[Senate Hearing 115-38]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-38
PENDING LEGISLATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
WATER AND POWER
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
on
S. 440 S. 1012
S. 677 S. 1029
S. 685 S. 1030
S. 930
__________
JUNE 14, 2017
__________
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
_________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
25-979 WASHINGTON : 2018
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
MIKE LEE, Utah BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan
STEVE DAINES, Montana AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
CORY GARDNER, Colorado JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
LUTHER STRANGE, Alabama CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
------
Subcommittee on Water and Power
JEFF FLAKE, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO ANGUS S. KING, JR.
JAMES E. RISCH RON WYDEN
MIKE LEE BERNARD SANDERS
BILL CASSIDY AL FRANKEN
ROB PORTMAN JOE MANCHIN III
LUTHER STRANGE TAMMY DUCKWORTH
Colin Hayes, Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Chief Counsel
Lane Dickson, Professional Staff Member
Angela Becker-Dippmann, Democratic Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Democratic Chief Counsel
Melanie Stansbury, Democratic Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Hoeven, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from North Dakota.............. 1
King, Jr., Hon. Angus S., Subcommittee Ranking Member and a U.S.
Senator from Maine............................................. 3
WITNESSES
Cameron, Scott, Acting Assistant Secretary--Water and Science,
U.S. Department of the Interior................................ 5
Gabriel, Mark A., Administrator, Western Area Power
Administration................................................. 22
Sell, Hon. Jeff, Mayor, City of Harlowton, Montana, and Board
Member, Central Montana Regional Water Authority............... 27
Davis, Tom, General Manager, Yuma County Water Users' Association 45
Fisher, Tom, President, Patterson Lake Homeowners Association.... 51
Hamman, Mike A., Chief Executive Officer, Middle Rio Grande
Conservancy District........................................... 56
Wynn, Christopher, Vice President, Northeast Operations,
Brookfield Renewable........................................... 63
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
American Rivers:
Letter for the Record........................................ 99
Audubon New Mexico:
Letter for the Record........................................ 106
Cameron, Scott:
Opening Statement............................................ 5
Written Testimony............................................ 7
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 96
City of Dickinson (North Dakota):
Letter for the Record........................................ 80
Daines, Hon. Steve:
Photo from Roundup, Montana.................................. 85
Davis, Tom:
Opening Statement............................................ 45
Written Testimony............................................ 47
Dickinson Parks & Recreation:
Letter for the Record........................................ 79
Dry-Redwater Regional Water Authority:
Statement for the Record..................................... 109
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC):
Letter for the Record........................................ 73
Fisher, Tom:.....................................................
Opening Statement............................................ 51
Written Testimony............................................ 54
Gabriel, Mark A.:
Opening Statement............................................ 22
Written Testimony............................................ 24
Hamman, Mike A.:
Opening Statement............................................ 56
Written Testimony............................................ 58
Hoeven, Hon. John:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
King, Jr., Hon. Angus S.:
Opening Statement............................................ 3
(The) Nature Conservancy:
Letter for the Record........................................ 126
North Dakota Game & Fish Department:
Letter for the Record........................................ 78
Ohkay Owingeh (New Mexico):
Statement for the Record..................................... 129
Pueblo de Cochiti (New Mexico):
Statement for the Record..................................... 133
Pueblo of San Felipe (New Mexico):
Statement for the Record..................................... 138
Sell, Hon. Jeff:
Opening Statement............................................ 27
Written Testimony............................................ 29
Stark County (North Dakota) Board of Commissioners:
Letter for the Record........................................ 81
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership:
Statement for the Record..................................... 141
Trout Unlimited:
Letter for the Record........................................ 145
Wynn, Christopher:
Opening Statement............................................ 63
Written Testimony............................................ 65
----------
The text for each of the bills which were addressed in this hearing can
be found on the Committee's website at: https://www.energy.senate.gov/
public/index.cfm/2017/6/subcommittee-legislative-hearing-to-receive-
testimony-on-various-bills.
PENDING LEGISLATION
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 14, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Water and Power,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:25 p.m. in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Hoeven,
presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Hoeven [presiding]. This hearing will come to
order. This is a hearing of the Energy and Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Water and Power.
I am joined by Senator King, the Ranking Member, and also
Senator Heinrich. Thank you both for being here.
I am filling in, of course, for Senator Jeff Flake, who is
the Chairman on this Subcommittee. For obvious reasons, he is
unable to be here. He, his family and our other associates,
certainly Representative Scalise and the staff are tremendous.
The U.S. Capitol Police and all law enforcement are in our
thoughts and prayers during this very sobering day here on
Capitol Hill.
We thank all of you for being with us. There is a vote
going on, which is not unusual around here. There is always a
lot, it seems, going on at the same time. We will have people
coming and going based on that vote, but we will go ahead and
proceed with the hearing. We know, in some cases, that you had
to come back due to schedule changes in earlier hearings. We
apologize for the fact that you had to come back, but we
appreciate it very much and thank you again for being here.
The purpose of today's hearing is to receive testimony on
seven bills pending before the Subcommittee, and I am Chairing,
as I said, in place of Senator Flake.
The jurisdiction of the Subcommittee ranges from the Bureau
of Reclamation, agencies that market federal hydropower, and
our Ranking Member just informed me that he was formerly in the
federal hydropower business so I would think he has a very good
perspective on it. Of course, the Subcommittee's jurisdiction
also covers the Bureau of Reclamation projects throughout the
Great Plains, dams in the Pacific Northwest and hydropower
facilities in the Northeast.
After the unfortunate cancellation of this hearing last
month, today we will hear about a number of bills that cover
the full range of this Subcommittee's jurisdiction including S.
440, which is my legislation related to land surrounding
Patterson Lake. I am also very pleased to have the support of
my colleague from North Dakota, Senator Heitkamp, on that bill
as co-sponsor.
S. 440 is a result of a lot of work by landowners, excuse
me, we hope soon-to-be landowners, homeowners around Patterson
Lake who have gotten together and worked in a cooperative way
to come up with, what I think, is a very good, common sense
solution. Our role is to help support our citizens around the
country, and this is a great example of where we have that
opportunity to empower them because they have been able to work
together and come to a very good solution. I have had the
privilege to attend some of their meetings, listen and really
understand what their concept is and provide some feedback, but
again, commend them on their ability to come together with a
good solution.
This bill is a result of various stakeholders looking at
all aspects of the land conveyance and coming to a workable
solution, recognizing that it has to work not only for them but
for the City of Dickinson, for Stark County where they live,
the State of North Dakota and for the Federal Government who,
of course, represents all of the other citizens of this great
nation of more than 300 million people.
In addition to the primary water supply purpose of this
project based on its original construction, the Dickinson
Reservoir, which is Lake Patterson, has a public recreation
purpose and lands on the south side of the reservoir were
leased to individuals for part-time or full-time cabin
construction. The City of Dickinson has transitioned to
obtaining their drinking water from the Southwest Water
Authority, but the recreation and residential uses of the
contiguous lands remain a viable benefit to the citizens of
Dickinson and the surrounding area.
Since 1953, the Dickinson Parks and Recreation has worked
cooperatively with the Bureau of Reclamation to manage the
Patterson Lake Recreational Area. Over several decades they
have worked hard to increase and enhance recreational
opportunities as well as support public accessibility.
I have been there and I have seen the area. It really is a
beautiful area and an example of where the Federal Government
coming in and actually building a dam has really created not
only a beautiful lake, but just a beautiful surrounding area
that is used for many purposes--not only residential but
recreational and really an asset for the community and our
state.
We will also hear testimony on a bipartisan bill, the
Western Area Power Administration (WAPA) Transparency Act.
There have been financial challenges at WAPA and they have made
some progress with transparency but more needs to be done. The
bill directs WAPA to continue those efforts that their
customers deserve.
Also on the agenda today is the reintroduced Water Supply
Permitting Coordination Act. Although we were fortunate to have
healthy snowpack this year, the prolonged drought we have just
experienced should illustrate the need for water storage and
supply infrastructure. This bill sets out a streamlined process
led by the Bureau of Reclamation to aid the construction on
water supply projects.
We have two hydropower bills from Senator King that shed
light on additional opportunities to produce clean, renewable
hydropower and to speed up the permitting process for
hydropower projects. The New Mexico delegation introduced a
drought bill that we will also consider.
From the challenges of building new water supply projects
across the West to the hydropower issues faced by customers
from the West to Northern Maine, these bills provide a good
example of the range of issues that this Subcommittee deals
with.
I would now turn to Senator King for any remarks that he
might like to make.
STATEMENT OF HON. ANGUS S. KING, JR.,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MAINE
Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am delighted to
see all of you, and I thank you and appreciate your coming back
so that we can hold this important hearing.
