49–010 

Calendar No. 309 

109TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 109–190 

RECLAMATION STATES EMERGENCY DROUGHT RELIEF 

ACT OF 1991 

DECEMBER 8, 2005.—Ordered to be printed 

Filed under authority of the order of the Senate of November 18, 2005 

Mr. DOMENICI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 648] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 648) to amend the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 to extend the authority for 

drought assistance, having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE OF MEASURE

The purpose of S. 648 is to amend the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 to extend the authority for 

drought assistance. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 

(Public Law 102–250), as amended (Drought Act), authorizes the 

Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau or Reclamation) to undertake 

drought relief measures through emergency assistance (Title I) and 

planning activities (Title II). Title I is a temporary authority that 

expired September 30, 2005. S. 648 amends the Drought Act to extend the Title I authority until September 30, 2010. 

Title I of the Drought Act provides authority for construction, 

management, and conservation measures to address drought impacts, including the mitigation of fish and wildlife impacts. With 

the exception of permanent well construction, only temporary construction activities are authorized. Title I also authorizes temVerDate Aug 31 2005 05:20 Dec 10, 2005 Jkt 049010 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR190.XXX SR190
2 

porary contracts to make project and non-project water available 

and to allow Reclamation facilities to be used for storage and conveyance purposes. The Drought Act provides for both reimbursable 

and non-reimbursable activities although all activities to date have 

been non-reimbursable. Pursuant to the Drought Act, the Bureau 

is authorized to make loans to water users for mitigating damages 

caused by drought. The 17 Reclamation States and Hawaii, as well 

as tribes within those states, are eligible for this assistance. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 648 was introduced by Senator Smith on March 17, 2005, and 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The 

Water and Power Subcommittee held a hearing on S. 648 on July 

12, 2005 (S.Hrg. 109–138). At the business meeting on November 

16, 2005, the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources ordered 

S. 648 favorably reported without amendment. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open business session on November 16, 2005, by unanimous voice vote of a 

quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass S. 648. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 extends the authorization of the Reclamation States 

Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 through September 30, 

2010. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office: 

DECEMBER 1, 2005. 

Hon. PETE V. DOMENICI, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 648, a bill to amend the 

Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 to extend the authority for drought assistance. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Rachel Milberg. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS HOLTZ-EAKIN, 

Director. 

Enclosure. 

S. 648—A bill to amend the Reclamation States Emergency Drought 

Relief Act of 1991 to extend the authority for drought assistance 

Summary: The Bureau of Reclamation undertakes construction, 

water management, and water conservation activities to alleviate 

damages caused by drought in certain states. Under current law, 

the authority to provide such assistance ended on September 30, 

3 

2005. S. 648 would extend that authority through September 30, 

2010. 

Assuming appropriation of amounts necessary to provide the 

drought assistance authorized by S. 648, CBO estimates that implementing the bill would cost $18 million over the 2006–2010 pe- riod and another $2 million after 2010. Enacting S. 648 would not 

affect direct spending or revenues. 

S. 648 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

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

would benefit states and local and tribal governments that qualify 

for reclamation assistance by extending the legislative authority 

that provides them such drought aid. Any costs incurred by governmental entities would result from complying with conditions for receiving federal assistance. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 648 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 IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Estimated authorization level ....................................................................... 4 4 4 4 4 

Estimated outlays ......................................................................................... 3 3 4 4 4 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes S. 648 will be 

enacted in fiscal year 2006 and that the necessary amounts will be 

appropriated for each year. Estimates of outlays are based on historical spending patterns for this activity. 

The Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 

provided the Bureau of Reclamation the authority to mitigate damages caused by drought in certain states by undertaking construction, water management, and water conservation activities. Since 

that time, the Congress has provided almost $70 million for those 

activities (an average of about $4 million per year over the past 16 

years). 

S. 648 would extend the authority provided under the 1991 act 

over the 2006–2010 period. Because we cannot predict the timing 

or severity of droughts, CBO assumes for this estimate, that the 

need to undertake drought relief over the next five years will continue at the same rate as the average need over the past 16 years. 

CBO estimates, therefore, that implementing S. 648 would cost 

about $4 million each year over the 2006–2010 period. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 648 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA. 

The bill would benefit certain states and local and tribal governments within those states by extending the legislative authority 

that provides them drought aid. Any costs incurred by governmental entities 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: Craig Cammarata. 

Estimate approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

4 

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. 648. 

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 S. 648. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The testimony provided by the Department of the Interior at the 

Subcommittee hearing on S. 648 follows: 

STATEMENT OF JOHN W. KEYS III, COMMISSIONER, U.S. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Madam Chairman, I am John W. Keys, Commissioner of 

the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation). I am pleased to 

appear for the Department in support of S. 648 which extends Title I of the Reclamation States Emergency 

Drought Relief Act of 1991 until the year 2010. 

Title I provides authority for construction, management, 

and conservation measures to alleviate the adverse impacts of drought, including mitigation of fish and wildlife 

impacts. However, wells are the only permanent construction authorized under the Act. All other Title I work must 

be of a temporary nature. No new Reclamation projects are 

authorized under Title I; Reclamation does not own, operate, or maintain projects funded under it. S. 648 would 

simply extend the expiration date. The $90 million ceiling 

in the law, initially authorized in 1991, is adequate for the 

foreseeable future. 

Title I also provides Reclamation with the flexibility to 

meet contractual water deliveries by allowing acquisition 

of water to meet requirements under the Endangered Species Act, benefiting contractors at a time when they are financially challenged. Additionally, Title I authorizes Reclamation to participate in water banks established under 

state law; facilitate water acquisitions between willing 

buyers and willing sellers; acquire conserved water for use 

under temporary contracts; make facilities available for 

storage and conveyance of project and non-project water; 

make project and non-project water available for nonproject uses; and, acquire water for fish and wildlife purposes on a non-reimbursable basis. 

Title I often helps smaller, financially-strapped entities 

(towns, counties, tribes) that do not have the financial capability to deal with the impacts of drought. In many 

cases, Reclamation is the ‘‘last resort’’ for these communities. 

5 

The Bureau of Reclamation has a long history of effective and responsive water management in good times and 

bad. While we consider ideas to make drought relief even 

more effective through improved interagency cooperation 

and other changes, we recognize that the reauthorization 

of Title I is necessary. S. 648 allows Reclamation the flexibility to continue delivering water to meet authorized 

project purposes, meet environmental requirements, respect state water rights, work with all stakeholders, and 

to provide leadership, innovation, and assistance. This is 

why Reclamation supports S. 648. 

This concludes my statement. I am pleased 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. 

648, 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): 

Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 

(43 U.S.C. 2214, as amended) 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 2214. APPLICABLE PERIOD OF DROUGHT PROGRAM. 

* * * * * * * 

(c) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.—The authorities established 

under this title shall terminate on øSeptember 30, 2005¿ September 30, 2010. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