[Senate Hearing 108-758]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 108-758
WATER PROBLEMS ON THE STANDING ROCK SIOUX RESERVATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
OVERSIGHT HEARING TO RECEIVED TESTIMONY ON PROBLEMS THAT HAVE BEEN
EXPERIENCED BY THE STANDING ROCK SIOUX TRIBE AND TRIBES SITUATED ALONG
THE MISSOURI RIVER
__________
NOVEMBER 18, 2004
WASHINGTON, DC
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
97-093 WASHINGTON : 2005
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Vice Chairman
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, KENT CONRAD, North Dakota
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico HARRY REID, Nevada
CRAIG THOMAS, Wyoming DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota
GORDON SMITH, Oregon MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
Paul Moorehead, Majority Staff Director/Chief Counsel
Patricia M. Zell, Minority Staff Director/Chief Counsel
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statements:
Breitzman, Dennis, area manager, Dakotas Area Office, Bureau
of Reclamation............................................. 10
Claymore, Mike, chairman, Economics Committee, Standing Rock
Sioux Tribe................................................ 1
Conrad, Hon. Kent, U.S. Senator from North Dakota............ 7
Dorgan, Hon. Byron L., U.S. Senator from North Dakota........ 5
Ferguson, Ron, director, Division of Sanitation Facilities
Construction, Indian health Services....................... 12
Grisoli, Brig. Gen. William T., commander and division
engineer, Northwestern Division, Army Corps of Engineers... 9
Inouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii, vice
chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs...................... 1
Johnson, Hon. Tim, U.S. Senator from South Dakota............ 4
Murphy, Charles W., chairman, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe...... 1
Olson, M.D., Richard, director, Division of Clinical and
Community Services, Indian Health Services................. 12
Appendix
Prepared statements:
Breitzman, Dennis (with attachment).......................... 69
Frazier, Harold, chairman, Cheyenne River Tribe (with
attachment)................................................ 73
Grisoli, Brig. Gen. William T. (with attachment)............. 25
Murphy, Charles W. (with attachment)......................... 30
Olson, M.D., Richard......................................... 29
WATER PROBLEMS ON THE STANDING ROCK SIOUX RESERVATION
----------
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 2004
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to other business, at 10 a.m.
in room 485, Russell Senate Building, Hon. Daniel K. Inouye
(vice chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Inouye, Johnson, Dorgan, and Conrad.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII,
VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
Senator Inouye. The Committee on Indian Affairs meets today
to receive testimony on a series of problems that have been
experienced by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, as well as other
tribes whose reservations are situated along the Missouri
River.
In order to effectively address these problems, it will
require the coordinated efforts of several Federal agencies. So
that we may better understand the nature of the problems and
the impact they have had on the lives of the members of the
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, I would like to call upon our first
witness today, Charles Murphy, chairman of the Standing Rock
Sioux Tribe. Chairman Murphy will be accompanied by Mike
Claymore, Tribal Councilman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
Council.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES W. MURPHY, CHAIRMAN, STANDING ROCK SIOUX
TRIBE, ACCOMPANIED BY MIKE CLAYMORE, CHAIRMAN, ECONOMICS
COMMITTEE, STANDING ROCK SIOUX TRIBE; MR. PERRY, ATTORNEY; AND
JIM GLAZE,
ATTORNEY
Mr. Murphy. Senator, thank you very much. First of all, we
want to congratulate you for the election that happened a few
days ago. But first of all, we want to thank you from the
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, because there are 18,000 enrolled
members, and they send their regards up here because you're the
Senator that helps the tribes, the Standing Rock also. We
appreciate that.
Also here to my left, Senator, I have Mr. Claymore, who is
the chairman of the Economics Committee. I have two of our
attorneys here, Mr. Perry and Jim Glaze.
Back in 1997, Senator, you visited our reservation. There
are some pictures here that I would like to show you. We had
water around the reservation here, such as this, when you flew
in there. We were talking about the erosion at that time. You
were there, we looked at the taken area, which was 1620, it was
eroding the highway and so forth. The Corps came in there and
did some dike work.
Now today, Senator, it is very serious. We don't have the
water to provide for our people. One year ago today, or 1 year
ago, it will be 2 weeks, 5 days before Thanksgiving, we had
approximately 10,000 people without water. These were Indian
and non-Indian people within our reservation of 2.3 million
acres.
Senator we are also scared that if it freezes, what we
could have is like a delta. What's going to happen is that it
will not go right into the intake. What's happening, Senator,
is that we have people today that are scared because they don't
know if they're going to have drinking water the next day. The
two largest districts in our reservation will be without water
if the water should shut off today.
Senator, we also had a number of people, at the time we had
lost our water, we had to send people to Bismarck, ND, which is
about 60 miles away, that were on dialysis. Those people did
not have transportation. We helped them with transportation, we
helped them with their rooms up in Bismarck. The tribe did all
this. BOR did not help, Corps of Engineers did not help, IHS
didn't help, the BIA didn't help. We footed the whole bill,
Senator.
Senator, also we had tried to keep the IHS hospital open.
They didn't even have water, they couldn't even buy a bottle of
water for those people that were coming into the hospital. We
had to provide that water for them. We had to buy porta-potties
for all those districts that were out of water.
Also, we were scared that our sewer systems were going to
freeze up also. Mr. Claymore will tell you a little bit more
than I will get back on another part, Senator.
Senator Inouye. Mr. Claymore.
Mr. Claymore. Thank you.
I am very humbled and privileged to speak in front of the
Senate committee today. Senator, we have a major problem out
there with the management of the Missouri River. Drought
conditions have changed the river's status. Lake Oahe is to me
no longer a lake, it's back to the Missouri River situation,
which is very scary for us as a people, because we don't know
what channel or where that water line is going to go, where the
river is going to channel next.
We have the communities of Cannonball, Fort Yates, and
Porcupine on the North Dakota side. If things would have all
been as planned the Bureau of Reclamation would have had
completed the projects in the future and every community in
Standing Rock will be dependent upon this water source. That's
a very scary thing, because with all our communities depending
on the rural water system, if it goes down there are going to
be a lot more people affected.
I do have to say that it's not just our issue, it's a
region issue. The State of North Dakota, the State of South
Dakota are facing the same issues. They continue to have
communities that have intake issues and they're spending
millions of dollars to address these issues within their own
system, within their own grounds. Because there's no way that
anybody can say that this river is not going to be lower.
There's no way to say that the lake is going to come up, rising
levels.
Back in 1948 or so, I wasn't alive, but I can tell you, my
grandma will tell you that the people of Standing Rock thought
there would never be a water shortage. They couldn't even
imagine how that water would disappear. And today we are in
that situation to know whether or not we can have a water
shortage, and we do.
Go ahead, Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Murphy. Senator, also we have people yet today that are
filling up their bathtubs every night, our elderly people
filling up their bathtubs every evening because they don't know
if they are going to run out of water the next morning, because
we don't have a way of knowing if the water is going to be shut
off or whatever. At the time it happened, it just happened, it
happened that Sunday night 5 days before Thanksgiving. We had
people coming home, school kids coming back from college and so
forth, our kids were without water. People without water.
The other thing was that we had people going around, we had
an elderly man with a 55-gallon drum driving from house to
house helping people. He was telling them that this water is
only to be flushed with, we had those types of people. People
were working together, we had come together. We had the
Senators from North Dakota and the representatives calling
people to donate water to us. We had that done, too, Senator.
It's very sad right now that we don't know if we're going to
have water next week or not.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Murphy appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Mr. Chairman, do we know what the cause of
the shortage is?
Mr. Murphy. Senator, I think they're holding water
upstream, they're letting too much water downstream. What we
were told is that for them to keep those barges moving in the
State of Missouri they had to have more water down there so
they could move those barges up and down the river.
They are not worried about human consumption, but they are
worried about some barges, three or four barges that they have
to move up and down in the Kansas City area, and they're not
worried about the people that are running out of water. Right
now, we have another community, another Indian reservation,
which you might know, Senator Conrad and Senator Dorgan also,
and the representative from North Dakota also mentioned that
Parshall, ND, the Indian reservation up there has no water. I
mean, they have water now, but they run out of water because of
the low water tables, too.
Senator Inouye. In your prepared testimony, you speak of
the construction of an inland reservoir at Fort Yates. Do you
have any estimate as to the construction costs?
Mr. Murphy. The estimate was about $30 million, Senator.
What we're going to have to do is we're going to have to go
further south to put that inlet in, where the main channel will
provide that water, where it's more narrow and so forth.
But right now, Senator, our inlet is right about in here.
It's probably about four-tenths of a mile out, maybe, or three-
tenths of a mile out. The inlet right here, Senator, this is
Fort Yates here and the inlet is right here. What's happening
is, what we're scared of is that this thing is going to change
here, then we're going to have to change it clear out to here
to chase that water.
The siltation, we had engineers out of the Minnesota area
come out and tell us how the siltation is moving. That doesn't
look very good, either.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much.
Senator Johnson.
STATEMENT OF HON. TIM JOHNSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Vice Chairman Inouye, for
holding this hearing, and thank you also for all you have done
for our great plains tribes and the people of North and South
Dakota.
I understand that this is your last hearing as official
leadership of the Committee on Indian Affairs, and I want you
to know that your leadership will be missed. But knowing your
passion for the issues, I'm confident that you will continue to
provide important leadership for Indian country. I thank you
for your great service.
I also congratulate my colleague, Senator Dorgan from North
Dakota, on the leadership role that he is going to begin to
play on this committee.
