Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 260
116th Congress  }                                            {   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session    }                                            {  116-140

======================================================================



 
    BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PUMPED STORAGE HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT ACT

                                _______
                                

                October 23, 2019.--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 S. 1751]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 1751) to amend the Reclamation Project 
Act of 1939 to authorize pumped storage hydropower development 
utilizing multiple Bureau of Reclamation reservoirs, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an 
amendment and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.

                               Amendment

    The amendment is as follows:
    On page 2, line 10, strike ``as of August 9, 2013'' and 
insert ``as of the date of the enactment of the Bureau of 
Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs 
Act''.

                                Purpose

    The purpose of S. 1751 is to amend the Reclamation Project 
Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485) to authorize pumped storage 
hydropower development utilizing multiple Bureau of Reclamation 
(BOR or Reclamation) reservoirs.

                          Background and Need

    Pumped storage hydropower projects generate electricity by 
moving water between an upper and lower reservoir based on 
electricity prices and demand, and other operational 
considerations. Under current law, and pursuant to two 
Memorandum of Understanding agreements between the BOR and the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) dated 1981 and 
1992, Reclamation has jurisdiction over hydropower development 
at its projects when hydropower is an authorized project 
purpose. For those BOR facilities where hydropower is not an 
authorized purpose, FERC has jurisdiction over hydropower 
development. BOR asserts its permitting authority through a 
Lease of Power Privilege (LOPP) program under the Reclamation 
Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h(c)), while FERC is 
authorized by the Federal Power Act to issue hydropower 
licenses (16 U.S.C. 797).
    Given this framework, a pumped storage project using two 
Reclamation dams may require both a FERC license and a BOR LOPP 
where one reservoir is authorized for hydropower development 
but the other is not. Concerns have been raised that requiring 
two separate Federal permitting processes for a single project 
is inefficient and may serve as a disincentive for future 
pumped storage development. S. 1751 clarifies that BOR has 
exclusive authority to permit the development of non-Federal 
pumped storage hydropower if the project uses two BOR-owned 
facilities.
    At the time of this legislation's consideration, the only 
active non-Federal pumped storage hydropower project now facing 
these dual processes is located in Washington State. The 
proposed project seeks to use Banks Lake and Lake Roosevelt, 
both of which are owned and operated by Reclamation. Developers 
are currently seeking a FERC license for Banks Lake (the upper 
reservoir), and will also be required to obtain a LOPP from BOR 
for Lake Roosevelt (the lower reservoir).
    This specific project is unique in that the project 
developer initiated a FERC licensing process prior to the 
introduction of S. 1751 and the Confederated Tribes of the 
Colville Reservation and the Spokane Tribe of Indians of the 
Spokane Reservation (Tribes), with reservations located on Lake 
Roosevelt, have formally engaged on a number of issues through 
that process. Additionally, these Tribes maintain that they 
have dedicated significant resources to the process with the 
expectation that FERC's dispute resolution process for study 
requests, the Federal Power Act's mandatory conditioning 
authority for the Department of the Interior, and State and 
Federal fish and wildlife recommendations, would be available. 
As such, a detailed process to address this single project that 
was already seeking a FERC license has been included in S. 1751 
as amended, but will not apply to any future pumped storage 
projects employing two Reclamation facilities.

                          Legislative History

    S. 1751 was introduced by Senator Cantwell on June 5, 2019.
    In the 115th Congress, a similar measure, H.R. 1967, was 
introduced by Congressman Lamborn in the House of 
Representatives on March 6, 2017. The bill passed the House of 
Representatives by voice vote on June 27, 2017, and referred to 
the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on June 28, 2017.
    The Water and Power Subcommittee held a hearing on H.R. 
1967 on June 13, 2018 (S. Hrg. 115-519). The Senate Committee 
on Energy and Natural Resources met in an open business session 
on October 2, 2018, and ordered H.R. 1967 favorably reported, 
as amended (S. Rept. 115-377). On December 22, 2018, H.R. 1967, 
as amended, passed the Senate by unanimous consent.
    The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in 
open business session on September 25, 2019, and ordered S. 
1751 favorably reported, as amended.

