[Senate Report 106-359]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                       Calendar No. 710
106th Congress                                                   Report
 2d Session                                                     106-359




                 July 24, 2000.--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. 2425 ]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 2425) to authorize the Bureau of Land 
Management to participate in the planning, design, and 
construction of the Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project, Oregon, 
and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports 
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the 
bill, as amended, do pass.
    The amendment is as follows:
    On page 2, strike paragraph (g), line 21 through 24.

                         purpose of the measure

    The purpose of S. 2425 is to authorized the Bureau of 
Reclamation to participate in the planning, design, and 
construction of the Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project, Oregon, 
for other purposes.

                          background and need

    The Tumalo Irrigation District (TID) was founded in 1914. 
It serves an area of about 28 square miles with 8,100 irrigated 
acres, between Bend and Sisters, Oregon, on the east slope of 
the Cascade Mountains. TID was originally designed to deliver 
water to large commercial farms. Because of growth and 
urbanization in Central Oregon, water is being delivered to an 
increasing number of small farms and ranchettes over a large 
geographic area.
    The area's geology of fractured basalt and lava tubes in 
combination with long canal lengths cause high water loss. TID 
has been aggressively converting open distribution canals to 
underground pressurized pipelines to eliminate seepage, reduce 
delivery time, provide enough water to meet irrigation 
requirements, and guarantee minimum water levels in Tumalo 
Creek. Other benefits of piping are increased public safety by 
enclosing canals, and system durability in the harsh Central 
Oregon climate.
    Conservation project expenditures from 1995-2000 totaled 
$2,620,500. Comparatively, TID's annual operating budget is 
just over $500,000. The TID has funded previous projects 
largely through excess property sales. Projected conservation 
project cost for the Bend Feed Canal Project Group is 
$4,000,000. TID contemplates replacing 6 sections of open canal 
with pipeline, including replacing an elevated flume with 
buried steel pipeline. The work would be done between 2000 and 
2003 and anticipated benefits include water conservation, 
increased system reliability, a substantial increase in safety, 
and operation and maintenance savings.
    S. 2425 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
participate in the planning, design and construction of the 
Project. Federal costs shall not exceed 50% of the total and 
shall be non-reimbursable. The bill authorizes $2.5 million for 
the Federal share of the activities authorized.

                          legislative history

    S. 2425 was introduced by Senator Smith of Oregon on April 
13, 2000. The Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on 
the bill on May 24, 2000. After the business meeting on June 7, 
2000, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 
2425, as amended, favorably reported.

            committee recommendation and tabulation of votes

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open 
business session on June 7, 2000, by a unanimous vote with a 
quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 2425, if 
amended as described herein.

                          committee amendment

    During the consideration of S. 2425, the Committee adopted 
an amendment to strike section 2(g) which limited 
administrative expenses to one percent. Because of the nature 
of this project, the Committee expects that the administrative 
expenses will be minimal. In this case, the irrigation district 
has done the bulk of the work and the Bureau of Reclamation 
does not anticipate participating in planning, design or 
construction of the Project. Instead, the agency will only be 
acting as a pass-through for the federally funded portion of 
the project.


    Section 1 is a short title.
    Section 2 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 
participate in planning, design, and construction of the Bend 
Feed Canal Pipeline Project. The Federal share of the costs 
shall not exceed 50 percent and shall be nonreimbursable. Funds 
received shall not be considered a supplemental or additional 
benefit; title of facilities constructed shall be held by the 
District, and O&M shall be the responsibility of the District. 
This section also authorizes $2.5 million for the Federal share 
of authorized activities.

