Should the Bureau of Reclamation be the Lead Agency for Reviewing Permits for New Reservoirs? (H.R. 1654)

What is H.R. 1654?

(Updated November 16, 2018)

This bill would make the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) to act as the lead federal agency for coordinating with 17 western states for issuing permits to construct new water storage projects on land managed by the Depts. of the Interior or Agriculture. When the BOR receives an application for such a project, it’d notify other federal agencies and receive from them a timeline for completing that agency’s responsibilities, environmental review materials, and all relevant project data.

A state in which a qualifying project is being considered would have the option of being a cooperating agency and require state agencies with relevant oversight powers to fulfill the same requirements as federal agencies.

The BOR’s primary responsibilities would be to:

• Serve as the point of contact for applicants, state agencies, Indian tribes, and others regarding qualifying projects;

• Coordinate preparation of unified environmental documentation that will serve as the basis for all federal decisions necessary to authorize the use of federal funds for qualifying projects;

• Coordinate all federal agency reviews necessary for the development and construction of qualifying projects.

The Dept. of the Interior would be authorized to accept and expend funds contributed by a non-federal public entity to expedite the evaluation of a permit after issuing a public notice. Interior must ensure that all final permit decisions are made available to the public, including on the Internet.

Argument in favor

The existing process for granting permits to build reservoirs and other water storage projects leaves applicants dealing with numerous agencies at the federal, state, and local levels. This bill would designate one lead agency that coordinates with other relevant parties, greatly simplifying the process for applicants.

Argument opposed

This bill would impose an ill-conceived review process that’s at odds with existing federal law and could unnecessarily speed up critical environmental reviews. Besides, the bigger obstacle facing water storage projects are related to cost, pricing, and repayment challenges rather than bureaucratic inefficiency.

Impact

Applicants looking to build water storage projects; relevant agencies at the local, state, and federal level especially the Bureau of Reclamation.

Cost of H.R. 1654

The CBO estimates that enacting this bill would cost about $1 million per year.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) introduced this bill to revise a burdensome permitting process involving numerous agencies at all levels of government that has caused extreme delays in the construction of new water projects:

“[This bill] establishes a framework in which federal agencies with permitting responsibilities for the construction of new surface water storage projects must work together, coordinate their schedules, share data and technical materials, and make their findings publicly available. The end result would be fewer delays, more efficient use of taxpayer dollars, and ultimately, more abundant water supplies.”

House Democrats have expressed their opposition to this bill on the grounds that it creates a lack of clarity surrounding existing environmental protections and that its accelerated timelines could reduce, rather than increase, the number of water storage projects built:

“The confusion this bill would cause, coupled with the compressed timeframe it mandates to established the merits of projects, will likely make favorable recommendations for construction projects less probable.”

This legislation passed the House Natural Resources Committee on a 24-16 vote, and has the support of eight Republican cosponsors in the House.

Media:

• Sponsoring Rep. Tom McClintock (R-CA) Press Release
  
• CBO Cost Estimate