As the Chairman stated, the breadth of issues that this
Committee deals with is quite broad, and it is clear from the
range of witnesses here who have come from across the country
to provide information that there are unique needs in each
region of the country, but some common areas of agreement.
I especially want to thank Mr. Wynn for being here.
Brookfield has a very large presence in Maine, where hydropower
is nearly 25 percent of our total energy production. I
appreciate Brookfield's perspective on the matters we are going
to cover today as we talk about important hydropower issues,
both in the Northeast and across the country.
I do not want to start the Subcommittee hearing without
acknowledging the leadership of Senator Flake and the idea that
we intend to operate in a totally bipartisan--I should say
since I am neither Democrat nor Republican--non-partisan way. I
look forward to working with Chairman Flake. We are already the
co-sponsors of each other's bills before this Committee today.
Hydropower, I think, is often forgotten as one of America's
most important energy sources and most important renewable
energy sources. Conventional hydropower, as we all know it,
accounts for six or seven percent, which is significant, of our
total energy production in the country, and it is something
that is important, both in terms of critical renewable baseload
power, but also in terms of the fact that it is renewable and
sustainable.
Hydropower can be expensive, however, particularly in the
capital area. I think that is one of the things we are going to
talk about today--that hydropower, like wind power, is capital
intensive but operationally cheap. Once the capital is
advertised and supported then the power is there into the
indefinite future. Part of that capital cost, however, is
licensing and permitting costs, and that has to be recognized
as a significant part of what is, ultimately, the price of the
power. Therefore, what we have to try to manage is to maximize
environmental protection and environmental benefit and minimize
costs and time involved so that we can achieve important
renewable energy benefits from hydropower at a cost that
customers can afford and also in a time that makes sense for
getting these important resources on the grid.
As some of you may know, I spent some of my first
professional years in the hydropower business in New England.
In 1983, I worked with a small company that developed
hydropower around New England. Later we did biomass and later
on in my career I've done wind power and also conservation. So
I may be one of the few people around here who has actually
applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for
a permit--and actually, I think it was for an exemption. But I
do understand the process and look forward to working with all
of you and with my colleagues in order to make that process as
efficient as possible while emphasizing the importance of our
regulatory process in terms of environmental protection.
I have to pause at this moment and tell a story that I
think some of you may appreciate. I was once working on the
licensing of a hydro project somewhere in the Northeast--and I
won't identify the state--but we were sitting around the table
discussing this project and the head of the environmental
agency was talking about his concerns about the project. It
suddenly dawned on all of us sitting around the table, both
staff and people working on the project, that this fellow
thought that once water went into a turbine it never came out.
[Laughter.]
That we were, in fact, using up the river. It was one of
those situations where nobody knows how we are going to break
this to him, but we did. That is an absolutely true story.
Senator Hoeven. Like a black hole.
Senator King. Yes, that is right.
So, I really appreciate, again, your being here today. I
look forward to your testimony and am delighted to be working
on, what I consider, one of our most important energy issues.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I will turn it back to you.
Senator Hoeven. Senator Heinrich, any opening statement you
might have?
Senator Heinrich. I think the problem was that Senator King
used steam turbine.
[Laughter.]
No. I want to welcome Mr. Hamman from New Mexico who has
joined us today. He's got a great perspective, having been on
multiple sides of some of these issues and now represents the
conservancy district but previously was at the Bureau and knows
the level of cooperation and coordination it takes to solve
some of these issues.
I am looking forward to hearing their testimony.
Senator Hoeven. Alright, then we will begin the panel with
Mr. Scott Cameron, the Acting Assistant Secretary for Water and
Science in the Department of the Interior. We appreciate, Mr.
Cameron, the work that you have been doing in the water and
science function of the Department, especially on the Colorado
River, and look forward to your confirmation. Go ahead and
proceed.
STATEMENT OF SCOTT CAMERON, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY--WATER
AND SCIENCE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Mr. Cameron. Mr. Chairman, Senator King, Senator Heinrich,
I want to thank you, first of all, for the opportunity to
testify before you today on four of the bills pending before
the Subcommittee. I am Scott Cameron, Acting Assistant
Secretary for Water and Science at the Department of the
Interior.
In the interest of time, I will summarize the Department's
views on these four bills and submit my full testimony on each
bill for the record.
S. 440, as the Chairman knows, would provide a path for
permitted cabin owners in the Dickinson Parks and Recreation
Department to take ownership of certain federal lands in the
State of North Dakota. The legislation will allow for flexible
management of the lands to meet local needs and alleviate the
administrative cost of oversight and management of the land.
I would like to reemphasize the Secretary's staunch
commitment against the sale or wide-scale transfer of federal
lands. As he stated at this Committee throughout his
confirmation process, the Secretary firmly holds that our
treasured public lands are to be maintained and preserved for
the benefit and enjoyment of the people. The Department is
quite willing to work with Congress to ensure proposals like S.
440 preserve access and recreation for future generations. My
written testimony recommends a few changes to S. 440 to provide
additional clarity and protections.
S. 677 directs the Secretary of the Interior to coordinate
federal and state permitting processes related to the
construction of new surface water storage projects on lands
managed by the Interior and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
We welcome efforts to streamline and expedite the approval
of new surface water storage projects. The President's 2018
budget request includes an infrastructure initiative aiming to
explore long-term reforms on how infrastructure projects are
regulated, funded, delivered and maintained. In particular, the
initiative acknowledges the current environmental review and
permitting processes' lack of cohesiveness, often making
infrastructure projects more costly, unpredictable and time-
consuming, all while adding little environmental protection.
This initiative dovetails into the goals set forth in S. 677.
The Department supports the goals of S. 677 and recommends a
few amendments which are detailed in my written statement.
S. 685 would authorize construction of the Dry-Redwater
Regional Water Authority System and the Musselshell-Judith
Rural Water System in the states of Montana and North Dakota.
The Department supports the goals on encouraging a vibrant,
rural economy and ensuring safe, reliable sources of drinking
water. Given the past history and future prospects of funding
for the rural water program, we are cautious not to raise
unreasonable expectations for future federal funding should
this bill become law. The Department has concerns about adding
to the backlog of Reclamation's already-authorized rural water
projects that are in queue for federal construction funding
already. While the Department acknowledges the critical
functions rural water projects offer to communities across the
West, we have concerns with S. 685 as written and we would like
to work with the Committee to address those concerns.
Last, S. 1012 aims to enhance coordination from water
acquisition, encourage water conservation, authorize and
provide for studies and support efforts to provide an annual
spring peak flow for the Middle Rio Grande in New Mexico.
Congress has encouraged Reclamation to pursue efforts to
facilitate agricultural water leasing. In response, Reclamation
has started a pilot project for leasing and is planning a grant
opportunity to build and begin testing the framework for a
leasing program in collaboration with the Middle Rio Grande
Conservancy District. S. 1012 would provide Reclamation and the
District with increased flexibility to implement and
effectively manage such a program. S. 1012 would authorize a
National Academy of Sciences study of water and reservoir
management and operation. The study would likely provide water
managers along the Rio Grande in New Mexico with useful
information; however, there may be ways this study can build on
the work of other prior studies. The Department supports many
elements of S. 1012 but has, again, a few concerns which are
detailed in my written statement. We would like to work with
the sponsors and the Committee to address those particular
concerns.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member King, for
the opportunity to present these views. I would be happy to
answer questions at the appropriate time.
[The prepared statements of Mr. Cameron follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Secretary Cameron.
Next we will have Mr. Mark Gabriel, Administrator and CEO
of the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA).
STATEMENT OF MARK A. GABRIEL, ADMINISTRATOR, WESTERN AREA POWER
ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Gabriel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Subcommittee. I am Mark Gabriel, Administrator of the Western
Area Power Administration, one of four power marketing
administrations within the Department of Energy, whose role is
to market and transmit wholesale electricity from 56 hydropower
dams.
For the past 40 years WAPA has supplied at-cost electricity
to hundreds of municipalities, rural electric cooperatives,
public utilities, irrigation districts, federal and state
agencies, military installations and Native American tribes.
Forty million people benefit from the federal hydropower and
transmission services that WAPA provides. They depend on us to
provide reliable service, not only today, but also into the
future.
Low-cost federal hydropower was a cornerstone in the
development of the West and remains a key element of the
economic life in maintaining strong communities. WAPA serves a
diverse customer base across a 15-state territory the size of
Paris to Moscow and Athens to Oslo. We are a complex
organization with 10 rate-setting systems and more than 17,000
miles of transmission line. We do this offering the lowest-cost
rates consistent with sound business principles.
WAPA is committed to transparency, and so am I. In the four
years that I have served as head of the organization, we have
proactively taken multiple steps to evolve and increase our
transparency efforts and we will continue to do so.
