[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 146 (Monday, October 3, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H6473-H6475]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CLARIFYING INTERIOR DEPARTMENT JURISDICTION REGARDING CRAGIN PROJECT
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (H.R. 489) to clarify the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the
Interior with respect to the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and for
other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 489
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. LAND WITHDRAWAL AND RESERVATION FOR CRAGIN
PROJECT.
(a) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Covered land.--The term ``covered land'' means the
parcel of land consisting of approximately 512 acres, as
generally depicted on the Map, that consists of--
(A) approximately 300 feet of the crest of the Cragin Dam
and associated spillway;
(B) the reservoir pool of the Cragin Dam that consists of
approximately 250 acres defined by the high water mark; and
(C) the linear corridor.
(2) Cragin project.--The term ``Cragin Project'' means--
(A) the Cragin Dam and associated spillway;
(B) the reservoir pool of the Cragin Dam; and
(C) any pipelines, linear improvements, buildings,
hydroelectric generating facilities, priming tanks,
transmission, telephone, and fiber optic lines, pumps,
machinery, tools, appliances, and other District or Bureau of
Reclamation structures and facilities used for the Cragin
Project.
(3) District.--The term ``District'' means the Salt River
Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District.
(4) Land management activity.--The term ``land management
activity'' includes, with respect to the covered land, the
management of--
(A) recreation;
(B) grazing;
(C) wildland fire;
(D) public conduct;
(E) commercial activities that are not part of the Cragin
Project;
(F) cultural resources;
(G) invasive species;
(H) timber and hazardous fuels;
(I) travel;
(J) law enforcement; and
(K) roads and trails.
(5) Linear corridor.--The term ``linear corridor'' means a
corridor of land comprising approximately 262 acres--
(A) the width of which is approximately 200 feet;
(B) the length of which is approximately 11.5 miles;
(C) of which approximately 0.7 miles consists of an
underground tunnel; and
(D) that is generally depicted on the Map.
(6) Map.--The term ``Map'' means sheets 1 and 2 of the maps
entitled ``C.C. Cragin Project Withdrawal'' and dated June
17, 2008.
(7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary
of Agriculture, acting through the Chief of the Forest
Service.
(b) Withdrawal of Covered Land.--Subject to valid existing
rights, the covered land is permanently withdrawn from all
forms of--
(1) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land
laws;
(2) location, entry, and patent under the mining laws; and
(3) disposition under all laws pertaining to mineral and
geothermal leasing or mineral materials.
(c) Map.--
(1) In general.--As soon as practicable after the date of
enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Interior, in
coordination with the Secretary, shall prepare a map and
legal description of the covered land.
(2) Force and effect.--The map and legal description
prepared under paragraph (1) shall have the same force and
effect as if included in this Act, except that the Secretary
of the Interior may correct clerical and typographical
errors.
(3) Availability.--The map and legal description prepared
under paragraph (1) shall be on file and available for public
inspection in the appropriate offices of the Forest Service
and Bureau of Reclamation.
(d) Jurisdiction and Duties.--
(1) Jurisdiction of the secretary of the interior.--
(A) In general.--Except as provided in subsection (e), the
Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Commissioner of
Reclamation, shall have exclusive administrative jurisdiction
to manage the Cragin Project in accordance with this Act and
section 213(i) of the Arizona Water Settlements Act (Public
Law 108-451; 118 Stat. 3533) on the covered land.
(B) Inclusion.--Notwithstanding subsection (e), the
jurisdiction under subparagraph (A) shall include access to
the Cragin Project by the District.
(2) Responsibility of secretary of the interior and
district.--In accordance with paragraphs (4)(B) and (5) of
section 213(i) of the Arizona Water Settlements Act (Public
Law 108-451; 118 Stat. 3533), the Secretary of the Interior
and the District shall--
(A) ensure the compliance of each activity carried out at
the Cragin Project with each applicable Federal environmental
law (including regulations); and
(B) coordinate with appropriate Federal agencies in
ensuring the compliance under subparagraph (A).
(e) Land Management Activities on Covered Land.--
[[Page H6474]]
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall have administrative
jurisdiction over land management activities on the covered
land and other appropriate management activities pursuant to
an agreement under paragraph (2) that do not conflict with,
or adversely affect, the operation, maintenance, or
replacement (including repair) of the Cragin Project, as
determined by the Secretary of the Interior.
