service are that the title to the lands must remain unchanged and
either the agricultural produce from the lands or the proceeds of the
sales of such produce must be used directly for charitable purposes.
The intent of the second condition is that such lands could not be
operated for general revenue, but that the sale of produce from such
lands would be permissible if the proceeds of such sales are directly
used for charitable purposes.
 Section 8. (b)-The Act of July 7, 1970 (43 USC 425b) exempts
certain State-owned lands from the acreage limitation. Section 3 of
that Act provides that a State may lease lands for revenue so long as
the lands of each leaseholder comply with the acreage limitation. The
existing law limits such leasing arrangements to a period of 25 years
from the 1970 date of enactment. This section would remove the
25-year limitation upon the States.
 Section 8. (c) -This section provides a blanket exemption from the
acreage limitation of the Federal Reclamation Law for the lands of
the Imperial Irrigation District of California. This district was served
with water by the Boulder Canyon Reclamation project authorized in
1928. The water users received formal assurances from the Secretary
of the Interior in 1933 that the acreage limitation did not apply, and
no effort was made by the Federal Government to impose the acreage
limitation until 1964.
 The Committee believes that the land patterns which have evolved
based upon investments and individual decisions which relied upon
Federal behavior of nearly 40 years duration should not now be over-
turned and that the economic impacts upon the landowners involved
of belated application of the acreage limitation would be inequitable.
The residency requirement, of course, would be removed by the gen-
eral provision of Section 5.
 Section 8. (d)-This section clarifies the congressional intent that
the acreage limitation of Reclamation Law does not apply to projects
constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers unless an Act of
Congress explicitly makes the Reclamation Law applicable to a par-
ticular project.
 Section 8 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 provided that dams
constructed by the Corps of Engineers thereafter "may be utilized
for irrigation purposes", and the Act authorized the Secretary of the
Interior to become involved in such projects "under the provisions of
the Federal Reclamation Laws". The wording of the section is ambig-
uous and has given rise to sweeping controversies concerning the ap-
plication of the Reclamation Law to agricultural lands which are
benefited by dams constructed by the Corps. Subsequent court deci-
sions and sporadic efforts on the parts of successive Secretaries of the
Interior to consumate contracts with various beneficiaries of Corps
projects have served to create a shadow extending to .all agricultural
lands which are involved with Corps projects.
 The intent of Section 8(d) of S. 14 is to make clear that Section 8
of the Flood Control Act of 1944 did not, in and of itself, make the
Reclamation Law applicable to any specific project. The specific legis-
lation dealing with the project in question must be consulted to deter-
mine the applicability of the Reclamation Law. S. 14 sets forth three
criteria for making such a determination and declares that the Recla-
mation Law shall not apply unless: (1) by explicit statutory language