[Senate Report 110-360]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 792
110th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 110-360
======================================================================
SIERRA VISTA SUBWATERSHED FEASIBILITY STUDY ACT
_______
June 16, 2008.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Bingaman, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1929]
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was
referred the bill (S. 1929) to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to
conduct a feasibility study of water augmentation alternatives
in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed, having considered the same,
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that
the bill do pass.
PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE
The purpose of S. 1929 is to authorize the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to
conduct a feasibility study of water augmentation alternatives
in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed.
BACKGROUND AND NEED
S. 1929 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
study alternatives to augment water supplies in Arizona's
Sierra Vista Sub-watershed, which is home to the San Pedro
Riparian National Conservation Area (SPRNCA), the Fort Huachuca
Army base, and 76,000 residents. SPRNCA, which protects nearly
43 miles of the San Pedro River, serves as a principal passage
for the migration of approximately 4 million birds annually. It
also provides crucial habitat for 100 species of birds, 81
species of mammals, 43 species of reptiles and amphibians, and
two threatened species of native fish.
Fort Huachuca, which is adjacent to SPRNCA, plays a
critical role in this country's national security by training
soldiers in military intelligence. It also is the largest
employer in the area, contributing greatly to the economy of
Cochise County and the State of Arizona. In recent years, the
Fort has implemented water conservation and recharge measures
as part of its responsibilities under the Endangered Species
Act. Since 1995, the Fort has reduced its groundwater pumping
by more than 50 percent.
Water levels in certain areas of the regional aquifer in
the Sierra Vista Sub-watershed are still declining due to
natural causes and development near Sierra Vista. Because
SPRNCA and the Fort could be negatively impacted by these
declining water levels, a 2007 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
Appraisal level study concluded that augmenting the local water
supply is necessary. To that end, Reclamation's study
recommended several augmentation alternatives for further
analysis, all of which are supported by the Upper San Pedro
Partnership, a congressionally recognized consortium of 21
local, state, and Federal agencies and private organizations.
The feasibility study authorized by S. 1929 is the next step in
the process of determining how to best address the water
challenges facing the Sierra Vista Sub-watershed.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
S. 1929 was introduced on August 1, 2007 by Senator Kyl for
himself and Senator McCain, and referred to the Committee on
Energy and Natural Resources. The Water and Power Subcommittee
held a hearing on S. 1929 on February 28, 2008. At its business
meeting on May 7, 2008, the Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources ordered S. 1929 favorably reported.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open
business session on May 7, 2008, by voice vote of a quorum
present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 1929.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1 provides the short title of the Act.
Section 2 defines several terms used in the Act.
Section 3(a) authorizes the Secretary, through the
Commissioner of Reclamation, to complete a feasibility study of
alternatives to augment water supplies within the Sierra Vista
subwatershed, and to include certain information and perform
specified analysis.
Section 3(b) defines a maximum Federal cost-share of 45
percent, and authorizes the non-Federal cost-share to include
in-kind services.
Section 3(c) provides a statement of congressional intent
on the completion of the study.
Section 3(d) authorizes appropriations for the study.
Section 4 disclaims any effect of the Act on certain water
rights.
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following estimate of costs of this measure has been
provided by the Congressional Budget Office:
S. 1929--Sierra Vista Subwatershed Feasibility Study Act
S. 1929 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
complete a feasibility study of alternatives to augment water
supplies within the Sierra Vista Subwatershed in Arizona. The
legislation would authorize the appropriation of $1.3 million
for the study and stipulates that the federal share of the
study's cost cannot exceed 45 percent of the total. Based on
information from the department, CBO estimates that carrying
out the study would cost the federal government $1.3 million
over the next three years, assuming availability of
appropriated funds. Enacting the legislation would not affect
direct spending or revenues.
S. 1929 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.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Tyler Kruzich.
This estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, 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. 1929. 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. 1929, as ordered reported.
CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING
In accordance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following identification of congressionally directed spending
items contained in the bill, as reported:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section Provision Member
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3(d).......................... Authorization of Senator Kyl.
appropriations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
The testimony provided by the Bureau of Reclamation at the
Subcommittee hearing on February 28, 2008 on S. 1929 follows:
Statement of Robert J. Quint, Director of Operations, Bureau of
Reclamation, Department of the Interior
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Robert
J. Quint, Director of Operations, Bureau of Reclamation. I am
pleased to be here today to give the Department of the
Interior's views on S. 1929 and H.R. 3328, the Sierra Vista
Subwatershed Feasibility Act. The Department does not support
the proposed legislation.
The legislation would authorize the Secretary of the
Interior, acting through the Commissioner of Reclamation, to
conduct a feasibility study of water augmentation alternatives
in the Sierra Vista Subwatershed, located in southeastern
Arizona, Cochise County, in the upper San Pedro watershed, near
the City of Sierra Vista. It provides for Federal funding of
$1,260,000, with a local cost share of 55%, for a total
estimated cost of $2,800,000. In addition to local cost share
for the study, a significant local effort will be required to
resolve legal and institutional challenges in order to complete
the study.
