[Senate Report 104-242]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 348
104th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 104-242
_______________________________________________________________________
FORT PECK RURAL COUNTY WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM ACT OF 1995
_______
March 15, 1996.--Ordered to be printed
_______________________________________________________________________
Mr. Murkowski, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1467]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the bill (S. 1467) to authorize the construction of
the Fort Peck Rural County Water Supply System, to authorize
assistance to the Fort Peck Rural County Water District, Inc.,
a nonprofit corporation, for the planning, design, and
construction of the water supply system, and for other
purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon
without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
Purpose
S. 1154 would authorize $5.8 million for the federal
portion of a rural water supply system within the service area
of the Fort Peck Rural County Water District.
Background and Need
In September 1994, the Bureau of Reclamation and HKM
Associates completed a final engineering report and alternative
evaluation for the Fort Peck Rural County Water District. The
Bureau participated pursuant to its general authority under the
1902 Act. The report concluded that the 562 residents of the
District have an urgent need for a reliable water supply system
since no public water serves the District and groundwater
sources are not potable.
The 24,160 acre water district is located in southern
Valley County, Montana near the town of Fort Peck. The southern
portion of the district is bordered by the Fort Peck Reservoir,
constructed as part of the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program.
Approximately 95 percent of the residents haul all or part of
their water from Fort Peck Lake or Fort Peck to meet domestic
needs. The process of hauling water is very expensive and
difficult, particularly during bitterly cold winter months. The
lake impoundment is seen as the best water source for a
municipal water system since the water is considered to be of
good quality, requiring only conventional treatment.
The report examined 15 alternatives and selected one that
would construct a new intake in the reservoir and water
treatment facility near Duck Creek. The estimated cost for the
system would be $5,708,000. If the system were expanded to
include fire protection, there would be an additional 15
percent cost. The report concluded that substantial capital
funding assistance would be required at a minimum of 75
percent. The legislation contemplates 80 percent federal
assistance.
Legislative History
S. 1467 was introduced by Senator Burns for himself and
Senator Baucus on December 11, 1995. A hearing was held before
the Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land Management on
December 13, 1995 on S. 1467 and an earlier version, S. 1154.
A companion measure, H.R. 2819, was introduced by
Congressman Williams on December 20, 1995.
The Committee considered S. 1467 in an open business
meeting on March 13, 1996 and ordered the measure reported
favorably to the Senate.
Committee Recommendation and Tabulation of Votes
The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in
open business session on March 13, 1996, by a unanimous vote of
a quorum present recommends that the Senate pass S. 1467
without amendment.
section-by-section analysis
Section 1. This section states the short title.
Section 2. This section provides a series of definitions
that are self-explanatory.
Section 3. This section provides the authority for the
Secretary of the Interior to enter into a cooperative agreement
for the planning, design and construction of the rural water
system. The federal share of the costs are limited to 80%. The
provisions are self-explanatory.
Section 4. This section limits the authorization for
appropriations to $5.8 million subject to adjustment for
fluctuations indicated by engineering cost indices.
cost and Budgetary Considerations
The Congressional Budget Office estimate of the costs of
this measure and compliance with the requirements of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act has been requested but was not
received at the time the report was filed. When the report is
available, the Chairman will request that it be printed in the
Congressional Record for the advice of the Senate.
Regulatory Impact Evaluation
In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following
evaluation of the regulatory effect which would be incurred in
carrying out S. 1467.
The legislation is not a regulatory measure in the sense of
imposing Government established standards or significant
economic responsibilities on private individuals and
businesses.
No personal information would be collected in implementing
the legislation. Therefore there would be no effect on personal
privacy.
Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the
enactment of S. 1467.
Executive Communications
On December 4, 1995, the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of
the Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting
forth executive views on S. 1154, similar legislation that had
been introduced on August 10, 1995. S. 1467 was introduced on
December 11, 1995, two days prior to the Subcommittee hearing.
While formal legislative reports were not received, the
Department of the Interior did present testimony at the hearing
on the substance of the legislation and a copy of the prepared
testimony of the Department witness follows:
Statement of the Regional Director, Great Plains Region, Bureau of
Reclamation, Department of the Interior
Thank you for the opportunity to present the Department's
views on S. 1154, the Fort Peck Rural County Water Supply
System Act of 1995, and S. 1013, a bill to amend the Act of
August 5, 1965 in connection with the Garrison Diversion Unit
Project, and for other purposes. I appreciate the
Subcommittee's as well as Senators Conrad Burns' and Senator
Kent Conrad's interest in these bills.