(2) Interagency agreement.--The Secretary and the Secretary
of the Interior, in coordination with the District, may enter
into an agreement under which the Secretary may--
(A) undertake any other appropriate management activity in
accordance with applicable law that will improve the
management and safety of the covered land and other land
managed by the Secretary if the activity does not conflict
with, or adversely affect, the operation, maintenance, or
replacement (including repair) of the Cragin Project, as
determined by the Secretary of the Interior; and
(B) carry out any emergency activities, such as fire
suppression, on the covered land.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Utah (Mr. Bishop) and the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands
(Mr. Sablan) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.
General Leave
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5
legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and also to include
any extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Utah?
There was no objection.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
H.R. 489 is sponsored by our colleague, Representative Gosar of
Arizona, and it seeks to resolve bureaucratic dysfunction and
streamline regulatory processes for the purposes of creating jobs in
northern Arizona.
This is a no-cost bill, and it eliminates duplicative permitting
requirements--which we often, in this body, commonly refer to as ``red
tape''--by putting just one Federal agency in charge of the C.C. Cragin
project's pipeline, part of a Federal water project.
Prior to this bill, the Bureau of Reclamation and the U.S. Forest
Service could not reconcile their responsibilities over who would
actually manage the pipeline. These dueling regulatory requirements
ultimately increased the costs that were passed on to the water
consumers. They also created enough confusion to keep one community
from going forward with a locally financed project that would have been
connected to the Federal pipeline.
This bill clarifies these Federal management responsibilities, and it
mirrors other permitting and approval precedents on similar Federal
projects. It also creates a regulatory environment for that local water
project--and the jobs that will go with it--to proceed.
I thank Congressman Gosar for sponsoring this jobs bill, and I urge
the adoption of this particular measure.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
(Mr. SABLAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 489 would specify that the Bureau of
Reclamation is authorized to approve necessary operation and
maintenance activity for the C.C. Cragin project on National Forest
System land.
H.R. 489 was introduced this Congress with language that reflects
negotiations between the Bureau of Reclamation, the Forest Service, and
the Salt River Project and the Congress. This legislation is not meant
to serve as precedent for the management of utility corridors on Forest
Service land. Instead, the legislation allows for the management of
C.C. Cragin consistent with all the other Salt River Project facilities
on Forest Service land where the Bureau of Reclamation oversees the
operation and management of the facilities.
I have no requests for time, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, Phelps Dodge, just to give you some background of this
particular legislation, is a large mining company that built what is
now the Cragin project in the 1960s to supply water to its mine
complex. Phelps Dodge transferred ownership of the project to the Salt
River Project, that's known as the SRP, after the former realized it
was not necessary for mining operations. At the request of the SRP and
with the support of Phelps Dodge and the Bureau of Reclamation, the
Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act authorized transfer of the title of
the project and the associated lands from SRP to Reclamation in 2005.
Even though the Federal Government owns the project, SRP stills
operates and maintains it pursuant to the 1917 contract between SRP and
the United States.
The project consists of a number of facilities, including a 147-foot-
high dam, a 15,000-acre-foot reservoir, a diversion tunnel and pump
shaft, pumping plant, priming reservoir, a 10-mile-long pipeline,
electrical transmission line, and a small generating plant which
supplies power to the project's pumping plant. The project helps SRP to
supply water to the Phoenix metropolitan area and to the town of Payson
and neighboring communities in northern Gila County.
Implementation of the title transfer under Public Law 108-45 has been
controversial due to misunderstandings between the U.S. Forest Service,
Reclamation, and SRP. The operation of the project is like that of all
other Salt River Project-managed Reclamation facilities located on U.S.
Forest Service lands. And for those projects, Reclamation approves
SRP's work plan, their environmental compliance, and other regulatory
permitting requirements associated with the project.
Mr. Speaker, that is some background to the issue and why this
particular bill is there.
With that, it is my pleasure to now yield such time as he may consume
to the sponsor of this legislation, the gentleman from Arizona (Mr.
Gosar).
