```

[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.

                                  

```