[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 143 (Monday, October 21, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1933]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 UMATILLA BASIN PROJECT COMPLETION ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. WES COOLEY

                               of oregon

                    in the house of representatives

                        Monday, October 21, 1996

  Mr. COOLEY of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, over the course of the last year, 
I have worked diligently to resolve long-standing water disputes in the 
Umatilla Basin of northeast Oregon. With the help of Senator Hatfield, 
affected irrigation districts in the Basin (the districts, the 
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (the Tribes), 
and the State of Oregon (the State), we were able to fashion a 
compromise which struck the delicate balance between environmental 
enhancement and the needs of the local economy. However, this consensus 
could not have been reached if all sides were not willing to 
compromise. Because of this, I am somewhat puzzled by recent statements 
that place the blame for the bill's failure on the irrigation 
districts.
  H.R. 2392, my bill to adjust the boundaries for the four irrigation 
districts in the Umatilla Basin, has undergone many changes in the past 
year. The original draft of the bill would have simply adjusted these 
boundaries upon enactment. However, it has always been my intention to 
listen carefully to all members of the community in the hopes of 
ultimately crafting a proposal which has unanimous support. So, when 
the Confederated Tribes of Umatilla Indian Reservation (the Tribes) 
raised concerns about the need for a continued commitment to 
environmental enhancement, and a new NEPA study prior to boundary 
adjustment, I added those provisions to the bill.
  The compromise agreed to by the Tribes, the districts, and the State 
of Oregon would make the boundary adjustments contingent upon 
completion of a NEPA study and approval of the Secretary of the 
Interior--a major concession on the part of the districts who were 
seeking long-term stability. In addition, I added language that 
requires the districts to donate 6,500 acre feet of water per year for 
environmental enhancement--as their interim contract requires--until a 
portion of Phase III of the Umatilla Basin Project large enough to 
exchange 90 cubic feet per second is completed and operational. These 
provisions were added in a good faith attempt to address the concerns 
of the Tribes.
  Unfortunately, despite the agreement of all affected interests in the 
Basin, the Clinton Administration threatened to veto the bill. They 
wanted to alter the bill so that the Secretary of the Interior had full 
discretion to not only adjust the boundaries, but to alter the size of 
the new boundaries. In short, they wanted the authorization to do 
something for which they are already authorized, but have failed to 
accomplish. The Administration wanted more spending authority without 
addressing the basic issue of boundary adjustments. In short, they 
wanted to have their cake and eat it too. I could not support a change 
that would render the status quo.
  The compromise reached by all of the interests in the Umatilla Basin 
would have succeeded because each of the parties had an economic stake 
in seeing that the other parties' objectives were attained. The 
districts' opposition to the Administration's request to negate the one 
section of the bill in which they have an interest should not be viewed 
as uncooperative. By removing sections from the bill that pertain to 
the districts, we would be left with an unbalanced, unworkable solution 
that would not solve the complex problems in the Basin, or provide 
long-term stability for all who live there.
  Even more troubling than the Clinton Administration's threatened veto 
over a procedural technicality, are some of the statements that have 
been made since the bill failed to pass. These statements argue that 
the districts' failure to compromise was responsible for the bill's 
inability to win Administration support. Nothing could be further from 
the truth.
  Once again, I would point out the progress we have made in the last 
year. What once was a bill that only contained boundary adjustments 
upon enactment for the four districts, eventually contained provisions 
that first, authorized $64 million for construction of Phase III of the 
Umatilla Basin Project; second, authorized $6.5 million for the Tribes' 
share of a joint City of Pendleton/Tribes' water storage facility; 
third, authorized $500,000 for development of a water management plan, 
and a ground water/surface water model of the Umatilla Basin; fourth, 
authorized $400,000 annually for the operation of Phases I, II, and 
III; fifth, required that the Secretary of the Interior enter into 
negotiations with the State of Oregon to determine the Tribes' water 
right claim; sixth, required the districts to donate 6,500 acre feet of 
water for environmental enhancement until a portion of Phase III is 
built large enough to exchange 90 cubic feet per second; and seventh, 
required a NEPA study to be conducted prior to the adjustment of the 
districts' boundaries.
  Many of these provisions, particularly numbers 6 and 7, constitute 
substantial movement on the part of the districts, and should not be 
discounted in the rush to lay blame on any one party.
  I still maintain that the only way to address the Umatilla Basin's 
long-standing water issues is to work together in a cooperative 
effort--something I felt was accomplished this year. Although I will 
not be returning for the 105th Congress, I hope that my successor--
whoever it may be--builds upon the agreements reached in the last year, 
and helps to foster long-term stability for the environment and the 
local economy in the Umatilla Basin.

                          ____________________