69–010 

Calendar No. 816 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 110–384 

MADERA WATER SUPPLY ENHANCEMENT 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 H.R. 1855] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the Act (H.R. 1855) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Madera Irrigation District for purposes 

of supporting the Madera Water Supply Enhancement Project, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that the Act do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE

The purpose of H.R. 1855 is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Madera Irrigation District for purposes of supporting the Madera Water Supply Enhancement 

Project. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

It is estimated that the aquifer on which the Madera Water District (District) relies is being depleted at a rate that surpasses the 

rate of recharge by 100,000 acre-feet per year (af/y). The District 

contends that these withdrawals have resulted in lower water tables, requiring wells to be drilled deeper in order to maintain the 

same level of productivity. In order to address the reliance on 

groundwater, historically used for agricultural purposes, the District is developing the Madera Water Supply Enhancement Project. 

The Project contemplates the creation of a water bank. The District would store water in an aquifer underlying the Madera Ranch 

which could be withdrawn for use during drought years. ProVerDate Aug 31 2005 01:06 Jun 18, 2008 Jkt 069010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR384.XXX SR384

wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
2 

ponents of the Project maintain that the geology of the ranch is 

ideal for aquifer storage, allowing water deposited on the surface 

to quickly percolate to the underlying aquifer therein creating a 

water bank. Water contained in the water bank could then be withdrawn during years of water shortages, providing a reliable source 

of water for the District. Based on the District’s estimates, approximately 250,000 af could be stored in the aquifer beneath the 

Madera Ranch, of which 55,000 af/y could be withdrawn annually. 

The proposed Project would require the upgrading of existing 

water conveyances, constructing facilities on Madera Ranch on 

which surface water could be deposited for aquifer recharge, and 

groundwater wells and pumps that would withdraw water stored 

in the aquifer for use by the District. The Project would help address water supply and environmental issues in the San Joaquin 

River basin. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

H.R. 1855 was introduced by Representative George Radanovich 

on March 30, 2007 and referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. Under suspension of the rules, H.R. 1855 passed 

the House of Representatives on October 22, 2007, and was referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. A companion measure, S. 1473 was introduced on May 24, 2007 by Senator Feinstein and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The Subcommittee on Water and Power held a 

hearing on S. 1473 and H.R. 1855 on February 28, 2008. At its 

business meeting on May 7, 2008, the Committee on Energy and 

Natural Resources ordered H.R. 1855 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 H.R. 1855. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 provides the short title of the Act. 

Section 2 defines terms used in the Act. 

Section 3(a) declares the Project feasible as described. 

Section 3(b) states that the Secretary shall implement the Act in 

accordance with applicable Federal law. 

Section 4 declares that activities authorized by the Act shall be 

undertaken pursuant to a cooperative agreement between the Secretary and the District which addresses specific items. 

Section 5(a) authorizes the Secretary, pursuant to Federal reclamation laws, to enter into a cooperative agreement with the District to provide support for the Project. 

Section 5(b) declares that the total cost for determining the Federal cost share shall not exceed $90,000,000. 

Section 5(c) states that the Federal share of the Project’s capital 

costs shall not exceed 25 percent of the total cost, and that certain 

costs incurred by the District prior to enactment would be considered as part of the non-Federal cost share. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
3 

Section 5(d) states that the District shall receive credit toward 

the non-Federal share of the Project’s cost for in-kind services and 

other identified items. 

Section 5(e) declares that the Secretary shall not provide funds 

for operation and maintenance of the Project. 

Section 5(f) requires the Secretary to work cooperatively with the 

District and, to the extent possible, use any existing plans, designs, 

and analyses prepared by the District. 

Section 5(g) declares that nothing in the section transfers title, 

responsibility, or liability for the Project to the United States. 

Section 5(h) authorizes appropriations in the amount of 25 per- cent of the total project cost, up to a maximum of $22,500,000. 

Section 6 provides that the authority in the Act shall terminate 

10 years from the date of enactment. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The Congressional Budget Office estimate of the costs of this 

measure has been requested, but was not received at the time the 

report was filed. When the Congressional Budget Office completes 

its estimate, it will be posted on the Internet at www.cbo.gov. 

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. 1855. 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 H.R. 1855, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

H.R. 1855, as reported, does not contain any congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, or limited tariffs benefits as defined by rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the Bureau of Reclamation at the 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources subcommittee 

hearing on companion measure, S. 1473 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 present the Department of the 

Interior’s views on S. 1473, the Madera Water Supply Enhancement Act. While Reclamation has been an active 

partner with the Madera Irrigation District and other entities in studying this project, the Department does not support S. 1473. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
4 

Reclamation and the state of California have studied the 

Madera Water Supply Enhancement Project. The purpose 

of this project is to reduce the overdraft of the area’s 

groundwater aquifer and improve water supply reliability. 

In March 2007, Reclamation published an appraisal report 

for this project and transmitted it to Congress. Appraisal 

reports are based upon existing information to determine 

whether additional studies to determine Federal feasibility 

are warranted. 

Reclamation’s March 2007 appraisal report identified 

several alternatives, including delineation of groundwater 

recharge areas; engineered recharge basins on the Madera 

Ranch; and direct recharge from the San Joaquin and 

Fresno Rivers. The cost for the project is estimated at approximately $91 million, and section 5(b) of the legislation 

commits the Federal government to paying 25 percent of 

project costs. The total storage space is 250,000 acre-feet. 

However, it is important to note that while a maximum of 

55,000 acre-feet can be moved to and from storage in any 

given year, the average annual water yield is estimated to 

be 20,000 acre-feet per year. Altogether, an appraisal level 

estimate is that this project would provide water at a cost 

of $420 per acre-foot. 

Although the bill lists eighteen studies that have been 

completed relating to this project, none of these studies 

meet Reclamation’s feasibility study criteria. Because Reclamation has not completed a feasibility study of the 

Madera Water Supply Enhancement Project, it is premature to authorize Federal implementation at this time. 

Moreover, this project would directly compete for funding 

with other currently authorized projects in the CVP service 

area, including several storage studies authorized under 

the CALFED Program (PL 108–361). 

Reclamation continues to emphasize completion of ongoing projects and the safe and effective maintenance of its 

aging infrastructure. Reclamation must prioritize its program activities to ensure that the most worthy projects receive funding. In light of these needs, Reclamation allocates funds to projects and programs based on objective 

and performance-based criteria to most effectively implement Reclamation’s programs and its management responsibilities for the water and power infrastructure in the 

West. 

The Administration appreciates local efforts to address 

current and future water issues. However, in light of the 

concerns expressed above, the Department does not support S. 1473. 

That concludes my prepared remarks. I would be 

pleased to answer any questions. 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS
5 

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 H.R. 1855, as ordered reported. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with REPORTS