[House Report 114-747]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


114th Congress  }                                            {   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session     }                                            {   114-747

======================================================================



 
AMENDING THE SAN LUIS REY INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT TO CLARIFY 
            CERTAIN SETTLEMENT TERMS, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 September 15, 2016.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mr. Bishop of Utah, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted 
                             the following

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 1296]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 1296) to amend the San Luis Rey Indian Water 
Rights Settlement Act to clarify certain settlement terms, and 
for other purposes, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 
do pass.

                          Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of H.R. 1296 is to amend the San Luis Rey 
Indian Water Rights settlement Act to clarify certain 
settlement terms.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    H.R. 1296 helps bring closure to the decades-old San Luis 
Rey Water Settlement and related litigation and uncertainty in 
southern California.
    Beginning in 1969, the La Jolla, Rincon, San Pasqual, 
Pauma, and Pala Bands of Mission Indians (the Bands) sued the 
City of Escondido, California and the Vista Irrigation district 
(Local Entities) on the grounds that the federal government 
improperly signed over the Bands' water rights to the Local 
Entities. Decades of litigation surrounding the Bands' water 
rights claims ensued until 1988, when Congress enacted the San 
Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act (the 1988 
Settlement Act, Public Law 100-675). It is one of 29 Indian 
water rights settlements that have been approved by Congress.
    The 1988 Settlement Act, among other things, directed the 
Secretary of the Interior to provide 16,000 acre-feet of water 
annually to the Bands. An acre foot of water is equivalent to 
approximately 326,000 gallons or enough to cover a football 
field with a foot of water. The 1988 Settlement Act becomes 
effective only when the United States, the Bands and the Local 
Entities enter into ``a settlement agreement providing for the 
complete resolution of all claims, controversies, and issues 
involved in all the pending proceedings among the parties''. 
Public Law 100-675 also established the San Luis Rey Tribal 
Development Fund that authorized up to $30 million in federal 
appropriations.
    One of the main hurdles to resolution of a settlement 
agreement was whether the 16,000 acre-feet of water would be 
deemed supplemental water or would be classified as water 
reserved under the Winters Doctrine, which holds that the 
federal government implicitly reserved water rights sufficient 
to fulfill the purposes of an Indian reservation (based on the 
1908 Supreme Court decision in Winters v. United States). In 
January 2015, the parties signed a settlement agreement that 
stipulated that the 16,000 acre-feet of water would be deemed 
supplemental. This designation kept the Bands' Winters Doctrine 
rights intact, allowing them the ability to pursue those rights 
at a later time if necessary. However, the settlement agreement 
also relieved the federal government as a future supporting 
party to the Bands' Winters Doctrine rights, effectively 
resolving some future federal liability. H.R. 1296 approves and 
ratifies this settlement agreement, which provides that 
Congressional approval is required for the agreement, and thus 
the settlement, to take effect. The Departments of the Interior 
and Justice submitted a letter and testimony to the House 
Natural Resources Committee conveying support for the January 
2015 settlement agreement and this legislation.
    Following Committee consideration of H.R. 1296, it was 
discovered that the trust fund established for the San Luis Rey 
Indian Water Rights Settlement under Public Law 100-675 was 
still considered part of the federal budget. Therefore, to 
avoid scoring issues associated with the distributions from 
that trust fund already funded by the Congress, the Committee 
will need to further modify the reported text before it can be 
considered by the House of Representatives.

                Section-by-Section Analysis of the Bill

    Section 1. Section 1 amends Public Law 100-675 by approving 
and ratifying all provisions of the January 30, 2015, 
Settlement Agreement entered into by the parties and the United 
States. The Secretary of the Interior and the Attorney General 
are authorized to execute and implement the agreement and any 
amendments approved by the parties that are necessary to make 
it consistent with this Act (and such execution shall not 
constitute a major Federal action under the National 
Environmental Policy Act). The Bands will continue to possess 
federally reserved rights and other rights held in trust by the 
United States. However, the United States shall not be a 
required party and any decision by the United States regarding 
participation in any such proceeding shall not be subject to 
judicial review or give rise to any claim for relief against 
the United States in these water rights claims.

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 1296 was introduced on March 4, 2015, by Congressman 
Duncan Hunter (R-CA). The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Natural Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee 
on Water, Power and Oceans. On October 28, 2015, the 
Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill. On February 2, 2016, 
the Natural Resources Committee met to consider the bill. The 
Subcommittee was discharged by unanimous consent. No amendments 
were offered, and the bill was ordered favorably reported to 
the House of Representatives by unanimous consent on February 
3, 2016.

            Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Natural Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

                    Compliance With House Rule XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. 
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the Committee has received the enclosed cost estimate for 
the bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

H.R. 1296--A bill to amend the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights 
        Settlement Act to clarify certain settlement terms, and for 
        other purposes

    Summary: H.R. 1296 would amend current law and ratify a 
settlement agreement negotiated in 2014 between the United 
States and other parties in southern California including the 
La Jolla, Rincon, San Pasqual, Pauma, and Pala Bands of Mission 
Indians (collectively known as the Bands), the City of 
Escondido, the San Luis Rey Indian Water Authority (the 
Authority), and the Vista Irrigation District. The 2014 
settlement clarifies certain issues regarding the Bands' water 
rights and the federal govermnent's legal responsibilities and 
if ratified would transfer control and ownership of the funds 
in the San Luis Rey Indian Trust Fund from the federal 
government to the Authority.
    Based on information from the Department of the Interior 
(DOI), CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would 
increase net direct spending by $18 million over the 2017-2026 
period; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Enacting 
H.R. 1296 would not affect revenues.
    CBO estimates that enacting the bill would not increase net 
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2027.
    H.R. 1296 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would benefit the La Jolla, Rincon, San Pasqual, Pauma, and 
Pala Bands of Mission Indians. Any costs to local and tribal 
governments would be incurred voluntarily as a result of 
entering into the settlement agreement ratified in the bill.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary effect of H.R. 1296 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 450 
(community and regional development).

 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                       By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                             -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               2017   2018   2019   2020   2021   2022   2023   2024   2025   2026  2017-2021  2017-2026
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       INCREASE OR DECREASE (-) IN DIRECT SPENDING
 
Transfer Ownership of San Luis Rey Trust Fund balances
    Estimated Budget Authority..............................     55      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0       55          55
    Estimated Outlays.......................................     55      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0       55          55
Changes in Interest Disbursements from the trust fund
    Estimated Budget Authority..............................     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4      -19         -37
    Estimated Outlays.......................................     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4      -19         -37
    Total Changes
        Estimated Budget Authority..........................     51     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4       37          18
        Estimated Outlays...................................     51     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4       37         18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Components may not sum to totals because of rounding.

    Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that H.R. 
1296 will be enacted at the end of fiscal year 2016. Based on 
information from the Department of the Interior (DOI), CBO 
estimates that implementing the legislation would increase net 
direct spending by $18 million over the 2017-2026 period.
    In 1990, $30 million was appropriated to capitalize the San 
Luis Rey Indian Trust Fund, which was established by Public Law 
100-675, the San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act 
(1988 Settlement Act). The San Luis Rey Indian Water Authority 
was also established by the Bands as an intertribal entity 
pursuant to that Settlement. The Authority negotiates on behalf 
of the Bands regarding water supply and use in the San Luis Rey 
River Basin. Under current law, the federal government retains 
ownership of and fiduciary responsibility for the San Luis Rey 
Indian Trust Fund until all parties reach agreement under the 
1988 Settlement Act at which time the fund will be transferred 
to the Authority. Until ownership of the Fund is transferred, 
the U.S. Treasury is authorized to disburse a portion of 
interest credited to the fund to the Authority for annual 
expenses related to facilitating and negotiating a final 
agreement. In the last few years, those disbursements have 
averaged $3.7 million annually and CBO expects that under 
current law those disbursements will continue.
    The parties have been unable to reach agreement under the 
1988 Settlement Act because of differing interpretations of the 
Bands' future claims to federally reserved water in the San 
Luis Rey River Basin. Enacting H.R. 1296 would amend the 1988 
Settlement Act to clarify that the Bands' right to federally 
reserved water in the basin would remain intact; the 
legislation also would waive certain legal claims against the 
federal government and ratify a settlement agreement entered 
into by all these parties in 2014.
    Based on information from the DOI, CBO expects that upon 
enactment of H.R. 1296, which we assume would occur in fiscal 
year 2017, ownership of the balance in the trust fund would be 
transferred to the Authority that year. CBO estimates that the 
amount transferred would total $55 million and would include 
$30 million of principle and $25 million in accrued interest. 
Following enactment of the bill, the Treasury would discontinue 
annual disbursements of interest to the Authority, thus 
reducing federal spending by $37 million over the 2017-2026 
period. In total, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 1296 would 
increase net direct spending by $18 million over the 2017-2026 
period.
    Pay-As-You-Go considerations: The Statutory Pay-As-You-Go 
Act of 2010 establishes budget-reporting and enforcement 
procedures for legislation affecting direct spending or 
revenues. The net changes in outlays that are subject to those 
pay-as-you-go procedures are shown in the following table.

