Should it be Easier to Transfer Certain Federally-Operated Water Projects to Local Control? (H.R. 3281)

What is H.R. 3281?

(Updated April 8, 2019)

This bill would streamline the Dept. of the Interior’s (DOI) process for transferring the ownership of certain eligible reclamation projects (like dams, reservoirs, or canals) to states, a joint action or powers agency, a water users association, or an Indian tribe or tribal utility authority which have the capacity to continue managing the property. The DOI would have to notify Congress of proposed conveyances at least 90 days in advance and could execute the transfer if Congress doesn’t pass a joint resolution of disapproval. Facilities generating hydropower marketed by a power marketing administration wouldn’t be eligible for conveyance, and no conveyance could adversely impact power rates or repayment obligations.

The following criteria would be used to determine whether facilities are eligible for title transfer:

• The transfer will not have an unmitigated significant effect on the environment;

• The qualifying entity intends to use the property for substantially the same purposes the property is being used for at the time DOI evaluates the potential transfer;

• The qualifying entity agrees to provide the U.S. the equivalent of the present value of any repayment obligation or other income stream the U.S. derives from the assets.

DOI would be required to submit a description of actions taken to implement this bill along with a list of conveyances made as part of its annual budget submission to Congress.

Argument in favor

Transferring dams and reservoirs to local operators — be they states, tribes, or local water boards — is a win-win: it promotes non-federal investment in water infrastructure and more efficient management of water resources, while also reducing federal liabilities.

Argument opposed

This bill encourages the irresponsible privatization of valuable federal assets, such as dams and reservoirs, while weakening congressional oversight and limiting public input in the decision-making process. Existing transfer procedures should remain in effect.

Impact

States, tribes, water boards, and power agencies; eligible dams or canals operated by the Bureau of Reclamation; and the DOI.

Cost of H.R. 3281

The CBO estimates that enacting this bill would cost about $1 million over the 2017-2022 period.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-CO) introduced this bill to streamline the process of transferring certain Bureau of Reclamation projects to local water users to incentivize new non-federal investment in water infrastructure and more efficient water management:

“Transferring these low hanging fruit facilities is often a win-win allowing water districts to leverage non-federal financing through ownership equity while also decreasing federal liability. This legislation creates an optional process that can be used to help expedite the transfer of these easy projects through a streamlined administrative process while still maintaining important oversight. Prior title transfers have proven that local water users can do a better job managing something they own than when it is on the federal ledger.”

House Democrats expressed opposition to this bill, writing:

“In sum, H.R. 3281 irresponsibly incentivizes the privatization of public resources, reduces Congressional oversight, limits public input in the federal decision-making process, and fails to protect the interests of numerous stakeholders including American taxpayers, tribes, fishing groups, and environmental and recreational interests. For these reasons, we oppose H.R. 3281 as written.”

This legislation passed the House Natural Resources Committee on a 17-12 vote and has the support of one cosponsor, Rep. Jim Costa (D-CA).

Media:

• House Natural Resources Committee Press Release
  
• Republican Policy Committee
  
• CBO Cost Estimate