Bureau of Reclamation: FY2016 Appropriations
link to page 1 
Updated March 1, 2016
Bureau of Reclamation: FY2016 Appropriations
Overview
FY2016 Appropriations
Most of the large dams and water diversion structures in the
The President’s budget for FY2016 proposed $1.09 billion
West were built by, or with the assistance of, the Bureau of
for the Bureau of Reclamation, a decrease of $32 million
Reclamation, part of the Department of the Interior.
from the FY2015 enacted level. (This figure included $805
Whereas the Army Corps of Engineers built hundreds of
million for Reclamation’s largest account, Water and
flood control and navigation projects, Reclamation’s
Related Resources.) Final FY2016 enacted appropriations
mission was to develop water supplies, primarily for
from Congress provided $1.26 billion for Reclamation.
irrigation to reclaim arid lands in the West.
The FY2016 President’s budget proposed $1.09 billion
Today, Reclamation manages hundreds of dams and
for the Bureau of Reclamation, a decrease from the
diversion projects, including more than 300 storage
FY2015 enacted level. Final enacted appropriations for
reservoirs in 17 western states. These projects provide
FY2016 provided $1.26 billion for Reclamation.
water to approximately 10 million acres of farmland and
31 million people. Reclamation is the largest wholesale
supplier of water in the 17 western states and the second-
In its budget, the Administration proposed to create new
largest hydroelectric power producer in the nation.
accounts for San Joaquin River restoration and Indian water
Reclamation facilities also provide substantial flood
rights settlements activities, both of which previously were
control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits.
funded in Water and Related Resources. These new
Operations of Reclamation facilities often are controversial,
accounts also were proposed in previous budget cycles but
particularly for their effects on fish and wildlife species and
were rejected by Congress. Activities that would have been
conflicts among competing water users.
funded in the San Joaquin River restoration account
encompass ongoing Reclamation actions under a
Reclamation’s single largest account, Water and Related
congressionally authorized settlement act (P.L. 111-11).
Resources, encompasses the majority of the agency’s
The Administration also requested $112 million in funding
traditional programs and projects, including construction,
for a separate Indian water rights settlements account to
operations and maintenance, dam safety, and ecosystem
fund ongoing expenses associated with four congressionally
restoration, among others. Reclamation also requests funds
authorized Indian water rights settlements: the Aamodt
in a number of smaller accounts, including California Bay-
Settlement, the Crow Settlement, the Navajo-Gallup
Delta Restoration, the Central Valley Project Restoration
Settlement, and the Taos Settlement. The proposed $112
Fund (CVPRF), and Policy and Administration. Figure 1
million for these activities would have been an increase
shows recent appropriations for Reclamation accounts.
from the FY2015 enacted level of $90 million, which was
provided within the Water and Related Resources Account.
Figure 1. Bureau of Reclamation Appropriations,
Although the enacted bill for FY2016 generally agreed with
FY2010-FY2016
the Administration’s proposed funding levels for Indian
(nominal $ in millions)
water rights settlements and San Joaquin River restoration,
Congress again rejected the Administration’s request for
new accounts for these activities.
Earmarks and Reclamation
The Reclamation budget is made up largely of individual
project funding lines and contains relatively few programs.
Recently, these Reclamation projects have been subject to
earmark moratoriums that restrict the addition of funding
for geographically specific project line items that the
Administration did not request. In lieu of these additions,
Congress has included “additional funding” for selected
categories of Reclamation projects (e.g., rural water
projects, water conservation, and drought response) and
directed the bureau to report on project-level allocations of
this funding in an annual work plan. Enacted appropriations
for FY2015 added $97 million to the President’s requested
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service with data
budget for ongoing work in various categories. This
from the Bureau of Reclamation.
funding was allocated at the program and project levels in
Note: CVPRF = Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
the bureau’s FY2015 work plan. In FY2016, Congress
added $166 million for various categories of work, which
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2
Bureau of Reclamation: FY2016 Appropriations
was reported in the Administration’s FY2016 spending plan
would fund new planning and implementation actions under
(available at http://www.usbr.gov/budget/).
existing authorities.
