[Senate Report 104-37]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                        Calendar No. 60
104th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE

 1st Session                                                     104-37
_______________________________________________________________________


 
                    RIO PUERCO WATERSHED ACT OF 1995

                                _______


    April 7 (legislative day April 5), 1995.--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. 363]
    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 363) to improve water quality within the 
Rio Puerco watershed, New Mexico, and to help restore the 
ecological health of the Rio Grande through the cooperative 
identification and implementation of best management practices 
that are consistent with the ecological, geological, cultural, 
sociological, and economic conditions in the region, and for 
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 
thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                         purpose of the measure

    The primary purpose of S. 363 as ordered reported, is to 
establish the Rio Puerco Management Committee and to direct the 
Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the committee, 
to prepare and implement a plan for the restoration of the Rio 
Puerco watershed in New Mexico.

                          background and need

    The Rio Puerco watershed, comprising over 7,000 square 
miles, is the largest tributary of the Rio Grande in terms of 
area and sediment. The Rio Puerco, which drains into the Rio 
Grande northwest of Albuquerque, was once known as New Mexico's 
breadbasket. Over time, however, expensive ecological changes 
have occurred in the Rio Puerco watershed, some of which have 
resulted in damage to the watershed that has seriously affected 
the economic and cultural well-being of the area's residents.
    According to the Bureau of Land Management, the Rio Puerco 
now contributes only 6 percent of the total water volume to the 
Rio Grande but over 50 percent of its sediments. Accelerated, 
progressive soil erosion within the basin threatens not only 
the sustained productivity of the rangeland watershed, but also 
the middle Rio Grande aquatic foundation of the Mesilla Valley 
dependent on the Elephant Butte Reservoir.
    Many area residents are concerned about their ability to 
maintain a traditional lifestyle with an economy which is 
natural resource based and dependent upon the productivity of 
land with multiple ownerships. The vast Rio Puerco drainage 
system is a mosaic of land ownership and Federal agency 
management, with no single agency having watershed-wide 
expertise and management responsibility. S. 363 constitutes an 
effort to bring together the numerous agencies and individuals 
with resource management responsibility, including Indian 
Pueblos, Federal and State agencies, and private citizens, in 
order to work together and develop a plan for an effective Rio 
Puerco watershed management program.
    S. 363 would direct the Secretary to coordinate a 
management program in the Rio Puerco watershed with advice from 
a Rio Puerco management committee composed of the various 
landowners, affected Indian Pueblos, local, regional, State, 
and Federal government entities, and other interested citizens. 
The committee will prepare a management plan to identify 
reasonable and appropriate goals and objectives for property 
owners and land managers in the Rio Puerco watershed; to 
describe potential alternative actions to meet the goals and 
objectives; to recommend voluntary implementation of 
appropriate best management practices on both public and 
private lands; to provide for cooperative development of 
management guidelines for maintaining and improving the 
ecological, cultural, and economic conditions on both public 
and private lands; and other activities that will promote 
cooperation and information sharing among those that own and 
manage land in the Rio Puerco watershed.
                          Legislative History

    Senators Bingaman and Domenici introduced S. 363 on 
February 7, 1995.
    In the 103rd Congress, similar legislation was introduced 
by Senator Bingaman on March 10, 1994. The Subcommittee on 
Public Lands, National Parks and Forests held a hearing on S. 
1919 on April 21, 1994. The Bureau of Land Management testified 
in support of the basic purpose of S. 1919 to improve water 
quality but objected to the formation of a management 
committee. At the business meeting on June 15, 1994, the 
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 1919 to be 
favorably reported. The Senate passed S. 1919 on August 2, 
1994.
    At the business meeting on March 29, 1995, the Committee on 
Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 363 favorably reported.

           Committee Recommendations and Tabulation of Votes

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open 
business session on March 29, 1995, by a unanimous vote of a 
quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 363 without 
amendment.
    The roll call vote on reporting the measure was 20 yeas, 0 
nays, as follows:
        YEAS                          NAYS
Mr. Murkowski
Mr. Hatfield \1\
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Nickles \1\
Mr. Craig
Mr. Campbell \1\
Mr. Thomas \1\
Mr. Kyl \1\
Mr. Grams
Mr. Jeffords \1\
Mr. Burns \1\
Mr. Johnston
Mr. Bumpers
Mr. Ford
Mr. Bradley
Mr. Bingaman
Mr. Akaka
Mr. Wellstone \1\
Mr. Heflin \1\
Mr. Dorgan

    \1\ Indicates voted by proxy.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

