39–010 

Calendar No. 515 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 113–228 

EAST BENCH IRRIGATION DISTRICT WATER CONTRACT 

EXTENSION ACT AMENDMENTS 

JULY 31, 2014.—Ordered to be printed 

Ms. LANDRIEU, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1965] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 1965) to amend the East Bench Irrigation District Water Contract Extension Act to permit the Secretary of the 

Interior to extend the contract for certain water services, having 

considered the same, reports favorably thereon without amendment 

and recommends that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 1965 is to amend the East Bench Irrigation 

District Water Contract Extension Act to permit the Secretary of 

the Interior to extend the contract for certain water services. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The East Bench Irrigation District (EBID) is a privately owned 

irrigation district located in Dillon, Montana. EBID had an irrigation water service contract supplied by the Bureau of Reclamation’s 

Clark Canyon Dam and Reservoir in southwest Montana from the 

contract’s original execution in 1958 until its expiration on December 31, 2005. EBID began to renew its 1958 contract in 2006 

(which requires a Montana 5th District Court decree), but an objection was filed that is not expected to be resolved for two or more 

years. Short-term extensions of the 1958 contract were provided in 

prior year appropriations bills and most recently by Public Law 

112–139 for an additional four years, but this expired on December 

31, 2013. EBID is concerned about losing their right to renew their 

1958 contract if it is allowed to expire prior to securing court conVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:22 Aug 05, 2014 Jkt 039010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR228.XXX SR228

tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
2 

firmation of the renewed 2006 contract, so EBID is pursuing an extension of the 1958 contract. S. 1965 would further extend the 1958 

contract for an additional six years (for a total of 10 years, or until 

December 31, 2019) or until the renewed 2006 contract is executed. 

S. 1965 would still defer to the court to take up the issue again at 

a time of its choosing. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Senator Baucus introduced S. 1965 on January 28, 2014 with 

Senator Tester as a co-sponsor. Senator Walsh was added as a cosponsor on June 3, 2014. A hearing was held by the Subcommittee 

on Water and Power on February 27, 2014 (S. Hrg. 113–284). At 

its business meeting on June 18, 2014, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee ordered S. 1965 favorably reported without amendment. 

A related bill, S. 997, was introduced by Senator Tester in the 

112th Congress. A hearing was held by the Subcommittee on Water 

and Power on June 23, 2011 (S. Hrg. 112–129). At its business 

meeting on July 14, 2011, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee ordered S. 997 favorably reported (S. Rpt. 112– 

65) and was passed into law on June 27, 2012 (P.L. 112–139). 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on June 18, 2014, by a voice vote, recommends that the Senate pass S. 1965 without amendment. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 amends the East Bench Irrigation District Water Contract Extension Act (Public Law 112–139; 126 Stat. 390) to extend 

the contract from 4 years to 10 years. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

S. 1965—A bill to amend the East Bench Irrigation District Water 

Contract Extension Act to permit the Secretary of the Interior 

to extend the contract for certain water services 

S. 1965 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 six additional 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 legislation would 

not affect the federal budget. Because enacting S. 1965 would not 

affect revenues or direct spending, 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. Although the interim contract expired at 

the end of 2013 both the bureau and the district continue to operVerDate Mar 15 2010 04:22 Aug 05, 2014 Jkt 039010 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR228.XXX SR228

tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
3 

ate under the terms of the expired contract and expect to do so 

until a new contract is executed. 

S. 1965 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would 

not affect the budgets of 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. 1965. 

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 could 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. 1965, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

This bill, as 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 

Subcommittee on Water and Power hearing on S. 1965 follows: 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT QUINT, SENIOR ADVISOR, BUREAU

OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Chairman Schatz and members of the Subcommittee, I 

am Bob Quint, Senior Advisor at the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). I am pleased to provide the views of 

the Department of the Interior (Department) on S. 1965, 

to amend the East Bench Irrigation District Water Contract Extension Act to permit the Secretary of the Interior 

to extend the contract for certain water services. The Department supports S. 1965. 

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 confirmation by a Montana District court. 


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
4 

In 2006, EBID filed a petition with the Montana Fifth 

Judicial District Court seeking confirmation of the execution of their renewed contract with Reclamation. A hearing 

was convened on December 14, 2006, in Dillon, MT, and 

one objection to the confirmation was filed. 

A part of the legal challenge to confirmation of the contract involves the proper place of use of the water, which 

is an element of a water right which the Montana Water 

Court has sole jurisdiction over. Therefore, the case was 

certified from the Montana District Court to the Montana 

Water Court. 

Once the Montana Water Court addresses the proper 

place of use for the subject water right, it will send the 

case back to the Montana District Court for further proceedings on the various additional legal challenges to the 

contract. A decision by either the Montana Water Court or 

the Montana District Court may be appealed directly to 

the Montana Supreme Court, which is the court of last resort. 

Prior year appropriations bills have extended the contracts for terms of up to two years. Most recently, in the 

112th Congress, Public Law 112–139; 126 Stat. 390 extended the contract for four years (to December 31, 2013) 

or until the date on which a new long-term contract is executed. EBID remains concerned about losing their right to 

renew their 1958 contract if it is allowed to expire prior to 

securing court confirmation of the renewed 2006 Contract. 

For this reason they are pursuing extension of the 1958 

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. 1965 to extend the 1958 contract. S. 1965 would 

extend the contract for six years beyond Public Law 112– 

139 for a total of ten years (to December 31, 2019) 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 believes that a 10 year extension under S. 1965 

will allow adequate time for confirmation by the Montana 

Fifth Judicial District Court. 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. Again, the Department 

supports S. 1965. I would be pleased to answer questions 

at the appropriate time. 

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. 

1965, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is in 


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS
5 

italic, and existing law in which no change is proposed in shown 

in roman): 

EAST BENCH IRRIGATION DISTRICT WATER CONTRACT 

EXTENSION ACT 

PUBLIC LAW 112–139 

AN ACT TO AUTHORIZE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR TO EXTEND A WATER

CONTRACT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND THE EAST BENCH IRRIGATION DISTRICT. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO EXTEND WATER CONTRACT. 

The Secretary of the Interior may extend the contract for water 

services between the United States and the East Bench Irrigation 

District, numbered 14–06–600–3593, until the earlier of— 

(1) the date that is ø4 years¿ 10 years after the date on which 

the contract would have expired if this Act had not been enacted; 

or 

(2) the date on which a new long-term contract is executed by the 

parties to the contract. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with REPORTS