[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 12]
[House]
[Pages 18052-18053]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    CLARIFYING CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS IN PROVO RIVER PROJECT 
                              TRANSFER ACT

  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 255) to amend certain definitions contained in the Provo 
River Project Transfer Act for purposes of clarifying certain property 
descriptions, and for other purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 255

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

     SECTION 1. CLARIFYING CERTAIN PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONS IN PROVO 
                   RIVER PROJECT TRANSFER ACT.

       (a) Pleasant Grove Property.--Section 2(4)(A) of the Provo 
     River Project Transfer Act (Public Law 108-382; 118 Stat. 
     2212) is amended by striking ``of enactment of this Act'' and 
     inserting ``on which the parcel is conveyed under section 
     3(a)(2)''.
       (b) Provo Reservoir Canal.--Section 2(5) of the Provo River 
     Project Transfer Act (Public Law 108-382; 118 Stat. 2212) is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``canal, and any associated land, rights-
     of-way, and facilities'' and inserting ``water conveyance 
     facility historically known as the Provo Reservoir Canal and 
     all associated bridges, fixtures, structures, facilities, 
     lands, interests in land, and rights-of-way held,'';
       (2) by inserting ``and forebay'' after ``Diversion Dam'';
       (3) by inserting ``near the Jordan Narrows to the point 
     where water is discharged to the Welby-Jacob Canal and the 
     Utah Lake Distributing Canal'' after ``Penstock''; and
       (4) by striking ``of enactment of this Act'' and inserting 
     ``on which the Provo Reservoir Canal is conveyed under 
     section 3(a)(1)''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McClintock) and the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. 
Grijalva) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.


                             General Leave

  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 255, sponsored by the gentleman from Utah (Mr. 
Chaffetz), allows the Provo River Waters Users Association to own a 
canal facility that it has operated, maintained, and repaid for 
decades. This title transfer was the original intent of public law 
enacted in 2004, and the passage of this bill would remove existing 
legal barriers in order to fulfill that intent. A companion measure by 
Senator Hatch passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee 
in May.
  The whole matter comes down to this: the canal was originally an 
open, earthen canal in a rural setting. The city of Provo grew up 
around it until, for a variety of reasons, it was decided to enclose 
the canal, essentially changing it to a pipeline. In order to make it 
possible for the local water authority to raise non-Federal capital to 
do so, Congress adopted the Provo River Transfer Act in 2004 to 
authorize the Bureau of Reclamation to convey title to the association 
for the canal as if existed when the act was adopted.
  Now that the enclosure is completed and the time has come to transfer 
title--as Congress directed nearly a decade ago--the Bureau of 
Reclamation has opined that by covering the canal, it technically is no 
longer a canal but rather a piped facility, that it is now different 
than the facility in existence when Congress ordered the transfer of 
title. Therefore, it doesn't meet the specifications of the conveyance 
act.
  So, in an only in Washington, D.C., moment, we now have this measure 
before us that changes the facility description in the 2004 act to the 
``water conveyance facility historically known as the Provo Reservoir 
Canal,'' so that the title transfer can proceed.
  The passage of this bill would amend outdated legal definitions while 
accelerating repayment to the U.S. Treasury. This legislation continues 
the positive trend demonstrated by the Natural Resources Committee of 
economically empowering our communities.
  The Bureau of Reclamation supports the bill. I am unaware of any 
opposition, and I urge its adoption.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 255 is a technical correction for the Provo River 
Transfer Act. This change will allow for the title transfer of the 
Provo River Canal to the Provo River Water Users Association. The 
administration supports the legislation, and we do not oppose the bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as he 
may consume to the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Chaffetz), the author of 
the measure.
  Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I simply want to thank both sides of the 
aisle. I want to thank Mr. McClintock, the chairman of this 
subcommittee, for allowing us to move this forward, and I appreciate 
the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Grijalva), the ranking member of the 
committee, for allowing this to pass.
  This is truly a technical change. It strikes the term ``canal'' and 
replaces it with ``water conveyance facility historically known as the 
Provo Reservoir Canal.'' The final payment to the Federal Government of 
$700,000 will be completed once this bill becomes law. It scores 
positively. It is truly a technical change.

[[Page 18053]]

  I appreciate the indulgence of the Congress on both sides of the 
aisle for making this happen, and I urge its adoption.
  Mr. GRIJALVA. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I urge adoption of the measure, and I 
yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock) that the House suspend the 
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 255.
  The question was taken.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds 
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

                          ____________________