55 



And then the inevitable question from the contractors is, "OK, 

 what are the rules of the game here? You have got to tell us what 

 do we have to put in here?" because the usual argument is what 

 constitutes an acceptable plan. 



Mr. POMBO. In the law does it say that you have to accept the 

 plan, that the Bureau has to accept the plan? Or does it say that 

 the district has to come up with a plan? Because it was my under- 

 standing that it — and I may be wrong on this-but it was my under- 

 standing that nowhere in the law does it say that the Bureau has 

 to accept the plan. 



Mr. Beard. Does it state in words that we must then, in turn, 

 approve the plans? I don't see that here right now, but I would like 

 an opportunity to answer for the record if I could. 



Mr. POMBO. I would appreciate that. 



Mr. Beard. Sure. 



Mr, PoMBO. Because what you are saying and what is happening 

 out there doesn't exactly fit with what I understood. I would like 

 to go to Mr. Nelson. I had asked a question before about legislative 

 fix versus an administrative fix, and he requested the opportunity 

 to answer that, and I would like to give you that opportunity. 



Mr. Nelson. Well, actually, it was more to the 800,000 acre feet 

 in the context of legislative versus administrative fix, and I don't 

 think that there is a clearer example in why it is we have to have 

 legislation. I would like to put the 800,000 acre feet into perspec- 

 tive. 



Despite popular belief, the 800,000 acre feet isn't allocated out of 

 8 million acre feet of CVP yield. As a practical matter and as the 

 dust settles on the implementation of CVPIA, there is about 2.2 to 

 2.3 million acre feet of CVP contracts that are on the hook for not 

 only the 800,000 acre feet, but Trinity River and the refuge sup- 

 plies. 



To say that we need flexibility in determining the 800,000 acre 

 feet, frankly, is a great example of why we need legislation. We 

 don't need flexibility. We need definition because right now we 

 don't have even general agreement on the concepts involved in the 

 800,000 acre feet. On the notion of crediting, what can we credit, 

 what it is intended for, what it isn't. 



And essentially we have at limbo out there a significant portion 

 of a large group of water users' water supply, and the uncertainty 

 is unacceptable. And, again, I think that that is a prime example 

 of why it is we need legislative fix as opposed to administrative fix. 



Mr. PoMBO. Thank you. And, Mr. Beard, for the record, I would 

 like you to respond, that bv what specific authority can the Bureau 

 require increased prices for water conservation plans ifor people 

 who have a contract based on their water rate? 



Mr. Beard. Sure. I would be happy to do so. 



Mr. POMBO. Because what you are doing and what you are say- 

 ing is contrary to what I have read, and I am a little bit confused 

 as to how you can do what you are doing or under what authority. 

 So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. DOOLITTLE. OK. Yes. Mr. Miller. 



Mr. Miller. Thank you, Mr, Chairman. Mr. Nelson, the question 

 that I put to Mr. Quinn on the terms and conditions of contract re- 

 newal, could you explain your position? 