I believe what has prompted this proposed legislation is
that some of our customers want access to more information that
informs our planning and operations at our Headquarters office
and an understanding of how it relates to our annual budget
and, ultimately, their rates. This is a reasonable request, and
we are working toward that end with many of our customers
through multiple processes.
I understand the customer concern for rates. Our rates,
however, are extremely competitive. For example, our customers
in Arizona benefit from rates that are significantly less than
comparable wholesale rates. In our Upper Great Plains Region,
customers will be seeing rate reductions in 2018 for the second
year in a row.
Now back to our growth. Our Headquarters staff and budget
has, in fact, grown over the past decade. It is bringing value
to our organization and customers and keeps us well-positioned
amid changing times in our dynamic industry. It is aligned with
our commitment to business excellence and sound business
practices and enables us to continue delivering on our mission
and maximize the value of hydropower for all of our customers.
Our growth in headquarters staff has allowed us to build a
Continuous Process Improvement Program that has resulted in $34
million in cost avoidance and cost savings, a 217 percent
return on the program's investment.
Some of our ``growth,'' however, is not growth at all, but
an organizational realignment and shifting of the budget that
has resulted in increased efficiencies. These changes allow us
to improve our ability to adhere to mandatory compliance
standards and laws, such as Critical Infrastructure Protection
and the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act.
Some of our customers may not agree with these changes that we
have made. I believe it is, in part, because we did not do a
good enough job communicating early and sufficiently.
We have already begun to increase transparency,
specifically regarding our Headquarters budget. I am very proud
of these efforts that we began three years ago to address
transparency and communication gaps. Customers have stated they
are already seeing improvements in how we engage with them on
budget issues. We are working well with the Mid-West Electric
Consumers Association, our California customer base and the
Colorado River Energy Distributors Association. Thanks to our
customers in Arizona, we are now partners in a Customer
Technical Committee to address a number of improvement
opportunities including financial transparency.
We've developed a more consistent 10-Year Planning process
across our regional offices, have been hosting annual all-
customer meetings since 2014, and last year opened up our
Headquarters 10-Year Planning process to customers with more
engagement in the coming year. Additionally, we host or attend
more than 300 meetings with customers annually to share
information and answer questions.
Just over a year ago we launched ``The Source,'' a space on
our website dedicated to sharing operational and auditable
financial statements. Much of that information was already
available on our website, but we brought it into one convenient
location and put it front and center. It includes annual
reports, presentations, a searchable index of power system
data, rates information, key topics and customer news.
We have produced and made available reams of data. We have
memorandums of understanding with many customer groups,
agreeing to share and discuss financial information. We are
more transparent than any organization for which I have worked
and we are exploring ways to further expand our engagement. Our
transparency efforts are consistent with the spirit of the
proposed transparency legislation. We are committed to sharing
information openly and honestly and providing a mechanism for
feedback.
As a public servant charged with leading a federal
organization, a very large utility, I am ultimately responsible
for the safe and reliable operation of our large,
interconnected generation and transmission system. I take my
responsibility in earnest.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. I
look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Gabriel follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Administrator.
Next we will hear from the Honorable Jeff Sell, Mayor of
Harlowton, Montana.
STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SELL, MAYOR, CITY OF HARLOWTON, MONTANA,
AND BOARD MEMBER, CENTRAL MONTANA REGIONAL WATER AUTHORITY
Mr. Sell. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member King and members of
the Subcommittee on Water and Power, my name is Jeff Sell and I
serve as a Board Member of the Central Montana Regional Water
Authority (CMRWA) which has been working on the Musselshell-
Judith Rural Water System project in Montana for over 12 years.
I also serve as the Mayor of the City of Harlowton, Montana.
On behalf of the CMRWA and the City of Harlowton, I wish to
thank the Chairman and the Subcommittee for the opportunity to
testify on behalf of Senate bill 685, the Clean Water for Rural
Communities Act. This bill will authorize two regional drinking
water projects in different areas of our vast State of Montana.
We want to thank Senator Steve Daines and his dedicated
staff, who have helped us craft this important legislation. We
wish to thank bill sponsor Senator Jon Tester and his staff,
who have provided valuable guidance to our organization over
the years during the planning of this project. We also want to
thank Secretary of the Interior, Ryan Zinke, as he was the
author of this same legislation in the 114th Congress. It is
our hope that, under his leadership, the Bureau of Reclamation
will continue to work with us to actually build the
Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System.
We turn to you, the United States Congress, to pass Senate
bill 685 into law and allow us to construct this regional water
system. The Bureau of Reclamation has deemed our project
feasible, yet Reclamation told us last year it will not
recommend the water system for authorization. After 12 years of
working with Reclamation and finally securing approval of our
feasibility study from Reclamation, we feel the Federal
Government's commitment to bringing safe drinking water to our
community will only be continued if Congress authorizes this
water system.
Let me tell you about our project need. The CMRWA is a
coalition of eight incorporated communities, several
unincorporated communities and the rural areas within six
counties in central Montana with a long legacy of poor water
quality and limited quantity.
The water system will provide communities and rural
residents in the region with a reliable supply of high-quality
drinking water from the Madison aquifer groundwater. The
groundwater meets all primary and secondary federal drinking
water standards. Delivering this drinking water will improve
the health and quality of life of Americans in a large area of
Montana.
The CMRWA has already spent nearly $3 million of state,
local and federal funding on the project to date for test well
construction, engineering, planning and administration of the
project. With this investment the CMRWA has completed several
major milestones including completing its 2,200-foot deep test
well at Ubet which demonstrated that the adequate quantity of
high-quality water is available at the preferred well site;
obtained all the water rights needed for the project;
demonstrated to the Federal Government that the project has a
benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.28 to 1; demonstrated that the
project complies with the National Environmental Policy Act,
Endangered Species Act and the National Historic Preservation
Act; and completed and received Reclamation approval for the
project feasibility report.
Further, the project area has one of the lowest median
household incomes in Montana. The low income of this region
combined with the lack of dense population centers makes it
very difficult for rural areas to afford drinking water
infrastructure compared to urban areas.
We have all heard of the drinking water problem faced in
the big City of Flint, Michigan, but small towns, ranching
communities in the West, face similar water problems. Federal
authorization of this project is absolutely necessary, not only
to provide safe drinking water but to make the project
affordable for our residents in Montana.
In conclusion, the residents, institutions and businesses
of this region face significant deficiencies with the existing
water supplies. These deficiencies impact the health and safety
of residents across this region of Montana. The deficiencies
with the water supplies also have a significant economic impact
on these communities that have median household incomes among
the lowest in Montana.
We have worked for 12 years with the Bureau of Reclamation
to become a federally-authorized project; however, after being
deemed feasible by Reclamation, we were told we must secure
authorization from Congress to continue.
We began work on this project system, excuse me, we began
work on this water system before the Rural Water Supply Act was
passed in 2006 and implemented in 2008, but we adhered to the
stipulations outlined in the Act and completed the process.
Reclamation reports that our project is only one of two
projects that have successfully completed the feasibility
process and that is out of 20 applicants that started the
process under the Act; therefore, we need Congress to authorize
our project to ensure Reclamation continues to work with us
through construction.
Thank you for allowing me to testify on behalf of the CMRWA
and the City of Harlowton for this critical legislation for our
region. An adequate quantity of safe drinking water is a basic
human need that most Americans take for granted. Please support
our efforts to secure a system that will deliver that same
promise to our citizens.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sell follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mayor Sell.
Now we will turn to Mr. Tom Davis, the General Manager of
the Yuma County Water Users' Association in Southwestern
Arizona.
Mr. Davis.
STATEMENT OF TOM DAVIS, GENERAL MANAGER,
YUMA COUNTY WATER USERS' ASSOCIATION
Mr. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member King and
other members of the Subcommittee. My name is Tom Davis, and
I'm the Manager of the Yuma County Water Users' Association.
We're the oldest and the last diverter of Colorado River water
in the State of Arizona, and we're also a customer of Western
Area Power Administration.
I'm here to testify on both Senate bill 930 and Senate bill
677--930 being the Western Area Power Administration
Transparency Act, and Senate bill 677, the Water Supply
Permitting Coordination Act.
I am in support of Senate bill 930 that requires Western to
establish within 120 days a public accessible database that
will provide its customers transparency into the planning,
budgeting, rate setting, purchasing, staffing, contracting
process at Western.
And I want--Mr. Gabriel did a fine job of laying out
Western's core mission, and I just want to emphasize part of
that is the fact that Western is required by law to transmit,
market and transmit power to its customers at the lowest
possible rate with sound business practices. And now some of
the customers have witnessed six percent increases in their
power rates each year for the last five years. We feel that a
lot of those rate increases aren't due to capital project
increases but, in fact, is due to probably the operation and
maintenance, staffing needs in some of the offices.