                        Committee Recommendation

    The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 
open business session on September 25, 2019, by a majority 
voice vote of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass 
S. 1751, if amended as described herein.

                          Committee Amendment

    During its consideration of S. 1751, the Committee adopted 
an amendment to correct a technical error.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis


Sec.1. Short title

    Section 1 provides a short title.

Sec. 2. Authority for pumped storage hydropower development using 
        multiple bureau of reclamation reservoirs

    Section 2 amends the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 to 
provide the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) with the sole 
authority for development of pumped storage hydropower 
exclusively using Reclamation reservoirs.

Sec. 3. Limitations of issuance of certain leases of power privilege

    Subsection (a) defines key terms for section 3.
    Subsection (b) prohibits the Secretary from issuing a LOPP 
for the project unless the proposed lessee and the Tribes have 
entered into a study plan agreement or the Secretary or the 
Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals (Director), as 
applicable, make a final determination on a study plan 
agreement or a study plan.
    Subsection (c) specifies the requirements of a study plan 
agreement, including allowing the parties to submit additional 
comments and study requests, and requiring the proposed lessee 
to study any potential adverse economic effects of the project 
on the Tribes, including on annual payments to the Tribes as 
part of the Grand Coulee Dam Settlement (Public Law 103-436). 
This subsection also sets forth a protocol for communication 
and consultation between the parties, and dispute resolution 
procedures in the event the parties cannot resolve the study 
plan agreement terms or implementation.
    Subsection (d) requires the project developer to submit the 
study plan to the Secretary for approval. The subsection also 
requires the Secretary to make an initial determination to 
approve, reject, or impose additional requirements on the study 
plan within 60 days of submittal. This subsection further 
allows the Tribes or the project lessee to submit to the 
Director an objection to the Secretary's initial determination, 
and requires the Director to hold a hearing on the record 
regarding the objection and make a final determination within 
120 days of receiving an objection.
    Subsection (e)(1) requires the Secretary to include 
conditions on the LOPP for the project, to be based on joint 
recommendation of the Tribes, to ensure that the Tribes' 
paramount hunting, fishing and boating rights are not 
interfered with, that the project is consistent with those 
rights, and that fish and wildlife are adequately and equitably 
protected. This subsection also directs the Secretary to 
attempt to resolve any inconsistency with the Tribes' 
recommendations, and requires the Secretary to publish 
findings, including a statement of the basis for each of the 
findings.
    Subsection (e)(2) directs the Secretary to condition the 
LOPP to require the lessee to make direct payments to the 
Tribes through reasonable annual charges for adverse economic 
effects, and sets forth a process to determine the payment 
amount and the settlement of disputes.
    Subsection (e)(3) authorizes the Secretary to impose 
additional conditions on the project consistent with the 
Reclamation Project Act of 1939.
    Subsection (f) allows the Secretary or any officer of the 
Office of Hearing and Appeals to extend deadlines set by the 
Act.
    Subsection (g) states that final actions made pursuant to 
this section remain subject to judicial review.
    Subsection (h) states that nothing in section 3 is 
precedential or binding on any future project.

                   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 cost 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 S. 1751. 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 S. 1751, as ordered reported.

