89–010 

Calendar No. 649 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 115–362 

CONTRA COSTA CANAL TRANSFER ACT 

NOVEMBER 14, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 

Ms. MURKOWSKI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 6040] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (H.R. 6040) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain land and facilities of the Central Valley 

Project, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon 

without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of H.R. 6040 is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to convey certain lands and facilities of the Central Valley Project. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

The Contra Costa Canal System in California, which includes the 

Rock Slough intake channel, Main Canal, Loop Canal, Shortcut 

Pipeline, the Clayton and Ygnacio Re-lift Canals and pumping 

plants, and the Martinez Reservoir and pumping plants, was authorized in 1937 through the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1937 (Public Law 75–392). Construction was completed in 1948, and additional features were finished in 1967. 

The Contra Costa Water District (CCWD) has operated and 

maintained these facilities since 1972 under agreement with the 

Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), and in 2010 repaid its contract for 

the cost of construction in full. The repayment contract states that 

at completion of repayment, title to the facilities is to be transferred to CCWD, following authorization by Congress. 

2 

With repayment for these facilities complete, CCWD has asked 

for authorization to receive title of the Contra Costa Canal System 

as provided in its contract with BOR. Conveying title to CCWD will 

facilitate a planned $650 million project to convert the open main 

canal to closed pipe in order to increase public safety and water 

conservation, and to provide needed upgrades to the main canal 

and other system components. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Representative DeSaulnier introduced H.R. 6040 on June 7, 

2018. The Natural Resources Committee’s Subcommittee on Water, 

Power and Oceans held a hearing on H.R. 6040 on July 11, 2018. 

The bill was favorably reported, as amended, by the Natural Resources Committee on August 31, 2018. H.R. 6040 passed the 

House of Representatives by voice vote on September 12, 2018. 

Senator Feinstein introduced S. 3001, companion legislation, on 

June 6, 2018. The Subcommittee on Water and Power held a hearing on S. 3001 on June 13, 2018. 

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources met in 

an open business session on October 2, 2018, and ordered H.R. 

6040 favorably reported. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in 

open business session on October 2, 2018, by a majority voice vote 

of a quorum present, recommends that the Senate pass H.R. 6040. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Sec. 1. Short title 

This section states the short title. 

Sec. 2. Definitions 

Section 2 defines key terms. 

Sec. 3. Conveyance of land and facilities 

Subsection (a) directs BOR to convey all right, title and interest 

of the United States in the Contra Costa Canal and the acquired 

land, as well as all interest in the acquired land to date to CCWD 

within 180 days of the Act’s enactment. As consideration for the 

conveyance, CCWD must assume all liability for the administration, operation, maintenance, and replacement of the Contra Costa 

Canal, in accordance with applicable agreements and valid existing 

rights. 

Subsection (b) directs the Secretary to convey the Rock Slough 

fish screen facility to the CCWD pursuant to that facility’s title 

transfer agreement. This subsection also directs the Secretary and 

CCWD to enter into negotiations to accomplish the fish screen facility conveyance within 180 days of the Contra Costa Canal conveyance. 

Subsection (c) requires the CCWD to pay any conveyance-related 

administrative and real estate transfer costs to the Secretary. 

Subsection (d) requires the Secretary to comply with applicable 

environmental laws prior to conveyance. 

3 

Sec. 4. Relationship to existing Central Valley project contracts 

Section 4 states that nothing in the Act affects the application 

of reclamation laws to water delivered to CCWD and authorizes the 

modification of existing contracts to comply with the Act. This section further shields the United States from liability related to the 

conveyed property after the date of conveyance. 

Sec. 5. Report 

Section 5 requires the Secretary to submit an explanatory report 

to Congress if the conveyance and assignment of the Contra Costa 

Canal is not completed within one year after the Act’s enactment. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

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

H.R. 6040 would authorize the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), the 

Western Area Power Administration, and the Department of Defense to transfer the Contra Costa Canal, the Rock Slough Fish 

Screen, and the associated federal land and facilities to the Contra 

Costa County Water District located in California. 

Under the Act, BOR would modify the Rock Slough Fish Screen 

to ensure the screen is operating safely before transferring it. 

Using information from BOR, CBO estimates that the federal share 

of the costs to complete that work would be $2 million, subject to 

the availability of appropriated funds. 

Under current law, the federal government collects leasing and 

grazing fees of about $80,000 per year from the property that 

would be transferred under H.R. 6040. Those amounts are recorded 

in the federal budget as offsetting receipts, or reductions in direct 

spending. Under the Act, to compensate the federal government for 

those lost receipts, the district would pay the federal government 

an amount equal to the net present value of 10 years of receipts 

(discounted using the 10-year Treasury rate). CBO estimates that 

the district would pay the federal government $750,000 in the next 

few years and that the net effect on direct spending over the 2019– 

2028 period would be negligible. 