The Yuma County Water Users' Association is a priority use
power customer of Western. We're not a large customer of
Western and we're not a large entity, but we're 100 percent
dependent on Western Power. A lot of our uses of that power is
to pump water into Mexico, into Sonora, Mexico, as part of the
1944 Treaty between the U.S. and Mexico to supply Mexico its
proportional share of the Colorado River water.
This transparency is good for the customers, but the thing
the customers really want is more input into where these costs
are going and input into selection of capital improvement
projects, input into looking at the staffing needs that Western
has.
One of the things we've done in the Southwestern office of
WAPA, out of Phoenix, the customers have formed, as Mr. Gabriel
mentioned, a Customer Technical Committee. We're working real
close over Western with the new staff there in Phoenix to
actually have some valuable input into analyzing the staffing
needs, the capital improvement projects and both the capital
and the O&M budgets of Western and that's working out really
well. We're just beginning that process. I think that has a
good future. It lets the customers have an understanding of the
need of Western. And so, I think that's going to be a good
process.
One thing I want to mention. This Administration's 2018
budget proposes the sale of assets of Western and other PMAs to
private interest. If you recall, that's come up in previous
Administrations since the 1980s. Congress has always rejected
that because it's not favorable to the customers. And I
recommend the same position taken by Congress this time. It's
not in the customer's interest for these assets to be
privatized. We bought and paid for those already once in the
past.
In regards to Senate bill 677, that's basically the Water
Supply Permitting Coordination Act--it sets up the Bureau of
Reclamation as a one-stop shop for new water supply diversion
projects that's going to be coming up in the West. And the
Bureau then is in charge of wrangling all the other federal
agencies that's going to be involved in the NEPA process and
the permitting process, to give them a timeline to respond to
their permitting needs. It favors those advocates that are
needing to get these projects constructed because it sets a
time limit and it doesn't run us around the horn of having to
deal with a half a dozen different federal agencies. The Bureau
is in charge of getting that done, so we really support that
bill. And also, the main thing that bill does, it allows the
states to be a player in that process. So it allows the Western
states to pay into the cost of that process, of the permitting
process, and also to provide important data and science into
the process.
So I'm in favor of both of these bills, and I think there's
a lot of citizen support in the West, particularly for
construction of new water and diversion projects. And I hope
this process can be streamlined to be able to allow those
projects to be constructed in the next 20 years or so.
Appreciate you giving me an opportunity to give you my
thoughts, and I'll be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Davis.
Now we will turn to Mr. Fisher, who is President of the
Patterson Lake Homeowners Association. Thanks for your
leadership and thanks for coming back--sorry that you had to
make two trips--but it is great to have you here.
Mr. Fisher.
STATEMENT OF TOM FISHER, PRESIDENT,
PATTERSON LAKE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Fisher. Good afternoon. My name is Tom Fisher. I am
President of the Patterson Homeowners Association. I am here
today representing the 41 permit holders who have permanent
homes along the shores of Patterson Lake near Dickinson in
southwest North Dakota. We wish to be recorded in strong
support of Senate bill S. 440.
The Patterson Homeowners Association would also like to
thank Senator John Hoeven for his sponsorship and support for
this important legislation. I would also like to thank the
fellow members of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee
for the opportunity to speak to you today about the Senate bill
S. 440.
As a brief history, the Dickinson Dam was completed by the
Bureau of Reclamation in May 1950 which impounds the Heart
River. The dam, amongst the rolling hills and prairies, created
the Edward Arthur Patterson Lake, which covers nearly 1,200
surface acres and 22 miles of shoreline.
The original purpose of the dam and lake was as a municipal
water source for the City of Dickinson, with recreation and
irrigation as secondary usages. In 1991, the City of Dickinson
began getting their water from Lake Sakakawea through the
Southwest Pipeline Project and in 1996, the Southwest Water
Authority was established to take over the management of the
Southwest Pipeline Project.
Since that change in 1991, the dam and lake are no longer
utilized for the primary original purpose of construction.
Patterson Lake is now used primarily for recreation and adds a
tremendous quality of life to the City of Dickinson and to the
surrounding communities.
Speaking of the quality of life, in the last 15 months I
have gotten to know all of the homeowners on a very personal
level. I have heard many stories of barbeques, holiday
gatherings, graduations and wedding receptions that have taken
place in our neighborhood. I've also had non-association
members ask me on a daily basis whether or not we have come up
with a solution. Those conversations usually end up with me
hearing about a breathtaking sunset that they have witnessed on
the lake. Many others have told me about stories of being on
the lake and how wonderful it is to have a resource like that
just only minutes from town.
Patterson Lake and the surrounding area has always been a
major outdoor recreation destination for the residents of
Dickinson, Stark County and the region, so continuing public
access to the lake is important to everyone in the area.
In our many discussions and interactions with the elected
members of the Dickinson Park Board and the employees,
maintaining that public access has always been paramount to
those discussions and everybody in the community looks forward
to continuing the usage of the lake, parks, golf course and
other activities currently available.
Patterson Lake homeowners have been trying to purchase the
lots around this lake for over 30 years. Over those years, the
Patterson Homeowners Association has worked with and had many
discussions with the local park board, city and county
officials, along with the North Dakota Game and Fish Department
and our local state legislators, Governor, as well as both the
prior and current congressional delegation.
During that time, each of these individuals has expressed
support for our efforts. This bill is the culmination of those
efforts and discussions. We have worked with and met with the
Bureau of Reclamation, the Park Board Department and officials
and city and county elected and appointed individuals to
discuss how we can move forward in a positive manner. Those
meetings have included the Executive Board of the homeowners
association, the entire homeowners association membership,
multiple meetings with staff of our congressional delegation
and two meetings with Senator Hoeven himself.
The Patterson Lake Homeowners Association takes very
seriously the varied interests and concerns of all
stakeholders, which is why it has been a priority to have
transparent and constructive meetings to allow for full and
open discussions.
The homeowners take significant pride in not only the
ownership of our homes, but the manner in which we maintain the
land where our homes sit, as well as the other surrounding
federal lands bordering our homes. We pay property taxes to
Stark County and to the Dickinson School District for the
assessed value of our homes, as well as a small usage tax for
the land. Additionally, we pay an annual permit fee to the park
board and these funds have been used to help maintain the
public lands around the lake. If this bill is approved, we will
pay additional further property taxes to the county and schools
for the assessed value of the land, which will further benefit
the community.
With the passage of Senate bill S. 440, the homeowners will
be given the option to buy the land under their permanent
homes. For most of us, our home is our greatest investment and
asset. This bill would allow financial lenders to use the land
and all the improvements the homeowners have made over the
years as securities. By doing so, this will open the
opportunities so we can make improvements to utilize the equity
for whatever purpose we deem necessary and appropriate. For
example, lenders have now advised us that we can no longer take
out home improvement loans for our homes or access the equity
due to not owning the land underneath the structures. Passage
of S. 440 will not only provide us the opportunity to make
improvements to our homes, but it will also eliminate financial
uncertainties.
We are not asking for a giveaway as this bill will require
that the land and the purchase price of the land to be
established based on fair market value through a third-party
appraiser in the same manner as the value for all other
properties appraised.
The Patterson Lake Homeowners Association members are very
active in the community. Most have been on numerous volunteer
committees and boards and helped with countless city and county
projects. The members are tax paying, productive, hardworking
people who are excellent stewards of the lake and land that we
choose to enjoy as homeowners.
We, as homeowners, support the Senate bill S. 440. With
this bill's passage we too will have the chance to experience
the American Dream of home ownership and security.
Thank you for your time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fisher follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Fisher.
Now we will turn to Mr. Hamman, Chief Engineer and CEO of
the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District in New Mexico.
STATEMENT OF MIKE A. HAMMAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MIDDLE
RIO GRANDE CONSERVANCY DISTRICT
Mr. Hamman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member King
and members of the Subcommittee for the opportunity to testify
on the New Mexico Drought Preparedness Act (the Act). I am Mike
Hamman, the Chief Executive Officer of the Middle Rio Grande
Conservancy District (the District) and have served in this
capacity for two and a half years. I have over 32 years of
public service in Western water resources management including
18 years with the Bureau of Reclamation, culminating in five
years as the Area Manager in the Albuquerque area office,
working primarily on Rio Grande issues.
This Committee received our detailed written testimony for
the record supporting this legislation, so I will focus my
testimony on the very positive developments that have occurred
in the Middle Rio Grande since this Committee last heard our
testimony in October 2015.
I'm very pleased, Mr. Chairman, to inform the Subcommittee
that along with our partners, the Bureau of Reclamation, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Fish and Wildlife Service and the
State of New Mexico, we have successfully negotiated a new
Biological Opinion (BO) for the Middle Rio Grande that moves us
away from the highly prescriptive measures of the 2003 BO
toward a performance-based strategy that will use sound science
and adaptive management process.
