[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 188 (Thursday, December 8, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8456-S8457]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      HOOVER POWER ALLOCATION ACT

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about the 
importance of the Hoover Power Allocation Act of 2011, of which I am a 
cosponsor.
  This legislation passed the Congress after a multiyear effort led by 
Senator Harry Reid, the bill's lead author, and I thank him for his 
work.
  Upon enactment, Californians will be able to continue buying Hoover 
Dam's power at the cost of production for the next 50 years.
  The legislation allows the people of southern California whose local 
governments and utilities signed the 50-year contracts that made 
building Hoover Dam possible to receive 56 percent of the energy 
produced by the dam for another five decades.
  For the people of my State, the Hoover Dam has been a consistent 
supply of affordable, pollution-free power for decades. The Hoover Dam 
is one of the largest power plants in the United States, with a 
capacity of 2,080 megawatts approximately the size of each of 
California's nuclear powerplants.
  Its average production between 1999 and 2008 was about 4.2 billion 
kilowatt-hours per year, approximately 2.4 billion kilowatt hours of 
which goes to southern Californians who buy their power from Southern 
California Edison, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, or 
members of the Southern California Public Power Agency.
  Hoover's power also plays an essential role moving water into parched 
and populous southern California.
  The Metropolitan Water District uses Hoover's power to move its 
550,000 acrefeet annual allocation of water from the Colorado River, 
over five desert mountain ranges, to Los Angeles.
  Without Hoover's power, the Metropolitan Water District's cost of 
moving that water would be inordinately more expensive.
  And if California rate payers had to buy that much power at market 
rates instead of Hoover Dam's 2.5 cents per kilowatt hour cost of 
production, it would cost approximately $180 million more each year.
  And that power would likely come from dirtier, more distant sources, 
including coal plants.
  Instead, continued access to Hoover's low-cost, renewable hydropower 
will keep rates low as California's utilities bring on new, more 
expensive renewable power to comply with the State's 33-percent 
renewable portfolio standard.
  The legislation also sets up a process through which new power 
recipients in California will be determined by the Western Area Power 
Administration.
  As explained in the House committee report accompanying this bill, 
Congress expects the agency to conduct an open hearing and review the 
process to determine power allocations fairly and equitably.
  The process should provide the opportunity for irrigation districts, 
rural electric cooperatives, and other eligible entities to receive 
allocations.
  Congress also expects that Western Area Power Administration will 
evaluate the relevant power requests of potential new Hoover power 
recipients in an open, thorough, and transparent process to assess both 
the applicants' power needs and the classes of customers they serve.
  The agency should make allocation determinations in an impartial, 
unbiased, and objective manner, consistent with State and Federal 
preference standards, and in a way that provides the most benefit to 
the most Californians.
  My colleagues and I also expect that the process and analytical 
results will be documented and made available for review.
  Finally, no discussion of Hoover Dam would be complete without 
acknowledging efforts to protect endangered species.
  Hoover contractors have committed to providing more than $150 million 
over 50 years to support the Lower Colorado River Multi-Species 
Conservation Program for the protection of 26 endangered, threatened 
and sensitive species.
  The legislation authorizing the MSCP was enacted in the 111th 
Congress and signed into law on March 30, 2009.
  I thank the parties for reaching this agreement.
  The Hoover Dam is an American success story. And it is a renewable 
energy success story.
  During the depths of the Great Depression, Americans stepped forward 
to help build one of the great engineering marvels of all time.
  Between 1931 and 1936, our Nation made a massive effort involving 
thousands of workers more than 100 of whom lost their lives to build a 
powerplant unlike anything the world had ever seen.
  Many in Congress at the time argued the cost of Hoover Dam was too 
high.
  They argued that government should not be making such large 
investments in infrastructure.
  They opposed efforts to invest in an unproven energy technology like 
hydropower.
  The debate was strikingly similar to debates we are having in this 
body today.
  Luckily for the people of California, believers in American 
infrastructure and technology won the Hoover Dam debate.
  The U.S. Congress provided Federal funds, but only after the 
Department of the Interior arranged power contracts at prices 
sufficient to both, No. 1, cover the operating and maintenance charges 
and, No. 2 repay the capital appropriated by the U.S. Congress within 
50 years.
  When the communities and utilities of California, led by the City of 
Los Angeles, stepped forward to sign those contracts, construction 
began.
  As the years have passed, the investment has been repaid and the 
wisdom of Congress's decision has become apparent.
  And now we have enacted a law that continues the legacy of Hoover 
Dam.
  I thank the generations before us for having the foresight to fund 
the Hoover

[[Page S8457]]

Dam, and I hope we can again rekindle the spirit and invest in America.

                          ____________________