WSP09205 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ o 0 'l S 3 ;' . Federal Register/Vol. 64, No, 21O/Monday, November 1. 1999/Rules and Regulations 59005 years. demand for banked water is relatively low because water users in the Lower Division Slales can meet most of their water needs with diversions from the m,linstream within the basic and surplus apportionments for use \,',:i.thtn those States. (2) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for consumers, indiVidual industries, Federal. State, or local government agencies, or geographic regions. This rule facilitates the creation of an additional alternative for water agencies (Q secure water supplies. However, entering inlo Storage and Interstate Release Agreements for the offstream storage of Colorado River water and the release of lCUA provided for in this rule is \Johmt-ar\l. Should the costs of the procedures to facilitate these transactions, provided for in the rule. be greater than the cost of other alternative water supplies, the States would probably select the cheaper allernatives. This rule may create an opporlunity for the total cost of alternative water supplies to decrease, thereby reducing the cost burden on all water users in southern California. Water users in southern Nevada are just now approaching use of the entire 300 kafbasic annual apportionment of Colorado River for use in Nevada. Like California. Nev<lda will also need alternalive water supplies to satisfy the increasing demands of economic development and population growth. The cost of securing alternative supplies will be greater than the cost of obtain,ing Culorado River waler under the State s basic or surplus apportionment. This rule may provide an opportunity for Colorado River water users in Nevada to experience a cost savings in securing additional supplies of Colorado River water. (3) Does not have signifJcant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment. productivilY. innovation. Uf the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises. This rule is facilHating voluntary ...vater transactions that may confer benefJts on a nalional basis in many economic sectors. (i) Voluntary water transactions can promote economic efficiency ~ai~s. These gains accrue to the parties m a given transactiol~ and to the wider regi(lnal and national economy. The gains result due to greater flexibility in how and where wa[er is used. (ii) Voluntary water transactions offer a cost effective way to increase water supplies without constructing new mainstream facilities such as dams. (iil) Voluntary water transactions may stimtJlate investment and development in conservation technology that is currently economically infeaslble given the returns ro water in lIs present use. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 This ru\e does not impose an unfunded mandate on State. local. or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100 million per year. The range of benefits and costs associated with the rule are constrained because the amount of water that can be released under an offstream storage agreement in anyone year is constrained by State law and immediate demand. This ruLe does not have a significant or unique effect on State, local. or tribal governments or the private sector. The rule provides a framework under which authorized entities could vo\untarlly store Co)orado River water ofTstream for future interstate use. The publication of this rule does not authorize specific activities, and will not impose costs on any State. local. or tribal governmenl. or the private sector. A statement (bcnefit- cost analysis) containing the information required by the Unfundcd Mandates Reform Act (2 use, 153 \ et seq.) has been prepared and is summarized below in the section relating to Executive Order 12866. We received comments on the bcnefit- cost analysis [hat were editorial ill nature or asked for clarification or revision of information in the analysis. We accepted approxlmatcly 85 percent of the comments and revised the text or footnotes as necessary to include those changes where requested. The benefit-cost analysis concluded that this rule does not impose significant or unique impact upon small governments (including Indian communities). small entities such as wate!' distrJcts, or individual entitlement holders. Tile rute will not affect the priority of water use on (he Colorado River. Therefore benefits received by water users, regardless of size, associated with the right to divert Colorado River water will remain. Costs of storage and release of unused apportionment water will be borne by authorized entities in the Storing State and the Consuming State who voluntarily enter into storage and release agreements. All Colorado River water users may experience a decrease in water costs since the rule will enable authorized entities in the lower Division Stares to secure additional water supplies. The adoption of 43 CFR parl414 will not result in any unfunded mandate to State. local, or tribal governments in the aggregate, or to the privale seCLor. of $100 million or more in anyone year. Executive Order J 2612. Federalism Assessment In accordance with Executive Order 12612, this rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment. A Federalism Assessment is not required. ThiS rule does not alter the relationship between the Federal Government and the Stares under the Decree nor does it alter the distribution of power and responSibilities among the various levels of government. Executive Order J2630, Takings Implications Analysis )n accordance With Executive Order 12630. this rule does not have significant takings implications.. A takings implication assessment IS not required. This rule does not represent a government action capable of interfering with constitutionally protected property rights. This rule does nOL impose additional fiscal burdens on the publIc and would not result in physical in\'asion or occupancy of private property or substantially affect its value or U$C. This wle would not result in any Federal action that would place a restriction on a use of private property and does not affect a Colorado River water entitlement holder's right to use ils full water entitlement. Under this rule. an authorized entity may store unused Colorado River waler available from an entitlement holder's water rights only if the water right holder does not use or store that water on its own behalf. When the Storing Stale must reduce its diversions to develop ICUA, an entity that reduces its consumptive use of ColoradO River water to develop that unused apportionment will do so voluntarily under an appropriate agreement. Therefore. the Department of the Interior ha.s determlned rhal this rule would not cause a taking of private property or require further discu~sion of takJngs implications under this Executive Order. E-.:ecutive Order 12866. Regulacory Planning and Rel/iew This rule is J signiflcant regulatory action under section 3(t)(4) of Execllliv~ Order 12866 becausc it raises novel legal or policy issues. Executive Order 12866 requires an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3). The Department's benefit-cost analysis determines that this rule does not impose significant or unique impacts upon small governments (including Indian communities). smatl entities such as waler purveyors or associations. or even individual water entitlement holders.