Drought in the West
Enacted appropriations for FY2016 agreed with the
recommendation of $58 million total for the program.
Drought conditions in California and other states
However, they decreased funding for WaterSMART grants
throughout the West have received attention in recent
from $23 million to $20 million and increased funding for
appropriations bills. As of late 2015, more than 88% of the
Title XVI projects from $20 million to $23 million.
state of California was experiencing severe drought, with
nearly 69% experiencing extreme drought and 45%
Figure 2. Reclamation WaterSMART Program,
experiencing exceptional drought—the most severe drought
FY2011-FY2016
classification. Anticipated shortages remain serious enough
(nominal $ in millions)
to potentially warrant ongoing water delivery curtailments
similar to those in recent years.
FY2015 appropriations included multiple drought-related
provisions. For instance, Congress enacted an extension of
Reclamation’s authority under P.L. 102-250, the
Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act, to
FY2017. Congress also provided Reclamation with $50
million in additional funding for “Western Drought
Response” actions. This funding was subsequently
allocated by Reclamation at the project level in its FY2015
work plan.
In its FY2016 request, the Administration did not propose
comparable funding for drought response but instead
requested lesser funding for other programs (such as the
drought response funding for the WaterSMART program,
see below). Enacted appropriations for FY2016 again
included funding for Western Drought Response, adding
$100 million to be allocated at the Administration’s
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service with data
discretion. Project-level allocations were reported in the
from the Bureau of Reclamation.
Administration’s FY2016 spending plan. Enacted
appropriations included additional authority for
Status of the Reclamation Fund
Reclamation to study and incorporate new water storage at
dam safety projects; Congress also included deadlines for
Much of the Bureau of Reclamation’s funding is made
the completion of certain new and ongoing water storage
available from the Reclamation Fund, which originally was
studies in California. These authorities had been proposed
intended as a mechanism to fund western water
previously in comprehensive drought legislation during the
infrastructure. Funding is based on incoming proceeds from
several different sources, including receipts from
114th Congress.
Reclamation project repayment, natural resource royalties
WaterSMART
on public lands, and hydropower revenues. In recent years,
appropriations from the fund (largely for the Water and
In recent years, Reclamation has combined funding for
Related Resources account) have not kept pace with
bureau-wide programs promoting water conservation into a
receipts, and some have proposed increasing appropriations
single program—the WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage
from the fund (either through mandatory or discretionary
America’s Resources for Tomorrow) program. The
funding) in accordance with the original intent of the fund’s
program is part of the Department of the Interior’s focus on
authorizers. Congress could increase appropriations from
water conservation, reuse, and planning, and it is notable
the Reclamation Fund at any time (including in annual
for its departure from Reclamation’s traditional project-
discretionary appropriations or through mandatory
based funding. It includes funding for seven programs,
funding), but these changes typically are subject to
which are shown in Figure 2. Of these seven items, the
congressional budget and scoring rules.
largest are WaterSMART grants and Title XVI projects.
In FY2016, it was expected that receipts accruing to the
In FY2016, the President’s budget requested $58 million
Reclamation Fund would exceed the final appropriated
for the WaterSMART program, an increase of $7.5 million
level by almost $500 million. For more information on the
over the FY2015 enacted level. Most of the increase would
Reclamation Fund, see CRS In Focus IF10042, The
have been for WaterSMART grants, with a proposed
Reclamation Fund, by Charles V. Stern.