The four objectives of this 15-year, non-jeopardy,
Biological Opinion are to: operate the reservoir system to
create more spring spawn and recruitment flows for the
endangered silvery minnow; acquire water for summer survival
flows to help minimize river drying; create and maintain more
in-river habitat that increases flood plains at lower flows;
and construct fish passage structures at three district
diversion dams. Each of these requirements is well supported
and enhanced by this bill, with these proposed changes and
authorities for federal partners in the basin.
Section Five of the Act requires that additional authority
be afforded to re-operate Cochiti Dam in order to provide
needed flexibility to meet the first and most important
objective toward species recovery, particularly during drought
years. The District strongly supports this critical action
necessary for long-term survival of the silvery minnow and to
meet human needs during times of shortage. We urge that Cochiti
Pueblo will be consulted with early on so that any impacts to
their lands are addressed thoroughly.
We also recommend that all six Middle Rio Grande Pueblos be
consulted regarding this legislation.
The District is the lead agency engaged in four WaterSMART
Grants with Reclamation under the 50/50 cost share requirements
for these programs. We are: developing a drought contingency
plan with basin stakeholders; performing a pilot on-farm
efficiency project to encourage more farmers to improve
irrigation practices; investing $700,000 in cost share for a
water salvage pumping station that will provide water to
support river marine habitat and to also supplement irrigation
during low flow periods, it will be completed by 2018; and we
have also joined with Reclamation to lead an Upper Rio Grande
Basin Study from the Colorado border to Elephant Butte Dam
involving a broad group of basin stakeholders.
This bill will enhance these types of projects. However,
given that a Rio Grande Basin Study will be underway soon, we
suggest that under Section Six, the National Academy of
Sciences be asked to serve as an independent science panel to
peer review basin study work in the Rio Grande Basin in lieu of
conducting its own study as they are restricted from including
Elephant Butte Reservoir operations that is critical for a
comprehensive study.
Reclamation is also partnering with the National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation and the District to create a pilot Water
Banking Program for willing lessors of pre-1907 water rights
within the District. This would be consistent with Section 3 of
the Act.
The District fully supports reauthorizing the Secure Water
Act, and we strongly support reauthorization of the Rio Grande
Pueblos' Irrigation Infrastructure Improvement Act that will
continue to provide resources to our Pueblo partners to improve
inefficient irrigation systems as they receive water from the
District works.
In closing, Mr. Chairman and Committee members, the
District believes that passage of this legislation will assist
in providing additional tools for federal agencies to use in
helping state, tribal and local partners prepare this region
for extended drought.
The evidence is clear that drought conditions will persist
given that during the last 15 years we have seen above normal
snowmelt runoff in only five of those years and having
experienced an unprecedented five consecutive years of below to
well-below normal runoff in the Rio Grande Basin.
We thank Senator Udall and Committee member Heinrich for
their work in introducing this bill and this Committee for this
hearing on drought preparedness so critical to the future of
New Mexico.
I stand ready for any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hamman follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Finally we will hear from Christopher Wynn,
the Vice President of Northeast Operations for the Brookfield
Renewable Group which has a significant portfolio in the State
of Maine.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER WYNN, VICE PRESIDENT, NORTHEAST
OPERATIONS, BROOKFIELD RENEWABLE
Mr. Wynn. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member King, members of the
Subcommittee, good afternoon and thank you for the opportunity
to appear today. My name is Todd Wynn, and I'm the Vice
President of Northeast Operations at Brookfield Renewable. In
that role, I oversee operations of all Brookfield's
hydroelectric and wind facilities in Maine, New Hampshire and
Massachusetts.
Brookfield Renewable is one of the largest, independent
hydropower producers in the United States. Our portfolio is
comprised of 88 percent hydroelectric generation. We operate
these resources with an embodying global commitment to safety,
environmental responsibility and community engagement.
In the United States, we own and operate nearly 140
hydropower facilities and seven wind farms across 13 states.
These facilities generate approximately 14 terawatt hours of
clean, renewable and reliable energy, enough to supply one
million homes and making us intimately familiar of the
challenges of relicensing small and large hydropower facilities
alike.
Today, I'm here to support two bills proposed by Senator
King that we believe will help support hydro owners and
operators--the Small Dam Exemption Act and the Small Dam
Information Act.
Hydropower is a proven, long-life and reliable, renewable
resource providing critical, baseload power and delivering a
variety of important benefits to the electrical grid. As
America's first indigenous, renewable energy source, it
contributes valuable fuel diversity and security to our
domestic energy portfolio. It is also highly flexible, able to
quickly ramp up and down to support fluctuating grid demands.
This flexibility is critical for liability and helps to
accommodate the increasing penetration of intermittent
generation such as wind and solar.
While hydropower facilities appear to operate nearly self-
sufficiently, they're actually a capital-intensive resource
requiring continuous monitoring and re-investment to ensure
reliable, efficient and safe operation. This investment helps
stimulate local economies and sustain nearly 517 Brookfield
Renewable jobs nationally.
In Senator King's home state, where we operate 39 small-
scale facilities, we invested nearly $16 million last year. By
creating an opportunity to streamline the FERC permitting
process for small hydropower assets, Senator King's Small Dam
Exemption Act is an important initial step toward better
acknowledging the value and importance of these resources.
Although the FERC relicensing process is defined as five to
six years, a hydropower relicensing sometimes takes eight to
ten years to complete. Over 500 projects nationwide will begin
their relicensing process between 2017 and 2030, representing
about half of all hydropower projects licensed by the
Commission. The vast majority of these projects are very small
with a median install capacity of two and a half megawatts.
The cost to relicense a project is not directly tied to a
facility's energy output. A one megawatt project is forced to
file the same licensing process as a 1,000 megawatt project.
The cost of a single, hydro licensing process can vary
considerably and can run to millions of dollars in certain
cases. The challenge is especially acute with smaller dams and
for smaller hydro operators. Small projects earn less revenue,
making it more difficult for small projects to absorb or
recover the costs associated with licensing and any protection
mitigation enhancement measures. This is leading some small
hydro operators to surrender licenses and/or decommission
smaller projects.
Providing FERC with the discretion to exempt certain small
hydro projects from the relicensing process while still
providing prudent and necessary environmental oversight is an
important step toward streamlining the licensing process and
recognizing the values that these resources provide.
We applaud Senator King's leadership on relicensing for
small scale hydro and also wish to speak briefly on the Small
Dam Information Act. While not directly impacting the majority
of our portfolio we understand this Act seeks to study how
requiring FERC licensing of small, non-powered dams balances
with the challenges and burdens of the licensing requirements.
As we noted previously in our testimony, FERC licensure can
impose significant economic challenges. We believe to
understand the various costs and options available to license
non-powered dams can only be helpful to policymakers and
regulators who might consider future legislation on this topic.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today, and I
welcome questions from the Committee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wynn follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Wynn.
I would also add that we received written testimony from
FERC on Senator King's two bills, S. 1029 and S. 1030.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. At this point we will go to questions. I am
going to start the questions. I do have to go preside on the
Floor at 3:30, so I am going to try to get through. I might go
a little bit over my time, so I will ask the indulgence of the
Committee. Thank you.
Senator Barrasso will be here to preside so that there will
be plenty of time for all of you to ask any and all questions
that you want to ask.
Mr. Fisher, I am going to start with my questions for you.
Public access to public lands is an important issue to all of
us and certainly it is important to Secretary of Interior
Zinke. We know that.
You mentioned in your testimony the community's usage of
the lake and other activities. Can you tell the Committee here
today a little bit more about the public access the community
currently enjoys at Patterson Lake and will continue to enjoy
if this bill is enacted?
Mr. Fisher. Currently there are three main public access
areas around Patterson Lake. Two areas are on the north side
which include picnic areas, two boat ramps and a public beach.
On the south side of the lake there is a picnic area, a boat
ramp and then also access to the water for fishing. Fishing on
the lake is actually a year-round thing.
The community also enjoys miles of natural and paved
walking paths around the edges of Patterson Lake, and with
those walking paths those are also used year-round.
Senator Hoeven. Talk for a minute about the Dickinson Parks
and Recreation Department and their continued commitment to
public access and recreation.
Mr. Fisher. Just from the meetings with the Dickinson Parks
and Recreation Department, they have addressed, in their letter
of support, their efforts to enhance the access for the public
there while they also talk about what they have managed for the
Bureau of Reclamation over the years and how they have enhanced
the opportunities and support for the public accessibilities.
Senator Hoeven. They have submitted that letter for the
record, correct?
Mr. Fisher. They have. Correct.
Senator Hoeven. Which details their support.