                   cost and budgetary considerations

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

S. 2425--Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project Act of 2000

    S. 2425 would direct the Secretary of the Interior, in 
cooperation with the Tumalo Irrigation District, to participate 
in the planning design, and construction of the Bend Feed Canal 
Pipeline Project in Oregon. The bill would limit the federal 
share of total project costs to 50 percent. Assuming 
appropriation of the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that 
implementing S. 2425 would cost $2.5 million over the 2001-2003 
period. The bill would not affect direct spending or receipts; 
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply.
    S. 2425 contains no private-sector or intergovernmental 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 
Enactment of this bill would benefit the Tumalo Irrigation 
District. The district probably would incur costs to match the 
authorized federal funds and to operate and maintain the 
project, but these costs would be voluntary. The bill would 
impose no costs on other state, local, or tribal government.
    The CBO staff contacts are Rachel Applebaum and Ali Aslam 
(for federal costs), and Marjorie Miller (for the state and 
local impact). This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, 
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                      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. 2425. 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 
    Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the 
enactment of S. 2425, as ordered reported.

                        executive communications

    On, May 10, 2000, 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. 2425. These 
reports had not been received at the time the report on S. 2425 
was filed. When the reports become available, the Chairman will 
request that they be printed in the Congressional Record for 
the advice of the Senate. The testimony provided by the 
Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation at the Subcommittee 
hearing follows:

 Statement of Eluid L. Martinez, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation, 
                       Department of the Interior

    Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 2425, the 
Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project Act. I am Eluid L. Martinez, 
Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). The 
legislation authorizes the Secretary of the Interior 
(Secretary), in cooperation with the Tumalo Irrigation District 
(District) to participate in the planning, design, and 
construction of the Bend Feed Canal Pipeline Project in Oregon. 
By returning water to a stream that is seasonally dewatered, 
the project will enhance instream flows for resident fish, 
improve water quality, and conserve water. Reclamation assisted 
the Tumalo Irrigation District's efforts to plan and design 
this project under several programs, including the Efficiency 
Incentives Program that helps local entities achieve their 
water conservation objectives. However, the Administration 
believes there is sufficient authority under the Deschutes 
Basin Ecosystem Restoration Act (Public Law 104-333 and Public 
Law 104-208) to complete this project. Therefore, the 
Administration does not support this legislation to authorize 
Reclamation to participate in construction of the Bend Feeder 
Canal Pipeline.
    The Tumalo Irrigation District is located near Bend, 
Oregon, in the Deschutes River basin. The District has two 
diversions points on Tumalo Creek: the Tumalo Feed Canal and 
the Bend Feed Canal. The last 2.5 miles of Tumalo Creek lack 
sufficient flow in later summer to allow fish passage between 
the Deschutes River and Tumalo Creek above the Tumalo Feed 
Canal Diversion. The District want to pipe the Bend Feed Canal 
to the point where it meets the Tumalo Feed Canal. The piping 
will line the canal and reduce the amount of water seepage in 
the canal. The saved water will be used to improve reliability 
of water supply to the District and streamflows to benefit 
resident fish and wildlife in Tumalo Creek.
    The legislation would authorize $2.5 million for the 
Federal share (50 percent) of the costs of planning, design, 
and construction of the Bend Feeder Canal Pipeline Project. S. 
2425 would authorize the Secretary to credit the District's 
near-term outlays for design, planning and construction work 
completed prior to the enactment of this legislation toward the 
District's cost-share requirements under this bill.
    In March of this year, Reclamation, the District, and the 
Oregon Water Resources Department (Oregon) entered into a water 
rights transfer agreement that specifies how the saved water 
will be allocated under Oregon water law. Oregon is now 
processing a water right action through its administrative 
processes to implement the agreement. Reclamation assisted the 
State of Oregon in its construction of a water measuring 
station just downstream of the Tumalo Creek diversion so that 
the State can monitor and enforce the agreement in accordance 
with state water law.
    In addition, the Administration is concerned about 
explicit, legislative exemptions from the Reclamation Reform 
Act as it contained in Section 2(b). I would like to point out 
that subsection 2(g), which limits Reclamation's administrative 
expenses to no more than one percent of project cost, is 
inappropriate and unworkable.
    This concludes my statement. I will be glad to answer any 

                        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. 2425, as 
ordered reported.