 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    By fiscal year, in millions of dollars--
                                                      --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        2016   2017   2018   2019   2020   2021   2022   2023   2024   2025   2026  2016-2021  2016-2026
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       NET INCREASE OR DECREASE (-) IN THE DEFICIT
 
Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Impact.......................      0     51     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4     -4        37         18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Increase in long term direct spending and deficits: CBO 
estimates that enacting the legislation would not increase net 
direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 
consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2027.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: H.R. 1296 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA and would benefit the La Jolla, Rincon, San 
Pasqual, Pauma, and Pala Bands of Mission Indians. Any costs to 
local and tribal governments would be incurred voluntarily as a 
result of entering into the settlement agreement as ratified in 
the bill.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Aurora Swanson; Impact 
on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Rachel Austin; Impact 
on the Private Sector: Amy Petz.
    Estimate approved by: Samuel H. Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.
    2. General Performance Goals and Objectives. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill is to amend the San Luis Rey Indian 
Water Rights settlement Act to clarify certain settlement 
terms.

                           Earmark Statement

    This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                       Compliance With H. Res. 5

    Directed Rule Making. The Chairman does not believe that 
this bill directs any executive branch official to conduct any 
specific rule-making proceedings.
    Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not 
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government 
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was 
not included in any report from the Government Accountability 
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program 
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law 
98-169) as relating to other programs.

                Preemption of State, Local or Tribal Law

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is 
printed in italics and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

            SAN LUIS REY INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT


        TITLE I--SAN LUIS REY INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT

SEC. 101. SHORT TITLE.

  This title may be cited as the ``San Luis Rey Indian Water 
Rights Settlement Act''.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


SEC. 112. IMPLEMENTATION OF SETTLEMENT.

  (a) Findings.--Congress finds and recognizes as follows:
          (1) The City of Escondido, California, the Vista 
        Irrigation District, the San Luis Rey River Indian 
        Water Authority, and the Bands have approved an 
        agreement, dated December 5, 2014, resolving their 
        disputes over the use of certain land and water rights 
        in or near the San Luis Rey River watershed, the terms 
        of which are consistent with this Act.
          (2) The Bands, the San Luis Rey River Indian Water 
        Authority, the City of Escondido, California, the Vista 
        Irrigation District, and the United States have 
        approved a Settlement Agreement dated January 30, 2015 
        (hereafter in this section referred to as the 
        ``Settlement Agreement'') that conforms to the 
        requirements of this Act.
  (b) Approval and Ratification.--All provisions of the 
Settlement Agreement, including the waivers and releases of the 
liability of the United States, the provisions regarding 
allottees, and the provision entitled ``Effect of Settlement 
Agreement and Act,'' are hereby approved and ratified.
  (c) Authorizations.--The Secretary and the Attorney General 
are authorized to execute, on behalf of the United States, the 
Settlement Agreement and any amendments approved by the parties 
as necessary to make the Settlement Agreement consistent with 
this Act. Such execution shall not constitute a major Federal 
action under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The Secretary is further authorized and 
directed to take all steps that the Secretary may deem 
necessary or appropriate to implement the Settlement Agreement 
and this Act.
  (d) Continued Federally Reserved and Other Water Rights.--
          (1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision 
        of law, including any provisions in this Act, the Bands 
        had, have, and continue to possess federally reserved 
        rights and other water rights held in trust by the 
        United States.
          (2) Future proceedings.--In any proceeding involving 
        the assertion, enforcement, or defense of the rights 
        described in this subsection, the United States, in its 
        capacity as trustee for any Band, shall not be a 
        required party and any decision by the United States 
        regarding participation in any such proceeding shall 
        not be subject to judicial review or give rise to any 
        claim for relief against the United States.
  (e) Allottees.--Congress finds and confirms that the benefits 
to allottees in the Settlement Agreement, including the 
remedies and provisions requiring that any rights of allottees 
shall be satisfied from supplemental water and other water 
available to the Bands or the Indian Water Authority, are 
equitable and fully satisfy the water rights of the allottees.
  (f) No Precedent.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed or 
interpreted as a precedent for the litigation or settlement of 
Indian reserved water rights.