In your testimony you mentioned that the Patterson Lake
Homeowners Association currently pays permit fees to the
Dickinson Parks and Recreation to help maintain public lands
around the lake. In addition to local property taxes, if this
bill was to successfully pass and the homeowners are able to
purchase their lots, they will no longer pay the permit fees to
Dickinson Parks and Recreation. So you will be paying increased
property tax fees as owners then of the property to support the
county and the school, but you will not be paying the permit
fees. I know you are not part of the Dickinson Parks and
Recreation Department, but do you know what their plan is to
cover the costs without revenue from the fees?
Mr. Fisher. In the discussions I've had with the Park
Director and the Board, they've planned to incorporate the
operation and maintenance of Patterson Lake Recreation Area
with their regular operating funds.
Senator Hoeven. Okay, so they have that covered?
Mr. Fisher. They've been planning this for years.
Senator Hoeven. Okay, is there anything else that you want
to elaborate on as far as the history or anything else
regarding the homeowners and the lots that are on Patterson
Lake in their development? Any other thoughts?
Mr. Fisher. Yeah. The original cabins and structures, they
were originally built in the 1950s and 1960s and they were all
constructed being seasonal use structures. Over the years, as
the homeowners have lived there and the homes have changed
hands, you know, people have added on to the actual cabin lots
and sites by planting trees, establishing lawns. They've also
helped maintain the shorelines to help slow the causes of
erosion.
And over those years, as things have happened, we had a
chance many years ago to actually choose to become full-time,
permanent residents which, unanimously, everybody chose to be
full-time, permanent residents. And with that choice, over the
years, those structures have grown into being beautiful,
beautiful homes which you've seen when you were out there.
Senator Hoeven. I have been there. I have seen the homes,
they are very nice homes. An incredible amount of improvements
around the lake from riprap, trees, yards, like you are
saying--really a beautiful place. And these are full-time,
permanent residences, no question.
Some questions for Secretary Cameron. Secretary Cameron,
you mentioned in your testimony the Bureau of Reclamation
acquired the lands needed to construct the Dickinson dam and
reservoir and fulfill the authorized project purposes. My
question, is the Bureau property under consideration in this
bill necessary to fulfill the project purposes of the Dickinson
unit?
Mr. Cameron. Senator, we don't see any problem in terms of
impairing the future operations of the Reclamation project or
this legislation to move forward. We've got a very good, long-
standing relationship with local residents, with Dickinson
Parks and Recreation, and we don't see any impediment to our
operations.
Senator Hoeven. Secretary, I want to thank you for being
here today. Thank you for your testimony on S. 440. I
appreciate your feedback on the bill and will continue to work
with you on your suggestions.
I want to note that at the introduction of S. 440 we were
contacted by the North Dakota Game and Fish Department
regarding the land that it leases from the Bureau. We have
taken that feedback into consideration and have worked with
North Dakota Game and Fish to produce language that would also
allow them to be conveyed the land that they currently lease.
So we will work with the full Energy and Natural Resources
Committee to include the updated language.
I also am submitting a letter from the North Dakota Game
and Fish Department in support of this legislation, S. 440. I
also would like to make note of letters of support for S. 440
from the Dickinson Parks and Recreation, the City of Dickinson,
and the Stark County Board of Commissioners and want to make
them part of the record as well.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Does the amended language I mentioned which
would provide conveyance of land permitted to cabin owners and
land managed by the Dickinson Parks and Recreation to extend to
the North Dakota Game and Fish Department alleviate your
concerns regarding, ``fractionated ownership with continued
Reclamation oversight responsibilities and costs,'' that you
referenced in your testimony regarding the North Dakota Game
and Fish leased land?
Mr. Cameron. Yes, Mr. Chairman, that would be very helpful
and we appreciate your doing that.
Senator Hoeven. Okay. I would also note that the concern
raised in your testimony regarding liability is also addressed
in the amended language, and I welcome any feedback that you
may have on it once you and whoever at Interior needs to take a
look at it does so.
Again, you have been absolutely fantastic to work with in
this process. We will continue to make sure that we address
anything that you bring forward to us, but I do want to thank
you very much.
Mr. Cameron. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. We
appreciate your response on this and your willingness to move
ahead here to benefit the community and the homeowners.
Senator Hoeven. Also, Mr. Fisher, thank you for being here
and for your good work.
I do have other questions from Chairman Flake, but I am
going to turn those over to Senator Barrasso as well as the
gavel at this point and turn to Senator King for his questions.
Again, thanks to all of you.
Senator King. Mr. Chairman, I understand that Senator
Heinrich has a commitment in a short time, so I am going to
yield my first round of questions to him.
Senator Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Senator King. I will point out
that the Acting Chairman has said how beautiful this lake is,
but he said nothing about the fishing and I find that very much
out of character, but we will solve that later.
I want to turn back to S. 1012 and really start by thanking
Senator Udall for the incredible work that he and his staff
have done on this legislation over time. It has been an
absolute pleasure to work with him on this legislation.
As my first question, I was going to ask Mr. Hamman to walk
through some of the things the District has done to deal with
the drought conditions that we have seen for a number of years
now. I think you have effectively done that, but I want to take
this as an opportunity to commend you and commend your board
members.
We have seen more proactive measures taken in the last
couple of years than in many, many years before. It really is,
I think, a testament to your board members and your leadership
just how active you have been on this front and how much
progress is being made. So I want to say thank you.
Mr. Hamman, how might we facilitate water leasing as we are
looking at setting up a pilot project? How do we make sure we
do that in a way that is beneficial for water rights holders as
well as for the natural environment?
Mr. Hamman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Heinrich.
The process that I think will work, at least in the initial
stages of getting this program up and running, would be to work
closely with the state engineer's office and Reclamation and
the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to do an inventory to
fully determine the extent of the pre-1907 water rights that
are in the basin.
And then have an outreach effort for the owners of that, of
those rights, to encourage the opportunity for them to, in lieu
of outright transfer and sale and severance of those rights
from the land, to actually have another alternative for them to
achieve some kind of an income stream to work directly with the
District through a water bank that we would likely manage and
would relish the opportunity to manage, quite frankly, in
addition to the water bank we currently manage, to afford those
folks that opportunity.
And then we would work with various NGOs and Reclamation
and others to determine how an instream flow process might work
and how you convert an irrigation right that doesn't have
storage rights to a storage right that can be used in a way
that can protect the species of interest during the summer
months when we have the most trouble----
Senator Heinrich. Right.
Mr. Hamman. ----keeping the river from drying out below
Isleta Diversion Dam. So that would be the focus that we'd work
on there.
Senator Heinrich. Excellent.
Before my time is out, I want to switch over to Mr. Cameron
real quickly. Can you talk a little bit about how the Bureau
has used water leasing in other basins to help ameliorate some
of the drought stresses that some of our basins are under?
Mr. Cameron. Senator Heinrich, I'm probably best advised to
give you a more detailed response for the record.
Senator Heinrich. Okay.
Mr. Cameron. I will say more generally, however, that we
strongly support the notion of water leasing--any way that one
could use markets to move water around consistent with state
water law is advantageous to everyone involved.
So we strongly support the notion, and I can give you,
perhaps, a detailed example for the record.
Senator Heinrich. That would be just fine.
Real quick, my last question for you, Mr. Cameron. Would
greater flexibility in authorization language for dam and
reservoir management help the Bureau better respond to
droughts?
Mr. Cameron. Yes, I think it would, Senator. And we welcome
that, that would be helpful. Frankly, a drought situation needs
as much flexibility as you can get your hands on.
Senator Heinrich. Yes, I hear you.
Thank you very much. Thanks to all of you for your
testimony and for being here today.
Senator Barrasso [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Heinrich.
Senator Daines.
Senator Daines. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to start off by welcoming back Mayor Jeff Sell. As
the Mayor of Harlowton, right there in Wheatland County, you
know first-hand the challenges of lacking access to clean
water. Unfortunately, during your last visit here to speak on
behalf of your community, you were caught up in all that is
wrong with Washington, DC. You flew all the way out here to
share your story and be the voice for rural Montana and for
rural America, and you were not allowed to speak.
I want to thank you for returning here to share your
thoughts. You had to bear additional expense and share your
insights on this critical issue that affects thousands of
Montanans.
Water is a basic need of life. There are rural communities
in Montana that lack access to the basics of clean and reliable
drinking water. In fact, if you look at this--I have a picture
here I am going to show in a minute--you are going to see what
the quality of water is like in one of the affected communities
in Montana. I will have Steven put that up.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
This is a picture from Roundup, and you can see when you
open up a hydrant what we got out of there in Roundup, Montana.
