49–010 

Calendar No. 265 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 109–164 

DESCHUTES RIVER CONSERVANCY REAUTHORIZATION 

ACT OF 2005 

OCTOBER 27, 2005.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DOMENICI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 166] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 166) to amend the Oregon Resource Conservation Act of 1996 to reauthorize the participation of the Bureau of 

Reclamation in the Deschutes River Conservancy, and for other 

purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE

The purpose of S. 166 is to reauthorize the participation of the 

Bureau of Reclamation in the Deschutes River Conservancy 

through FY 2015. It also updates references to the Deschutes River 

Conservancy Working Group, redefines a quorum, and authorizes 

appropriations. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The Deschutes River Conservancy, previously referred to as the 

Deschutes Resources Conservancy, was originally authorized in 

1996 as a 5-year pilot project (P.L. 104–208). It was reauthorized 

by Congress in 2000 (P.L. 106–270). The Deschutes drains Oregon’s 

high desert along the eastern front of the Cascade Mountains and 

eventually flows into the Columbia River. The Deschutes River 

Conservancy was created to bring together diverse interests within 

the Basin, including irrigators, tribes, ranchers, environmentalists, 

businesses, local officials, and State and Federal agencies, in order 

to resolve potential conflicts and avoid crises over water allocation 

like that which occurred in the Klamath Basin in 2001. 

2 

The Conservancy has worked to develop project criteria and identify potential projects for the benefit of water quality, water quantity, fish passage, and habitat improvement. Projects are selected 

by consensus and there is a 50–50 cost share component. The Conservancy has employed such mechanisms as voluntary, marketbased programs to restore streamflows in the Deschutes Basin. It 

has worked to improve habitat and water quality in the Deschutes 

River. It has also planted more than 100,000 trees and installed 40 

miles of riparian fencing. 

The existing authorization provides up to $2 million for each of 

fiscal years 2002 through 2006. Funding is provided through the 

Bureau of Reclamation, the lead Federal agency. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 166 was introduced by Senators Smith and Wyden on January 

25, 2005, and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources. The Water and Power Subcommittee held a hearing on 

S. 166 on April 19, 2005 (S. Hrg. 109–96). At the business meeting 

on September 28, 2005, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 166 favorably reported without amendment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open business session on September 28, 2005, by unanimous vote of a 

quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 166. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 sets forth the short title. 

Section 2 amends Section 301 of the Oregon Resource Conservation Act: to replace references to the ‘‘Deschutes River Basin Working Group’’ with the ‘‘Deschutes River Conservancy Working 

Group’’; redefine a quorum to mean eight of the qualified Working 

Group members appointed and eligible to serve; extend the participation of the Bureau of Reclamation in the Deschutes River Conservancy through fiscal year 2015; and authorize $2 million in appropriations for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2015. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office. 

S. 166—Deschutes River Conservancy Reauthorization Act of 2005 

Summary: S. 166 would authorize the appropriation of $10 million over the 2006–2010 period, and another $10 million over the 

2011–2015 period, for ecosystem restoration projects in the 

Deschutes River basin in Oregon. Assuming appropriation of the 

authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing S. 166 

would cost $7 million over the 2005–2010 period, with the remaining $13 million to be spent after 2010. Enacting the legislation 

would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

S. 166 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). The bill 

would benefit local and tribal governments participating in the 

3 

Deschutes River Conservancy by authorizing funds for restoration 

projects. Any costs to governmental entities, including matching 

funds, would result from complying with conditions for receiving 

federal assistance. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: For this estimate, 

CBO assumes that the amounts specified in S. 166 will be appropriated for each year and that outlays will follow the historical 

spending pattern for similar activities. The estimated budgetary 

impact of S. 166 is shown in the following table. The costs of this 

legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources and 

environment). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 

CHANGES TO SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Authorization Level .................................................................................................. 2 2 2 2 2 

Estimated Outlays ................................................................................................... * 1 2 2 2 

* = Less than $500,000. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 166 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA. 