I want to welcome Chairman Murphy, Councilman Mike Claymore
and other witnesses to the hearing. I also want to thank the
representatives from Minnesosi and Chairman Frazier of the
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe for being here today. I'm glad that
we have an opportunity to specifically address the water
problem at Fort Yates. I share the concerns of my North Dakota
colleagues regarding the issue.
I'd like to take just 1 moment to address a similar problem
we are facing farther south along the Missouri River. It's
probable that in the fall of 2005 the Cheyenne River Sioux
Tribe could be experiencing similar acute water shortages now
facing the Indian tribes and communities of North Dakota. The
consequences, however, could be even more pronounced,
negatively impacting 17 communities and 14,000 people.
The latest Corps of Engineers 2005 spring runoff forecast
is predicted to be only 16.52 million acre feet compared to a
normal spring runoff of 25 million acre feet. If the Missouri
River reservoirs were not already at record low storage levels,
such a paltry runoff forecast would not be a dangerous omen for
2005. However, the Missouri River reservoir system contains a
total of only 37 million acre feet of water, a full 3 million
acre feet less than the total reservoir impoundment in the fall
of 2003.
The cumulative impact of successive drought years has left
these giant reservoirs 21 million acre feet below average, a
record. So I implore the Federal Government to take a serious
look at the failures at Parshall, ND, Fort Yates, ND, and this
potential crisis that would affect the Cheyenne River Sioux
Tribe in South Dakota.
We need to look at a preventative fix rather than just
focusing on the crisis of the moment. One can only imagine the
outcry if the same number of people in large urban areas of
America lost their water for 10 days. This is a situation we
would not tolerate in major cities and cannot allow to happen
again anywhere in the country, whether here in Washington, DC
or in Fort Yates, ND or White Horse, SD.
It's particularly disconcerting given the treaties that
bind the Federal Government's responsibilities to our tribes in
North and South Dakota. The particular water needs in North
Dakota that is being described so ably by the chairman here
today involves the municipal, rural and industrial water system
that is operated pursuant to the Garrison Diversion
Reformulation Act of 1986, and the Dakota Water Resources Act
of 2000. Under the Dakota Water Resources Act, the Department
of the Interior is mandated to construct, operate, and maintain
an MR&I water supply system for the Standing Rock Sioux
Reservation. Legal title to the water system is held by the
Bureau of Reclamation.
To have this failure at this point and not to have a
permanent fix underway is a cause of great concern. We need to
end the crisis mentality and approach this from a permanent fix
mind set. I am confident that this committee can play a key
role in helping us to do that for both our friends in North and
South Dakota.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much.
Senator Dorgan.
STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH
DAKOTA
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much.
First of all, we appreciate your holding this hearing. I
appreciate Chairman Murphy and Mr. Claymore, thank you for
being here and thanks for your statements.
This is a vexing problem, difficult, wrenching for the
people who are affected. We are talking today about the
Standing Rock Reservation and the citizens of Fort Yates and
the surrounding area. But this also affects Parshall, Fort
Yates, ND, and Wakpala, SD, this is a significant issue. When
the water was lost over Thanksgiving, the folks in Fort Yates
canceled their Thanksgiving plans, they spent all their time
trying to figure out how to get safe water for their families
to drink.
Let me commend the chairman and the tribal council for the
extraordinary work you did during a real crisis. Losing water
is a real crisis. I have previously said to Dennis Breitzman,
who we will hear testify in a few minutes, that the folks who
work at the Bureau, they just picked up and over the whole
Thanksgiving period they were down there working to try to put
in a temporary line. And we owe them a debt of gratitude for
the work they did. They worked through the holiday, day and
night, and put in that line.
But I was down there 2 weeks ago. Mr. Chairman, I think you
have this sheet, three graphs or three slides, rather, from the
end. You will see where the old intake was, you will see where
the new intake is. As of 2 weeks ago, it is quite clear, that
they are going to be out of water, even the new intake is not
going to provide water for those people.
So the question is, what is going to happen here? How is
this going to be resolved? Because this river is shrinking and
drying up. When you stand on the bank where the old intake used
to be and just look out, this is a puddle. This river has
become a puddle right at Fort Yates where the intake is. And I
am convinced that these folks are going to lose water again.
Now, there are a lot of reasons for all of this. Probably
the most important is that we've had less snow pack and less
water in the entire reservoir system. But that is not the only
reason. I regret to say that the Corps of Engineers has been
extraordinarily hard headed on the issues of dealing with the
water in the entire Missouri River system. The upper reaches of
that system have been systematically cheated in the manner in
which that river has been managed. I use that word fully
understanding what it means. We have been systematically
cheated for a long period of time.
As you can see from these slides, we are going to need to
find water to assure municipal water supply, not just for Fort
Yates, especially for Fort Yates, however, and we need to do so
quickly. That is why I am pleased that we have the Corps here
to testify.
Let me also say that the tribe spent a great deal of money,
of its own money, trying to respond to this crisis. Some of
those resources, $2.8 million, my colleague and I asked
Commissioner Keyes to reprogram some money so we got some money
back to the Tribe to recompense them for that expenditure. But
they are still out a lot of money as a result of this crisis.
We also need to work with the Bureau and the Corps to try to
respond to that.
But let me conclude by saying this. Senator Conrad and
Congressman Pomeroy and I have been fighting this battle for a
long, long while. And it is one of the most frustrating fights
that we have had. As all of you know, the water policies are
very controversial. How the reservoir systems and the river,
the Missouri River, are managed, is critical for a whole range
of issues, for the minnow of a barge industry, the whale of the
recreation, tourism, and fishing industry up north, and yes, it
is a minnow to a whale and yet we manage the river for the
benefit of the minnow.
It is just enormously frustrating for us. Somehow, some
way, we need to resolve it. I do not intend to be partisan at
all, but let me observe that this fight that we've had,
especially dealing with the State of Missouri, is a fight that
has not resulted in a fair use of water in this river system
when we are short of water. And at least one part of that is
because the President, campaigning in Missouri, said, I am with
you on this water fight. So did the Vice President.
As a result, we have been systematically blocked here in
Congress in resolving this issue. That's not partisanship, that
is just the fact. My hope is that the President, the Congress,
Republicans, and Democrats, and all of us, can understand that
when you run out of water, that is a human crisis. We need
finally to resolve and address this issue.
My colleagues, Senator Johnson and Senator Daschle, have
worked enormously hard on this. I have worked with my
colleagues Senator Conrad and Congressman Pomeroy. All of us
are determined to fight this to the end so that we get a result
that is fair to everybody who lives on that river.
Mr. Chairman, I am sorry I took as much time as I did. But
I think this is a critically important issue.
Senator Inouye. Senator Conrad.
STATEMENT OF HON. KENT CONRAD, U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Conrad. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before I address the issue at hand, I want to thank you,
Senator Inouye, for your long leadership of this committee. I
must say, I'm in my 18th year here. There is no better Senator
than Senator Inouye. Your compassion and your courage and your
really exceptional leadership of this committee is deeply
appreciated. I don't know of anybody that made the
extraordinary effort that you have made to go all over this
country to understand better the needs of Native people.
Your record and your legacy will be written in the record
books of the U.S. Senate and in the history books of this
country. You will have a very proud position.
I also want to thank you very much for holding this
hearing, as perhaps your last act as the vice chairman of this
committee before you go to become the Ranking Member of the
very powerful Commerce Committee. I know you will still be here
as our member, but you will be passing the leadership torch to
my colleague, Senator Dorgan. Again, I just want to say how
deeply we appreciate the quality of your leadership.
I want to extend a welcome to Chairman Murphy and
Councilman Mike Claymore from Standing Rock. I regret I was not
here, I was doing the C-SPAN broadcast this morning. All of us
are asked to do that from time to time, as you know, Members of
Congress, so that people around the country can ask questions
of us. And of course, the debt limit of the United States was
extended yesterday, so I was asked in my role on the Budget
Committee to visit with people around the country this morning.
Imagine if you can, what would happen if you got up in the
morning and turned on the spigot and nothing comes out. You
think of how disruptive it is just to not have hot water. Think
of what it's like to have no water. That's what happened to the
people in the communities of Fort Yates, Cannonball, and
Porcupine just days before Thanksgiving last year.
This is the sign that greeted people that came to the
hospital. This is the headline from our newspaper: Without
Water. Schools, clinics, tribal offices, and hospital closed.
This is the sign that was at the hospital, at the hospital:
Hospital is closed, no water. That's a disaster. That is an
absolute disaster.
The Standing Rock Tribe relies on an intake along the Oahe
Reservoir to supply drinking water to their communities. The
Oahe Reservoir now is down 32 feet, 32 feet. What's the reason?
Well, obviously the biggest single reason is drought, a lack of
water. That's the fundamental reason.
But mankind has contributed to the problem by the
mismanagement of the reservoir. This reservoir is being managed
under rules that were written 50 years ago. The world has
changed. The running of the reservoirs up and down the river
system in this part of the country has not changed.
This is all overwhelmingly managed for the benefit of the
barge industry downstream. Because when they started this
process they thought the barge industry was going to be a much
more dominant economic player. That proved to be wrong. Things
changed. Transportation systems changed. The management of the
reservoirs has not changed.
I believe this dire situation at Fort Yates underscores the
strong need for change in the management of the Missouri River.
We can't afford this any longer. People's lives are at risk
without water. What could be more clear?
The dramatic drain of Lake Oahe has created a river that is
constantly shifting and changing course. Therefore, I believe
the Corps has a responsibility to help fix it. I am concerned,
as I know the tribe is, about whether they will lose water
again. We can't afford to wait until another disaster strikes
before taking action.
