79–010

Calendar No. 883

106TH CONGRESS REPORT

2d Session " ! SENATE 106–438

RECLAMATION WASTEWATER AND GROUNDWATER STUDY

AND FACILITIES ACT

SEPTEMBER 29, 2000.—Ordered to be printed

Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of September 28 (legislative day,

September 22), 2000

Mr. MURKOWSKI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources, submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany S. 2195]

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was

referred the bill (S. 2195) to amend the Reclamation Wastewater

and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and

construction of the Truckee watershed reclamation project for the

reclamation and reuse of water, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and an amendment to

the title and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass.

The amendments are as follows:

1. Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu

thereof the following:

SECTION 1. TRUCKEE WATERSHED RECLAMATION PROJECT

(a) AUTHORIZATION.—The Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with Washoe

County, Nevada, may participate in the design, planning, and construction of, the

Truckee watershed reclamation project, consisting of the North Valley Reuse Project

and the Spanish Springs Valley Septic Conversion Project, (‘‘Project’’) to reclaim and

reuse wastewater (including degraded ground water) within and without the service

area of Washoe County, Nevada.

(b) COST SHARE.—The Federal share of the cost of the Project shall not exceed

25 percent of the total cost.

(c) LIMITATION.—Funds provided by the Secretary shall not be used for the operation or maintenance of the Project.

(d) FUNDING.—Funds appropriated pursuant to section 1615 of the Reclamation

Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act may be used for the Project

(106 Stat. 4663–4669, 43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), as amended.

SEC. 2. RECLAMATION WASTEWATER AND GROUNDWATER STUDY AND FACILITIES ACT

Design, planning, and construction of the Project shall be in accordance with, and

subject to the limitations contained in, the Reclamation Wastewater and GroundVerDate 11-MAY-2000 16:01 Sep 30, 2000 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\SR438.XXX pfrm02 PsN: SR438
2

water Study and Facilities Act (106 Stat. 4663–4669, 43 U.S.C. 390h et seq.), as

amended.

Amend the title so as to read: ‘‘To authorize the Secretary of the

Interior, pursuant to the provisions of the Reclamation Wastewater

and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to participate in the design, planning, and construction of the Truckee watershed reclamation project for the reclamation and reuse of water.’’

PURPOSE OF THE MEASURE

The purpose of S. 2195 is to amend the Reclamation Wastewater

and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the design, planning, and

construction of the Truckee watershed reclamation project for the

reclamation and reuse of water.

BACKGROUND AND NEED

Title XVI of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (P.L. 102–575, 106 Stat. 4006) authorized a program of wastewater reclamation and reuse feasibility and demonstration projects within the Reclamation States. The Federal

share of costs was limited to 50 percent. In addition, several individual studies were directed as well as 5 projects (San Jose, Phoenix, San Diego, Los Angeles, and San Gabriel Basin) for which

funding was limited to 25 percent. The legislation was directed at

reuse of existing supplies and did not address desalination, although title XI did authorize a program to research and demonstrate methods for control of salinity at the Salton Sea in California with 50 percent Federal cost-sharing. Partially in response

to the number of requests for participation in the program and the

costs, P.L. 104–266 modified the program to limit Federal contributions to 25 percent of the total cost, with a maximum of $20 million, and required a feasibility analysis prior to the expenditure of

any funds for construction. The new requirements were not made

applicable to several very large projects, mainly in California, authorized under title XVI. The 1996 Act also included authorization

for 18 additional water reclamation and reuse projects in California, Utah, New Mexico, Nevada, and Texas. Title XVI was again

amended in October 1998 by P.L. 105–321 to include authorization

for the Willow Lake Natural Treatment System Project in Oregon.

The use of reclaimed water in the arid West is significant, especially in areas experiencing groundwater overdraft or facing reduced freshwater supplies. While municipal uses are the primary

benefits of the program, there can be significant indirect benefits

for other consumptive uses, such as agriculture, and non-consumptive uses, such as augmenting in-stream flows or reducing depletions.

The Truckee watershed reclamation project

The Truckee Watershed Reclamation Project contains two separate components: the North Valley Reuse Project in Lemmon Valley, Nevada, and the Spanish Springs Valley Septic Conversion

Project in Washoe County, Nevada. Both of these components were

identified in a recently completed Regional Water Management

Plan, developed by staff the cities of Reno and Sparks, Washoe

3

County and Sierra Pacific Power Company, the dominant water

purveyor in the region.

North Valley reuse project

Lemmon Valley is located immediately north of Reno, Nevada

and is separated into two distinct hydrobasins; the west basin lies

primarily within the City of Reno, and the east basin lies primarily

within unincorporated Washoe County. Both basins have limited

groundwater and surface water resources.