                   Congressionally Directed Spending

    S. 1751, 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 Committee did not request executive views on S. 1751. 
The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at the 
June 13, 2018, hearing on H.R. 1967, an identical measure, 
during the 115th Congress 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, Assistant Secretary for 
Water and Science at the U.S. Department of the Interior 
(Department). Thank you for the opportunity to provide the 
views of the Department on H.R. 1967, the Bureau of Reclamation 
Pumped Storage Hydropower Development Act. For the reasons I 
will discuss below, the Department supports this bill.
    H.R. 1967 aims to streamline the development and permitting 
of non-federal pumped-storage hydroelectric projects on 
Reclamation reservoirs. As noted in previous hearings, the 
Department has an aggressive sustainable hydropower agenda, 
which we continue to implement under existing authorities.
    Pumped-storage can be a premiere, utility-scale energy 
storage solution, able to provide both firm power and ancillary 
services--to support the transmission of capacity and energy in 
a safe, reliable manner. With that said, pumped-storage 
deployment requires both significant, up-front capital 
investment and specific topographical features. Therefore, we 
see this bill as providing opportunities to streamline the 
permitting process which may encourage the development of these 
projects.
    Reclamation is the second largest producer of hydroelectric 
power in the United States, operating 53 hydroelectric power 
facilities, comprising 14,730 megawatts of capacity. Each year, 
Reclamation generates approximately 40 million megawatt-hours 
of electricity (the equivalent demand of approximately 3.5 
million U.S. homes) and producing over one billion dollars in 
Federal revenue.
    In 2010, the Department of the Interior, Department of 
Energy, and Department of the Army (through the US Army Corps 
of Engineers) entered a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for 
Hydropower. The MoU advances reliable, low-cost, and 
environmentally sustainable hydropower through a collaborative, 
interagency framework, prioritizing like-goals and aligning 
ongoing and future renewable energy development efforts. 
Interior's MoU participation is administered through 
Reclamation, given our mission and authorities in hydropower 
generation.
    In 2011 and 2012, Reclamation coordinated with MoU partners 
to publish two resource assessment reports identifying 
technical hydropower potential at non-powered Reclamation dams 
and conduits. At this time, seven assessment sites, comprising 
over 21 megawatts have been developed by non-federal entities--
with an additional nineteen assessment sites, comprising 
approximately 74 megawatts in some stage of development.
    Reclamation has also coordinated with MoU partners to 
assess pumped-storage potential at existing Reclamation 
reservoirs and associated projects. Specifically, the 
assessment reports (one completed in 2013 and the other in 
2014) evaluated the technical, environmental, and economic 
merits of over 200 unique pumped-storage configurations at 60 
Reclamation reservoirs that passed topography and storage 
screening criteria. Reclamation is using these assessment 
results to inform further study should sufficient customer 
interest exists.
    Reclamation would be happy to discuss with the Committee 
these, and other MoU products. All MoU documents are available 
on the Reclamation hydropower program webpage: https://
www.usbr.gov/power/.
    In terms of non-federal development--both Reclamation and 
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) are authorized 
to permit the use of Reclamation dams and reservoirs to non-
federal entities for the purposes of hydropower development--
Reclamation via a Lease of Power Privilege (LOPP) contract or 
FERC via a License. Per the Bureau of Reclamation Small Conduit 
Hydropower Development and Rural Jobs Act of 2013 (Public Law 
113-24), permitting authority on Reclamation conduits is 
reserved, exclusively to Reclamation via a LOPP.
    Reclamation is committed to facilitating the development of 
non-federal hydropower on our existing assets--through either 
Reclamation's or FERC's permitting processes. Acting on this 
commitment, Reclamation has worked diligently with our customer 
and stakeholder groups to define our LOPP permitting process, 
detailed in Reclamation Manual Directive and Standard (D&S) 
Lease of Power Privilege (LOPP) Processes, Responsibilities, 
Timelines, and Charges (FAC 04-08). Reclamation has conducted 
ongoing outreach to communicate and update LOPP permitting 
process requirements and revised LOPP materials to ensure 
consistent LOPP program administration. Current LOPP process 
requirements implement Public Law 113-24 authorities related to 
non-federal development on Reclamation conduits.
    It is important to note that any non-federal hydroelectric 
project developed on a Reclamation asset must not impair the 
efficiency of any Reclamation generated power or water 
deliveries, jeopardize public safety, or negatively affect any 
other Reclamation project purpose. For these reasons, project 
oversight is necessary--either through the LOPP contract or 
FERC License conditioning requirements. In addition, 
Reclamation would review any pumped storage application under 
this authority to ensure the proposed LOPP does not conflict 
with the statutory obligations of the Power Marketing 
Administrations (PMAs). Consistent with Reclamation's existing 
directives and standards, Reclamation would contact the 