I want to particularly commend the tribe, especially
Chairman Murphy and the Bureau of Reclamation, for their quick
response to this crisis. They worked around the clock and
through the Thanksgiving holidays, overcoming tremendous odds,
not to mention freezing conditions, to restore service.
Again, Senator Inouye, our very distinguished vice
chairman, thank you so much for holding this hearing. It's just
critical that we find a way to resolve this crisis.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, I wanted to ask just one
question, just to have something on the record from the
chairman and the councilman. The Missouri is one of the great
rivers in America. I was told when I was there 2 weeks ago, I
believe by you, Chairman Murphy, that there is a spot north of
Fort Yates where you can walk across the Missouri River and not
get your hips wet.
Mr. Murphy. Right.
Senator Dorgan. Can you describe that?
Mr. Murphy. Sure, Senator. It's north of Fort Yates about 4
miles. They call it Battle Creek Bay. And there is a place
where you can actually walk across and get on the other side of
the river, it's probably no wider than from here to you.
And what we're scared of there, Senator, is that if that
should freeze up in that area, what's going to happen? That's
where that delta is going to happen, then the water will not
flow into our intake. We're lucky right now that the weather
has been holding up to like 60 degrees back home. Very unusual
for this time of year, when it's supposed to be about 30
degrees.
Senator Dorgan. Again, this is one of the great rivers in
America. And the chairman describes a location, I have not seen
it, but I was in the area 2 weeks ago, just south of there. An
area of 15, 20 feet wide where it is sufficiently shallow so
that you can easily walk across it.
Mr. Claymore. Senator, may I? At the time that Lewis and
Clark came through there, they didn't even drop their boat in
there because it was so sandy there that they couldn't even
make it up, they had to clear to Bismarck to drop their boat
in. They took it out at Mobridge and went around the whole
reservation to get the boat up north.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much.
Chairman Murphy, I thank you. I can assure you that under
the leadership of these gentlemen, something will be done.
Thank you.
Mr. Claymore. Thank you, Senator, and thank you, Senator
Johnson, Senator Dorgan, and Senator Conrad. Thank you very
much.
Senator Inouye. Our next panel consists of the commander of
the Northwest Division of the Army Corps of Engineers,
Brigadier General William T. Grisoli; the area manager of the
Dakotas Area Office, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the
Interior, Dennis Breitzman; the director of the Division of
Clinical and Community Services, Indian Health Service,
Department of Health and Human Services, Richard Olson,
accompanied by Ronald Ferguson, director of the Division of
Sanitation Facilities Construction.
I now call upon General Grisoli. Welcome, sir.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM T. GRISOLI, BRIGADIER GENERAL, COMMANDER
AND DIVISION ENGINEER, NORTHWESTERN DIVISION, ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS
Mr. Grisoli. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
committee. My name is William T. Grisoli and I am the commander
and the division engineer of the Northwestern Division of the
Army Corps of Engineers.
I am pleased to be here today to testify on the matter of
water supply issues at the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
Reservation and on the Corps' role and efforts on managing the
Missouri River mainstem reservoir system in this time of severe
drought throughout the basin.
As you know, the Missouri River basin is currently in its
fifth consecutive year of drought. Since 2000, below normal
snow pack, rainfall, and runoff have resulted in record low
reservoir levels behind the three large upper dams. Fort Peck
is currently drawn down over 34 feet, Garrison over 24 feet,
and Oahe over 32 feet. All congressionally authorized purposes
for which the system was built are presently being impacted,
except of course for flood control.
We recognize that the continuing drought conditions have
resulted in hardships for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and
other tribes and to many of the other water users in the
Missouri River basin. The drought has impacted water intakes
all along the river, including intakes that serve the Standing
Rock Sioux Tribe at Fort Yates, ND. Additionally, the drought
has caused problems related to noxious weed control, boating
and reservoir access, exposure of cultural resources and
increased fire threat.
Last fall I testified before this committee about the
Corps' efforts to improve the management of the Missouri River
system during the times of extended drought and discussed the
involvement and consideration of basin tribes in that process.
I listened to the committee and I listened to the tribes'
concern over the past management and actions in operating the
mainstem project. Since then, we have improved our ability to
serve the basin and I am pleased to provide you an update on
our actions from last year.
In March 2004, we issued a revised Missouri River master
water control manual, the guide used by the Corps to regulate
the six dams on the mainstem of the Missouri River. This
signing culminated a 14-year effort of analyzing numerous
alternatives and effects on important economic uses and
environmental resources in the basin. The revised master manual
includes more stringent drought conservation measures and
provides greater reliability and predictability.
In addition, in April of this year, the Corps co-signed a
programatic agreement under the National Historic Preservation
Act, along with 16 Indian tribes, State and tribal historic
preservation officers, the National Trust for Historic
Preservation and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
We are committed to work collaboratively to preserve cultural
resources that are exposed due to the drought conditions and
reservoir fluctuations, and to operate and manage the system in
compliance with the NHPA.
The Corps also continues to work with Federal agencies and
with State, local and tribal governments to mitigate the short
term effects of the ongoing drought. When the Fort Yates raw
water intake failed in November 2003, the Corps assisted Bureau
of Reclamation by managing water releases and operations during
intake construction activities and providing equipment and
technical assistance during the emergency. We also granted
emergency permits to place fill material in the Oahe reservoir
in conjunction with the construction of access roads and the
placement of water supply intake lines.
Over the past year we have proactively continued to provide
technical assistance to the Bureau at their request by making
design recommendations, providing surveys of the problem areas
and evaluating contingency plans and technical reports. The
Corps has also assisted other communities throughout the basin
with water supply and other problems triggered by the drought,
including Parshall, ND.
In closing, we recognize that the continuing drought
conditions have resulted in hardships for the Standing Rock and
other tribes along the basin, as well as other water users in
the Missouri River basin. The Corps remains committed to
working with our Missouri River basin partners to mitigate
those impacts to the extent possible, meet our responsibilities
to federally recognized tribes, serve the congressionally
authorized project purposes, balance the competing needs of the
basin and comply with environmental laws.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here today and I look
forward to listening to the other testimony and to other ideas
on how the Corps may improve their service to the public and to
the Missouri River basin.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. I would be happy
to answer any questions you or any other members have.
[Prepared statement of General Grisoli appears in
appendix.]
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much, General.
May I now call on Mr. Breitzman.
STATEMENT OF DENNIS BREITZMAN, AREA MANAGER, DAKOTAS AREA
OFFICE, BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
Mr. Breitzman. Good morning, Senator.
I'm Dennis Breitzman, I'm Reclamation's area manager for
the Dakotas Area Office. I'm located in Bismarck, ND. I'd like
to summarize the written testimony I submitted on Wednesday.
Senator Inouye. Without objection, the full statement will
be made part of the record.
Mr. Breitzman. Reclamation has worked with the Standing
Rock Sioux Tribe for almost 20 years on the development and
operation of a rural water system to distribute water to about
16,000 residents throughout the reservation. The tribe has
prepared a final engineering report, which is the tribe's plan
for completing construction of the reservation-wide system.
We have also been working with the tribe to construct a
water supply system to deliver Missouri River water for the
irrigation of 2,380 acres of crop land. These projects are
being designed and built, and in the case of the rural water
system, operated and maintained by the tribe through contracts
with Reclamation under Public Law 93-638.
Reclamation's work over the past year on the Standing Rock
reservation focused on water supply intakes from the Missouri
River. These include the Fort Yates intake, the Wakpala intake,
and the Cannonball irrigation intake. The Fort Yates and
Cannonball intakes are located on the Missouri River at the
upper end of Lake Oahe, and the Wakpala intake is located in
Lake Oahe near the mouth of the Grand River.
Fort Yates' raw water intake is an integral part of the
Standing Rock rural water system, transmitting river water to
the treatment plant located in Fort Yates. It is the primary
source of drinking water for a population of over 3,400,
including the communities of Fort Yates, Cannonball and
Porcupine, as well as Prairie Knights Casino and Lodge.
On November 24, 2003, low water conditions and shifting
water sediment combined to disable the Fort Yates intake.
Normally this intake is safely submerged in 30 to 40 feet of
reservoir water. With the continuing drought in the Missouri
River watershed, the intake is now in a river channel in a
delta at the upper end of Lake Oahe. Without a water supply,
the tribe closed schools, hospitals and tribal offices. Working
day and night in severe weather conditions, Reclamation and
tribal crews, assisted by State agencies, restored water flow
by the afternoon of November 26 by using temporary pumps and
above-ground piping assembled across the mud flats of the river
channel.
In consultation with the Environmental Protection Agency, a
precautionary boil water advisory went out and remained in
effect until December 2. This allowed for flushing of the
distribution system and water quality sampling in the system.
Reclamation secured supplementation operation and maintenance
funding from within the agency to cover the immediate costs of
restoring the water supply.
In December 2003, work focused on making the temporary pump
system more reliable during the freezing water conditions. This
included construction of an access road and installation of a
pipeline below the frost line. The Army Corps of Engineers
coordinated releases and operation of the reservoir during the
construction activities. And by March 2004, a new interim
intake sump structure with a submersible pump assembly was
operational. That pump remains operational today.
Concerned about the continuously changing river conditions,
the tribe requested that Reclamation prepare backup water
supply plans. Reclamation is working with the Standing Rock
rural water office on finalizing emergency response plans to
address potential problems caused by low water levels. If the
intake fails or the river channel shifts and the water supply
is cut off, a backup pumping plan has been developed. Recent
field exercises held just the week before last proved that we
can restore water supply to the treatment plant well before all
system storage is fully depleted. This plan will hopefully
avoid future interruptions.