The use of reclaimed wastewater effluent within Lemmon Valley

can reduce the region’s current dependence on groundwater for irrigation purposes. The city of Reno and Washoe County plan to design and construct wastewater effluent reuse facilities necessary to

convey treated wastewater to the region’s recreation sites that currently hold groundwater rights for irrigation. Once the new effluent

reuse system is operational, groundwater currently dedicated for irrigation purposes can be utilized as a reliable supplement to the region’s potable water resources.

Both Washoe County and the city of Reno operate wastewater facilities in the Lemmon Valley region. Approximately 2 miles separate the facilities. The Reno facility is designed to treat 1.3 million

gallons of wastewater per day. The city is currently modernizing

and expanding the facility’s treatment process, including the design

of a new wastewater effluent reuse delivery system.

Washoe County operates the Lemmon Valley Wastewater Treatment Facility. This facility treats an average of 240,000 gallons of

wastewater per day, and is projected to reach its current design capacity of 300,000 gallons per day by 2002. At that time, the facility

will require major renovations, or complete abandonment and replacement. The facility currently does not have a beneficial effluent

reuse system; rather treated effluent is disposed of in ponds designed to allow the wastewater to evaporate. The current cumulative water allowed to evaporate each year from the ponds is approximately 265 acre feet, or roughly the amount of water needed

annually to irrigate 80 acres of grass.

Washoe County and the city of Reno propose that the Lemmon

Valley facility be closed when it reaches its treatment capacity in

2002. Wastewater currently being treated at the site would then be

pumped 2 miles to the Reno facility for treatment. In 1996, CH2M

Hill was retained to evaluate the feasibility to close the Lemmon

Valley facility and combine treatment operations of the two facilities at the Reno facility. CH2M Hill determined that combining

wastewater treatment at Reno was cost effective for sewer users

due to lower capital and O&M costs compared to separate operation. More importantly, decommissioning the Lemmon Valley facility and pumping its wastewater to Reno for treatment would

allow for more reclaimed effluent to be used in Reno’s effluent

reuse system, which would be beneficial to the entire Lemmon Valley area.

Money from sources other than selling reuse water to replace potable supplies is needed to start the decommissioning process and

construct the pump station, pipeline and plant expansion. Once

these facilities are constructed, a revenue source would exist to pay

for O&M and enhanced recycled water distribution due to the inVerDate 11-MAY-2000 07:09 Sep 30, 2000 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR438.XXX pfrm08 PsN: SR438
4

creased supply for recycled water. The title XVI funds would be

used for this initial capitalization.

Spanish Springs project

Currently over 1,900 homes in the Washoe County portion of

Spanish Springs Valley are on individual septic systems. Sixty-six

percent of these septic systems are on lots less than 1 acre and 97

percent of them are on lots of less than 2 acres. A recent USGS

report commissioned by the Washoe County Regional Water Planning Commission (RWPC) identified nitrogen contamination of municipal and domestic wells in the area. The source of the nitrogen

was confirmed to originate from septic tank discharge. As a result,

the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection has directed

Washoe County to develop a plan to bring a sewer system to the

area. The county has eighteen months to develop a facility plan to

alleviate the nitrogen contamination problem. Relocating wells will

not be considered mitigation, only the elimination of the contaminant source.

Newer subdivisions have brought a sewer interceptor to the area

creating an opportunity to connect the existing homes, most of

which are less than 20 years old. Another interceptor is being designed and would be available to convey additional flows to the

Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility. A study commissioned by the RWPC has developed a preliminary plan to connect

these homes as mandated by the State. Costs estimates for doing

so range from $10,000 to $13,000 per house, including a hook-up

fee of $4700.

The mandate to bring a sewer system to these homes requires

Washoe County to develop an implementable plan by February

2002. This plan would include a financial plan that requires the individual homeowners to contribute monthly payments as a revenue

source to pay off a low interest loan obtained from the State of Nevada. Any grants to reduce these costs will reduce the impact to

the homeowners. Potential sources of funding, in addition to title

XVI funding, include wellhead protection grants and community

development block grants.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 2195 was introduced by Senator Reid on March 7, 2000. The

Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on July 11,

2000. At the business meeting on September 20, 2000, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 2195, as

amended, favorably reported.

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND TABULATION OF VOTES

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open business session on September 20, 2000, by a unanimous voice vote

with a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 2195,

if amended as described herein.

