PDF(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)Tip?
Calendar No. 649
115th Congress } { Report
SENATE
2d Session } { 115-362
======================================================================
CONTRA COSTA CANAL TRANSFER ACT
_______
November 14, 2018.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Ms. Murkowski, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany H.R. 6040]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the bill (H.R. 6040) to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior to convey certain land and facilities of the Central
Valley Project, having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of H.R. 6040 is to authorize the Secretary of
the Interior (Secretary) to convey certain lands and facilities
of the Central Valley Project.
BACKGROUND AND NEED
The Contra Costa Canal System in California, which includes
the Rock Slough intake channel, Main Canal, Loop Canal,
Shortcut Pipeline, the Clayton and Ygnacio Re-lift Canals and
pumping plants, and the Martinez Reservoir and pumping plants,
was authorized in 1937 through the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1937 (Public Law 75-392). Construction was completed in 1948,
and additional features were finished in 1967.
The Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) has operated and
maintained these facilities since 1972 under agreement with the
Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and in 2010 repaid its contract
for the cost of construction in full. The repayment contract
states that at completion of repayment, title to the facilities
is to be transferred to CCWD, following authorization by
Congress.
With repayment for these facilities complete, CCWD has
asked for authorization to receive title of the Contra Costa
Canal System as provided in its contract with BOR. Conveying
title to CCWD will facilitate a planned $650 million project to
convert the open main canal to closed pipe in order to increase
public safety and water conservation, and to provide needed
upgrades to the main canal and other system components.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Representative DeSaulnier introduced H.R. 6040 on June 7,
2018. The Natural Resources Committee's Subcommittee on Water,
Power and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 6040 on July 11, 2018.
The bill was favorably reported, as amended, by the Natural
Resources Committee on August 31, 2018. H.R. 6040 passed the
House of Representatives by voice vote on September 12, 2018.
Senator Feinstein introduced S. 3001, companion
legislation, on June 6, 2018. The Subcommittee on Water and
Power held a hearing on S. 3001 on June 13, 2018.
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in
an open business session on October 2, 2018, and ordered H.R.
6040 favorably reported.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in
open business session on October 2, 2018, by a majority voice
vote of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R.
6040.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Sec. 1. Short title
This section states the short title.
Sec. 2. Definitions
Section 2 defines key terms.
Sec. 3. Conveyance of land and facilities
Subsection (a) directs BOR to convey all right, title and
interest of the United States in the Contra Costa Canal and the
acquired land, as well as all interest in the acquired land to
date to CCWD within 180 days of the Act's enactment. As
consideration for the conveyance, CCWD must assume all
liability for the administration, operation, maintenance, and
replacement of the Contra Costa Canal, in accordance with
applicable agreements and valid existing rights.
Subsection (b) directs the Secretary to convey the Rock
Slough fish screen facility to the CCWD pursuant to that
facility's title transfer agreement. This subsection also
directs the Secretary and CCWD to enter into negotiations to
accomplish the fish screen facility conveyance within 180 days
of the Contra Costa Canal conveyance.
Subsection (c) requires the CCWD to pay any conveyance-
related administrative and real estate transfer costs to the
Secretary.
Subsection (d) requires the Secretary to comply with
applicable environmental laws prior to conveyance.
Sec. 4. Relationship to existing Central Valley project contracts
Section 4 states that nothing in the Act affects the
application of reclamation laws to water delivered to CCWD and
authorizes the modification of existing contracts to comply
with the Act. This section further shields the United States
from liability related to the conveyed property after the date
of conveyance.
Sec. 5. Report
Section 5 requires the Secretary to submit an explanatory
report to Congress if the conveyance and assignment of the
Contra Costa Canal is not completed within one year after the
Act's enactment.
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following estimate of the costs of this measure has
been provided by the Congressional Budget Office:
H.R. 6040 would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR),
the Western Area Power Administration, and the Department of
Defense to transfer the Contra Costa Canal, the Rock Slough
Fish Screen, and the associated federal land and facilities to
the Contra Costa County Water District located in California.
Under the Act, BOR would modify the Rock Slough Fish Screen
to ensure the screen is operating safely before transferring
it. Using information from BOR, CBO estimates that the federal
share of the costs to complete that work would be $2 million,
subject to the availability of appropriated funds.
Under current law, the federal government collects leasing
and grazing fees of about $80,000 per year from the property
that would be transferred under H.R. 6040. Those amounts are
recorded in the federal budget as offsetting receipts, or
reductions in direct spending. Under the Act, to compensate the
federal government for those lost receipts, the district would
pay the federal government an amount equal to the net present
value of 10 years of receipts (discounted using the 10-year
Treasury rate). CBO estimates that the district would pay the
federal government $750,000 in the next few years and that the
net effect on direct spending over the 2019-2028 period would
be negligible.