S. 1154 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to enter
into a cooperative agreement with the Fort Peck Rural County
Water District, Inc. Under terms of the agreement, the District
would be responsible for the planning, design and construction
of a water supply system built and operated in substantial
compliance with the Final Engineering Report and Alternative
Evaluation for the Fort Peck Rural County Water District, dated
September 1994. Taxpayers would provide 80 percent of the costs
of the project. S. 1154 would authorize an appropriation of
$5.8 million for the water supply system.
S. 1013 would authorize the Secretary to acquire private
lands and interests in lands from willing sellers. The purpose
of this new authority would be to enable the Secretary to
exchange the lands and interests in lands, as well as other
Federally owned lands and interests in lands for non-Federal
parcels in the Kraft and Pickell Slough and Lonetree areas in
North Dakota. The lands and interests in lands to be exchanged
are to be generally equal in value.
The Department opposes S. 1154 and supports S. 1013. The
following provides greater detail on the Department's position
on both measures.
s. 1154, fort peck rural county water supply system
The area served by the Fort Peck Rural County Water
District, located in rural northeast Montana, does not
currently have a safe, reliable and adequate water supply.
Although the Fort Peck Rural County Water District is located
near a large lake used primarily for recreational purposes,
many homes in the area do not have their own water supply.
Approximately 95 percent of the residents haul all or part of
their water from Fort Peck Lake or the town of Fort Peck to
meet domestic needs. The groundwater in most of the area is
often poor quality or in limited supply.
Despite the need for a water supply system, the economics
of the Fort Peck Rural County Water Supply System are not easy
to justify. According to the Final Engineering Report and
Alternative Evaluation for the Fort Peck Rural County Water
District, the project will benefit 562 people living in 225
homes. The report estimates the project development costs would
be $25,000 per household. We understand that some of these
homes are located on property owned by the Army Corps of
Engineers. The homeowners pay $160-$170 per year to lease the
land for their cabins.
S. 1154 would mandate that the Federal government supply 80
percent of the project's construction costs. Given the
competing demands for Reclamation's resources as well as the
Federal deficit, the Administration is opposed to S. 1154.
In the past, the Administration has supported rural water
supply systems such as the Mni Wiconi project in South Dakota
where the needs of the Indian communities justify Federal
involvement. We believe the Bureau should be involved where
Federal funding is needed to encourage innovation or otherwise
serve a basic national purpose.
In summary, the Department opposes S. 1154.
s. 1013
The Garrison Diversion Unit Reformulation Act of 1986
(Public Law 99-294) directed the Secretary of the Interior to
acquire up to 5,000 acres of land in the Kraft and Pickell
Sloughs areas of North Dakota. The acquisitions were to be
managed as a component of the National Wildlife Refuge System
in recognition of the unique wildlife values of the area.
Additionally, the Secretary was directed to complete
acquisition in the Lonetree Area.
Working with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau
of Reclamation finalized an Acquisition and Development Plan
for Kraft Slough in 1991. The Plan identified lands considered
necessary to meet the directives in Public Law 99-294. Under an
acquisition program based on acquiring lands only from willing
sellers, Reclamation has obtained approximately 1,215 acres at
Kraft Slough, and a 480 acre parcel has been withdrawn from the
Bureau of Land Management. In total, 1,695 acres have been
acquired, an amount far short of the 5,000 acre directive in
Public Law 99-294. Reclamation has also invested substantial
resources in the acquisition and development of the Lonetree
Area but several small inholdings remain. If these inholdings
were acquired from willing sellers, the Department could better
manage this increasingly popular recreation area.
The Garrison Diversion Unit Federal Advisory Council,
created in Public Law 99-294 to provide continuing oversight
and coordination of wildlife programs associated with the
reformulated Garrison project, recommended at their April 1995
meeting that the Secretary be granted the land exchange
authority in S. 1013. Comprised of Federal, State and
conservation members in the Kraft and Pickell Sloughs and
Lonetree Areas, the Council supported the land exchange
authority concept as a means of encouraging additional willing
seller transactions.
Based on the Council's recommendations, Reclamation
contacted landowners within the immediate vicinity of Kraft and
Pickell Slough to identify potential landowners willing to
consider the acquisition or exchange of their lands. Five
landowners agreed to an appraisal under the option of
exchanging lands. Their land ownerships total approximately 960
acres, all within a five mile radius of Kraft Slough.
Reclamation believes enactment of S. 1013 will promote
additional willing seller transactions, and the authority to
negotiate for land exchanges will improve the Secretary's
ability to establish a manageable unit at Kraft and Pickell
Sloughs and complete development of the Lonetree Area.
The Department has no objection to an amendment which would
stipulate that all lands acquired under S. 1013 must be located
in the state of North Dakota.
In summary, the Department strongly supports S. 1013.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify. I am
pleased to answer any questions you may have.
changes in existing law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no
changes in existing law are made by the bill S. 1467 as
reported.