In fact, I have water samples here that were taken from kitchen
sinks in Circle, Montana, just East of Harlowton and a little
bit, well, pretty much due East. Here is one from the Hans
Family, taken out of their faucet. Here is one from the Good
Family. Here is one from the Arneson Family. I have more, but I
told my staff member, just give me three. I could show you
many, many more samples just like it. These samples were taken
from the kitchen sinks in Circle, Montana. We are not talking
about a Third World country, we are talking about the United
States of America. We are talking about Montana.
In light of that, I have introduced Senate bill 685, the
Clean Water for Rural Communities Act, with my colleague from
Montana, Senator Tester. This bill would authorize two Bureau
of Reclamation rural water projects critical to Montana, the
Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System and the Dry-Redwater
Regional Water Authority System. Authorizing these two projects
would be an important step in providing clean and safe drinking
water to nearly 36,000 Montanans and North Dakotans.
Mayor Sell, Harlowton has serious issues with the wells
used to provide your town with water. Unfortunately, Harlowton
is just one example of numerous communities in Central and
Eastern Montana that are facing severe drinking water
challenges. The Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System would
provide a clean and reliable water supply to your area, and I
am impressed by the fact it has a demonstrated benefit-to-cost
ratio of 1.28 to 1.
So my question, Mayor Sell, is what benefits can we expect
to see if we were to approve this project?
Mr. Sell. Mr. Chairman, Senator Daines, we realize that
authorization of this project does not get us any funding from
the Federal Government at this time. But to use Mr. Cameron's
words, it would allow us to get in the queue at the Bureau of
Reclamation for future funding, if that did become available.
Reclamation entered into numerous agreements with the CMRWA
over the last 12 years to put this water system together.
Reclamation has committed time and money, roughly $700,000 to
this project already.
Basically, with the short construction season that we have
in the State of Montana, if this project were authorized we
would be able to access state and local funding to get this
project started and then if our current administration does
provide infrastructure funding, like has been talked about
numerous times over the last few months, we would have a
project that would be completely shovel ready and we could get
this project built in a very short amount of time.
Senator Daines. I think that is something that folks lose
sight of when you are from a northern state. We sometimes say
we have nine months of winter and three months of bad sledding.
Mr. Sell. Correct.
Senator Daines. So, to restate, what could be accomplished
with authorization, even if the federal dollars were not
appropriated?
Mr. Sell. We would be able to get, probably, design. We
would be able to get land access rights and the design of the
first phase of the project completed and possibly even get
water to the first two communities in the first phase of the
project which are Judith Gap and Harlowton.
Senator Daines. Alright. Thank you.
I have some more questions, Chairman, but I am out of time.
Thanks.
Senator Barrasso. Senator King.
Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cameron, S. 677 looks like a very sensible bill in
terms of it providing a coordination of a one-stop shop. Is
this in any way duplicative of processes that you already have,
or do you think this would be useful authority?
Mr. Cameron. Senator King, I do think it would be helpful.
One of the challenges that we have as a Federal Government, and
frankly state governments as well, in environmental reviews is
that different agencies run their own processes along their own
timelines, very often difficult to coordinate. They, way too
often as I suspect you learned in your experience with
hydropower in New England, are done sequentially as opposed to
simultaneously.
So we think this legislation would help control the expense
and the duration of environmental reviews. And that, I think,
would benefit the environment and would also certainly benefit
the project proponents.
Senator King. I completely agree and we incorporated
changes in our own law in Maine when I was there to do just
this. One of the problems with the sequential is you can need
27 permits and if you get them all except 26, you are out of
luck and you have made an enormous investment.
I think anything we can do in the way of one-stop shopping,
coordination in one lead agency, would be beneficial. I
complement the Chairman on this bill. I think it is something
we are going to have to look carefully at and be sure the
language works, but the concept, I think, makes a lot of sense.
Mr. Cameron. If I could elaborate, Senator. Sometimes
agency number 17 wants a change that's inconsistent with agency
number 5 and you find yourself in an endless do loop which
makes matters even worse.
Senator King. And that is when we get into these 10-, 12-
and 20-year permitting processes which really do not serve any
purpose, in my view.
Mr. Gabriel, do you have any objection to S. 930? You
talked about the changes you have made in terms of transparency
and clarity of your work. Do you welcome this bill or do you
view it as unnecessary?
Mr. Gabriel. Well, we believe that this bill is in line
with what we are looking at in terms of transparency. The only
concern that I would express is we want to make sure that
whatever is in the bill is actually answering the questions
that the customers have because we can be chasing lots of
information and then still not have folks satisfied.
So we've been working carefully with Senator Flake's staff
and we'll continue to do so. I'm all for transparency.
Everything we've been doing in the last four, four and a half
years, is moving down that path. So we have no issues with the
bill itself. I just want to make sure that the details are well
spelled out so we're answering the right questions.
Senator King. Thank you.
Mr. Wynn, you mentioned you have both wind and hydro. One
of my concepts for many years is the use of hydro as the
battery for wind in terms of intermittency. Are your projects
adjacent in a way that you could do that or is that a
conceivable concept at some time in the future?
Mr. Wynn. I believe it is, Senator. You could combine the
hydro and the wind so when the wind isn't blowing you could,
kind of, offset or complement with hydro generation. I think
that's----
Senator King. As I recall, most of your hydro is run-of-
the-river though, isn't it, or do you have storage?
Mr. Wynn. We do have several storage facilities, especially
in the headwaters of the Penobscot, Kennebec and Androscoggin
Rivers.
Senator King. So that would definitely be a place where you
could pair that with a wind project?
Mr. Wynn. Absolutely.
Senator King. Where you have the storage.
Talk to me about the costs of relicensing a small project.
I mean, it was striking what you said: that the relicensing of
a one megawatt dam is the same as for a 1,000-megawatt dam.
That really strikes me as very, very difficult. Tell me about
that situation.
Mr. Wynn. The cost for a small facility for relicensing can
be a very big burden. Small facilities earn less revenues,
generate less cash and therefore, the owner or licensee of a
small facility would have a difficult decision to make if
you're burdened or facing significant relicensing costs. The
amount of time to recover that would just be a long period of
time. And then you're making the tough decision if you should
surrender or decommission a facility.
Senator King. And isn't it true that we are in danger of
losing significant hydropower by people that are just saying,
``I can't afford the capital investment involved in a
relicensing,'' and we lose the power?
Mr. Wynn. I think that's right. I think that some of the
small facilities face that burden.
Senator King. The second bill that I have in is essentially
a study of the relicensing of storage dams, of non-powered
development. Do you see that as useful, for generating useful
information?
Mr. Wynn. I do. I think--we own and operate several storage
dams in the State of Maine. I think they provide great benefit,
and just having a better understanding of them would be a good
thing to know.
Senator King. But again, if a storage dam doesn't produce
any revenue, it makes the challenge of justifying the
relicensing even greater.
Mr. Wynn. Yes, absolutely. That's correct.
Senator King. Well, I have to say one of the reasons I
submitted this bill is I think this is a problem generally. We
legislate around here for everybody. For example, financial
regulation that is designed for big banks ends up hitting
credit unions and small community banks with an equal
regulatory burden that is way disproportionate to what those
institutions are doing. So this is exactly the same problem. We
are aiming it at this small hydro relicensing.
I appreciate your testimony, and I appreciate your
management of those great resources in Maine. As you said, I
think it is one of the largest privately-owned hydro systems in
the country, and very much a part of our history. I want to
thank you for coming and testifying before us today.
Mr. Wynn. Thank you, Senator.
Senator King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator King.
Senator Daines, you had a last question?
Senator Daines. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have one question that I wanted to ask, it is for Mr.
Cameron. Congress passed the Rural Water Supply Act to
establish and carry out a rural water supply program in Western
states. After 12 years and over $3 million spent by the Federal
Government, the State of Montana and local communities, the
Musselshell-Judith Rural Water System was found to be feasible
and to have met the broad criteria of the program. Yet the
Bureau of Reclamation will still not recommend this project for
authorization. Mr. Cameron, what good does a feasibility
approval do if the project will not be authorized?
Mr. Cameron. Senator, I completely am sympathetic with the
basis of your question there.
Our--we certainly recognize the fact that there's a
positive benefit cost ratio with this project. And were there,
if an amount of funds were available, I think, yeah, we'd align
it to fund it.
Our concern really is reflecting the fact that Congress has
authorized a number of projects already, well in excess of $1
billion. Roughly, $50 million is being appropriated every year
and we're concerned, frankly, about raising expectations which
we might not be able to fulfill through the appropriations
process.
But I certainly agree that this is a good project. I
certainly agree that no one should be asked to drink brown
water, you know, such as you've exhibited here in the
photographs. And we're very sympathetic with the plight that
these communities in Montana are facing. Secretary Zinke has
underscored that for us on more than one occasion, I might add.
Senator Daines. Yes. My concern is that we are stewards of
taxpayer dollars to make sure the resources that are devoted to
the development of these projects, they are not just wasted.
