[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 77 (Thursday, June 15, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5961-S5962]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      BY Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Smith, Mr. Craig, and Mrs. 
        Murray):
  S. 3522. A bill to amend the Bonneville Power Administration portions 
of the Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act of 2000 to 
authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2006 through 2012, and for 
other purposes; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I am pleased to be joined today by Senator 
Gordon Smith, Senator Larry Craig and Senator Patty Murray in 
introducing the Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act of 
2006--or FRIMA. Our legislation extends a homegrown, commonsense 
program that has a proven track record in helping restore Northwestern 
salmon runs. Dollar-for-dollar, the fish screening and fish passage 
facilities funded by our legislation are among the most cost-effective 
uses of public and private restoration dollars. These projects protect 
fish while producing significant benefits. That is why it is important 
that this program be reauthorized and funding be appropriated now.
  Since 2001, when the original Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation 
Mitigation Act of 2000, FRIMA, was enacted, more than $9 million in 
Federal funds has leveraged nearly $20 million in private, local 
funding. This money has been used to protect, enhance, and restore more 
than 550 river miles of important fish habitat and species throughout 
Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and western Montana. For decades, State, 
tribal and Federal fishery agencies in the Pacific Northwest have 
identified the screening of irrigation and other water diversions, and 
improved fish passage, as critically important for the survival of 
salmon and other fish populations.
  This program is very popular and has the support of a wide range of 
constituents, including community leaders, environmental organizations, 
and agricultural producers. Senator Smith and I are proud of the 
successful collaborative projects that irrigators and members of the 
Oregon Water Resources Congress have completed while putting this 
program to work in our home State. Our program also has the support of 
Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski, irrigators throughout the Northwestern 
States, Oregon Trout, American Rivers and the National Audubon Society.
  FRIMA authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to establish a program 
to plan, design, and construct fish screens, fish passage devices, and 
related features. It also authorizes inventories to provide the 
information needed for planning and making decisions about the survival 
and propagation of all Northwestern fish species. The program is 
currently carried out by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on behalf 
of the Interior Secretary.
  FRIMA provides benefits by: keeping fish out of places where they 
should not be--such as in an irrigation system; easing upstream and 
downstream fish passage; improving the protection, survival, and 
restoration of native fish species; helping avoid new endangered 
species listings by protecting and enhancing the fish populations not 
yet listed; making progress toward the de-listing of listed species; 
utilizing a positive, win/win, public-private partnership; and, 
assisting in achieving both sustainable agriculture and fisheries. 
Since FRIMA's enactment in 2001, 103 projects have been installed. This 
is a true partnership and fine example of how our fisheries and farmers 
can work together to protect fish species throughout the Northwest.
  While he was Governor of Idaho, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne 
said, ``. . . the FRIMA program serves as an excellent example of 
government and private land owners working together to promote 
conservation. The screening of irrigation diversions plays a key role 
in Idaho's efforts to restore salmon populations while protecting rural 
economies.'' [from ``Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation 
Programs, FY 2002-2004'', U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Washington, 
D.C., July, 2005, p. 13]
  The bill that we are introducing today specifically extends the 
authorization for this program through 2012; gives priority to projects 
costing less than $2.5 million--a reduction in a targeted project's 
cost from $5,000,000 to $2,500,000; clarifies that projects funded 
under the act are viewed as recipients of a ``pass through program'' 
and not a ``grant'' program; that any Bonneville Power Administration, 
BPA, funds provided either directly or through a grant to another 
entity shall be considered non-Federal matching funds--because BPA's 
funding comes from ratepayers; requires an inventory report describing 
funded projects and their benefits; and changes the administrative 
expenses formula used by the Fish & Wildlife Service and the States of 
Oregon, Washington, Montana and Idaho, so that administrative costs are 
scaled in proportion to the amount of funds appropriated for the 
program each year.
  Ultimately, it will take the combined efforts of all interests in our 
region to recover our salmon. State, Tribal and local governments, 
local watershed councils, private landowners and the Federal Government 
need to continue working together. Initiatives such as the bill I am 
introducing today help to sustain the partnerships upon which 
successful salmon recovery will be based.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to see this legislation 
pass.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of 
support from Oregon Governor Kulongoski be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 3522

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Fisheries Restoration and 
     Irrigation Mitigation Act of 2006''.

     SEC. 2. PRIORITY PROJECTS; PARTICIPATION IN PROGRAM.