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT

During the consideration of S. 2195, the Committee adopted an

amendment in the nature of a substitute that amends the legislation to make it a freestanding bill, rather than amending the existVerDate 11-MAY-2000 07:09 Sep 30, 2000 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR438.XXX pfrm08 PsN: SR438
5

ing title 16 Act of Public Law 102–575. The substitute amendment

also specifies the two components of the project to be authorized.

They are the North Valley Reuse Project and the Spanish Springs

Valley Septic Conversion Project. The title of the bill is also amended. The authorization for this wastewater reuse project is limited

to two specific projects—The North Valley Reuse Project and the

Spanish Springs Valley Septic Conversion Project. The third project

described in testimony at the July 11, 2000 Water and Power Subcommittee hearing, the Truckee River Channel Restoration Project,

is specifically excluded from this authorization.

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 report is available, the Chairman will

request it to be printed in the Congressional Record for the advice

of the Senate.

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. 2195. 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. 2195, as ordered reported.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

On May 10, 2000, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of the

Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting forth

Executive agency recommendations on S. 2195. These reports had

not been received at the time the report on S. 2195 was filed. When

the reports become available, the Chairman will request that they

be printed in the Congressional Record for the advice of the Senate.

The testimony provided by the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation at the Subcommittee hearing follows:

STATEMENT OF ELUID L. MARTINEZ, COMMISSIONER,

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Thank you for the opportunity to appear today to provide the Administration’s views on S. 2195, concerning the

Truckee (Nevada) watershed reclamation project. My name

is Eluid Martinez. I am Commissioner of the U.S. Bureau

of Reclamation (Reclamation).

S. 2195 would amend the Reclamation Wastewater and

Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (43 U.S.C. 390h et

seq.) [Title XVI of P.L. 102–575 (1992)] to authorize the

Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to participate in the

design, planning, and construction of the Truckee watershed reclamation project in Washoe County, Nevada. S.

6

2195 limits the Federal share of project costs to 25 percent

of the total costs and restricts the Secretary from providing funding for the operation and maintenance of this

project. While Reclamation strongly encourages local water

recycling efforts, we must oppose authorizing this additional Federal recycling project for the reasons described

below.

Mr. Chairman, in 1992, Congress adopted, and the

President signed, the Reclamation Projects Authorization

and Adjustment Act (Public Law 102–575). Title XVI of

this Act, the Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act, authorized the construction of five water reclamation and reuse projects. Four of these projects are in

California and the fifth is in Arizona. The Secretary was

also authorized to undertake a program to identify other

water recycling opportunities throughout the 17 western

United States, and to conduct appraisal level and feasibility level studies to determine if those opportunities are

worthy of implementation. The Bureau of Reclamation has

been administering a grant program to fund these Title

XVI projects since FY 1994.

In 1996, Public Law 104–266, the Reclamation Recycling

and Water Conservation Act was enacted into law. This

Act amended Title XVI and authorized the Secretary to

participate in the planning, design, and construction of 18

additional projects, including two desalination research

and development projects. These new projects are distributed within five states, including California, Nevada,

Utah, Texas, and New Mexico. Title XVI was further

amended in 1998 by Public Law 105–321 to authorize Reclamation to participate in the design, planning, and construction of the Willow Lake Natural Treatment System

Project in Salem, Oregon. To date, of the 24 specifically authorized projects, 17 have received funding, 13 for construction and four (4) for feasibility studies. In addition,

Congress has provided Reclamation funding to construct

two research and demonstration projects, and to participate in appraisal level or feasibility level studies for more

than ten other potential projects that have yet to be authorized for construction.

Municipal, industrial, domestic, and agricultural wastewater reuse efforts can assist states and local communities

in solving contemporary water supply problems. However,

the Department opposes authorizing additional projects in

the absence of feasibility studies to determine whether

these particular projects warrant Federal funding. In general, Reclamation places priority on funding new projects

that (1) are economically justified and environmentally acceptable in a watershed context; (2) are not eligible for

funding under another Federal program; and (3) directly

address Administration priorities for the Reclamation program, such as reducing the demand on existing Federal

water supply facilities.

S. 2195 would also increase outstanding Federal obligations for the water reclamation and reuse projects already

7

authorized by Congress. These currently authorized

projects are estimated to cost approximately $3 billion, and

the Federal government’s share of these costs is well in excess of $500 million. Although more than $188 million has

been appropriated to Reclamation for 17 of the 24 currently authorized projects, that amount represents only

about a third of the potential Federal contribution for the

ongoing projects. At current funding levels, it will take

Reclamation more than 10 years to complete the funding

of the 24 currently authorized projects.

For these reasons, the Department of the Interior cannot

support authorizing this new construction request.

This concludes my prepared testimony. I would be happy

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 bill S. 2195, as ordered reported.

Æ