Because enacting H.R. 6040 would affect direct spending,
pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Enacting H.R. 6040 would not
affect revenues.
CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6040 would not
significantly increase net direct spending or on-budget
deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods
beginning in 2029.
H.R. 6040 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
On August 29, 2018, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for
H.R. 6040, the Contra Costa Canal Transfer Act, as ordered
reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on July
18, 2018. On October 23, 2018, CBO transmitted a cost estimate
for S. 3001, the Contra Costa Canal Transfer Act, as ordered
reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources on October 2, 2018. The three pieces of legislation
are similar and CBO's estimates of their budgetary effects are
the same.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Aurora Swanson.
The estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.
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. 6040. The Act 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.6040, as ordered reported.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
H.R. 6040, as ordered reported, does not contain any
congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits,
or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at
the July 13, 2018, hearing on S. 3001, companion legislation to
H.R. 6040, follows:
Statement of Timothy R. Petty, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary for Water and
Science, U.S. Department of the Interior
Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Cortez Masto and members of
the Subcommittee, I am Dr. Tim Petty, the Assistant Secretary
for Water and Science at the Department of the Interior
(Department). Thank you for the opportunity to provide the
views of the Department on S. 3001, the Contra Costa Canal
Title Transfer Act.
S. 3001 directs the Department to offer to transfer and
convey to the Contra Costa County Water District (District) all
right, title, and interest of the United States in and to the
Contra Costa Canal (Canal) within 180 days of enactment of this
Act. The Canal, as defined in S. 3001, includes the entirety of
the Contra Costa Canal Unit of the Central Valley Project
(CVP), including pipelines, conduits, pumping plants,
aqueducts, laterals, water storage and regulatory facilities,
electric substations, related works, and improvements and all
interests in land associated within the unit, not including the
Rock Slough fish screen facility. The lands under consideration
to be transferred are currently under the jurisdiction of the
Bureau of Reclamation, the Western Area Power Administration,
and the Department of Defense. The District has been
effectively operating and maintain these facilities. The title
transfer of the Canal will maintain this arrangement into the
future.
The Department recognizes that the District is a longtime
CVP contractor, and that even with enactment of S. 3001, the
District would continue to pay their share of CVP operations
and maintenance and repayment through their water service
rates.
If the conveyance has not been completed within 12 months,
Interior is required to submit Congress an explanation and the
date by which the conveyance will be completed.
The Department has an active title transfer program and
supports transferring certain Reclamation project facilities to
non-Federal entities, particularly in cases where transfers
could create opportunities, not just for those who receive
title, but for other stakeholders and the public as well.
Specifically, a streamlined title transfer process for
uncomplicated transfers creates incentives for non-Federal
entities to closely engage with Reclamation to complete the
process and allow for appropriate transfers to take place
without legislation. This approach is reflected in the
Administration's Title Transfer legislative proposal,
transmitted to Congress in February of this year.
Mr. Chairman, it is important to note that in most cases,
Reclamation and the entity interested in taking title must
complete environmental compliance activities and negotiate the
terms and conditions of the transfer before pursuing
legislation. Reclamation has been working with the District
closely on this effort and will continue to do so. However,
this legislation, as currently drafted would authorize the
transfer before those steps are completed.
Instead, we recommend that the conveyance be completed
pursuant to a title transfer agreement developed between the
Department and the District, in consultation with other
stakeholders, including the East Bay Regional Park District,
the City of Antioch and the City of Walnut Creek. This will
enable Reclamation, the District and the other stakeholders to
work through the upfront activities necessary to complete a
title transfer. We have had situations in previous transfers
where additional legislation was required because the terms and
conditions were dictated exclusively in the legislation and
there was no flexibility to address unanticipated problems on
this matter.
Further, it is important that the legislation protect the
financial interests of the taxpayers. While the District has
completed its repayment obligation for its share of
construction costs of the Canal, we need to account for
revenues from other contracts, leases and agreements that
currently come to the United States, but would transfer to the
District under this Act. We recommend that the legislation
acknowledge this requirement.
We would be pleased to work with the Committee, the
sponsors and the District on legislative language to reflect
these necessary modifications. In the meantime, we recommend
that Reclamation and the District complete a valuation analysis
to ensure that the financial interests of the United States are
protected and that the results be reflected in the title
transfer agreement that is referenced in the legislation.
Mr. Chairman, Reclamation has been working closely with the
District on this issue and we look forward to continuing that
progress. We believe that if structured properly, the transfer
of these facilities will improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of the Canal's operations by getting control of
the lands and facilities into the hands of those who best
understand the needs of the community.
With these modifications, the Department is pleased to
support this legislation. This completes my statement, I am
happy to answer questions at the appropriate time.
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 Act as ordered
reported.
[all]