       The Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act of 
     2000 (16 U.S.C. 777 note; Public Law 106-502) is amended--
       (1) in section 3--
       (A) in subsection (a), by inserting ``as a pass-through 
     program'' before ``within the Department''; and
       (B) in subsection (c)(3), by striking ``$5,000,000'' and 
     inserting ``$2,500,000''; and
       (2) in section 4, by striking subsection (b) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(b) Nonreimbursable Federal and Tribal Expenditures.--
     Development and implementation of projects under the Program 
     on land or facilities owned by the United States or an Indian 
     tribe shall be nonreimbursable expenditures.''.

     SEC. 3. COST SHARING.

       Section 7(c) of Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation 
     Mitigation Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 777 note; Public Law 106-
     502) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``The value'' and inserting the following:
       ``(1) In general.--The value''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(2) Bonneville power administration.--Any amounts 
     provided by the Bonneville Power Administration directly or 
     through a grant to another entity for a project carried under 
     the Program shall be credited toward the non-Federal share of 
     the costs of the project.''.

     SEC. 4. REPORT.

       Section 9 of the Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation 
     Mitigation Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 777 note; Public Law 106-
     502) is amended--
       (1) by inserting ``any'' before ``amounts are made''; and
       (2) by inserting after ``Secretary shall'' the following: 
     ``, after partnering with local governmental entities and the 
     States in the Pacific Ocean drainage area,''.

     SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       Section 10 of the Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation 
     Mitigation Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 777 note; Public Law 106-
     502) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by striking ``2001 through 2005'' 
     and inserting ``2006 through 2012''; and
       (2) in subsection (b), by striking paragraph (2) and 
     inserting the following:
       ``(2) Administrative expenses.--
       ``(A) Definition of administrative expense.--In this 
     paragraph, the term `administrative expense' means any 
     expenditure relating to--
       ``(i) staffing and overhead, such as the rental of office 
     space and the acquisition of office equipment; and

[[Page S5962]]

       ``(ii) the review, processing, and provision of 
     applications for funding under the Program.
       ``(B) Limitation.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (C), 
     a percentage of amounts up to 6 percent made available for 
     each fiscal year, as determined under clause (ii), may be 
     used for Federal (including tribal) and State administrative 
     expenses of carrying out this Act.
       ``(ii) Formula.--For purposes of determining the percentage 
     of administrative expenses to be made available under clause 
     (i) for a fiscal year--

       ``(I) 1 percent shall be provided if less than $1,000,000 
     is made available to carry out the Program for the fiscal 
     year;
       ``(II) 2 percent shall be provided if $1,000,000 or more, 
     but less than $6,000,000, is made available to carry out the 
     Program for the fiscal year;
       ``(III) 3 percent shall be provided if $6,000,000 or more, 
     but less than $11,000,000, is made available to carry out the 
     Program for the fiscal year;
       ``(IV) 4 percent shall be provided if $11,000,000 or more, 
     but less than $15,000,000, is made available to carry out the 
     Program for the fiscal year;
       ``(V) 5 percent shall be provided if $15,000,000 or more, 
     but less than $21,000,000, is made available to carry out the 
     Program for the fiscal year; and
       ``(VI) 6 percent shall be provided if $21,000,000 or more 
     is made available to carry out the Program for the fiscal 
     year.

       ``(iii) Federal and state shares.--To the maximum extent 
     practicable, of the amounts made available for administrative 
     expenses under clause (i)--

       ``(I) 50 percent shall be provided to the Federal agencies 
     (including Indian tribes) carrying out the Program; and
       ``(II) 50 percent shall be provided to the State agencies 
     provided assistance under the Program.

       ``(iv) State expenses.--Amounts made available to States 
     for administrative expenses under clause (i)--

       ``(I) shall be divided evenly among all States provided 
     assistance under the Program; and
       ``(II) on request of a project sponsor, may be used to 
     provide technical support to the project sponsor.

       ``(C) Technical assistance.--
       ``(i) In general.--Amounts expended by the Secretary for 
     the provision of technical assistance relating to the Program 
     shall not be subject to the 6 percent limitation on 
     administrative expenses under subparagraph (B)(i).
       ``(ii) Inclusions.--For purposes of clause (i), 
     expenditures for the provision of technical assistance 
     include any staffing expenditures (including staff travel 
     expenses) associated with--

       ``(I) arranging meetings to promote the Program to 
     potential applicants;
       ``(II) assisting applicants with the preparation of 
     applications for funding under the Program; and
       ``(III) visiting construction sites to provide technical 
     assistance, if requested by the applicant.''.