respective PMA when a non-federal developer approaches 
Reclamation to develop a non-federal hydroelectric project, and 
will work with the respective PMA on any necessary right of 
first refusal or other agreement that preserves the PMA's 
statutory responsibilities.
    In total, 13 LOPP facilities currently operate on 
Reclamation assets, comprising 46 megawatts. Nine of the 13 
facilities were brought online since 2009, with three of the 13 
online facilities initiated following the passage of Public Law 
113-24. Likewise, 52 FERC facilities currently operate on 
Reclamation assets, comprising 466 megawatts of capacity. 
Approximately 50 non-federal projects--through either the LOPP 
or FERC processes--are currently in some stage of active 
development on Reclamation assets.
    Based on feedback we have received from our customers and 
operating partners, industry, and other stakeholders, 
Reclamation, with this Committee's support, has been successful 
in administering our leasing authorities.
    Under current law, both Reclamation and FERC are authorized 
to permit the use of Reclamation assets to non-federal entities 
for the purposes of hydropower development. Reclamation and 
FERC have entered two MoUs (one in 1981 and one in 1992) to 
define jurisdictional boundaries and responsibilities. Per 
those MoUs, each Reclamation asset is subject to one--and only 
one--permitting process, meaning that non-federal entities 
seeking to utilize a Reclamation asset for the purposes of 
hydropower development would be required to obtain either a 
Reclamation LOPP or FERC License--but not both.
    The problem the bill addresses relates to non-federal 
pumped storage projects utilizing multiple Reclamation 
reservoirs which may, under the current regulatory framework, 
require both a LOPP and FERC License in the circumstance that 
one reservoir is within Reclamation's jurisdiction and the 
other reservoir is within FERC's jurisdiction. Whereas both 
agencies are acting within their respective authorities, the 
result is a fragmented, cumbersome permitting process. The 
legislation as drafted would minimize the regulatory burden in 
these circumstances by requiring only a single LOPP approval.
    The general premise of the MoU agreements is that, unless 
otherwise specified in law, Reclamation assets reserved 
exclusively for Federal power development under Federal 
Reclamation law require a LOPP, and all other Reclamation 
assets require a FERC License. An exception is for Reclamation 
conduits, which were reserved for LOPP development by Public 
Law 113-24.
    Section 2 of the bill would specifically authorize 
Reclamation to enter into LOPP contracts that permit the 
development of non-federal pumped-storage hydropower utilizing 
multiple Reclamation reservoirs. Reclamation interprets this 
LOPP authorization to encompass all project works associated 
with the non-federal pumped-storage project sited on multiple 
Reclamation reservoirs. This language would streamline 
permitting requirements and development of affected projects.
    We interpret Section 2 as containing the same protections 
for authorized, existing uses of Reclamation assets as exist in 
any LOPP context. The LOPP authorization, for example, does not 
affect existing contracts ``for the use of power and 
miscellaneous revenues of a project for the benefit of users of 
water from such project,'' and LOPP contracts cannot, in the 
judgement of the Secretary, ``impair the efficiency of the 
project for irrigation purposes.'' In practice, these 
protections have meant that LOPP contracts generally do not 
modify the existing project operations that project users have 
come to rely on. To protect existing project users, 
Reclamation's policy to implement LOPP contracts requires 
extensive consultation among existing project users and the 
non-federal LOPP applicant.
    Reclamation is aware of one, active non-federal pumped-
storage project that would benefit from the proposed 
legislation--sited on Banks Lake and Lake Roosevelt reservoirs, 
which are part of Reclamation's Columbia Basin Project in 
Washington State. Given the current regulatory framework, non-
federal project works sited on Banks Lake would proceed through 
a FERC License--and those works sited on Lake Roosevelt would 
proceed through a Reclamation LOPP. This legislation would 
streamline the permitting from two distinct processes to one.
    The bill's language would not affect non-federal pumped-
storage projects utilizing one Reclamation reservoir and a 
second non-Reclamation reservoir (private or otherwise) outside 
Reclamation jurisdiction. Such projects would be required to 
obtain appropriate authorization to develop the Reclamation 
reservoir (either LOPP or FERC License, dependent upon the 
authorized reservoir purpose(s)), in addition to appropriate 
authorization from the non-Reclamation regulator (likely FERC) 
to develop the non-Reclamation reservoir. Reclamation would be 
happy to work with the Committee--and FERC--to discuss 
opportunities to streamline permitting and project development 
in this instance.
    In conclusion, as stated at previous hearings on 
hydropower-related issues before this subcommittee, Reclamation 
will continue to review and assess potential new hydropower 
projects that provide a high economic return for the nation, 
are both clean and energy efficient, and can be accomplished in 
accordance with protections for fish and wildlife, the 
environment, and recreation. As the nation's second largest 
hydropower producer, Reclamation strongly believes in the past, 
present and bright future of this important electricity 
resource.
    The Department is pleased to support this legislation.

