AgdaPkt 2004-04-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� � . ■ � � a i i� �-B ' � w There was some movement on CALFED legislation last session. Senator Feinstein was successful in securing a hearing on the subject. Her Republican colleagues on the committee were more supportive than they ha�•e been in the past, though they continued to express caution about program costs. Assistant Secretary � Raley testified on behalf of the Administration and was generally supportive. Ho�vever, he made clear that in light of current budget deficits, the Administration could not support the 5880 million authorization figure in the Senate bill. Raley also indicated the Administration would support adding recycling and reclamation projects to the CALFED portfolio—a position the PUC has advocated for some time. There has been tittle othe: than internal discussion of CALFED on the House side. 'I'he annual appropriations bill for CALFED appropriated a mere $9 million for the program this year. Optimists point to the continuity of federal funding as a reason to continue to push forward with CALFED. Pessimists point out that this is • little more than life support. Realists tend to think this is further evidence that the CALFED notion is continuing to evolve into a far more limited prograra than was origina(ly envisioned, and that federal funding �vi(l never materialize on anything like the levels set forth in the Record of Decision. Senator Feinstein hopes to move the bill to markup later this spring. The House schedule for consideration of the bill remains unclear. W Enerev Leeislation Late in the session last year the conference report on HR 6, the comprehensive energy legislation, fell two votes short of the number required to bring debate to a close anci to pass the bill into law. The principal obstacles were a liability waiver for producers of MTBE, and the bilPs cost, which exceeded �31 billion. In the wake of the defeat of the conference report the Senate leadership has introduced a slimmed down version of the bill which omits the MTBE liability ' waiver and pares the cost of the bill down to � 14 billion. The future of this bill remains uncertain, but many observers are deeply skeptical of its chances. Nevertheless, we will continue to monitor its progress to ensure that nothing pernicious is attached. Desalination The WRDA legislation, referenced above, evhich was reported by the House TranspoRation andlnfrastructure Committee, contains a provision requested by the PUC, Santa Clara and EBht UD calling for feasibility study on a Bay Area desafination project. It is anticipated that this provision will survi��e and become law with the WRDA bill itself sometime later this year. We are in