funding level that would have increased from $19 million to
$23 million. The FY2016 request also proposed to include
Charles V. Stern, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
$2.5 million for drought response as part of the
WaterSMART program. The Drought Response Program
IF10175
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Bureau of Reclamation: FY2016 Appropriations
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10175 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED
Updated March 1, 2016
Bureau of Reclamation: FY2016 Appropriations
Overview
FY2016 Appropriations
Most of the large dams and water diversion structures in the
The President’s budget for FY2016 proposed $1.09 billion
West were built by, or with the assistance of, the Bureau of
for the Bureau of Reclamation, a decrease of $32 million
Reclamation, part of the Department of the Interior.
from the FY2015 enacted level. (This figure included $805
Whereas the Army Corps of Engineers built hundreds of
million for Reclamation’s largest account, Water and
flood control and navigation projects, Reclamation’s
Related Resources.) Final FY2016 enacted appropriations
mission was to develop water supplies, primarily for
from Congress provided $1.26 billion for Reclamation.
irrigation to reclaim arid lands in the West.
The FY2016 President’s budget proposed $1.09 billion
Today, Reclamation manages hundreds of dams and
for the Bureau of Reclamation, a decrease from the
diversion projects, including more than 300 storage
FY2015 enacted level. Final enacted appropriations for
reservoirs in 17 western states. These projects provide
FY2016 provided $1.26 billion for Reclamation.
water to approximately 10 million acres of farmland and
31 million people. Reclamation is the largest wholesale
supplier of water in the 17 western states and the second-
In its budget, the Administration proposed to create new
largest hydroelectric power producer in the nation.
accounts for San Joaquin River restoration and Indian water
Reclamation facilities also provide substantial flood
rights settlements activities, both of which previously were
control, recreation, and fish and wildlife benefits.
funded in Water and Related Resources. These new
Operations of Reclamation facilities often are controversial,
accounts also were proposed in previous budget cycles but
particularly for their effects on fish and wildlife species and
were rejected by Congress. Activities that would have been
conflicts among competing water users.
funded in the San Joaquin River restoration account
encompass ongoing Reclamation actions under a
Reclamation’s single largest account, Water and Related
congressionally authorized settlement act (P.L. 111-11).
Resources, encompasses the majority of the agency’s
The Administration also requested $112 million in funding
traditional programs and projects, including construction,
for a separate Indian water rights settlements account to
operations and maintenance, dam safety, and ecosystem
fund ongoing expenses associated with four congressionally
restoration, among others. Reclamation also requests funds
authorized Indian water rights settlements: the Aamodt
in a number of smaller accounts, including California Bay-
Settlement, the Crow Settlement, the Navajo-Gallup
Delta Restoration, the Central Valley Project Restoration
Settlement, and the Taos Settlement. The proposed $112
Fund (CVPRF), and Policy and Administration. Figure 1
million for these activities would have been an increase
shows recent appropriations for Reclamation accounts.
from the FY2015 enacted level of $90 million, which was
provided within the Water and Related Resources Account.
Figure 1. Bureau of Reclamation Appropriations,
Although the enacted bill for FY2016 generally agreed with
FY2010-FY2016
the Administration’s proposed funding levels for Indian
(nominal $ in millions)
water rights settlements and San Joaquin River restoration,
Congress again rejected the Administration’s request for
new accounts for these activities.
Earmarks and Reclamation
The Reclamation budget is made up largely of individual
project funding lines and contains relatively few programs.
Recently, these Reclamation projects have been subject to
earmark moratoriums that restrict the addition of funding
for geographically specific project line items that the
Administration did not request. In lieu of these additions,
Congress has included “additional funding” for selected
categories of Reclamation projects (e.g., rural water
projects, water conservation, and drought response) and
directed the bureau to report on project-level allocations of
this funding in an annual work plan. Enacted appropriations
for FY2015 added $97 million to the President’s requested
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service with data
budget for ongoing work in various categories. This
from the Bureau of Reclamation.
funding was allocated at the program and project levels in
Note: CVPRF = Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
the bureau’s FY2015 work plan. In FY2016, Congress
added $166 million for various categories of work, which
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2
Bureau of Reclamation: FY2016 Appropriations
was reported in the Administration’s FY2016 spending plan
would fund new planning and implementation actions under
(available at http://www.usbr.gov/budget/).
existing authorities.