Reclamation and the tribe are also planning a groundwater
well to provide a backup water supply independent of the river.
This groundwater source would only serve as an emergency backup
water supply, because of poor water quality and limited
quantity. This backup water source should also be completed
before the end of the calendar year.
The Wakpala intake on the reservation also has been
affected by low water levels in Lake Oahe. The Wakpala intake
provides water for a population of about 1,600 people,
including the community of Wakpala and the Grand River Casino.
The Lake Oahe water forecast for the spring of 2004 indicated
the Wakpala intake would likely become inoperable in the summer
of 2004. Lowering the intake screen was a short term solution
enabling the tribe to maintain a water supply throughout the
summer.
Concerned about continuing reservoir decline, the tribe
secured funding, including $200,000 from Reclamation, to
construct a replacement intake that will be approximately 9
feet lower than the existing intake. This new intake should be
completed this fall.
Finally, to address potential intake problems in the event
of long term low water conditions for both the Fort Yates and
Wakpala service areas, Reclamation and the tribe are actively
investigating a horizontal well system near Fort Yates. The
Cannonball intake, constructed to provide a water supply to
irrigate about 800 acres of crop land near the community of
Cannonball, has also been impacted by low water levels. This
area is upstream of Fort Yates and the receding water levels in
Lake Oahe left this intake high and dry during the 2004
irrigation season. The tribe used project funds to install a
portable pump to provide a temporary water supply during this
period.
That concludes my comments, Senator. I thank you.
[Prepared statement of Mr. Breitzman appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. Mr. Breitzman, I thank you, sir.
May I now recognize Mr. Olson.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD OLSON, M.D., DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF
CLINICAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICES, INDIAN HEALTH SERVICES,
ACCOMPANIED BY RON FERGUSON, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF SANITATION
FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION,
INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE
Mr. Olson. Good morning, I'm Dr. Rick Olson. I'm the
director of the Division of Clinical and Community Services for
IHS at our Rockville office. I'm accompanied by Ron Ferguson,
who is the director of the Division of Sanitation Facilities
Construction at IHS headquarters.
We're here today to discuss the impact of the failure of
the Fort Yates municipal water system on our IHS hospital
located in Fort Yates, ND. Because the water system failed so
quickly, local officials were unable to provide advanced
warning to the public, and since then, as we have just heard,
the Bureau of Reclamation has made certain improvements to the
water intake system. In addition, the IHS has successfully
drilled and installed a well on IHS hospital property grounds
that could keep our boilers and furnaces in operation and
provide water to bathroom facilities. However, this water is
not of sufficient quantity or quality that would be suitable
for medical use or human consumption.
I would like to provide to the committee background on the
events of last year that left the Standing Rock community
without water, and particularly its impact on our health care
facility and our ability to provide health care services to the
Standing Rock tribal community. Late on Sunday night, on
November 23, service unit staff were informed that there were
problems with the water system and that the water lines were
losing pressure.
Quickly, steps were taken to deal with issues of patient
safety at the Fort Yates hospital. Fortunately at that time
there were no inpatients at the hospital. This is a low acuity
hospital with around three to five patients normally. Also,
since it was late at night, there were no emergency patients in
the emergency department. So without potable running water, we
made the decision to send the inpatient nursing staff home and
then the service unit leadership met with the tribal ambulance
officials and advised emergency medical technicians to take
patients to Bismarck rather than bring them to the IHS
facility.
Dialysis services, as we have heard already, had to be
closed. Dialysis requires a large amount of very pure water in
order to be provided. The emergency room staff was then sent
home and the hospital was essentially closed other than the
maintenance staff, who were kept there to keep the boilers and
furnaces up and running. The furnaces were kept running by
hauling water from a private well 4 to 5 miles away from the
hospital.
The next morning, on Monday, November 24, after conferring
with the tribe, the decision was made to keep the hospital
closed. Public statements on radio stations were used to inform
the public of the water supply problem, the closure of the
hospital and advising them where to seek medical services.
Arrangements were made to transport dialysis patients into
Bismarck. Medical staff from the Fort Yates hospital were sent
down to the McLaughlin, SD Indian Health Service clinic, which
is located about 25 miles south of Fort Yates, to assist in
seeing outpatients at that clinic, because it was anticipated
that we'd see more patients down there because of the closure
of the hospital.
By Wednesday, we were able to open up a general walk-in
clinic at the Fort Yates hospital, but had limited services and
restrooms were functional because of the use of hauled water to
them. The Fort Yates Indian hospital returned to full operation
the following week, the first week in December, after running
water was restored by the tribe and the Bureau of Reclamation
and the water was determined to be safe by the Environmental
Protection Agency.
That concludes my remarks, and I would be happy to answer
any questions.
[Prepared statement of Dr. Olson appears in appendix.]
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much, Dr. Olson.
Because of the nature of the problem being discussed in
this hearing, I would like to begin the questioning with the
members of the delegation from North Dakota, Senator Dorgan.
Senator Dorgan. Senator Inouye, thank you very much.
First, let me ask Brigadier General Grisoli about the
priorities with respect to the use of water in the Missouri
River system. In managing the dams and reservoirs along the
mainstem of the Missouri River, the question is how does the
Corps determine which water uses have the greatest priority?
For example, under the current management plan, does the Corps
consider the availability of drinking water to be the top
priority in terms of water use?
Mr. Grisoli. Senator, we look at all the congressionally
authorized purposes, and we try to balance the requirements
between those purposes that we've been given, plus comply with
the environmental laws and meet our treaty and trust
responsibilities.
Senator Dorgan. But as you assess the congressional
mandates, tell me where does drinking water fit in? Is drinking
water in your assessment of these mandates a higher or lower
priority than other uses?
Mr. Grisoli. We always look at, obviously, life and limb
and those types of things as the highest priority when we look
at our balancing. Drinking water, to make sure it's available,
and we feel that the revised current master manual provides the
availability. It is very difficult, as you know, when it's a
river versus a reservoir, to draw water out of that. We
recognize that.
Senator Dorgan. I am trying to get to something more
specific. As you evaluate the management of the river under the
current congressional mandate, is the assured supply of safe
drinking water for citizens who receive that water from the
river a higher priority than other priorities, or is it simply
equivalent to others?
Mr. Grisoli. All the purposes, except for flood control, we
look at trying to balance those.
Senator Dorgan. Including safe drinking water?
Mr. Grisoli. We provide adequate water supplies as it goes
by, and it is all calculated as we move water through the
system to ensure it is there and available.
Senator Dorgan. But the issue of whether someone has a
water supply would not be necessarily balanced against whether
someone else for 12 consecutive months had an opportunity to
take water for irrigation, would it? I understand what you are
saying, that there is a management plan, and I am trying to ask
with respect to the specifics of how you get to that, the
management of the mandate that comes from Congress with respect
to the assured supply of water for human consumption. I assume
when you talk about that that has to be the highest use.
Is that not right?
Mr. Grisoli. It always has to be available.
Senator Dorgan. So availability of water for human
consumption is the highest use?
Mr. Grisoli. Which is, Senator, we need to balance all of
them. We have several authorized purposes. That is one of the
ones, just like all the others, that has to be available.
Navigation has to be available. Recreation, flood control, they
have to be available to the users.
Senator Dorgan. Let me ask it in a different way. What if,
in order to make available sufficient water available for
navigation in the downstream reaches of a relatively small
navigation industry, less than $10 million a year, what if in
order to make that water available, you understood and knew
that it was jeopardizing the availability of water for human
consumption upstream? What then would be the response of the
Corps of Engineers?
Mr. Grisoli. I think that, Senator, when you look at that,
we've incorporated in our plan, a revised plan, stringent
drought conservation measures to ensure that when you got to a
certain level in the reservoirs. For example, we've raised the
preclude to navigation to 31 from 21. That's 10 million acre
feet. Therefore, we recognize the need to have that water
supply. You have to have a basic amount of water in the system
for those types of things you're saying.
So when you get down to a certain amount of water, you need
to draw the line, and we've drawn that line. We were able to
raise that and add more stringent capabilities above and beyond
the preclude. So if we continue to go down, we stop navigation,
we stop some congressionally authorized purposes. And we've
coordinated that on serving that purpose. So you do have that
water supply, that continues.
What we've tried to do in this new revised manual is cause
any sort of drought to mitigate those impacts and reduce the
drawdown. Unfortunately we are right in the middle of a
drought. So when we started this plan, it wasn't in the
beginning, which would cause us to come down a lot slower,
we're in the middle of it. That was all recognized and
considered within the plan itself.
Senator Dorgan. Is there roughly 37 or 38 million acre feet
in the system at this point?
Mr. Grisoli. Senator, I believe there's approximately 35.8.
Senator Dorgan. So close to 36 million acre feet in the
system at this point, and we're in the middle of a drought, is
that correct?
Mr. Grisoli. Yes.
Senator Dorgan. And you drew the line at 31 million acre
feet?
Mr. Grisoli. Thirty-one.
Senator Dorgan. Why would you draw the line at 31 million
acre feet if we're in the middle of a drought with 36 million
acre feet in the reservoir system?
Mr. Grisoli. Senator, as you know, that has been a
challenge for over 14 years, as far as where that preclude line
should be. Modeling was done, public discussions were done all
up and down the basin to determine a 31.
