[Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: George H. W. Bush (1992-1993, Book II)]
[October 30, 1992]
[Pages 2101-2103]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]



Statement on Signing the Reclamation Projects Authorization and 
Adjustment Act of 1992
October 30, 1992

    Today I am signing into law H.R. 429, the ``Reclamation Projects 
Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992.''
    The Act will make a major contribution to the development and reform 
of water resources in States throughout the West. It is the product of 
years of debate and compromise in the Congress. This bill will provide 
substantial economic and environmental benefits throughout the West.
    H.R. 429 authorizes numerous water projects in the western States 
that the Administration has supported. Included among the projects in 
the bill are the Buffalo Bill Dam and Reservoir in Wyoming; the Central 
Utah Project; South Dakota water planning studies; the Cedar Bluff Unit 
in Kansas; the Vermejo and Elephant Butte

[[Page 2102]]

Projects in New Mexico; the Glen Canyon Dam affecting the Grand Canyon 
in Arizona; the Sunnyside Valley Irrigation District in Washington; the 
Platoro Dam and Reservoir and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel in 
Colorado; the Mountain Park Project in Oklahoma; and the Central Valley 
Project in California.
    Several of the provisions that substantially reform the operation of 
the Central Valley Project in California are less flexible and more 
intrusive on the rights of the State of California and current project 
beneficiaries than I would have preferred. Nevertheless, the final bill 
includes several substantial modifications to the original House-passed 
version. These modifications will ensure that the fish and wildlife 
objectives of the legislation can be met in a manner that maintains the 
viability of other important uses to which CVP water is now devoted. 
Moreover, by establishing a voluntary system of water transfers--on a 
willing seller basis--H.R. 429 presents an important opportunity to 
increase the availability of water for uses which will best accommodate 
California's growth. A market-oriented water policy will create new jobs 
in the California economy.
    I am concerned, however, that a number of provisions, if broadly 
construed, could violate the basic principle of Federal Western water 
policy--State primacy. A fundamental principle of my Western water 
policy is that the Federal Government must respect the primary role that 
individual States have in shaping and controlling their own policies 
regarding water use and allocation. An individual State is best 
positioned to assess its needs and to accommodate competing interests. 
Except in those instances where an overriding Federal interest or an 
interstate conflict is present, States should retain primacy in 
fashioning their policies regarding water. Accordingly, I am directing 
the Secretary of the Interior, in implementing this legislation, to 
ensure that its provisions are conducted with due deference to State 
primacy. In addition, in implementing section 3411(a), I am directing 
the Secretary of the Interior to consult with the California Water 
Resources Control Board before reallocating water to implement title 
XXXIV, even if such reallocation might be allowable under the current 
conditions in existing permits or licenses. Lastly, I intend to submit 
legislation in the coming Congress which is substantially consistent 
with that introduced by Senator Seymour (S. 2016) in the 102nd Congress. 
This legislation has as its primary objectives the mitigation and 
enhancement of fish and wildlife resources in the Central Valley of 
California and the orderly allocation of available water supplies while 
maintaining the productivity of the Bureau of Reclamation's Central 
Valley Project.
    H.R. 429 also contains certain provisions that warrant careful 
construction to avoid constitutional concerns. First, section 301 
establishes a Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission 
that would formulate the policies and objectives for the implementation 
of certain projects authorized by the Act and administer expenditures of 
substantial Federal funds. The Commission members are to be appointed by 
the President from lists submitted by certain members of the Congress, 
the Central Utah Water Conservancy District, and the Governor of Utah. 
In order to avoid any conflict with the Appointments Clause of the 
Constitution, I will interpret the Act to provide for the appointment of 
members of the Commission after due consideration of the recommendations 
of those submitting lists, and not to inhibit my discretion to request 
from those groups and individuals the names of additional potential 
nominees.
    Second, section 301(h)(3) permits the Commission to ``secure 
directly from any department or agency of the United States'' 
information necessary to enable it to carry out the Act, and requires 
the heads of all agencies and departments to comply with a request for 
information from the Commission. I will construe this section consistent 
with my authority to supervise and guide executive branch officials, and 
to control access to information the disclosure of which might 
significantly impair the conduct of foreign relations, the national 
security, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch or the 
performance of its constitutional duties.
    Third, section 3201 establishes the conditions under which a South 
Dakota Preserva-

[[Page 2103]]

tion and Restoration Trust may receive and disburse Federal funds. Under 
the Act, such a trust must be governed by a five-member Board of 
Trustees, three of whom would be appointed by the members of the South 
Dakota congressional delegation, and one each of whom would be appointed 
by the South Dakota Academy of Sciences and the Governor of South 
Dakota. Under the Supreme Court's decision in Washington Metropolitan 
Airports Authority v. Citizens for the Abatement of Aircraft Noise, 
Inc., such a board exercises sufficient Federal power to subject it to 
separation of powers scrutiny. The Board, moreover, performs functions 
that are executive in nature, and therefore agents of the Congress may 
not manage its affairs. In addition, all members of the Board appear to 
exercise significant governmental authority, yet are not appointed in a 
manner consistent with the Appointments Clause. For all these reasons, I 
direct the Secretary of the Interior, in consultation with the Attorney 
General, to propose legislation to remedy these constitutional defects. 
Such legislation must be effective prior to the expenditure of any 
appropriated funds.
    Fourth, section 3405(a)(1), which purports to give contracting 
districts or agencies the authority to review and approve certain 
transfers of water under standards established by the Act, could be 
construed to permit the exercise of Federal executive power by the 
districts or agencies, which are not composed of individuals appointed 
pursuant to the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. To avoid 
constitutional questions that might otherwise arise, this section must 
be interpreted so as not to vest such power in those districts or 
agencies. Accordingly, I will interpret the role of these bodies under 
this section to be an advisory one.
    Notwithstanding the concerns I continue to have with certain 
provisions of the bill, I am signing H.R. 429 so that the establishment 
of water markets in California, and the bill's numerous beneficial water 
projects, can move forward without further delay. On balance, these 
projects will better enable the citizens in our western States to manage 
one of their most precious resources.

                                                             George Bush

The White House,
October 30, 1992.

                    Note: H.R. 429, approved October 30, was assigned 
                        Public Law No. 102-575.