Because enacting H.R. 6040 would affect direct spending, pay-asyou-go procedures apply. Enacting H.R. 6040 would not affect revenues. 

CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 6040 would not significantly 

increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four 

consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2029. 

H.R. 6040 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

On August 29, 2018, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

6040, the Contra Costa Canal Transfer Act, as ordered reported by 

the House Committee on Natural Resources on July 18, 2018. On 

October 23, 2018, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 3001, the 

Contra Costa Canal Transfer Act, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on October 2, 

2018. The three pieces of legislation are similar and CBO’s estimates of their budgetary effects are the same. 

4 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Aurora Swanson. The 

estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, 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. 6040. The Act 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 H.R.6040, as ordered reported. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

H.R. 6040, as ordered 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 Department of the Interior at the 

July 13, 2018, hearing on S. 3001, companion legislation to H.R. 

6040, follows: 

STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY R. PETTY, PH.D., ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR WATER AND SCIENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

THE INTERIOR

Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Cortez Masto and 

members of the Subcommittee, I am Dr. Tim Petty, the Assistant Secretary for Water and Science at the Department 

of the Interior (Department). Thank you for the opportunity to provide the views of the Department on S. 3001, 

the Contra Costa Canal Title Transfer Act. 

S. 3001 directs the Department to offer to transfer and 

convey to the Contra Costa County Water District (District) all right, title, and interest of the United States in 

and to the Contra Costa Canal (Canal) within 180 days of 

enactment of this Act. The Canal, as defined in S. 3001, 

includes the entirety of the Contra Costa Canal Unit of the 

Central Valley Project (CVP), including pipelines, conduits, 

pumping plants, aqueducts, laterals, water storage and 

regulatory facilities, electric substations, related works, 

and improvements and all interests in land associated 

within the unit, not including the Rock Slough fish screen 

facility. The lands under consideration to be transferred 

are currently under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Western Area Power Administration, and 

the Department of Defense. The District has been effectively operating and maintain these facilities. The title 

transfer of the Canal will maintain this arrangement into 

the future. 

5 

The Department recognizes that the District is a longtime CVP contractor, and that even with enactment of S. 

3001, the District would continue to pay their share of 

CVP operations and maintenance and repayment through 

their water service rates. 

If the conveyance has not been completed within 12 

months, Interior is required to submit Congress an explanation and the date by which the conveyance will be completed. 

The Department has an active title transfer program 

and supports transferring certain Reclamation project facilities to non-Federal entities, particularly in cases where 

transfers could create opportunities, not just for those who 

receive title, but for other stakeholders and the public as 

well. Specifically, a streamlined title transfer process for 

uncomplicated transfers creates incentives for non-Federal 

entities to closely engage with Reclamation to complete the 

process and allow for appropriate transfers to take place 

without legislation. This approach is reflected in the Administration’s Title Transfer legislative proposal, transmitted to Congress in February of this year. 

Mr. Chairman, it is important to note that in most cases, 

Reclamation and the entity interested in taking title must 

complete environmental compliance activities and negotiate the terms and conditions of the transfer before pursuing legislation. Reclamation has been working with the 

District closely on this effort and will continue to do so. 

However, this legislation, as currently drafted would authorize the transfer before those steps are completed. 

Instead, we recommend that the conveyance be completed pursuant to a title transfer agreement developed between the Department and the District, in consultation 

with other stakeholders, including the East Bay Regional 

Park District, the City of Antioch and the City of Walnut 

Creek. This will enable Reclamation, the District and the 

other stakeholders to work through the upfront activities 

necessary to complete a title transfer. We have had situations in previous transfers where additional legislation 

was required because the terms and conditions were dictated exclusively in the legislation and there was no flexibility to address unanticipated problems on this matter. 

Further, it is important that the legislation protect the 

financial interests of the taxpayers. While the District has 

completed its repayment obligation for its share of construction costs of the Canal, we need to account for revenues from other contracts, leases and agreements that currently come to the United States, but would transfer to the 

District under this Act. We recommend that the legislation 

acknowledge this requirement. 

We would be pleased to work with the Committee, the 

sponsors and the District on legislative language to reflect 

these necessary modifications. In the meantime, we recommend that Reclamation and the District complete a 

valuation analysis to ensure that the financial interests of 

the United States are protected and that the results be reVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:17 Nov 20, 2018 Jkt 089010 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6969 E:\HR\OC\SR362.XXX SR362
6 

flected in the title transfer agreement that is referenced in 

the legislation. 

Mr. Chairman, Reclamation has been working closely 

with the District on this issue and we look forward to continuing that progress. We believe that if structured properly, the transfer of these facilities will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Canal’s operations by getting control of the lands and facilities into the hands of 

those who best understand the needs of the community. 

With these modifications, the Department is pleased to 

support this legislation. This completes my statement, I 

am happy 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, the Committee notes that no changes in existing law are made by the Act as ordered reported. 

Æ