12 



What this reform action should not do is gut the Central Valley 

 Project Improvement Act. It should make it workable. One way to 

 do that is by bringing stability to contract renewals which have 

 been even more difficult for growers, making it harder for them to 

 plan for future crop production and infrastructure payments. As re- 

 cent experience has taught us, conflict over contract renewals has 

 created a distrust of the government's intention in fairly imple- 

 menting the CVPIA. 



I am most particularly concerned also that we recognize the spe- 

 cial water right status of the Sacramento River water settlement 

 contracts, those with prior riparian rights before Shasta Dam was 

 built. I worked very hard to ensure that their concerns were ad- 

 dressed in the original CVPIA, but those concerns have not been 

 respected by the Federal agencies. Without a doubt, it must be 

 made clear that these contracts do not, and I repeat, do not come 

 under the jurisdiction of this measure. That was never my under- 

 standing during negotiations on the CVPIA, and we need to remove 

 any ambiguity over the intent. 



Mr. Chairman, one area that has not been addressed thus far in 

 the bill is the matter of area of origin. I know you have an interest 

 in this as well, and I look forward to working with you and the 

 subcommittee generally to advance the basic precept. 



As you know, from the time the Federal Grovemment assumed re- 

 sponsibility for constructing the CVP, assurances were repeatedly 

 made to water users in the Sacramento Valley where the vast ma- 

 jority of the CVP water originates. Their needs would not be sac- 

 rificed to the needs of other water users elsewhere. That was the 

 basic precept that everyone understood when the CVP was author- 

 ized. 



On October 12, 1948, for example, the Secretary of the Interior, 

 J.A. Krug, substantiated former statements of Federal policy on the 

 issue of area of origin in a speech in Oroville, California. He said, 

 "Let me state clearly and finally, the Interior Department is fully 

 and completely committed to the policy that no water which is 

 needed in the Sacramento Valley will be sent out of it." 



The purpose of the CVP contemplated the export of only surplus 

 water from the Sacramento Valley. On this point, there is no ques- 

 tion. I hope this committee will not miss an opportunity to confirm 

 this concept that was included in state law and yet only referenced 

 in legislative debate when the CVP became a Federal project dur- 

 ing the Depression. 



And I note that the CVP power users are not on the witness list 

 today, and I think they need to be part of this process. Power users 

 have paid 30 percent, more than their targeted contribution to the 

 restoration fund. In addition, some provisions of the bill before us 

 would reduce costs for water users and shift additional costs to 

 power. These issues are important and need to be addressed, and 

 the power users need to be at the table to help us do that. 



Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. I 

 commend you for holding these hearings and for beginning this 

 process to see the problems with the CVPIA resolved once and for 

 all so that we can go forward in the common knowledge of what 

 this law was intended to do with the sort of balance and, impor- 