The bill would benefit local and tribal governments participating in 

the Deschutes River Conservancy by authorizing funds for restoration projects. Any costs associated to governmental entities, including matching funds, would result from complying with conditions 

for receiving federal assistance. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Rachel Milberg; Impact on 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Lisa Ramirez-Branum; Impact on the Private Sector: Selena Caldera. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, 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. 166. 

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. 166, as ordered reported. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at the 

Subcommittee hearing on S. 166 follows: 

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM RINNE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF

RECLAMATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Madam Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I 

am William Rinne, Deputy Commissioner of Reclamation. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify on S. 166. 

4 

This legislation would amend the Oregon Resource Conservation Act of 1996 to reauthorize the participation of 

the Bureau of Reclamation in the Deschutes River Conservancy (DRC). The Bureau does not oppose S. 166. However, in these lean budget times the Bureau must focus its 

scarce resources on its core mission of delivering water and 

generating power, and on aging infrastructure and O&M 

for existing Reclamation projects, therefore is not likely 

that the Conservancy will be a high priority for funding. 

Regardless of the level of federal financial support, we believe the Conservancy’s goals of improving stream flow and 

water quality will certainly benefit the basin. 

The DRC was originally authorized by Congress in 1996 

to implement water conservation measures in the 

Deschutes River basin. The DRC is a locally created private, nonprofit organization established to restore stream 

flow and water quality in the Deschutes Basin of Central 

Oregon. The DRC was founded by local irrigation districts, 

the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, 

environmental conservation groups, and other local stakeholders, in an effort to focus on practical, incentive-based 

solutions to the basin’s water management challenges. The 

DRC leased over 73 cubic feet per second of water in the 

basin’s streams and rivers during the 2004 irrigation season and has restored nearly 100 miles of stream corridor 

using livestock management techniques, restored channel 

floodplain connectivity, and planted over 100,000 native 

plants in the riparian zone. 

The DRC has permanently acquired about 7,259 acrefeet of senior water rights in the Deschutes basin that will 

remain instream during critical low flow periods, benefiting fish species such as ESA listed bull trout and summer steelhead. 

The Administration does not understand the rationale 

for the provision that would define a quorum as only 8 

people, less than half of the 19 people appointed to the 

Conservancy. 

This concludes my statement. I will be glad to answer 

any questions. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

166, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is 

printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is 

shown in roman): 

OREGON RESOURCE CONSERVATION ACT OF 1996 

(P.L. 104–208, as amended by P.L. 106–270) 

AN ACT Making omnibus consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 1997 

* * * * * * * 

5 

TITLE III—DESCHUTES BASIN 

SEC. 301. DESCHUTES BASIN ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECTS. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(1) WORKING GROUP.—The term ‘‘Working Group’’ means the 

øDeschutes River Basin Working Group¿ Deschutes River Conservancy Working Group established before the date of enactment of this title, consisting of members nominated by their 

represented groups, including: 

* * * * * * * 

ø(5) QUORUM.—The term ‘‘quorum’’ means one more than 

half of those qualified Working Group members appointed and 

eligible to serve.¿ (5) QUORUM.—The term ‘‘quorum’’ means 8 

of those qualified Working Group members appointed and eligible to serve. 

* * * * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) The Bureau of Reclamation shall pay from funds authorized under subsection (h) of this title up to 50 percent of the 

cost of performing any project proposed by the Working Group 

and approved by the Secretary, up to a total amount of 

$2,000,000 during each of the fiscal years 2002 through 2006, 

and up to a total amount of $2,000,000 during each of fiscal 

years 2006 through 2015. 

* * * * * * * 

(h) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There are authorized to 

be appropriated to carry out this title $2,000,000 for each of fiscal 

years 2002 through 2006, and $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 

2006 through 2015. 

Æ