Mr. GOSAR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of my legislation,
H.R. 489, a bill that will permanently end the bureaucratic wrangling
that has occurred between the Departments of Interior and Agriculture--
a jurisdictional dispute that compromises the routine maintenance of
critical water infrastructure in the State of Arizona, the C.C. Cragin
Dam and Reservoir.
The Federal Government employs over 2.1 million civilian employees.
There are hundreds of agencies, and within each agency there are
divisions, departments, and subgroups. Sometimes, especially with
respect to land management, more than one agency has jurisdiction; and
when that occurs, bureaucratic disputes arise and government no longer
serves the people.
{time} 1620
This is the exact circumstance that has necessitated my legislation.
The C.C. Cragin project consists of a number of facilities, including
a dam and reservoir, diversion tunnel and pump shaft, pumping plant,
priming reservoir, pipeline, electrical transmission line, and a
generating plant.
The majority of the project is located on Federal lands in the
Coconino and Tonto National Forests. This critical water infrastructure
project is an important aspect of the Salt River Project's Federal
Reclamation Project. It is integral to providing a water supply for
Phoenix and is instrumental in making 3,500 acre-feet of water a year
available to Gila County. The town of Payson and the neighboring
communities rely on the pipeline to supply municipal drinking water to
my constituents.
In 2004, at the request of the Salt River Project--or SRP as it is
commonly referred to--and with the support of the Bureau of Reclamation
and the former owner of the project, the Arizona Water Settlements Act
authorized the title transfer of the C.C. Cragin project from SRP to
the Bureau of Reclamation. Under this language, the Federal Government
would own the project, but SRP would still operate and maintain it.
Once a transfer was implemented, it became clear that there was a
disagreement between the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of
Reclamation over who had the responsibility for approving requested
operation maintenance and repairs. Specifically, the Bureau of
Reclamation argued that it should approve SRP's work plans,
environmental compliance, and other regulatory permitting requirements.
The U.S. Forest
[[Page H6475]]
Service asserted that the reclamation was required to obtain a special
use permit to operate, maintain, and repair the water project.
While the SRP project was able to overcome the issues with the Forest
Service to complete repairs, it was with the Bureau of Reclamation's
approval and occasionally over Forest Service objections. Concurrently,
the added permit requirement delayed much needed repairs, wasting
precious Arizona water resources, increased repair costs, and placed
the economic development of the town of Payson at risk.
Looking forward, this is a long-lived asset that will be relied upon
to provide reliable municipal water supply to Gila County and the
valley. Just a few weeks ago, a $34 million, 15-mile pipeline expansion
project, which will double Payson's long-term, sustainable water
supply, was finally approved by the Forest Service after a year-long
delay. If Congress allows the jurisdictional dispute to continue,
future operations and maintenance activities related to the C.C. Cragin
project could face costly delays and could possibly interrupt water
delivery to these Arizona communities.
This simply is not a tenable situation. I am pleased the House is
taking up legislation that will permanently resolve this ridiculous
jurisdictional battle.
My legislation reflects a compromise reached by the relevant parties.
It grants the Department of the Interior exclusive jurisdiction to
manage the C.C. Cragin project and grants the Department of Agriculture
administrative jurisdiction over land management activities that do not
conflict or adversely affect the operation, maintenance, replacement,
or repair of the project.
It is important to note that H.R. 489 will still require compliance
with all requirements under Federal law, including the National
Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. In addition, the implementation of
this legislation has no cost to the taxpayer.
Having a single agency overseeing the project remains important--if
not more important now that the project is operational. The United
States Bureau of Reclamation has the expertise to conduct oversight on
water supply projects and does so on many of the projects that are
within national forests. This commonsense legislation meets the needs
of SRP and Reclamation to ensure the infrastructure can be maintained
while accommodating the Forest Service, ensuring they continue to
manage the lands underlying the utility corridor with respect to
recreation, wildfire, law enforcement, and other activities consistent
with its authorities, responsibilities, and expertise.
It is important to note that when the House Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on my bill on May 12,
all parties--including the Bureau of Reclamation and the Forest
Service--agreed that H.R. 489 is vital to the long-term management of
the C.C. Cragin dam and reservoir project and would bring about
necessary economic certainty for the town of Payson and other impacted
communities.
It is not often that Congress gets the opportunity to take up
noncontroversial legislation like H.R. 489. I encourage my colleagues
to vote in favor of this legislation.
Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 489.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________