                        Changes in Existing Law

    In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the changes in existing law made 
by the original 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):

                    RECLAMATION PROJECTS ACT OF 1939


   Act of August 4, 1939 (53 Stat. 1187; 43 U.S.C. 495 et seq.), as 
                                amended


 AN ACT To provide a feasible and comprehensive plan for the variable 
payment of construction charges on United States reclamation projects, 
 to protect the investment of the United States in such projects, and 
for other purposes.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 9. (A)

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


    (c)(1) The Secretary is authorized to enter into contracts 
to furnish water for municipal water supply or miscellaneous 
purposes: Provided, That any such contract either (A) shall 
require repayment to the United States, over a period of not to 
exceed forty years from the year in which water is first 
delivered for the use of the contracting party, with interest 
not exceeding the rate of 3\1/2\ per centum per annum if the 
Secretary determines an interest charge to be proper, of an 
appropriate share as determined by the Secretary of that part 
of the construction costs allocated by him to municipal water 
supply or other miscellaneous purposes; or (B) shall be for 
such periods, not to exceed forty years, and at such rates as 
in the Secretary's judgment will produce revenues at least 
sufficient to cover an appropriate share of the annual 
operation and maintenance cost and an appropriate share of such 
fixed charges as the Secretary deems proper, and shall require 
the payment of said rates each year in advance of delivery of 
water for said year. Any sale of electric power or lease of 
power privileges, made by the Secretary in connection with the 
operation of any project or division of a project, shall be for 
such periods, not to exceed forty years, and at such rates as 
in his judgment will produce power revenues at least sufficient 
to cover an appropriate share of the annual operation and 
maintenance cost, interest on an appropriate share of the 
construction investment at not less than 3 per centum per 
annum, and such other fixed charges as the Secretary deems 
proper: Provided further, That in said sales or leases 
preference shall be given to municipalities and other public 
corporations or agencies; and also to cooperatives and other 
nonprofit organizations financed in whole or in part by loans 
made pursuant to the Rural Electrification Act of 1936. Nothing 
in this subsection shall be applicable to provisions in 
existing contracts, made pursuant to law, for the use of power 
and miscellaneous revenues of a project for the benefit of 
users of water from such project. The provisions of this 
subsection respecting the sales of electric power and leases of 
power privileges shall be an authorization in addition to and 
alternative to any authority in existing laws related to 
particular projects [, including small conduit hydropower 
development] and reserve to the Secretary the exclusive 
authority to develop small conduit hydropower using Bureau of 
Reclamation facilities and pumped storage hydropower 
exclusively using Bureau of Reclamation reservoirs. No contract 
relating to municipal water supply or miscellaneous purposes or 
to electric power or power privileges shall be made unless, in 
the judgment of the Secretary, it will not impair the 
efficiency of the project for irrigation purposes.
          (2)(A) When carrying out this subsection, the 
        Secretary shall first offer the lease of power 
        privilege to an irrigation district or water users 
        association operating the applicable transferred 
        conduit, or to the irrigation district or water users 
        association receiving water from the applicable 
        reserved conduit. The Secretary shall determine a 
        reasonable time frame for the irrigation district or 
        water users association to accept or reject a lease of 
        power privilege offer for a small conduit hydropower 
        project.
          (B) If the irrigation district or water users 
        association elects not accept a lease of power 
        privilege offer under subparagraph (A), the Secretary 
        shall offer the lease of power privilege to other 
        parties in accordance with this subsection.
          (3) The Bureau of Reclamation shall apply its 
        categorical exclusion process under the National 
        Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 