The preservation of two important Federal facilities, Fort
Huachuca (Fort) and the San Pedro Riparian National
Conservation Area (SPRNCA), requires augmentation of the local
water supply. Fort activities and associated development near
the City of Sierra Vista have resulted in a substantial
groundwater overdraft that is expected to negatively impact the
San Pedro River (River). A section of the River was protected
by Congress as the SPRNCA. As the area's largest employer, the
Fort greatly benefits southeast Arizona's (and the entire
State's) economy. Despite conservation and recharge measures,
groundwater overdraft continues to grow.
The Upper San Pedro Partnership (Partnership), a consortium
of Federal, state, local and private groups, was established in
1988 to sustain the viability of the Fort and the River--
Reclamation became a member in 2004. Also in 2004, Section 321
of the National Defense Authorization Act recognized the
Partnership and directed it to prepare an annual report on
progress toward the goal to ``restore and maintain the
sustainable yield of the regional aquifer by and after
September 30, 2011.'' The 2011 date has motivated the
Partnership to aggressively pursue feasibility authorization
which could lead to implementation of an augmentation project.
The Partnership hired a private consultant to investigate
measures to offset groundwater mining, including conservation,
recharge, and augmentation. Reclamation examined alternatives
found in the report and identified data gaps; then helped the
Partnership follow a process that characterized the
augmentation portion of the problem, analyzed alternatives and
screened them to identify viable solutions. Reclamation
documented this process in an appraisal report completed in
June 2007. A total of 14 augmentation alternatives were
evaluated, resulting in the Partnership selecting three
alternatives for further analysis: bringing Central Arizona
Project (CAP) water to Sierra Vista, capturing and recharging
stormwater, and reclamation and reuse of impaired mine water. A
feasibility study would be the next logical step for the
Partnership to secure Reclamation assistance with augmentation
implementation. The appraisal report identifies significant
legal and institutional issues that need to be addressed, by
local stakeholders, in order to make progress. Only the CAP to
Sierra Vista alternative completely addresses the Partnership's
goal for augmentation.
The Partnership is not a traditional government entity in
that its membership consists of representatives from Federal,
state and local governments, as well as non-profit
organizations and local businesses. It has no legal authority
to construct, operate, and repay capital costs. Because of
this, Reclamation cannot legally contract with the Partnership.
Water management in the area is further complicated by the
fact that all of the local water providers are private
entities. Alternatives under consideration would need to be
implemented by an entity other than the Partnership. In 2007,
the State of Arizona passed legislation enabling the creation
of an Upper San Pedro Water District. The legislation
establishes a temporary board, which is subject to a vote by
residents to make it permanent.
Reclamation recognizes issues of Federal concern in the
Sierra Vista Subwatershed, including protected Federal lands in
the SPRNCA, species listed under the Endangered Species Act,
and the U.S. Army garrison at Fort Huachuca. A feasibility
level study of water augmentation alternatives could help
evaluate possible ways forward. Reclamation's appraisal report,
however, identified water management challenges facing the
basin, as well as legal issues associated with the
alternatives. For instance, extending the CAP to Sierra Vista
would entail not only the acquisition of a CAP water right, but
the extension of the CAP service area. Extending the service
area would require both modifications to State law and the CAP
Master Repayment Contract.
To address these issues and develop an augmentation project
in a timely manner, Reclamation described a two-stage process
in the appraisal report. The first stage would involve
development of the appropriate legal and institutional
mechanisms required to implement a project, while a
programmatic feasibility/National Environmental Policy Act
study is conducted in which a preferred alternative or
alternatives will be identified. The completion of the first
stage would allow the Partnership the time to develop the
necessary institutions with repayment ability while providing
more detailed design and cost information needed to make
informed decisions. The second stage of the process involves a
detailed specific feasibility design and environmental impact
study for an augmentation project. This process avoids the
expense of performing detailed, and costly, design and
environmental work in the case that a project partner is not
created or if other significant legal issues are not resolved.
We note that the Partnership has worked through the issue of
institutional repayment ability in the past by using either the
City of Sierra Vista or Cochise County as fiscal agents.
If issues could be resolved and a partner identified prior
to feasibility authorization, consideration should be given to
conducting a more detailed feasibility study in a one stage
process that could move immediately to construction. Based on
Reclamation's experience, the expected cost of conducting such
a study would range from $5 to $10 million and take longer to
complete than the programmatic first stage study. However, if a
project is certain to move to construction, the overall cost
and time would be less than the proposed two stage process.
Again, while Reclamation does not support the legislation
given outstanding questions about institutional capacity and
has not requested appropriations for the study this bill would
authorize, we understand the tremendous importance to local
stakeholders, the state and the Federal government of the
resources involved. We will continue to work with the
Partnership on ways to deal with the groundwater overdraft that
the Sierra Vista Subwatershed is facing.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Thank you for
the opportunity to comment on S. 1929 and H.R. 3328. I would be
happy to answer any questions at this time.
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. 1929, as
ordered reported.