[Senate Report 108-287]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 602
108th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     108-287
======================================================================


 
CARPINTERIA AND MONTECITO WATER DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS CONVEYANCE ACT OF 
                                  2003

                                _______
                                

                 June 25, 2004.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Domenici, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1648]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the Act (H.R. 1648) to authorize the Secretary of the 
Interior to convey certain water distribution systems of the 
Cachuma project, California, to the Carpinteria Valley Water 
District and the Montecito Water District, having considered 
the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommends that the Act do pass.

                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of H.R. 1648, as ordered reported, is to 
authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain water 
distribution systems of the Cachuma Project, California, to the 
Carpinteria Valley Water District and the Montecito Water 
District.

                          BACKGROUND AND NEED

    H.R. 1648 authorizes the Bureau of Reclamation to transfer 
title to certain water distribution systems of the Cachuma 
Project to the Carpinteria Valley Water District and the 
Montecito Water District. The Carpinteria Valley Water District 
and the Montecito Water District have operated and maintained 
the facilities proposed for transfer since 1956 and 1995, 
respectively. The Districts have worked closely with the Bureau 
to meet the necessary requirements relating to the transfer. In 
addition, the Bureau has entered into title transfer agreements 
with both Districts.
    The bill proposes to transfer the distribution system 
located in Carpinteria, California, to the Carpinteria Valley 
Water District. This system consists of 36 miles of pipelines 
and laterals; Gobernador Reservoir; Shephard Mesa Tank; Lateral 
10L, Carpinteria and Shephard Mesa pumping plants; several 
pressure regulating vaults located throughout the system; 
fences and structures; and rights-of-way, easements, leases and 
other property permitting access to the Federal system. It is 
the Committee's understanding that the Carpinteria Valley Water 
District has made all required payments on its contract with 
the Bureau for construction of the Carpinteria system.
    The bill also proposes to transfer the distribution 
facilities located in Montecito, California, to the Montecito 
Water District. These facilities consist of 9\1/2\ miles of 
pipelines and laterals; the Asegra Pumping Plant; Ortega Ridge 
Pumping Plant located on Ortega Ridge Road; pressure regulating 
vaults, fences and structures appurtenant to the distribution 
system; and rights-of-way, easements, leases, and other 
property permitting access to the Federal system. It is the 
Committee's understanding that the Montecito Water District 
will pay the remaining debt on its contract with the Bureau for 
construction of the Montecito system as a condition of 
conveyance.
    The proposed transfer would apply only to lands and 
facilities associated with these facilities and would not 
affect the Districts' existing water service contract with the 
Santa Barbara County Water Agency nor the Federal Government's 
receipts from water deliveries under the contract. Also, the 
proposed transfer does not entail any new physical modification 
or expansion of the infrastructure.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    H.R. 1648, the Carpinteria and Montecito Water Distribution 
Systems Conveyance Act of 2003, was introduced by 
Representative Capps (D-CA) on April 7, 2003, and referred to 
the House Committee on Resources. The Resources Committee 
discharged the bill on November 17, 2003, and the House passed 
it under suspension on the same day. On November 18, 2003, H.R. 
1648 was received in the Senate and referred to the Committee 
on Energy and Natural Resources. A hearing on H.R. 1648 was 
conducted by the Water and Power Subcommittee on May 19, 2004. 
The Energy and Natural Resources Committee, on June 16, 2004, 
by a unanimous vote of a quorum present, favorably reported 
H.R. 1648.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in an 
open business session on June 16, 2004, by a unanimous voice 
vote of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R. 
1648.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

    Section 1 contains the short title.
    Section 2(a)(1) authorizes the Secretary to convey all 
right, title, and interest of the United States in the 
Carpinteria Distribution System of the Cachuma Project in 
California, consistent with the terms and conditions set forth 
in Transfer Agreement Number 00-XC-20-0364.
    Subsection (a)(2) authorizes the Secretary to convey all 
right, title, and interest of the United States in the 
Montecito Water Distribution System of the Cachuma Project in 
California, consistent with the terms and conditions set forth 
in Transfer Agreement Number 01-XC-20-0365.
    Subsection (b) exempts the United States from liability for 
any damages relating to the distribution systems, except for 
damages caused by acts of negligence committed by the United 
States, its employees, or agents prior to the date of 
conveyance.
    Subsection (c)(1) prohibits the conveyed water distribution 
systems from being considered part of a Federal reclamation 
project.
    Subsection (c)(2) prohibits the water districts from being 
eligible to receive any benefits for any facility comprising 
such distribution systems, except benefits that would be 
available to a similarly situated person for such a facility 
that is not part of a Federal reclamation project.

                   COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

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

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, June 18, 2004.
Hon. Pete V. Domenici,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1648, the 
Carpinteria and Montecito Water Distribution Systems Conveyance 
Act of 2003.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Julie 
Middleton.
            Sincerely,
                                      Elizabeth M. Robinson
                               (For Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director).
    Enclosure.