I would offer that when I came on board and I spoke to both
of you gentlemen about the different issues on the Missouri
River basin, back in 1999, seven out of the eight States
offered up a modified conservation plan that said 31 preclude
is about the right answer. So one of the areas that I took on
and wanted to provide for the basin was a 31 preclude. So we
were able to get that 31 preclude.
Senator Dorgan. And the one State that did not agree with
that was Missouri, as I understand, is that correct?
Mr. Grisoli. That's correct.
Senator Dorgan. And the 31 at that point was 5 years ago.
Since that time, of course, we have had even greater protracted
drought. The reason I am asking this question is that I
understood you to say there is a drought, I understood you to
say that you drew a line at 31 million acre feet to respond to
a drought, and because in a drought we now have 36 million acre
feet in the system, the 31 million acre feet line that you have
described as something that would relate to drought measures is
largely irrelevant with respect to your day to day activities,
is that not correct?
Mr. Grisoli. Senator, I would not say that it's not
relevant, in the fact that we're still able to provide water.
The difficulty and the risk is higher, I agree. But the water
is still available and passing by at this particular point. But
it's more of a challenge to obtain, yes.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Grisoli, I have laid eyes on this spot
at Fort Yates where they have the intake just 2 weeks ago. I
must say to you that when we talk about water, this mighty
river is fast becoming a puddle where we're trying to get water
for human consumption. I was heartened somewhat by Mr.
Breitzman's description of the alternative, so that you might,
when this line, not if but when this line plugs up or when this
line does not have availability of water to deliver that you
are going to have, in the storage system, sufficient time to go
to this alternative.
But the fact is, we have a full scale drought in my
judgment, a drought emergency. We asked Mr. Breitzman's
organization to come in and work through the Thanksgiving
period and cobble up some way to get some water out of part of
this river. But with respect to the management of the river, I
recognize there is less water in the system, therefore there
are problems.
But I also believe that the Corps of Engineers has created
a circumstance where you describe a drought and then describe a
remedy for responding to the drought that will never be
employed. Of what value is a remedy that will never be
employed? Thirty-one million acre feet, as you know, is not
going to reguire you to do anything, because we are at 36
million in a drought. Senator Burns and I have put in an
appropriations bill a 40-million acre trigger which is much
more realistic. We are in a drought. We ought to be employing
triggers immediately, especially for the highest priority,
which is water for human consumption.
This is a debate that will go on longer than this hearing,
General. I respect the work of the Corps, but I profoundly
disagree with what the Corps is doing and has done and likely
will do unless we continue to light as big a fire as is
possible under the Corps of Engineers to respond to the
management of the river in the right way. In my judgment, the
management of the river must understand that the first and most
important priority is to make certain that we don't have people
cutoff from an adequate supply of water. As Senator Conrad's
chart illustrates, when you show up at a hospital and see a
sign that says, no water, we are talking about a human crisis
here.
So I appreciate your coming to the hearing, but the 31
million acre feet trigger means nothing to me, and it means
nothing to the Fort Yates area, nothing to Parshall, nothing to
Wakpala, nothing to anybody upstream that I think has been
cheated by the management of the river, General. You and I
will, I was just reelected, and I am not boasting about that, I
am just observing, I am probably going to be here for a while,
and you are going to be around for a little while. So you and I
are just at this point a fuse and a match.
So we will try to get closer together and see if we can
find a way to explode this 31 number so that we have some
realistic way of managing the river to deal with this issue of
human consumption.
I have taken more time than I intended. But if I might make
one final point. Mr. Breitzman, again, and Mr. Olson, and all
the others who are unnamed at this hearing, thanks for the work
that you have done. We still have significant reimbursement
issues. I am going to submit questions to Mr. Keyes and to you,
Mr. Breitzman, in the hope that on these reimbursement issues
to the tribes that we will get some better answers.
Thanks for the cooperation so far. Thanks to your men and
women for the work they have done. General, thank you for being
here, but let's hope that we can find a way to begin creating
solutions for these issues, and that this never happens again.
Thank you very much.
Senator Inouye. Senator Conrad.
Senator Conrad. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Grisoli, if I could, first of all, let me say, I think
you are an excellent person. I think you are here, I think
you've been sent here to represent a policy that really doesn't
hold up much under the light of day. You and I have had intense
discussions previously about this, you know we have very strong
feelings. This does not reflect on you personally, let me start
with that.
What was the reservoir level in the early 1990's when we
had the previous dramatic drought?
Mr. Grisoli. Could I check on that point before I answer
that question? I think it was around 40.
In the drought of the 1980's and early 1990's, it was about
41 million acre feet.
Senator Conrad. 41 million. Now we're at 36 million.
Mr. Grisoli. Yes, Senator.
Senator Conrad. How much was the navigation season reduced
in that earlier period when the reservoir levels were higher?
Mr. Grisoli. I'd like to come back officially on the record
on that. But I know that they were reduced significantly.
Senator Conrad. Five weeks.
Mr. Grisoli. But it wasn't part of the master manual plan
at that particular time.
Senator Conrad. Well, let me just, would it surprise you to
know that the navigation season was reduced by 5 weeks?
Mr. Grisoli. That's approximately what I've heard.
Senator Conrad. How much was the navigation season reduced
this last year?
Mr. Grisoli. This has been reduced 47 days.
Senator Conrad. The previous year?
Mr. Grisoli. Reduced 13 days.
Senator Conrad. Reduced 13 days. And how about the year
before that?
Mr. Grisoli. I'd have to ask someone.
Senator Conrad. Seven days?
Mr. Grisoli. I'd have to come back on the record, Senator,
on that.
Senator Conrad. I'd like to get that. The point here is
very simple. We've got less water in the reservoir now than we
had in the late 1980's and early 1990's. And yet you reduced
the navigation season far more then than now. And it just, it
so profoundly angers people that this reservoir is being
managed for a barge industry that generates less than $10
million a year of economic activity and part of the result is
people are left without water.
Now, let me just--and I'm not talking about, the sign there
says it all, without water, hospital is closed, no water. So
we've got to get serious here about dealing with this
situation.
Let's talk about what's to come. Based on your projections
for next year, what's the Corps' forecast on the level of Lake
Oahe?
Mr. Grisoli. The level of Lake Oahe? I'll have that in 1
minute, Senator.
If I may offer one comment, reference the analogy of what
happened last year and what happened this year, as you saw,
there is a big difference. If we had not changed the master
manual from last year, it would have only been 17 days this
year. But because we revised it, it was 47 days.
Senator Conrad. And that is a step in the right direction.
Absolutely. The problem is, we're in the midst of this
horrendous problem.
Mr. Grisoli. Right.
Senator Conrad. But let me, I really want to get to where
we're headed. I think that's critically important. Can you give
us what the forecast is?
Mr. Grisoli. The challenge, Senator, is it would rise
slightly in the spring, about a foot. Then it depends on the
runoff and what we think the runoff would be, et cetera., as
far as what it's going to end up around this time of the year,
which is the worst time of the year, obviously, after the
runoff is gone. It really does depend on, do we have 16.8
million acre feet runoff or do we have 25 million acre feet
runoff on what it's going to be.
Senator Conrad. And do you have a forecast?
Mr. Grisoli. If we have a medium flow, it will be about 5
feet higher. If we have a low flow, we think it's going to be
somewhere between the medium and the low, it's not going to be
high, it will be 10 to 12 feet lower.
Senator Conrad. Well, that's what I was afraid of. What
would the impacts of that level be on the water and irrigation
intakes at Standing Rock?
Mr. Grisoli. Well, at Standing Rock, Senator, it's hard to
determine what I think is the real problem, which is, it's on a
river. There will still be adequate water passing through, but
it's the ability to draw that water. Because it's a river and
it's dynamic. So as we work these fixes and we work with the
Bureau of Reclamation, it will be very key, just like in
Bismarck, we have to draw out of the river. There's no
reservoir there. We have to have a good system that we fall
back on that can handle a river.
Senator Conrad. Well, let's get to that question, because
that really is the question.
What action steps have you taken to prepare for that
projected water level to prevent their being a water
interruption again?
Mr. Grisoli. We continue to work with, I think the key is
the Federal agencies work together with the State and tribe. I
think that's number one. And we communicate.
Number two is that we offer and we pay attention to the
water levels, the possibility of the shift, which is the
greatest worry of the tribe. Obviously the next one is the
icing issue. Work with the Bureau of Rec on any permits they
might need, and equipment and engineering advice.
It's a team effort, really.
Senator Conrad. Okay. Well, let's talk to the whole team.
Mr. Breitzman and General Grisoli, can you assure this
committee that you are prepared to take the steps necessary to
prevent an interruption of the water supply again?
Mr. Breitzman. Senator, we share the concerns mentioned by
the General. I think the concern we have is a shift in the
channel near Fort Yates, or ice-up conditions.
Senator Conrad. I know the concerns. That's not my
question. My question is very clear and very specific.
Mr. Breitzman. I understand.
Senator Conrad. Can you assure this committee that you are
prepared to take the steps necessary, whatever the conditions
are, to prevent an interruption of water again? That's the
question. And that's what I'm going to insist on an answer to.
Mr. Breitzman. Senator, as I mentioned, we've worked with
the tribe on an emergency response plan in the case of low
water conditions worse than we had last year. And we've done
two things. We have purchased the pipe and the pumping material
on the trailer. We've put an agreement together with the
Garrison Conservancy District to assist us to place that piping
and pump if need be. We exercised that the week before last. We
were very successful. We actually had water running to the
treatment plant in less than 1 hour.
