```

[Senate Report 109-248]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                       Calendar No. 410
109th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     109-248

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

 
      NORTHERN COLORADO WATER CONSERVANCY DISTRICT CONVEYANCE ACT

                                _______
                                

                 April 20, 2006.--Ordered to be printed

   Filed, under authority of the order of the Senate of April 7, 2006

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

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 3443]

    The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 
referred the Act (H.R. 3443) to direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to convey certain water distribution facilities to the 
Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, 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. 3443 is to direct the Secretary of the 
Interior to transfer the title of specific water distribution 
facilities of the Colorado-Big Thompson Project in northeastern 
Colorado to the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District.

                          BACKGROUND AND NEED

    The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District 
(hereinafter ``District'') seeks the transfer of title of the 
following three single-purpose Colorado-Big Thompson Project 
(hereinafter ``C-BT'') water conveyance facilities: the St. 
Vrain Supply Canal, the Boulder Creek Supply Canal, and the 
South Platte Supply Canal. The C-BT is a multi-purpose project 
built by Reclamation between 1938 and 1957. The C-BT's primary 
purpose is to provide supplemental water supply for the 
beneficial use of the District's customers, with hydropower 
generation as a secondary purpose.
    In 2000, Congress transferred title to four single-purpose 
water conveyance facilities associated with the C-BT from the 
United States to the District (P.L. 106-376). In that instance, 
a Memorandum of Agreement (hereinafter ``MOA'') with 
Reclamation was completed subsequent to passage of that law and 
the property was transferred. Enactment of H.R. 3443 would 
complete the transfer of title of all single-purpose water 
conveyance facilities within the C-BT to the District. In July 
2005, the District requested that Reclamation enter into a 
Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter ``MOU'') for purposes 
of the transfer proposed by H.R. 3443. Pursuant to that 
request, Reclamation and the District have reached agreement on 
the title transfer MOU.
    The District has operated and maintained these distribution 
facilities since 1957 and has completed its repayment of the 
capital costs for the C-BT. According to the bill's proponents, 
the transfer will allow the District to cost-effectively manage 
the facilities and reduce paperwork.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    H.R. 3443 was introduced on July 26, 2005, by 
Representative Musgrave for herself and Representative Mark 
Udall and referred to the House Resources Committee. The 
Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on H.R. 3443 on 
September 27, 2005. The House Resources Committee, by unanimous 
consent, ordered H.R. 3443 favorably reported on October 19, 
2005. Under suspension of the rules, H.R. 3443 passed the House 
of Representatives on December 13, 2005. A similar measure, S. 
1498 was introduced by Senator Allard on July 26, 2005 for 
himself and Senator Salazar and referred to the Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee. The Subcommittee on Water and 
Power held a hearing on S. 1498 on October 6, 2005. S. Hrg. 
109-273. The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
ordered H.R. 3443 favorably reported on March 15, 2006.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in an 
open business meeting on March 15, 2006 by unanimous voice vote 
of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R. 3443.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

    Section 1 defines the terms used in the Act.
    Section 2 subsection (a) directs the Secretary to convey to 
the District all right, title and interest in the St. Vrain 
Supply Canal; the Boulder Creek Supply Canal that extends from 
the St. Vrain River to Boulder Creek, including that portion 
that extends from the St. Vrain River to Boulder Reservoir; and 
the South Platte Supply Canal. This section directs that the 
title transfer take place while ensuring that the Secretary 
evaluate the impacts of the change of ownership of the 
transferred water distribution facilities, if any, develop 
environmental compliance documents, and proceed in compliance 
with all applicable laws. Any action required as a result of 
the Secretary's action shall be carried out by the Federal 
government or the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District 
pursuant to MOU No. 06AG602103 entered into on December 16, 
2005.
    Subsection (b) provides that the District has completed its 
capital cost obligation associated with the C-BT; that the 
District shall not be required to provide any additional 
consideration for the conveyance made under subsection (a); and 
that the Western Area Power Administration shall continue to 
include the unpaid portion of the transferred facilities in its 
annual power repayment studies for the Loveland Area Projects 
until such facilities are repaid, consistent with applicable 
laws and policies.
    Subsection (c) provides that, except as provided in the 
Act, nothing affects the obligations and rights of the District 
under the contract between the District and the United States 
providing for the construction of the C-BT.