H.R. 1648--Carpinteria and Montecito Water Distribution Systems 
        Conveyance Act of 2003

    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 1648 would have no 
significant impact on the federal budget. This act would direct 
the Secretary of the Interior to convey all rights, title, and 
interest of the federal government in the Carpinteria 
Distribution System to the Carpinteria Valley Water District 
and in the Montecito Water Distribution System to the Montecito 
Water District. Both of these water distribution systems are 
part of the Cachuma Project in Santa Barbara County, 
California.
    The Carpinteria Valley Water District has made all required 
payments on its contract with the Bureau of Reclamation for 
construction of the Carpinteria system. The Montecito Water 
District still owes about $7,000 for construction of its water 
distribution system and would be required to pay that sum as a 
condition of conveyance. Currently, the bureau spends less than 
$5,000 every three years to inspect these water distribution 
systems. The next inspections will take place in 2005. Once 
these systems are conveyed, all operations and maintenance 
(including inspections) would be the responsibility of the 
districts.
    H.R. 1648 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 
Enacting H.R. 1648 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues.
    On November 7, 2003, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 
H.R. 1648 as ordered reported by the House Committee on 
Resources on October 29, 2003. The two versions of the 
legislation are identical, as are our cost estimates.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Julie Middleton. 
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 H.R. 1648. The Act is not a regulatory measure in 
the sense of imposing government-established standards or 
significant 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 H.R. 1648.

                        EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

    On June 16, 2004, the Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of 
the Interior setting forth executive views on H.R. 1648. This 
report had not been received at the time the report on H.R. 
1648 was filed. When the report becomes available, the Chairman 
will request that it be printed in the Congressional Record for 
the advice of the Senate. The testimony provided by the Bureau 
of Reclamation at the Subcommittee hearing follows:

  Statement of John W. Keys, III, Commissioner, Bureau of Reclamation

    Good afternoon, I am John Keys, Commissioner of 
Reclamation. I am pleased to be here today to provide the 
Administration's views on H.R. 1648, legislation to authorize 
the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain Federally-owned 
water distribution systems of the Cachuma Project in California 
to the Carpinteria Water Valley District and the Montecito 
Water District. We strongly support this legislation and 
applaud the committee for considering it today.
    Madam Chairman, H.R. 1648 would actually authorize two 
distinct title transfers, both of which are reflected in 
separate agreements that can be executed as soon as the 
authorizing legislation is adopted.
    The proposed transfers would include the following 
facilities:
    Carpinteria: The distribution system located in the City of 
Carpinteria, California. This system consists of 36 miles of 
pipelines and laterals; Gobernador Reservoir; Shephard Mesa 
Tank; Lateral 10L, Carpinteria and Shephard Mesa pumping 
plants; several pressure regulating vaults located throughout 
the system; fences and structures; and rights-of-way, 
easements, leases and other property permitting access to the 
Federal system.
    Montecito: These facilities, located in Montecito, 
California consist of 9\1/2\ miles of pipelines and laterals; 
the Asegra Pumping Plant (a deactivated pumping plant connected 
to a portion of lateral 3 located on Asegra Road); Ortega Ridge 
Pumping Plant located on Ortega Ridge Road; pressure regulating 
vaults, fences and structures appurtenant to the distribution 
system; and rights-of-way, easements, leases, and other 
property permitting access to the Federal system.
    The transfer would apply only to lands and facilities 
associated with these facilities and would not affect the 
Districts' existing water service contract with the Santa 
Barbara County Water Agency nor the Federal government receipts 
from water deliveries under that contract.
    Anticipated Benefits of These Title Transfers: We believe 
that these title transfers will enable the districts to gain 
greater local control of the distribution facilities that were 
constructed for their use. It will also eliminate the need for 
duplicative and unnecessary administrative obligations that 
exist for the Districts based upon the fact that title to the 
facilities is held by the United States. Once title is 
transferred, the district will no longer have to seek approval 
for easements, crossing permits, or any work on the facilities, 
required while these facilities are Federally owned.
    For Reclamation, while we currently expend limited 
resources on these facilities, there is an important benefit as 
well. Upon title transfer, periodic inspections and the 
processing of paperwork that is currently required by 
Reclamation will no longer be necessary. We can redirect our 
resources to other priority activities.
    Title Transfer Processes: The successful processes that we 
went through to complete these two title transfers have been 
cooperative, smooth, efficient and--most importantly--cost 
effective. The relationship and the process is a model for 
others to follow. Let me outline how that went:
    Carpinteria: On March 4, 1999, the Carpinteria Valley Water 
District requested title to the distribution system referenced 
above, which they have operated and maintained since 1956. Upon 
receipt of that request, Reclamation and the District developed 
an agreement on responsibilities and costs for carrying out the 
title transfer process, spelling out who is responsible for 
which activities and how costs are distributed. The District 
and Reclamation signed it in December 1999.
    On April 25, 2000, Reclamation and the District jointly 
held a public scoping session to solicit comments on the 
proposed transfer of ownership from United States to the 
District. No issues were identified.
    Subsequently the District in consultation with Reclamation, 
completed activities pursuant to NEPA, the National Historic 
Preservation Act (NHPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and 
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, (FWCA). On August 30, 
2000, a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) was issued.
    On September 19, 2000, in Carpinteria, California, 
Reclamation and the District held a public negotiation session 
to develop a title transfer agreement for the Federally-owned 
facilities (Agreement No. 00-XC-20-0364), which spells out the 
terms and conditions of this title transfer and is the basis of 
this section of the legislation.
    Montecito: The process with the facilities to be 
transferred to the Montecito Water District resembled the one 
for Carpinteria.
    On March 23, 1999, the Montecito Water District contacted 
Reclamation to formally request title to the distribution 
system used exclusively by them and which they have operated 
and maintained since 1995, when they assumed responsibility 
from the Summerland County Water District, who had operated the 
system since 1956.
    In April 2000, the District signed a letter of agreement 
with Reclamation to address costs and responsibilities for the 
title transfer process.
    On November 29, 2000, Reclamation and the District jointly 
held a public scoping session to solicit comments on the 
proposed transfer of ownership from United States to the 
District. No issues were identified.
    Subsequently, the District, in consultation with 
Reclamation, completed activities pursuant to NEPA, the NHPA, 
the ESA, and the FWCA. On August 6, 2001 a FONSI was issued.
    On March 15, 2001, in Montecito California, Reclamation and 
the District held a public negotiation session to develop a 
title transfer agreement for the Federally-owned facilities 
(Agreement No. 01-XC-20-0365), which spells out the terms and 
conditions of this title transfer, which is the basis of the 
transfer of these facilities in the legislation.
    On March 26, 2001, the proposed draft Agreement was made 
available for a 30-day public review and comment period. No 
comments were received.
    On April 24, 2002, Representative Capps asked Reclamation 
to help draft legislation to implement both the Carpinteria and 
Montecito agreements. On April 29, 2002, the Department of the 
Interior provided such a drafting service to Representative 
Capps.