  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                    June 12, 2006.
     Hon. Pete V. Domenici,
     Chairman, Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
     Hon. Jeff Bingaman,
     Ranking Member, Senate Energy and Natural Resources 
         Committee,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators Domenici and Bingaman: I write in support of 
     the re-authorization of the Fisheries Restoration and 
     Irrigation Mitigation Act (FRIMA). In addition, I support the 
     funding 1evel originally authorized by Congress of $25 
     million per year.
       The Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act is 
     one of the most successful cost share programs in the Pacific 
     Northwest, funding the installation of fish screens and 
     ladders at irrigation diversions in Idaho, Montana, Oregon 
     and Washington. Conservationists support it because it saves 
     wild, migrating Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed fish such 
     as Steelhead, Coho and Chinook salmon, as well as those 
     produced in state and federal hatcheries. Irrigated 
     agriculture supports the program both for its conservation 
     effects and because it helps protect operators from possible 
     federal enforcement actions resulting from take of ESA fish.
       It is widely accepted that correcting fish barrier, 
     diversion and screen problems is a very cost-effective 
     investment. Each federal FRIMA dollar has been matched by 
     $1.37 in state or local dollars. Participants have 
     contributed a total of 58 percent toward the cost share--
     exceeding the legal requirement of 35 percent--and also pay 
     100 percent of project operation and maintenance costs. The 
     FRIMA projects are completed quickly because existing state 
     fish screening and passage programs are used to implement 
     projects.
       The program, which I have summarized for you in the 
     enclosed fact sheet, has resulted in fish-friendly irrigation 
     projects as well as increased spawning and rearing habitat. 
     Since FRIMA's introduction in 2000, 103 projects have been 
     installed, providing fish access to 553 miles of habitat 
     upstream and screening a total volume of water at 1,572,757 
     gallons per minute. Healthy fish populations produce 
     commercial and recreational fishing opportunities, which are 
     essential to our coastal economies and rural communities that 
     have often lost other industries in recent years.
       Due to its popularity and success, there is a backlog of 
     hundreds of potential FRIMA projects. To date, appropriations 
     have averaged only $3 million per year, or $750,000 per 
     state, per year. This amount has jump-started the process, 
     but is inadequate given the magnitude of the available 
     projects and the fish benefits they are designed to provide.
       I urge you to increase funding to $25 million per year--the 
     level originally authorized by Congress--so we can continue 
     increasing fish populations, assisting irrigators in 
     installing fish protection devices and bolstering local 
     economies.
           Sincerely,
                                           Theodore R. Kulongoski,
     Governor.
                                  ____



                                 FRIMA

       Re-authorization Fact Sheet
       Fisheries Restoration and Irrigation Mitigation Act 2000 
     (P.L. 106-502).
       FRIMA is a highly popular and cost-effective voluntary fish 
     screening and passage partnership program that benefits 
     Idaho, western Montana, Oregon and Washington.
       Why do fish need protection at water diversions?
       Water diversions redirect water from streams and rivers so 
     it can be used for crop irrigation, power, drinking water, 
     and other beneficial purposes. Water diversions also block 
     the normal migration of fish and pull fish into pumps, 
     irrigation canals, and fields greatly reducing their 
     survival.
       Benefits of fish protection 98% of young salmon survive an 
     encounter with a properly designed fish screen that meets 
     accepted state and federal criteria. Fish protection devices 
     benefit by: Keeping fish out of places where they should not 
     be (like an irrigation system); providing safe upstream and 
     downstream fish passage; improving the protection, survival, 
     and restoration of native fish species; achieving both 
     sustainable agriculture and sustainable fisheries.
       How the program works
       FRIMA is a 65%/35% cost share program requiring that grant 
     recipients contribute at least 35% in non-federal matching 
     funds. Projects must: Be associated with an irrigation, or 
     other water diversion; benefits fish species native to the 
     project area; have a local, state, tribal or federal 
     government sponsor or co-applicant.
       Successful cost share 2000-2005: 83 fish screens installed, 
     screening 1,572,757 gallons of water per minute; 20 fishways 
     installed, opening 553 miles of habitat to fish; $1 in FRIMA 
     funds leverage $1.37 in state/local funds; participants have 
     contributed 58% in cost share, which is much more than the 
     required 35%.
                                 ______