February 2005 Archives

« January 2005 | Main | March 2005 »

Miller says water contracts open to legal challenge

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. George Miller (D-Martinez) warned today that water contracts negotiated by the Bush Administration with California agribusinesses are open to legal challenge if they are finalized in their current form.

“These contracts serve only the interests of wealthy agribusinesses,” said Miller. “They do not serve the interests of urban water users, taxpayers, the environment, or the changing California economy. These contracts are inconsistent with the law, and the Bush administration's explanations don't pass the laugh test.”

Miller referred to a Los Angeles Times article published yesterday that he said included “misleading” and “inconsistent” comments by current and former Bush Administration officials. He said the comments again demonstrated that officials of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency responsible for negotiating the contracts, have a fundamental misunderstanding of the law and their responsibilities as trustees of public resources.

In light of the statements by Reclamation officials, Miller sent a letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton today asking for her to clarify the Bush administration's position on the contracts and the 1992 Central Valley Improvement Act, a law Miller authored.

The text of the letter follows.

***

February 17, 2005

Secretary Gale Norton

US Department of the Interior

1849 C Street, N.W.

Washington, DC

Dear Secretary Norton:

As you know, the Department of the Interior has announced that it will soon finalize more than one hundred long-term contracts for the water provided by the Central Valley Project (CVP) in California. The CVP was developed by the Bureau of Reclamation at public expense; the allocation of this scarce public resource has always been the subject of intense debate and controversy. Recent statements from representatives of Reclamation, unfortunately, suggest that at least some federal officials have a fundamental misunderstanding of federal law and their responsibilities as trustees of this public resource. I am writing to you for additional information because I believe the Bush administration’s position requires immediate clarification.

The Los Angeles Times printed a story yesterday (“Water Pacts Give State's Growers New Profit Stream,” February 16, 2005) in which Reclamation officials offered several explanations for the disturbing terms of the CVP contracts. Not only do these explanations fail to satisfy statutory requirements, they appear to be misleading and internally inconsistent.

For example, Former Assistant Secretary Bennett Raley stated that the contracts’ design was intended to “provide for stability and functioning markets.” The article also attributes to Mr. Raley the argument that current contractors “need long-term control” of the water so that other users (presumably urban areas) can buy “a long-term supply.” Yet that long-term supply could just as easily be delivered directly by Reclamation. Is it Interior Department policy that Reclamation, which reports to the federal taxpayer, should outsource the management of the CVP water supply to current CVP contractors – who collect substantial personal profits from resales?

In addition, Regional Director Kirk Rodgers states that Reclamation is “not contracting for water where there is not a need.” However, contractors throughout California are substantially reducing their use of water for irrigation, and there is evidence that some water districts already use far less water than is provided for by the CVP contracts. The Los Angeles Times article specifically notes that Westlands Water District, for example, has removed thousands of acres of land from production and intends to retire more in the future. Given this, why do the renewal contracts not provide for reductions in water deliveries as land is taken out of production? Please cite exactly where in the CVP contracts the United States reserves the authority to reduce water deliveries on a permanent basis in the event of changing circumstances, including the retirement of acreage under active irrigation. Do the contracts contain explicit provisions – necessitated by the recent legal arguments of some contractors – that contractors have no claim against the United States for damages for such modifications?

Finally, Director Rodgers is quoted as saying “it’s too early” to reevaluate contractors’ needs in drainage-affected areas, though such a reevaluation is possible in the future. As other stakeholders and I have suggested to you and others at Interior, such important course corrections should have been considered during the process of reviewing, negotiating and finalizing these long-term contracts. Please explain what criteria will trigger such a reevaluation in the future, and cite examples in the CVP where the Bureau has successfully amended a contract during its term to reduce quantity, with or without the contractor’s consent.

The Central Valley Project Improvement Act of 1992 made clear that if water contracted for irrigation is no longer used for that purpose, the water should be available for reallocation to other beneficial uses (including environmental and municipal) by the Bureau of Reclamation – not the contractors. I am very concerned by this new evidence that Reclamation officials are not managing this public resource in accordance with the law, and I ask for your immediate attention to the matters raised in this letter, specifically before the pending CVP contracts are approved and signed.

Sincerely,

GEORGE MILLER

Member of Congress

agriculture districtmatters water

Posted by Intern, CA07 at 09:47PM | Comments ()

Leading environmentalist in Congress to address Willamette University conference

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), a member of the Democratic Leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives and a leader on environmental issues in Congress, will visit Salem, Oregon on Friday, February 11 to address a conference on the environment, society and public policy.

Miller is speaking at Willamette University as part of a conference called “Is Nature Calling? New Perspectives on Living with and Working for Nature.” It is the third annual conference at Willamette University on the environment.

Miller is the Chairman of the Democratic Policy Committee, which oversees policy development and strategy for the House Democratic Caucus. He is the former Chairman of the House Resources Committee, and he retains a seat on that committee, which has jurisdiction over national park and forest lands, oil, gas, timber and mining exploration on public lands, the Endangered Species Act, and other major public lands and environmental policy issues.

In recent years, Miller led the charge in Congress for dedicated park and wildlife funding through his legislation, the Conservation and Reinvestment Act. He is also a recognized expert in Congress on western water issues, and wrote the historic 1992 law that reformed water policy in California. He led the Congressional investigation into the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska. And he coauthored the California Desert Protection Act.

college energyandenvironment global warming

Posted by Intern, CA07 at 09:52PM | Comments ()