    Section 1 entitles the bill the `'Rio Puerco Watershed Act 
of 1995''.
    Section 2 contains Congressional findings.
    Section 3(a) requires the Secretary of the Interior (the 
``Secretary'') to establish a clearinghouse for research and 
information on management within the area identified as the Rio 
Puerco Drainage Basin as depicted on the referenced map. The 
subsection also requires the Secretary to establish an 
inventory of best management practices and related monitoring 
activities that have been or may be implemented within the area 
identified as the Rio Puerco Watershed Project as identified on 
the map. Finally, the subsection requires the Secretary to 
provide support to the Rio Puerco Management Committee 
(established in section 4) to identify objectives and develop 
alternative watershed management plans for the Rio Puerco 
Drainage Basin, based on best management practices.
    Subsection (b)(1) requires the Secretary, within 2 years 
after the date of enactment of this Act, to prepare a report 
for the improvement of watershed conditions in the Rio Puerco 
Drainage Basin.
    Subsection (b)(2) describes the contents of the report. The 
report shall: identify reasonable goals and objectives for 
landowners and managers in the Rio Puerco watershed; described 
potential alternative actions to meet those goals; recommend 
voluntary implementation of best management practices on public 
and private lands; provide for cooperative development of 
management guidelines for maintaining and improving the 
ecological, cultural, and economic conditions on watershed 
lands; provide for the development of proposals for voluntary 
cooperative programs among members of the Rio Puerco Management 
Committee to implement best management practices in a 
coordinated, consistent, and cost effective manner; provide for 
the encouragement of, and support implementation of, best 
management practices on private lands; and provide for the 
development of proposals for a monitoring system.
    Section 4(a) establishes the Rio Puerco Management 
Committee (the ``Committee'').
    Subsection (b) requires that the Committee be convened by a 
representative of the Bureau of Land Management, and lists the 
various entities and organizations that must be represented on 
the Committee.
    Subsection (c) directs the Rio Puerco Management Committee 
to advise the Secretary on the development and implementation 
of the Rio Puerco Management Program described in section 3 and 
serve as a forum for information about activities that may 
affect or further the development and implementation of the 
best management practices described in section 3.
    Section 5 provides that the Secretary, in consultation with 
the management Committee, shall transmit a report, two years 
after the date of enactment of the Act and biennially 
thereafter, to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of 
the United States Senate and to the Committee on Resources of 
the House of Representatives. The section requires the report 
to contain a summary of accomplishments and proposals for joint 
implementation efforts, including funding recommendations.
    Section 6(a) requires the Secretary to conduct a study of 
the Rio Grande from Caballo Lake to Sunland Park, New Mexico.
    Subsection (b) describes the contents of the study as 
including a survey of the current habitat conditions, 
identification of the changes in vegetation and habitat over 
the past 400 years, and an assessment of the feasibility, 
benefits, and problems associated with activities to prevent 
further habitat loss and restoration of habitat through 
reintroduction or establishment of appropriate native plant 
species.
    Subsection (c) directs the Secretary, within 3 years after 
the date on which funds are made available to carry out this 
Act, to transmit the study to the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources of the United States Senate and the Committee 
on Resources of the House of Representatives.
    Section 7 authorizes a total appropriation of $7,500,000 
for the 10 fiscal years beginning after the date of enactment 
of this Act.
                   cost and budgetary considerations

    The following estimate of costs of this measure has been 
provided by the Congressional Budget Office:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, April 5, 1995.
Hon. Frank H. Murkowski,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, U.S. Senate, 
        Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
reviewed S. 363, the Rio Puerco Watershed Act of 1995, as 
ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources on March 29, 1995. We estimate that implementing S. 
363 would cost the federal government about $1.5 million over 
the next five years, assuming appropriations of the necessary 
funds. Because enacting S. 363 would not affect direct spending 
or receipts, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
    S. 363 would require the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to 
establish a clearinghouse for research and information on 
watershed management within the Rio Puerco Drainage Basin in 
New Mexico, and to provide support for a Rio Puerco Watershed 
management program. Within two years of enactment, BLM would be 
required to prepare a report on management alternatives for the 
watershed area. The bill would establish a Rio Puerco 
Management Committee to assist BLM in these efforts. BLM would 
be required to submit a report on its accomplishments to the 
Congress within two years of enactment and biennially 
thereafter. Finally, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) 
would be required to conduct a habitat study of the lower Rio 
Grande River in New Mexico. S. 363 would authorize the 
appropriation of $7.5 million over the 10 years after enactment 
for BLM to carry out certain activities authorized in the bill.
    For the purposes of this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 363 
would be enacted by the end of the fiscal year 1995, and that 
funds would be appropriated as necessary, beginning in fiscal 
year 1996. Based on information from BLM, we estimate that the 
agency would spend about $125,000 over two years to establish 
the clearinghouse and to prepare the reports required by the 
legislation. Subsequent biennial reports would cost about 
$25,000 each to complete. Ongoing management costs to maintain 
the clearinghouse and to provide support to the management 
committee would total about $75,000 annually beginning in 1997. 
Based on a similar study on another part of the Rio Grande 
River, we estimate that the habitat study would cost USFWS 
about $1 million to complete and that such costs would be 
incurred over a three-year period beginning in 1996.
    CBO estimates that enacting S. 363 would not require state 
or local governments to spend additional funds.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Theresa 
Gullo.
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.

                      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 impact which would be incurred in 
carrying out S. 363. The bill 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 administering 
the program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal 
privacy.
    Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the 
enactment of S. 363, as ordered reported.

                        executive communications

    On March 24, 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 agency recommendations on S. 363. These reports 
had not been received at the time the report on S. 363 was 
filed. When these reports become available, the Chairman will 
request that they be printed in the Congressional Record for 
the advice of the Senate.

                        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. 363, as ordered 
reported.