     General Background on Reclamation's Title Transfer Activities

    Having explained why Reclamation fully supports H.R. 1648 
and feels ready to carry it out, may I briefly update the 
committee on Reclamation's recent title transfer activities.
    Since 1996, the Bureau of Reclamation has transferred title 
to sixteen projects or parts of projects across the west--
pursuant to various Acts of Congress. Of those sixteen, 
Reclamation has been given authority by Congress to transfer 
title to thirteen projects or parts of projects since 2000, 
including the transfer of facilities and lands to the Fremont-
Madison Irrigation District in Idaho which was passed by this 
Congress and signed into law by the President on September 30, 
2003. Since each project is unique, each of the laws enacted by 
Congress has different terms, and each requires that different 
actions--such as the completion of the process under the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or agreements with 
State and local agencies over recreation or cultural resources 
management be taken prior to transfer.
    I am pleased to say that Reclamation has been moving 
expeditiously to implement each of these laws. Since May 2001, 
Reclamation has transferred nine projects, or parts of 
projects. This means that only three of the transfers that are 
currently authorized have yet to be implemented. Of those 
three, one (Humboldt) was adopted late in the 107th Congress, 
one (Wellton Mohawk) required that an EIS be completed and the 
transfer is expected to be completed in 2005, and one (Fremont-
Madison) was adopted in the 108th Congress and is moving 
forward on schedule.
    It is important to note that each of the completed 
transfers was done on time or ahead of our schedule and within 
the budgets that we estimated when we started. I commend the 
hard work and cooperation we have received from the water 
districts and entities who have been the recipients of these 
facilities as well as the other stakeholders who have been 
involved. I am also gratified by our staff's dedication to 
completing these transfers in a timely and cost-effective way.


                               conclusion


    As I conclude my remarks Madam Chairman, I would like to 
commend several people who worked hard to make these transfers 
possible. I would like to thank Representative Capps for 
working closely with us and with the District to move this 
legislation forward. Charles Hamilton, General Manager and 
Secretary of the Carpinteria Valley Water District, and Fred 
Adjarian of the Montecito Water District were absolutely 
instrumental in making this happen. They were creative and 
cooperative in identifying and solving issues even before they 
became controversial or problematic. Sheryl Carter from 
Reclamation's South Central California Area Office did an 
outstanding job coordinating this entire process for 
Reclamation.
    In summary, Madam Chairman, we strongly support passage of 
H.R. 1648. It is a good bill, a good title transfer, and 
provides a benefit to both the Districts and to Reclamation. I 
urge the Committee to move this legislation.
    That concludes my testimony; I would be pleased to answer 
any questions.

                        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 Act H.R. 1648 as 
ordered reported.

                                  
