulatory relief promised by
the Babbitt/Davis Administrations is adhered to; (6) requires
that prior to any federal land acquisition of private lands,
certain requirements need to be met; and (7) directs the CALFED
agencies to operate in compliance with California water law.
COMMITTEE ACTION
H.R. 5130 was introduced on September 7, 2000, by
Congressman John Doolittle (R-CA). The bill was referred to the
Committee on Resources, and additional to the Committee
onTransportation and Infrastructure. On September 20, 2000, the
Resources Committee met to consider the bill. Congressman Doolittle
offered an amendment in the nature of a substitute to assure regulatory
relief and compliance with California State water law. Representative
George Miller offered a substitute amendment to the Doolittle
amendment, which was ruled non-germane. The Doolittle amendment was
adopted by voice vote. The bill as amended was then ordered favorably
reported to the House of Representatives by voice vote.
section-by-section analysis
Section 1. Short title
The section provides a short title for the bill, the
``CALFED Extension Act of 2000''.
Section 2. Purpose
The purpose of this bill is to authorize interim funding
for the Secretary of the Interior to implement the CALFED
program, except as otherwise provided in this bill. This
authorization will ensure the implementation of ecosystem
protection programs, and development of water supply
enhancement projects critically needed to achieve increased
water supply and environmental benefits as well as improved
water system reliability, water quality, water use efficiency,
watershed management, water transfers, and levee protection for
California. This authorization will ensure that the CALFED
program emphasizes well-grounded, sound science for decisions
and actions.
Section 3. Definitions
This section defines several words used throughout the
bill. In particular, it identifies new water supply as ``a
quantity of water, either derived from recycling existing
sources, stored in a reservoir, or by other means that is
reliably available in critically dry years.''
Section 4. Water system improvements
This section provides for a balanced approach to water
management in California. It is designed to ensure that the
CALFED program results in continuous, measurable, and
significant benefits in the California water system to achieve
increased yield and environmental enhancement. It will assure
that funding to increase water yield in the State and to
improve environmental benefits will proceed together, with
adequate progress in each area.
A key goal of this section is to ensure that water storage
development and conveyance facilities proceed together. The
Committee wants to make sure that additional opportunities to
move water out of the Bay-Delta do not proceed without new
supplies being developed to meet the needs of the areas where
the water to be conveyed originates. There was a concern that
additional conveyance, without additional system yield, would
merely make environmental goals and water sufficiency harder to
achieve in upstream locations. The section also clarifies that
this CALFED authorization has nothing to do with the
authorization of any new facility, including any implicit or
explicit authorization of the Hood Diversion, any Peripheral
Canal, or any substitute. CALFED continues to evaluate a
variety of water enhancement and management options but any
proposal for additional facilities requiring federal funds
would have to come before Congress for subsequent scrutiny and
authorization.
One of the important considerations in this section was a
desire by the Committee to include adequate consideration of
the economic viability of water projects. Throughout the
hearing process and subsequent correspondence, the Committee
became concerned that projects were being evaluated for storage
and yield without making an objective determination of the
relative cost per acre-foot of the new yield being considered.
Section 5. Program management
This section is designed to recognize that there is yet to
be developed a long-term solution to California's water
problems, particularly a plan to address the Bay-Delta, and the
other areas of California that are affected by water management
through the Bay-Delta. The Committee wants to be very clear
that the future governance of the CALFED program needs to be a
multiparty structure originating in California with broad
public, tribal, and local government involvement. On that
basis, a structure could be advanced that would carry out the
responsibilities of the CALFED program only after it has been
authorized by both Congress and the California legislature.
Section 6. Environmental water management
A problem acknowledged by both Governor Davis and Secretary
Babbitt is a federal and state regulatory process gone awry
within the State of California. The California water system was
designed to meet the needs of a world-class agriculture system
and growing cities. For the last several years the water system
has been managed with the effect that fish priorities have been
addressed while jeopardizing water quality, human consumption
needs, and system reliability. The current operation of the
system is not producing balance.
This section requires the Secretary to manage the
Environmental Water Account so that environmental goals can be
met, but will be carried out in such a way that there will be
no annual net loss of water to water users in the Central
Valley Project, the State Water Project, and other water user
operations because of actions taken to avoid jeopardy due to
ESA, or other environmental requirements. The program would be
authorized to make sure that the public benefits are matched by
public expenditures to achieve these important goals.
Section 7. Land acquisition
This section is designed to ensure that federal or State
owned land is first identified to reach CALFED program
objectives. If private lands are proposed for acquisition, the
federal government cannot take additional private property off
the tax rolls unless the existing federal commitment to make
payments in lieu of taxes on existing federal lands within the
county are currently paid. In addition, theCALFED agencies are
being charged to consider the cumulative impact on the local government
and communities of transferring the property into government ownership
and then devise ways to mitigate such impacts. The section requires the
federal government to develop a program in cooperation with the State
agencies, landowners and local agencies to achieve local economic and
social goals at the same time it implements the ecosystem restoration
goals in the Record of Decision
Section 8. List of proposed federal expenditures
In recognition of the fact that the CALFED program has
operated as a preauthorization/block grant program, the
Committee believes that there needs to be an adjustment to
return the federal funding mechanism to Congress to allow
Congress to clearly understand what expenditures are planned
prior to a federal appropriation. This mechanism will be a
report to Congress that will identify the proposed projects to
be carried out with the federal portion of the funds prior to
the actual appropriation of the funds.