In addition to that, we are working with the tribe to drill
a groundwater well, which would be independent of the river.
And the bids closed on that well drilling, I believe it was
this Monday, sir. And we're hopeful that will provide an
adequate quantity of water for an emergency situation only.
It's not great water quality, but we're putting a chlorination
system in. It will be hooked up to the treatment plant and yes,
sir, we believe that we can't think of anything else to do. We
think that will address any situation we will encounter this
coming water year.
Senator Conrad. So, and let me ask General Grisoli, do you
believe that you are prepared to meet any eventuality to assure
that there is not a break in water supply?
Mr. Grisoli. Senator, the Corps is committed to all these
basin cities and tribes along the river to do everything within
our authorization to assist.
Senator Conrad. Wait 1 minute. That's not my question. I'm
not asking about every--I'm asking a very specific question
here.
Mr. Grisoli. At Fort Yates, we are prepared and we are very
well tied into Chairman Murphy and into the Bureau of
Reclamation to fill our role and to help and do everything we
can.
Senator Conrad. Okay, but that's not the answer to my
question. I want to know from you and from Mr. Breitzman
whether you are testifying to this committee that you are
prepared to prevent any breakdown in the delivery of water to
the tribe. That's the question.
Have you taken the steps necessary to assure this committee
there is not going to be an interruption in the water supply to
the people of that tribe?
Mr. Grisoli. I believe we have taken the steps necessary
within our authority to try to make sure there is no
interruption. We have got our folks watching very closely to
support the efforts of the Bureau of Reclamation. It's very
hard when your support, it's very hard to say it won't happen,
because I rely on a team.
Senator Conrad. Well, let's ask Mr. Breitzman.
Mr. Grisoli. We are prepared to do whatever necessary.
Senator Conrad. Okay. I'm taking you at your word, and I
trust you. I think you are honest. I disagree very much with
the position of the Corps on the management of this reservoir.
I trust you personally. I think you're an honorable person and
I'm taking your word.
Mr. Breitzman, I feel the same way about you. I've dealt
with you for many years. You're an honorable person. I
appreciate the extraordinary work that you did last time there
was an interruption.
But it's important for us to know, have all steps necessary
been taken to assure there is not an interruption again in the
water supply?
Mr. Breitzman. Senator, without repeating, I think the
steps we've taken, we believe we've taken the only steps we
know to take to assure a water supply this winter. I can speak
for myself and my staff, we're confident we can bring water to
Fort Yates this winter.
Now, to qualify that statement, there is still a need to
address the long term intake issue at Fort Yates. That is being
addressed by the tribe in their final engineering report.
Because of the emergency we encountered last year, I think that
the intake options that the tribe is examining have changed. I
mentioned earlier in my comments that they're looking at, and
we're working with them looking at a horizontal well system
which won't be as dependent on the flows in the river. That's
an option.
Senator Conrad. What's the cost of that option?
Mr. Breitzman. The only cost I've seen, and it's a rough
estimate by the tribe's consultants, that's around $30 million.
Senator Conrad. $30 million?
Mr. Breitzman. Yes, sir.
Senator Conrad. What would be the source of that funding?
Mr. Breitzman. That would be, I believe it would be Dakota
Water Resources Act. That would be a portion of the ceiling of
that Act allocated to the Fort Yates water system.
Senator Conrad. And do you recall what the ceiling is that
was allocated to them?
Mr. Breitzman. $80 million, sir, for Standing Rock.
Senator Conrad. So $30 million of the $80 million would go
just for that purpose?
Mr. Breitzman. That would be for a well system and for a
new treatment plant. That would replace both the Fort Yates and
Wakpala intakes.
Senator Conrad. That is really sobering. I must say that
$30 million estimate, that's stunning to me.
Mr. Breitzman. Yes.
Senator Conrad. That is truly stunning.
I have other questions, Mr. Chairman, but I don't want to
prevail on your patience any further. I do have questions I
would like to submit to the record with respect to Bureau of
Reclamation reimbursement of the tribe, some $400,000 to
provide meal services to those individuals repairing the
intake. Has that been reimbursed to the tribe?
Mr. Breitzman. Senator, I'm not sure about that specific
cost. We have reimbursed some costs to the tribes, and in some
cases I've been advised we don't have the authority to
reimburse some costs.
Senator Conrad. I'd like, and very specifically, I'll
submit this question for the record, and if you could respond
in writing as to whether or not they have been reimbursed, and
if not, why not. I would also like to submit to the Corps in
writing questions about the legal obligation to the tribe, what
I think is an irrefutable right to water in the basin, under
the Winters doctrine and the priority that is given within the
plan to the tribe. I think very clearly the commitment is
there. I want to find out if the Corps shares that view. Maybe
you could just tell me, General Grisoli, if you do share that
view under the Winters doctrine, that the tribe is assured
right to water.
Mr. Grisoli. We recognize the reserve water rights,
Senator, yes.
Senator Conrad. Where in the priority list does that fall?
Mr. Grisoli. It's equal to the things we have to do. We
look at, as I had mentioned, we have congressionally authorized
purposes, we have to comply with ESA and we always look at
meeting our trust and treaty responsibilities.
Senator Conrad. Let me just say to you, when I hear you say
this, it reminds me of what my grandmother used to say to me.
She said, Kent, if everything is a priority, nothing's a
priority. When I hear you say everything is equal, I don't see
it that way. I don't see floating a barge as equal to the right
of a tribe to have water for consumption that's necessary to
preserve human life. I don't see how that's equal.
Mr. Grisoli. Senator, let me clarify the point about when
the water, if the water is quantified and ratified by Congress,
and there is a certain amount of million acre feet, obviously
that will be fulfilled directly. As it stands right now, that
has not been done. We try to meet the trust and treaty
responsibilities by providing access to water.
Senator Conrad. Well, I'm not going to go further. I would
just say to you, this is a very serious obligation. The Federal
Government has made promises. We've entered into treaties.
Those treaties have been ratified by Supreme Court
determinations. It's just as clear as a bell to me that we've
got that obligation and that responsibility.
I thank the Chair.
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much.
I have a few questions, if I may ask. General, is there
anything you would have done differently to avoid the problems
experienced last November and December, if you had to do it
again?
Mr. Grisoli. Senator, I'm glad you asked that question. I
will tell you that across the board, I think the team didn't
anticipate well enough the issues along the reserve. I will
tell you that this year, that's a little different. We've been
more proactive, Federal agencies trying to work with State and
tribe.
Last year, it wasn't that way. We were anticipating some
problems, but I don't think it was proactive. I think that's a
fair statement to say across the board to everyone. You see the
changing of the reservoir system and yet, I'm not sure if we
were as proactive as we should be.
Senator Inouye. In the statement of Chairman Murphy, he
spoke of an inland reservoir, or a manmade lake, costing about
$30 million. Is there any construction plan for this project,
or is it just an item of discussion?
Mr. Grisoli. At this time, Senator, I have no information
as far as it being a particular plan or study. That's just an
initial idea or concept.
But I believe also, I offer that the Bureau of Reclamation
would be authorized to work that project. It wouldn't be a
Corps project. But I could be wrong.
Senator Inouye. Mr. Breitzman, is that or feasible idea? Is
it practical?
Mr. Breitzman. Senator, I also don't know. I must admit
this morning is the first time I've heard of the inland
reservoir proposal. We'd have to look into that.
Senator Inouye. General and Mr. Breitzman, can you sit down
with Chairman Murphy and his council and see if something can
be done? As a member of the committee, I would like to see
that. And if it is feasible and practical, I am on the
Appropriations Committee, so maybe we can do something about
it.
Mr. Breitzman. We will do that, Senator.
Mr. Grisoli. We will do that, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Inouye. I realize that a problem of this nature
cannot be fully and guaranteed controlled, because after all,
there is such a thing as nature and the Good Lord. He has His
own ideas.
But I would just like to note that when our troops entered
Baghdad, the people there received us with cheers and with
huzzahs, they tore down the statute of Saddam Hussein, there
was much joy and merriment in that city. But we noted that
within 1 week, these same faces became faces of anger. And in
our hearings, we noted that there were many causes for this.
One of the major causes was that we did not have plans to
repair the damaged water systems and the damaged sewer systems.
We had the finest troops in the world, but they were war
fighters.
They were not water system repairers and sewer system
repairers.
And the Indians here, I think, have been very patient all
these years, because they know that you're trying your best. So
I hope that you will try a little harder. Let us come up with
this plan, if it is feasible, if it is practical, maybe that is
the solution.
But I think it might cost more than $30 million. But we
will see.
But before I adjourn the hearing, I would like to indicate
that the record of this hearing will be kept open for 2 weeks.
For all the witnesses, if you wish to supplement your testimony
or clarify your testimony, please feel free to do so.
This will be my last meeting in which I will be presiding
as vice chairman. I will continue to serve as a member of the
committee, but I will be taking over another leadership role on
the Commerce Committee.
Before I do, I would like to just note a few things. When I
became a member of this committee 26 years ago, there were only
5 members. It was a select committee, it was not an important
committee. Today there are 15 members. And I am happy to say
that my colleagues in the Senate now seek membership on this
committee.
Second, we have been given much praise and credit for what
we have done. It is true that this committee has considered
more legislation and passed more bills than any other committee
in the Senate. It is hard to believe that, but this has been a
very busy committee. But it would not have been done were it
not for the staff, and I would like the record to show these
are the staff people.
The Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel, Paul
Moorehead. The following are the counsel to Chairman Campbell;
David Mullon, John Tahsuda, Perry Riggs, Rhonda Harjo, and Jim
Hall. Professional Staff Member, Lee Frazier.
The Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel is Patricia
Zell. The following are the counsel to the Vice Chairman; Janet
Erickson, Carl Christensen, Diana Kupchella, and Colin Kippen.
The Chief Clerk of the Committee, Marilyn Bruce; Computer
Systems Administrator, Dawson Ford; Office Manager, Tana
Towney; Receptionist, Sarah Fluhart; and Printing Officer, John
Mogavero.
I cite these names because there will be a major change in
the leadership of this committee.
Chairman Campbell will now go into the private sector, and
I will be on another committee. So many of these staff members
may not be back with us, but I wanted to thank them for all the
work they have done with us. I hope that the succeeding staff
will continue the work that we have established over the years.
I am sorry to have taken up this time, but General, Mr.
Breitzman, Mr. Olson, I thank you very much for your testimony.
We look forward to a report coming in from what you have
concluded.
One final question, Mr. Olson. Mr. Murphy said that as a
result of this recent drought, you incurred an extra cost of
$300,000, is that correct?
Mr. Olson. The information I have is that most of that
relates to lost services. We had staff that had to be put on
administrative leave and of course be paid, and services were
not provided to tribal members during that period of time. So
that was not extra expenses that the Indian Health Service had
to pay, except for overtime for maintenance staff and some
additional contract health dollars and some lost revenue. But
the bulk of it had to do with staff that was not able to
provide services to the tribal members.
Senator Inouye. Have you applied for compensation for this
loss?
Mr. Olson. Sir?
Senator Inouye. Have you applied for reimbursement for this
loss?
Mr.Olson. Not that I'm aware of.
Senator Inouye. Why do you not?
Mr. Olson. Yes, sir.
Senator Inouye. Once again, I thank you very much. And the
hearing stands at recess.
[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
=======================================================================
Prepared Statement of William T. Grisoli, Brigadier General, Commander
and Division Engineer, Northwestern Division, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Brigadier General
William T. Grisoli and I am Commander of the Northwestern Division of
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [Corps]. I am pleased to be here today
to discuss our roles, responsibilities, and efforts on managing the
Missouri River Mainstem Reservoir System and on the matter of water
supply issues at the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Reservation.
The Missouri River basin is currently in its fifth consecutive year
of drought. Since 2000, below normal mountain snowpack, rainfall and
runoff have resulted in record low reservoir levels behind the large
upper three dams: Fort Peck is currently drawn down over 34 feet;
Garrison, over 24 feet; and, Oahe over 32 feet. Currently, all
Congressionally authorized purposes for which the System was built are
being negatively impacted except for flood control. We recognize that
the continuing drought conditions have resulted in hardships for the
Standing Rock Sioux, other tribes, and to many of the water users in
the Missouri River Basin.
The drought has negatively affected many river and reservoir water
intakes including the water intake that serves the Standing Rock Sioux
Tribe at Fort Yates, ND. Lower pool levels at the upper three
reservoirs have also caused problems related to noxious weed control,
boating and reservoir access, exposure of cultural resources and
increased fire threat.
The System is comprised of six dam and reservoir projects
authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935 and the Flood Control
Act of 1944 to operate as an integrated system providing for flood
control, navigation, irrigation, hydropower, water supply, water
quality, recreation, and fish and wildlife. On this river system, the
Corps of Engineers follows the Missouri River Master Water Control
Manual [Master Manual], which guides how we regulate the flow of water
at the six dams on the mainstem of the Missouri River: Fort Peck,
Garrison, Oahe, Big Bend, Fort Randall, and Gavins Point. First
developed in 1960, the Master Manual was first revised in 1975 and
1979, to make changes in flood control regulation criteria.
With input from affected interests and other agencies, the Corps
formulates and publishes Annual Operating Plans, which inform the
public of expected operations over the coming year. The Draft Annual
Operating Plan for 2005, which presents our planned regulation of the
Mainstem System under a wide range of water supply conditions, was
recently released for public review. Seven public meetings were held
throughout the basin in October to review the Draft, take comments and
answer questions regarding the plan. The details of the plan were also
presented at the Mni Sose Intertribal Water Rights Coalition meeting in
late September. After taking into consideration comments received on
the Draft, we expect to release the Final Annual Operating Plan in
December.
It was 1 year ago I testified to this committee regarding our
efforts to improve our management of the System during times of ongoing
and extended drought. I discussed the involvement and consideration of
tribes in this process. I listened to the committees' and tribes'
concerns over our management and actions in operating the Mainstem
projects. Since that time, we've improved our ability to serve the
Basin, and I am pleased to provide you with an update of our actions
since that prior testimony.
On March 19, 2004, I signed a Record of Decision and issued a
revised Master Manual that includes stronger drought conservation
measures. This culminated a 14-year effort that included an analysis of
alternatives and their effects on the economic uses and environmental
resources in the basin. Our efforts involved extensive coordination
with stakeholders, public input, workshops and hearings across the
basin. We also consulted with the Missouri River Basin Tribes, and
included tribal workshops, and meetings with tribal chairmen and tribal
members. We received comments from tribes, States, and others on the
alternatives. The revision increases reliability and predictability for
the Basin. The revised Water Control Plan meets our Tribal Trust and
Treaty responsibilities, complies with Federal law and achieves a
balance among the interests on the river.
We are committed to working collaboratively to preserve cultural
resources that are exposed due to the drought conditions and reservoir
fluctuations. In April 2004, we co-signed a programmatic agreement with
the 16 American Indian Tribes, two Tribal Historic Preservation
Officers, four State Historic Preservation Officers, the National Trust
for Historic Preservation, the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation and other parties, that commits to the operation and
management of the Missouri River Mainstem System in compliance with the
National Historic Preservation Act. The Omaha District is now spending
approximately $3 million dollars a year for cultural resources. In
fiscal year 2004, we worked on projects to protect four high priority
cultural sites, and we have plans to protect three additional sites in
2005. We will continue to seek additional opportunities to preserve
cultural resources along the Missouri River.
We continue to work with the Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the U.S. Geological
Survey, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, American Indian Tribes,
and State and local governments to address the effects of the current
drought. We are taking actions to help relieve the drought's effects,
including its effects on the water supply of the Standing Rock Sioux.
When the Fort Yates raw water intake failed in November 2003, we
assisted the Bureau of Reclamation by managing water releases and
operations during intake construction activities, and providing
equipment and technical assistance during the emergency. We also
granted emergency authorization pursuant to section 10 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act and Section 404 of the Clean Water Act to place fill
material into Oahe reservoir in conjunction with the construction of
access roads and the placement of a water supply intake line. Over the
past year we have proactively continued to provide technical assistance
to the Bureau of Reclamation at their request, including making design
recommendations, providing surveys of the problem area, and evaluating
contingency plans and technical reports.
Further, the Corps has assisted other communities with water supply
problems brought on by the drought. In anticipation of required
regulatory permits associated with drought-related challenges to water
supply intakes in Fort Yates and Mandan, ND and Wakpala, SD, the Corps
coordinated with appropriate Federal and local agencies. In September
2004, we awarded a contract to extend and lower the municipal water
intake for Parshall, ND using our authority under Public Law 84-99 to
supply municipal water in emergency drought situations.
The Corps has also spent more than $2 million over the past 2 years
extending and relocating boat ramps on the upper three reservoirs. The
Corps has also expanded its efforts to control noxious weeds at the
upper three projects, which now involve expenditures of approximately
$500,000 per year.
The impacts of the current drought are not only being felt around
the upper three System reservoirs. Water intakes for municipal and
industrial water supply, including thermal powerplants, on the lower
Missouri River Basin below the System from Yankton, SD to St. Louis,
MO, have been negatively impacted in the river reach. Several intake
owners have had to modify their facilities to deal with the lower river
flows caused by the drought. More specifically, three intakes in the
Kansas City vicinity owned by the Kansas Board of Utilities, Water One
[Johnson County KS] and Kansas City, MO have added low water intakes to
ensure continued operation at those intakes. Navigation and river
recreation in the lower river has also been negatively impacted by
lower releases and shortened navigation seasons.
We recognize that the continuing drought conditions have resulted
in hardships for the Standing Rock Sioux and the other tribes, as well
as for many other of the water users in the Missouri River Basin. We
remain committed to address those impacts where possible, to meet our
responsibilities to federally recognized tribes, to serve the
authorized project purposes, to balance the competing needs of the
Basin, and to comply with environmental laws including the Endangered
Species Act. We will continue to work closely with you and all the
Missouri River Basin stakeholders in that effort.
We appreciate having the opportunity to be here today, and I look
forward to hearing the testimony from Tribal Leaders, and any ideas
they may have to improve our service to the public of the Missouri
River Basin.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to
answer any questions you or the members of the committee might have.
______
Missouri River Basin Water Management Division
January 14, 2005.
Hon. Daniel K. Inouye,
Vice Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Inouye: Thank you for your letter of November 22, 2004
as vice chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs. In that letter you
requested written responses to a number of questions regarding problems
with a water supply intake at Fort Yates, ND on the Standing Rock Sioux
Reservation. Please find responses to each of those questions in the
attached document.
I appreciated the opportunity to testify before the committee on
November 18, 2004 and to provide this additional clarification
requested in your letter. If you have any further questions or
comments, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
William T. Grisoli, Brigadier
General,
U.S. Army, Division Engineer.