        seq.) to small conduit hydropower development under 
        this subsection, excluding siting of associated 
        transmission facilities on Federal lands.
          (4) The Power Resources Office of the Bureau of 
        Reclamation shall be the lead office of small conduit 
        hydropower policy and procedure-setting activities 
        conducted under this subsection.
          (5) Nothing in this subsection shall obligate the 
        Western Area Power Administration, the Bonneville Power 
        Administration, or the Southwestern Power 
        Administration to purchase or market any of the power 
        produced by the facilities covered under this 
        subsection and none of the costs associated with 
        production or delivery of such power shall be assigned 
        to project purposes for inclusion in project rates.
          (6) Nothing in this subsection shall alter or impede 
        the delivery and management of water by Bureau of 
        Reclamation facilities, as water used for conduit 
        hydropower generation shall be deemed incidental to use 
        of water for the original project purposes. Lease of 
        power privilege shall be made only when, in the 
        judgment of the Secretary, the exercise of the lease 
        will not be incompatible with the purposes of the 
        project or division involved, nor shall it create any 
        unmitigated financial or physical impacts to the 
        project or division involved. The Secretary shall 
        notify and consult with the irrigation district or 
        water users association operating the transferred 
        conduit before offering the lease of power privilege 
        and shall prescribe terms and conditions that will 
        adequately protect the planning, design, construction, 
        operation, maintenance, and other interests of the 
        United States and the project or division involved.
          (7) Nothing in this subsection shall alter or affect 
        any existing agreements for the development of conduit 
        hydropower projects or disposition of revenues.
          (8) Nothing in this subsection shall alter or affect 
        any existing preliminary permit, license, or exemption 
        issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
        under Part I of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 792 et 
        seq.) or any project for which an application [has been 
        filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission as 
        of the date of the enactment of the Bureau of 
        Reclamation Small Conduit Hydropower Development and 
        Rural Jobs Act] was filed with the Federal Energy 
        Regulatory Commission before August 9, 2013, and is 
        still pending.
          (9) In this subsection:
                  (A) Conduit.--The term ``conduit'' means any 
                Bureau of Reclamation tunnel, canal, pipeline, 
                aqueduct, flume, ditch, or similar manmade 
                water conveyance that is operated for the 
                distribution of water for agricultural, 
                municipal, or industrial consumption and not 
                primarily for the generation of electricity.
                  (B) Irrigation district.--The term 
                ``irrigation district'' means any irrigation, 
                water conservation or conservancy, multicounty 
                water conservation or conservancy district, or 
                any separate public entity composed of two or 
                more such districts and jointly exercising 
                powers of its member districts.
                  (C) Reserved conduit.--The term ``reserved 
                conduit'' means any conduit that is included in 
                project works the care, operation, and 
                maintenance of which has been reserved by the 
                Secretary, through the Commissioner of the 
                Bureau of Reclamation.
                  (D) Transferred conduit.--The term 
                ``transferred conduit'' means any conduit that 
                is included in project works the care, 
                operation, and maintenance of which has been 
                transferred to a legally organized water users 
                association or irrigation district.
                  (E) Small conduit hydropower.--The term 
                ``small conduit hydropower'' means a facility 
                capable of producing 5 megawatts or less of 
                electric capacity.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                                  [all]