    Section 3 provides that, following the conveyance made 
under subsection (a), the United States shall not be liable for 
damages associated with the transferred facilities.
    Section 4 recognizes the unique status of the New 
Consolidated Lower Boulder Reservoir and Ditch Co., and the New 
Coal Ridge Ditch Company, and ensures that any action 
undertaken by the Secretary in accordance with this Act will 
not affect the rights and interests of those companies or 
ability to use the transferred water distribution facilities. 
This section does not affect the activities to be carried out 
pursuant to MOU No. 06AG602103.
    Section 5 provides that, if the conveyance has not occurred 
one year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary 
shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 
of the Senate and the Committee on Resources of the House of 
Representatives a report detailing why the facilities have not 
been transferred and the schedule for completing the transfer.

                   COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

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

H.R. 3443--An act to direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey 
        certain water distribution facilities to the Northern Colorado 
        Water Conservancy District

    H.R. 3443 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to 
convey certain water distribution facilities that are a part of 
the Colorado-Big Thompson Project to the Northern Colorado 
Water Conservancy District. Based on information from the 
Bureau of Reclamation, CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 3443 
would have no significant effect on the federal budget.
    The Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District has 
fulfilled all repayment obligations associated with the 
project. Under current law, the district pays all operations 
and maintenance costs for the project. In addition, H.R. 3443 
would have no effect on the Western Area Power Administration's 
(WAPA's) repayment obligation for the Colorado-Big Thompson 
Project. Under current law, WAPA will repay $72 million in 
construction costs for the project by 2051.
    H.R. 3443 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. 
Accepting the land conveyance authorized in this act would be 
voluntary on the part of the Northern Colorado Water 
Conservancy District. Any costs they might incur to comply with 
the conditions of conveyance would be incurred voluntarily.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Julie Middleton. 
The estimate was 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 H.R. 3443. The bill is not a regulatory measure in 
the sense of imposing Government-established standards or 
significant 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. 3443.

                        EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

    The testimony provided by the Bureau of Reclamation at the 
Subcommittee hearing on S. 1498, the Senate counterpart to H.R. 
3443, in the 109th Congress follows:

  Statement of William E. Rinne, Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of 
                Reclamation, Department of the Interior

    Good morning, I am William E. Rinne, Deputy Commissioner of 
the Bureau of Reclamation. I am pleased to appear before this 
Subcommittee to provide Reclamation's views on S. 1498, 
legislation to transfer title to certain water distribution 
facilities of the Colorado-Big Thompson Project (C-BT) located 
in Colorado, to the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy 
District. Mr. Chairman, we are working diligently with the 
District to accomplish this title transfer because we are 
convinced it has the potential to provide operations 
efficiencies and other benefits. However, we are concerned that 
the legislation may be premature because we have not yet worked 
out the details of the title transfer with the District.
    To date, our most successful transfers have relied on a 
simple plan--identify issues and obstacles at the local level 
and address them prior to the introduction of legislation 
authorizing the title transfer. Toward this end, Reclamation 
has a clear and collaborative process for title transfers. Not 
only has the preferred approach helped entities identify and 
address concerns of other interested parties early on in the 
process, but it has also enabled Reclamation and the districts 
to accurately predict and assign costs, and resolve other 
issues during the more flexible period preceding legislation. 
This process has been quite successful and we strongly 
encourage the District to continue to work through it with us 
before legislation advances.
    The transfer contemplated by S. 1498 has only just begun. 
On January 24 of this year, Reclamation wrote to the District, 
acknowledging its interest in title transfer and urging it to 
follow the title transfer process described above. On July 26, 
2005, H.R. 3443 was introduced in the House. On September 7, 
2005, the District wrote Reclamation requesting that an MOU be 
entered into by October 7, 2005. We have begun working with the 
District on that MOU, and if no unexpected issues arise, we 
anticipate executing the MOU by October 7. Subsequent to the 
completion of that MOU, Reclamation and the District need to 
thoroughly discuss the remaining issues associated with the 
transfer of these facilities.
    Mr. Chairman, we look forward to working with you and the 
District to complete this title transfer in the most efficient 
and cost-effective manner possible.
    That concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer 
any questions.

                        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 Act, H.R. 3443, as 
ordered reported.

                                  

```