Section 9. Annual reports
This section provides for annual reporting.
Section 10. Program funding
This section authorizes $60 million in appropriations to
the Secretary of the Interior for fiscal year 2001.
Section 11. Program responsibilities
This section focuses on the need for the CALFED program to
improve coordination with the state and federal agencies;
provide meaningful annual budget crosscuts; adopt performance
measures that provide a real basis for adaptive management
rather than continual policy drifting with no goals or
financial accountability; and the use of objective science
rather than the current agency speculation driven by regulatory
objectives.
Section 12. Compliance with State law
This section ensures that the authorization does not
inadvertently adversely affect the existing California legal
structure.
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. 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 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, October 6, 2000.
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. 5130, the CALFED
Extension Act of 2000.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel
Applebaum.
Sincerely,
Barry B. Anderson
(For Dan L. Crippen, Director).
Enclosure.
H.R. 5130--CALFED Extension Act of 2000
Summary: A consortium of federal agencies and the State of
California participate in the CALFED Bay-Delta program to
improve the water supply and environment in the area of the San
Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. H.R. 5130
would authorize the appropriation of $60 million for this
program. H.R. 5130 also would require federal agencies to study
all options for water storage projects, require federal
agencies to acquire Congressional approval before proceeding
with any project, and make other changes to the CALFED Bay-
Delta Program.
Assuming appropriation of the authorized amount, CBO
estimates that implementing H.R. 5130 would cost $60 million
over the 2001-2005 period. H.R. 5130 would not affect direct
spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would
not apply. H.R. 5130 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.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of H.R. 5130 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--
-----------------------------------------------
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
CALFED Spending Under Current Law:
Budget Authority \1\........................................ 60 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays........................................... 30 48 35 15 5 0
Proposed Changes:
Authorization Level......................................... 0 60 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays........................................... 0 9 12 15 15 9
CALFED Spending Under H.R. 5130:
Authorization Level \1\..................................... 60 60 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays........................................... 30 57 47 30 20 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 2000 level is the amount appropriated for that year.
Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes enactment
of H.R. 5130 early in fiscal year 2001 and appropriation of the
authorized amount. Outlay estimates are based on information
from the Bureau of Reclamation and historic spending patterns
for the CALFED Bay-Delta program.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 5130
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs state, local, or
tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Rachel Applebaum.
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie
Miller. Impact on the Private Sector: Lauren Marks.
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
If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing
law.
DISSENTING VIEWS OF CONGRESSMAN GEORGE MILLER
Enactment of H.R. 5130 as reported will do severe damage to
the CALFED water program in California. While we need to
reauthorize CALFED in order to assure that the $60 million
requested by the President is appropriated, passage of H.R.
5130 as reported would undermine the long negotiations and
careful planning that have gone into the CALFED Framework
document. Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt, California
Governor Gray Davis, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer,
and more than 40 state, local, and national environmental and
public interest organizations clearly indicated their strong
opposition to H.R. 5130. The Secretary of the Interior and the
Administrator of EPA have both advised they will recommend a
veto of any legislation containing these divisive CALFED
provisions.
CALFED officials held thousands of hours of negotiations
with dozens of state and federal planners and hundreds of
stakeholders, and many public comment sessions over the past
four years in order to arrive at its Framework package. By
contrast, H.R. 5130 was introduced just a few weeks before the
Committee convened to consider the bill, and has been the
subject of no hearings whatsoever.
The CALFED process is widely viewed as the key for
resolving California's legendary water disputes. State and
Federal agency heads on August 28, 2000 signed a comprehensive
``Record of Decision,'' a document that describes in great
detail how the agencies and many stakeholder groups believe
California should implement this new blueprint for solving the
state's water problems.
H.R. 5130 as reported in effect re-writes the recent CALFED
Record of Decision before the ink is dry. The bill introduces
extraneous and divisive requirements that are guaranteed to
disrupt sensible water planning efforts in California for years
to come. The bill will compound endangered species problems and
unravel years of effort to implement the Central Valley Project
Improvement Act. Moreover, the legislation threatens the
underlying integrity of the CALFED process: who will be willing
to devote hundreds of hours to the planning and implementation
efforts that are so critical to California's future if all of
that work can be undone without consultation by a congressional
committee acting without benefit of public input or expert
opinion?
H.R. 5130 as reported is not a simple extension of the
CALFED program. It is a major re-write of carefully negotiated
plans for water development and management in California for
the next several decades. The language will negate over 5 years
of negotiations and studies by California water users,
scientists, economists, environmentalists, and 18 agencies of
the Federal government and State of California.
H.R. 5130 as reported reverses CALFED decisions regarding
new dams for water storage in California. CALFED has carefully
selected new storage projects that are cost-effective and can
be build with minimal environmental damage. H.R. 5130 as
reported would require CALFED to reopen its analysis of water
storage projects, including highly controversial projects such
as the proposed Auburn Dam.
H.R. 5130 as reported requires micro-management of the
CALFED process by Congress, including project-level
congressional approvals. This would delay and politicize the
CALFED program and undermine the science-based approach to
restoration that the bill claims to support.
California water issues are complex and have far-reaching
implications for California's future. CALFED must continue to
do its challenging work without the controversial and
extraneous revisions unilaterally proposed in H.R. 5130 as
reported. This flawed legislation is clearly intended to
undermine sound water policy planning and management for
California, and it should be rejected in favor of a simple and
non-controversial extension of the CALFED authority.
George Miller.