Drought in the West
Enacted appropriations for FY2016 agreed with the
recommendation of $58 million total for the program.
Drought conditions in California and other states
However, they decreased funding for WaterSMART grants
throughout the West have received attention in recent
from $23 million to $20 million and increased funding for
appropriations bills. As of late 2015, more than 88% of the
Title XVI projects from $20 million to $23 million.
state of California was experiencing severe drought, with
nearly 69% experiencing extreme drought and 45%
Figure 2. Reclamation WaterSMART Program,
experiencing exceptional drought—the most severe drought
FY2011-FY2016
classification. Anticipated shortages remain serious enough
(nominal $ in millions)
to potentially warrant ongoing water delivery curtailments
similar to those in recent years.
FY2015 appropriations included multiple drought-related
provisions. For instance, Congress enacted an extension of
Reclamation’s authority under P.L. 102-250, the
Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act, to
FY2017. Congress also provided Reclamation with $50
million in additional funding for “Western Drought
Response” actions. This funding was subsequently
allocated by Reclamation at the project level in its FY2015
work plan.
In its FY2016 request, the Administration did not propose
comparable funding for drought response but instead
requested lesser funding for other programs (such as the
drought response funding for the WaterSMART program,
see below). Enacted appropriations for FY2016 again
included funding for Western Drought Response, adding
$100 million to be allocated at the Administration’s
Source: Prepared by the Congressional Research Service with data
discretion. Project-level allocations were reported in the
from the Bureau of Reclamation.
Administration’s FY2016 spending plan. Enacted
appropriations included additional authority for
Status of the Reclamation Fund
Reclamation to study and incorporate new water storage at
dam safety projects; Congress also included deadlines for
Much of the Bureau of Reclamation’s funding is made
the completion of certain new and ongoing water storage
available from the Reclamation Fund, which originally was
studies in California. These authorities had been proposed
intended as a mechanism to fund western water
previously in comprehensive drought legislation during the
infrastructure. Funding is based on incoming proceeds from
several different sources, including receipts from
114th Congress.
Reclamation project repayment, natural resource royalties
WaterSMART
on public lands, and hydropower revenues. In recent years,
appropriations from the fund (largely for the Water and
In recent years, Reclamation has combined funding for
Related Resources account) have not kept pace with
bureau-wide programs promoting water conservation into a
receipts, and some have proposed increasing appropriations
single program—the WaterSMART (Sustain and Manage
from the fund (either through mandatory or discretionary
America’s Resources for Tomorrow) program. The
funding) in accordance with the original intent of the fund’s
program is part of the Department of the Interior’s focus on
authorizers. Congress could increase appropriations from
water conservation, reuse, and planning, and it is notable
the Reclamation Fund at any time (including in annual
for its departure from Reclamation’s traditional project-
discretionary appropriations or through mandatory
based funding. It includes funding for seven programs,
funding), but these changes typically are subject to
which are shown in Figure 2. Of these seven items, the
congressional budget and scoring rules.
largest are WaterSMART grants and Title XVI projects.
In FY2016, it was expected that receipts accruing to the
In FY2016, the President’s budget requested $58 million
Reclamation Fund would exceed the final appropriated
for the WaterSMART program, an increase of $7.5 million
level by almost $500 million. For more information on the
over the FY2015 enacted level. Most of the increase would
Reclamation Fund, see CRS In Focus IF10042, The
have been for WaterSMART grants, with a proposed
Reclamation Fund, by Charles V. Stern.
funding level that would have increased from $19 million to
$23 million. The FY2016 request also proposed to include
Charles V. Stern, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
$2.5 million for drought response as part of the
WaterSMART program. The Drought Response Program
IF10175
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Bureau of Reclamation: FY2016 Appropriations
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF10175 · VERSION 4 · UPDATED