Amendments to the Warren Act

| Home | The District | Drainage | Links | Reference Library | Water Conservation | Water Supply |

AMENDMENTS TO THE WARREN ACT
AND THE FACT FINDER ACT

Revised March 1999
The Family Farm Alliance has been developing legislation to amend the Warren Act, the law governing numerous aspects of water contracting with the Bureau of Reclamation. Amendments would also be proposed to the Fact Finders' Act. The objective of this effort is to present Congress with legislation that accurately reflects the needs of irrigation districts throughout the west.

Westlands Water District is particularly interested in a proposed amendment to the law assuring that surplus water revenues are used to offset operation and maintenance expenses. Revenues derived from Warren Act contracts and the sale of surplus water (e.g. Section 215 water) in which Bureau of Reclamation facilities are utilized, are not applied in a consistent manner by the Secretary of the Interior in accordance with the Warren Act and subsection J of the Factfinder's Act.

This misapplication of revenues is only a recent occurrence. Prior to 1993, the Bureau of Reclamation had applied these revenues to project operation, maintenance and repayment. Since 1993, the revenues have not been applied to the project, but rather have been credited the Reclamation Fund (returned to the

Federal Treasury). Central Valley Project water contractors were not notified of the change in the application of these revenues, but instead were left to discover the modification when the final accounting reports were published several years later. The effect of this policy change has been the shifting of millions of dollars away from the payment of Central Valley Project Operation and Maintenance expense and a further deferral of capital repayment that had occurred prior to 1993.

Applying surplus revenues to the credit of the project is fair and sound practice supportable by law. Further, the law clearly supports application of revenues from the sale of water beyond contractually obligated amounts to the benefit of the project and those responsible for paying for the project.

Clarification of the law would therefore allow for consistent application by the Secretary to assure that revenues from the sale of surplus water are credited equitably to the construction and operation and maintenance charges of the project utilized in the generation of surplus revenues.

Legislation to incorporate this proposal will be forthcoming.


\| Home \| The District \| Drainage \| Links \| Reference Library \| Water Conservation \| Water Supply \|
	AMENDMENTS TO THE WARREN ACT AND THE FACT FINDER ACT
	Revised March 1999 The Family Farm Alliance has been developing legislation to amend the Warren Act, the law governing numerous aspects of water contracting with the Bureau of Reclamation. Amendments would also be proposed to the Fact Finders' Act. The objective of this effort is to present Congress with legislation that accurately reflects the needs of irrigation districts throughout the west. Westlands Water District is particularly interested in a proposed amendment to the law assuring that surplus water revenues are used to offset operation and maintenance expenses. Revenues derived from Warren Act contracts and the sale of surplus water (e.g. Section 215 water) in which Bureau of Reclamation facilities are utilized, are not applied in a consistent manner by the Secretary of the Interior in accordance with the Warren Act and subsection J of the Factfinder's Act. This misapplication of revenues is only a recent occurrence. Prior to 1993, the Bureau of Reclamation had applied these revenues to project operation, maintenance and repayment. Since 1993, the revenues have not been applied to the project, but rather have been credited the Reclamation Fund (returned to the Federal Treasury). Central Valley Project water contractors were not notified of the change in the application of these revenues, but instead were left to discover the modification when the final accounting reports were published several years later. The effect of this policy change has been the shifting of millions of dollars away from the payment of Central Valley Project Operation and Maintenance expense and a further deferral of capital repayment that had occurred prior to 1993. Applying surplus revenues to the credit of the project is fair and sound practice supportable by law. Further, the law clearly supports application of revenues from the sale of water beyond contractually obligated amounts to the benefit of the project and those responsible for paying for the project. Clarification of the law would therefore allow for consistent application by the Secretary to assure that revenues from the sale of surplus water are credited equitably to the construction and operation and maintenance charges of the project utilized in the generation of surplus revenues. Legislation to incorporate this proposal will be forthcoming.