Question 1. In 1908, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that when the
Indian reservations were created and reserved, the right of the tribes
to use the water was also reserved. The Court noted, ``fundamentally,
the United States as a trustee for the Indians, preserved . . . the
title to the right to the use of water which the Indians had `reserved'
for themselves. . . '' This decision became known as the Winters
Doctrine.
The Corps of Engineers cannot ignore the clear and indisputable
fact that the tribe has an irrefutable right to water in the basin. It
is a right that has existed for more than 100 years when the tribes
signed treaties with the United States and it is a right that was
reaffirmed by the Supreme Court 96 years ago. Those rights are never
forfeited.
Based on this doctrine, does the Corps in its management of the
dams and reservoirs afford the tribe's use of water a higher priority
than the other authorized purposes? If not, why not?
Answer 1. As indicated in our testimony before the committee,
tribal water rights may be quantified through adjudication or by
compact with the affected State, ratified by Congress. Most tribes
within the Missouri River basin, however, have not yet sought to
quantify their reserved water rights under the ``Winters Doctrine,''
although several tribes in Montana and Wyoming are at various stages of
the quantification process. The Corps does not have the responsibility
to define, regulate, or quantify water rights, or any other rights that
the tribes are entitled to by law or treaty. Unless specifically
provided for by Federal statute, quantification of water rights does
not entail an allocation of storage at Corps reservoirs. The Corps
recognizes, however, that the tribes have claims to reserved water
rights, and will, to the extent possible, continue to operate the
Mainstem Reservoir System [System] based on that recognition.
Question 2. In your testimony you indicate that the Corps is
meeting its trust obligation to the tribe.
Please reconcile for me how the Corps can state that it is meeting
its trust obligation if it fails to ensure that adequate water is
maintained in the reservoir to ensure the tribe has access to water as
was reserved in the treaties and confirmed by the Supreme Court?
Answer 2. The System was authorized by Congress to serve eight
purposes, including water supply, over a wide range of runoff
conditions. To accomplish this, a large portion of the storage in the
upper three reservoirs is used to hold water that is used during
extended drought, like the drought currently being experienced in the
basin, to continue service to authorized purposes. Releases from
Garrison Dam will continue to be adequate to serve the water supply
needs of the community, and we will continue to work with the Bureau of
Reclamation to ensure intake access. As indicated above and in our
testimony before the committee, most tribes within the Missouri River
Basin have not yet sought to quantify their reserved water rights under
the Winters Doctrine and allocations of System storage for their claims
to reserved water rights have not been made.
Question 3. At what point did the Corps become aware of the
potential threat to the tribe's water supply last year? When the Corps
became aware, what specific action steps were taken to either avert the
loss of water or respond to the loss?
Answer 3. The Corps first became aware of the problem at the Fort
Yates intake on November 25, 2003 when a staff member from Senator
Dorgan's Bismarck office contacted us. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
[BOR] operates and maintains the Fort Yates intake, and has the
authority to assist rural water systems in both an emergency repair and
a permanent remedy of the problem. At the request of the BOR, releases
from Garrison Darn were adjusted by the Corps to facilitate the repair
of the intake. The Corps also issued emergency permits, loaned
equipment and provided technical assistance as requested. Because the
BOR has the lead role in regard to this rural water system intake, the
Corps has, and will continue, to support their efforts through timely
issuance of required permits, as well as equipment loans and technical
assistance as requested. We will also continue to work with the BOR and
others on the development of a contingency plan and a long-term
solution. The Bureau of Reclamation's contingency plan for the Fort
Yates intake includes installing a portable pump in the river and
bringing it online within 9 hours, should a problem with the intake
occur. Longer-term solutions are being studied by the BOR, but in the
interim, the Corps will continue to work with the BOR to keep the
existing intake functional.
Question 4. On Tuesday of this week, the Omaha District office
issued a press release citing its work to extend the intake system at
Parshall as an example of the Corps' efforts to offset the drought
conditions.
What specific actions has the Corps taken at Standing Rock to
offset the impacts of the low water levels? Has the Corps developed any
action steps to help avert the loss of water again at Standing Rock?
Answer 4. The Corps initiated a multi-agency contingency planning
effort with a meeting at Fort Yates on December 13, 2004. Meeting
participants examined the authorities, roles and responsibilities of
the various Federal, tribal, and State agencies that can help if
another emergency arises. The meeting also helped to establish lines of
communication between the various agencies and participants committed
to work together on the Fort Yates intake problem and other drought
issues. The Corps is currently assisting in the preparation of an
Emergency Action Plan for the Fort Yates community. The plan will
present a list of actions necessary to provide relief for the Tribe
during an emergency associated with their water supply system.
Question 5. Based on your projections for next year's potential
run-off scenarios, what is the Corps' preliminary forecast on the level
of Lake Oahe and the impacts of that level on the water and irrigation
intakes at Standing Rock? What steps are being taken to ensure the
tribe will not lose access to water based on those projections?
Answer 5. Absent significantly above normal runoff this year, Lake
Oahe is not likely to refill substantially in 2005, and Fort Yates will
continue to experience river conditions at their intake. Releases from
Garrison will be adequate to serve the water supply needs of the
community. As described above, the Corps is currently working with the
Bureau of Reclamation to develop an Emergency Action Plan to respond to
any emergency associated with their water supply system.
Question 6. How many Missouri River intakes and/or inland
reservoirs has the Corps constructed, operates and maintains?
Answer 6. The Corps has constructed a total of 51 reservoirs in the
Missouri River basin including the six System reservoirs and 45
tributary reservoirs. In recent years, the Corps has constructed three
intakes along the lower Missouri River to pump water into environmental
restoration sites. The Corps does not own, operate or maintain any
municipal, rural, industrial or private intakes on the Missouri River;
however, we have provided emergency assistance to municipalities, such
as Parshall, ND, for water intakes that fall under the authorities of
the Public Law 84-99, Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies.
Prepared Statement of Richard Olson, M.D., Director, Division of
Clinical and Community Services, Indian Health Service, Department of
Health and Human Services
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee:
Good morning, I am Dr. Richard Olson, director, Division of
Clinical and Community Services, Indian Health Service [IHS]. I am
accompanied by Ronald Ferguson, director, Division of Sanitation
Facilities Construction, Indian Health Service. We are here today to
discuss the impact of the failure of the Fort Yates municipal water
system on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in November and December
2003 and its impact on the IHS hospital at Fort Yates, ND service unit.
Because the water system failure happened quickly, local officials
were unable to provide advance warning to the public. Since that time,
the Bureau of Reclamation [BOR], has made certain improvements to the
water intake system. In addition, we have successfully drilled and
installed a well on the IHS hospital property grounds that could keep
our boilers and furnaces in operation and provide water to bathroom
facilities. However, this water would not be suitable for medical use
or human consumption.
I would now like to provide to the committee background on the IHS
and the events of last year that left the Standing Rock Community
without water and particularly its impact on the IHS health facility's
ability to continue to provide health care services to the Standing
Rock tribal community.
The IHS, an agency in the Department of Health and Human Services,
delivers health services to more than 1.6 million federally recognized
American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/ANs) through a system of IHS,
tribal, and urban [I/T/U] operated facilities and programs based on
treaties, judicial determinations, and Acts of Congress. The mission of
the agency is to raise the physical, mental, social, and spiritual
health of AI/ANs to the highest level, in partnership with the
population we serve. The agency goal is to assure that comprehensive,
culturally acceptable personal and public health services are available
and accessible to American Indian and Alaska Native people and
communities.
On Sunday November 23, 2003, the Service Unit staff was informed
that the intake pump and water line into the Missouri River was either
plugged with silt or frozen or both. The water fines were rapidly
losing pressure as the municipal water storage tanks were rapidly being
depleted.
Immediate steps were taken to make sure the safety of patients was
not compromised and to implement backup plans to maintain the operation
of the Fort Yates Indian Hospital. At this time, there were no in-
patients in the Hospital and no patients being seen in the emergency
department. Without potable running water, we made a decision to send
the in-patient nursing staff home. The service unit leadership
conferred with the tribal ambulance staff and advised the emergency
medical technicians to transport patients directly from the pick-up
sites to hospitals in Bismarck, ND, and to cease delivery of patients
to the Fort Yates Indian Hospital. Dialysis services also had to be
closed until it was again safe to run the dialysis units at the
Hospital. Emergency staff was sent home and the Hospital closed
entirely except for the maintenance staff who remained on duty to keep
the boilers and furnaces up and running. The furnaces were kept running
by hauling water to the Hospital from a private well located
approximately 4-5 miles from the Hospital.
On Monday November 24, due to complete shut-down of water services
to the city of Fort Yates, the decision was made to completely close
the hospital after conferring with the tribe. Public statements by
radio stations were used to inform the public of the water supply
problem, the closure of the Fort Yates Indian Hospital, and where to
seek medical services. Arrangements were made to transport dialysis
patients to the, Med Center One Hospital in Bismarck, ND. All necessary
medical staff reported to the Indian Health Service Clinic in
McLaughlin, SD, which is located 25 miles south of Fort Yates, ND, to
assist in the added number of patients resulting from closure of the
Hospital. We operated under this plan for 2 days.
By Wednesday, November 26, 2003, we were able to operate a general
walk-in clinic for non-invasive procedures using local antiseptic hand-
washing procedures and limited restroom facilities with the use of
hauled water to the restrooms. The Fort Yates Indian Hospital returned
to fall operation during the first week of December after running water
was restored by Tribal Officials and the Bureau of Reclamation, and the
water was determined to be safe by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. Thank you for this
opportunity to discuss this health related matter. We will be happy to
answer any questions that you may have.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7093.050