```

[Senate Report 112-65]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                       Calendar No. 145
112th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 1st Session                                                     112-65

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

 
      EAST BENCH IRRIGATION DISTRICT WATER CONTRACT EXTENSION ACT

                                _______
                                

  August 30 (legislative day, August 2), 2011.--Ordered to be printed

   Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of August 2, 2011

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Bingaman, from the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 997]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the bill (S. 997) to authorize the Secretary of the 
Interior to extend a water contract between the United States 
and the East Bench Irrigation District, having considered the 
same, reports favorably thereon without amendment and 
recommends that the bill do pass.

                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of S. 997 is to authorize the Secretary of the 
Interior to extend a water contract between the United States 
and the East Bench Irrigation District in Montana.

                          BACKGROUND AND NEED

    The East Bench Unit of the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin 
Program is located in southwestern Montana, along the 
Beaverhead River and was originally authorized in 1944. The 
unit provides irrigation service to approximately 28,000 acres.
    The water supply contract between the East Bench Irrigation 
District and the Bureau of Reclamation expired on December 31, 
2009. Reclamation is not able to extend the contract deadline 
administratively; therefore Congressional approval is 
necessary. Extensions were granted during the 108th and 109th 
Congresses. The Montana Water Court is in the process of 
adjudicating the water rights to the system, including the 
water subject to the contract. National Environmental Policy 
Act requirements relating to the contract extension have been 
completed and the only outstanding requirement is for the 
Montana courts to confirm the contract terms.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    Senator Tester introduced S. 997 on May 12, 2011. The 
Subcommittee on Water and Power of the Committee on Energy and 
Natural Resources held a hearing on S. 997 on June 23, 2011, 
and considered the bill at its business meeting on July 14, 
2011. The Committee ordered S. 997 favorably reported without 
amendment at its business meeting on July 14, 2011.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 
open business session on July 14, 2011, by voice vote of a 
quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 997.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

    Section 1 includes the short title for the bill.
    Section 2 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to 
extend the contract for water services for the East Bench 
Irrigation District, numbered 14-06-600-3593, until the earlier 
of either the date that is four years after the date on which 
the contract would have expired if this Act is not enacted, or 
the date on which a new long-term contract is executed by the 
parties to the contract.

                   COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

    The following estimate of costs of this measure has been 
provided by the Congressional Budget Office:

S. 997--A bill to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to extend a 
        water contract between the United States and the East Bench 
        Irrigation District

    S. 997 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior, 
acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to extend the water 
contract between the United States and the East Bench 
Irrigation District for four years or until a new long-term 
contract is executed, whichever is earlier. Based on 
information from the Bureau of Reclamation, CBO estimates that 
enacting the bill would have no impact on the federal budget. 
Enacting S. 997 would not affect revenues or direct spending; 
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    The Bureau of Reclamation supplies irrigation water from 
the Clark Canyon Dam and Reservoir project to the East Bench 
Irrigation District under an interim contract negotiated in 
2006 after the original contract expired. When confirmed by a 
Montana district court, the 2006 contract will become the long-
term contract. Payments to the federal government under the 
2006 contract are about $115,000 annually, including 
reimbursement for operations and maintenance costs. Enacting S. 
997 would not affect those annual payments.
    S. 997 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 Aurora Swanson. 
The 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. 997.
    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. 997, as ordered reported.

                   CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

    S. 997, as ordered reported, does not contain any 
congressionally directed spending items, limited tax benefits, 
or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate.

                        EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

    The testimony provided by the Bureau of Reclamation at the 
June 23, 2011, Subcommittee hearing on S. 997 follows:

    Statement of Grayford F. Payne, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, 
  Administration and Budget, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the 
                                Interior

    Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am 
Grayford Payne, Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Administration 
and Budget at the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). I am 
pleased to provide the views of the Department of the Interior 
(Department) on S. 997, the East Bench Irrigation District 
Water Contract Extension Act. The Department supports S. 997.
    Reclamation's Clark Canyon Dam and Reservoir are located in 
southwest Montana and supply irrigation water under contract to 
the East Bench Irrigation District (EBID). EBID's water service 
contract with Reclamation was first executed in October 1958 
and expired on December 31, 2005. Pursuant to Section 1 of the 
Act of May 15, 1922 (42 Stat. 541), Section 46 of the Omnibus 
Adjustment Act of 1926 (44 Stat. 649), and Section 85-7-1957, 
Montana Code Annotated, execution of a new contract between the 
United States and any irrigation district requires a Montana 
5th District Court decree.
    In 2006, EBID filed a petition with the court seeking court 
confirmation of the execution of their new proposed renewed 
contract with Reclamation. A hearing was convened on December 
14, 2006, in Dillon, MT. One party appeared and filed an 
objection to the confirmation proceedings. The parties involved 
in this court confirmation case have filed various petitions 
and motions with the court. The court issued an order on April 
26, 2007, in response to EBID's petition to dismiss the 
objection, dismissing some of the counterclaims filed by the 
objectors, but continuing with other counterclaims. No trial 
date has been set for this case and as a result, no court 
decree confirming the 2006 contract has been issued.
    Additionally, prior year appropriations bills have extended 
the contracts for terms of up to two years. EBID remains 
concerned about losing their right to renew their 1958 contract 
if it is allowed to expire prior to securing a court decree of 
the renewed 2006 Contract. For this reason they are pursuing 
extension of the 1958 contract versus relying on a temporary 
water service contract.
    Under current law, the 2006 contract is not binding on the 
United States until court confirmation is secured. A final 
decree from the court confirming the 2006 contract has not 
occurred. Therefore, EBID is seeking authority under S. 997 to 
extend the 1958 contract. S. 997 would extend the contract for 
four years (to December 31, 2013) or until a new contract is 
executed, and still defer to the court to take up the issue 
again at a time of its choosing. The Department supports this 
legislation because it would allow water service to the EBID to 
continue and protects the right for contract renewal while the 
court confirmation process is given time to be completed.
    This concludes my statement. I am pleased to answer any 
questions the Subcommittee may have.

                        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 S. 997, as ordered 
reported.

                                  

```