You go through all these feasibility studies and so forth and
then no action is taken.
Mr. Cameron. I would agree with you. I think to some extent
this is consistent with some of the subject matter of S. 677 in
that there's an excessively prolonged evaluation process. And I
think, perhaps, having a better understanding up front what the
project proponents, about the sort of obstacles that they're
facing, and trying to expedite the reviews would be beneficial
for everyone involved.
What's happened with these two projects in Montana,
unfortunately, is history. You know, at this point we can't
wind the clock back 10 or 15 years and start over.
Senator Daines. Well, I am glad you are there now and I am
sure as we go forward here, we are looking forward to making
progress.
Thank you, Mr. Cameron.
Mr. Cameron. Yes, sir.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Manchin.
Senator Manchin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wynn, this will be for you. You met with the West
Virginia Alloy Manufacturing Company on June 9th.
Mr. Wynn. The company did, Senator. I'm responsible for
operations in New England, but other members of the company
did.
Senator Manchin. Oh, okay.
I was kind of happy that we were tied together with New
England and Maine.
Contrary to what some people believe, West Virginia is not
just all about coal. A lot of it is about coal, but we have an
``all-in'' energy policy.
The meeting was about the release on the flow levels at the
Hawk's Nest hydropower facility in New River in Fayette County.
The American Whitewater Association is proposing increased
releases and flow from the facility which would increase
rafting access for about one and a half miles. If that proposal
is successful it would impact the level of electricity produced
by the dam. Therefore, the West Virginia Alloy Manufacturing
Company could face increased costs of at least a half a million
dollars a year because they would need to purchase power from
American Electric Power (AEP) at a much, much higher cost.
Now the following questions will give you an opportunity to
address these concerns we have and I am sure you are familiar
with them on this project. Brookfield Renewable owns and
operates at Hawk's Nest and Glen Ferris facilities.
Mr. Wynn. That's right.
Senator Manchin. Correct. And that is on New River.
It is my understanding that they are currently working
through FERC relicensing, which we know the challenges we have
there, for several licenses for those two projects which
provide clean, affordable power to the community. I think both
projects are how many megawatts? One? Less than ten?
Mr. Wynn. I don't know, sir, off the top of my head.
Senator Manchin. Oh, okay. They are very small.
I recently met with West Virginia Alloy Manufacturing
Company which employs 240 people and has an 80-year history
producing high-quality silicon for the chemical, metal and
solar industry which is very little of that produced in this
country right now.
The company's production process is very energy intensive.
Potential loss of a portion of that supply is concerning to
these folks. The reason it is concerning is they have, with the
240 employees, about $1.1 million in taxes. They are talking
about a release that would cost them half a million dollars.
We have a lot of rivers to raft on, and I am all for the
rafting industry and all for the recreational industry, but
there comes the time when you put a pencil to it and a chance
of losing 240 jobs and taxes of $1.1 million. Does it make
sense? I mean, they are going through this process and there is
a chance they might not be relicensed.
Have you all done economic impacts? Are you showing the
economic impacts?
Mr. Wynn. I apologize, I'm not very familiar with that
relicensing. I know that, generically speaking, when we go
through a relicensing process we work with various large groups
of stakeholders. In this case, the facility you're speaking of,
the whitewater rafters, other groups, recreation groups,
environmental groups, et cetera.
So, I apologize for I won't be able to speak to the details
of that facility. But generally speaking, we work very hard to
work with all groups, economic impacts, recreation,
environmental.
Senator Manchin. No, but I am saying, I do not know what
the highest priority is from FERC. We are asking for a
relicensing here to continue to operate as it has operated for
over 80 years.
Mr. Wynn. Correct, sir.
Senator Manchin. There has not been any rafting in that one
and a half miles for 80 years. We have hundreds of miles of
rafting available, but I have 240 jobs at stake for that one
and a half miles, that is all I am asking.
There has got to be some common sense somewhere, maybe Mr.
Cameron, do you have any?
I meant, not common sense, I meant----
[Laughter.]
Senator Barrasso. Let the record reflect the question has
been clarified.
Mr. Cameron. On more than one occasion, Senator, I've been
accused of not having any common sense.
Senator Manchin. Well, we found out it is not real common
here in Washington, so do not be surprised.
Mr. Cameron. Yes, sir. I was actually sitting here
listening and I was saying to myself, the Senator has got a
great point. This doesn't make a lot of sense.
Senator Manchin. You know, I really agree. Senator King's
bill, S. 1029, it is a great bill, a great piece of legislation
and I do not know why--do you know where we are on that
Senator, if you can bring me up to speed?
Senator King. The good news is it is co-sponsored by the
Chairman of the Subcommittee. That is always a good sign.
Senator Manchin. That should make it fly.
Senator King. I hope.
Senator Manchin. Anyway, I think some of these
certificates, recertification--and they take into consideration
the size, the proportion of what we are asking for and the
amount of cost--it is just wearing people out, it just wears
them out.
We have an ``all-in'' energy policy in West Virginia. We
want all the hydro we can get. We want all the wind and solar.
We have the coal. We have been blessed with coal and natural
gas. We have a little bit of everything, and we want to use
everything to the best of our ability, but sometimes our own
government gets in our way and makes it very hard for us to do
what we need to do.
The cost of electricity in West Virginia has gone up
because 90 percent of our power was coming from coal and the
overreach of regulation from the Obama Administration drove the
price through the sky and never cleaned up one thing. We have
already taken on all the new regulations but the cost now has
doubled in West Virginia, a 50 percent increase.
This little project is so important for the economics for
it to work there. If it does not, it will not work. So I am
preaching to the choir, I think. Okay, thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Manchin.
Well, I am pleased to be here at this first Water and Power
Subcommittee hearing of this Congress. I am glad all of the
witnesses have made it back today. And we all agree good, clean
water with strong, reliable infrastructure is essential for
communities all across America.
Since the beginning of this year, the Full Committee,
alone, has held more than five hearings focused on
infrastructure. We have heard from experts across the country
in a variety of fields from electric utilities, our national
labs and water conservation districts. The common theme in
recommendation we received is that the current federal
permitting process is broken and needs improvement.
That is why we are here today to discuss a number of bills,
one of which is S. 677, the Water Supply Permitting
Coordination Act. It is also known as the ``one-stop shop.''
This bill is going to streamline the current multi-agency
permitting process which often draws out and delays the
construction of new surface water storage by creating this one-
stop shop permitting process at the Bureau of Reclamation.
Mr. Cameron, I want to thank you for your testimony on this
bill. I appreciate you taking the time to work with my staff to
discuss and get a better, fuller understanding of the bill. The
bill seeks to clarify what is currently a timely and confusing
permitting process for many.
I noted the comments and the suggestions in your written
testimony that we can use to strengthen the bill. Would you be
willing to continue to work to address some of those points in
your written testimony?
Mr. Cameron. Absolutely, Senator Barrasso. We'd be
delighted to do that.
Senator Barrasso. Great, I very much appreciate it. We
would be happy for you to work with my staff helping iron out
some of the details.
Mr. Davis, I want to thank you for your support of this
bill, S. 677. There is certainly a need for additional water
infrastructure across the West. As the general manager, as you
are, of the Yuma County Water Users' Association, you work
closely with the Bureau of Reclamation and it is the agency in
power to coordinate new projects under the bill. Will you
please describe some of your experiences with the Bureau of
Reclamation and why you think they are the appropriate lead
agency for this type of effort?
Mr. Davis. Well, the era of dam building was thought to be
over a number of years ago, Senator Barrasso, but recent
drought has proven in the West that new storage infrastructure
is going to have to be built to meet the ever-increasing
demands of water in the West. And the Bureau was the key
entity, the key agency all those past years to developing the
West. That's why the Reclamation Act was formed, passed in
1902, reclaimed the West and then the first thing necessary was
water supply and building dams.
I think it's recognized, from California to Oklahoma, that
to survive long-term droughts we're going to need more storage
because of the population growth in the West. It's natural that
the Bureau of Reclamation is the agency to go to for that
because traditionally they're the experienced agency in being
able to do this.
The challenge for them is being able to regulate and manage
and wrangle these other federal agencies that are, sort of,
Johnny-come-lately to the process of building dams and they
have other interests other than just building dams to impound
water for public use.
And so, the Bureau is the obvious agency to be in charge of
this process, to set timelines and controls on the other
agencies to get the permitting process.
I think that if this is implemented it's not going to have
any negative impact on the NEPA process and the other federal
laws that are required to build this infrastructure. It's, like
Mr. Cameron said, it's a time factor that it allows the Bureau
to put these folks and these other agencies in shape in a
timely manner to get their processes done.
Senator Barrasso. In your answer you used the word
timelines, time and timely. Could you just talk a little bit
about why you think the timeframes set forth in this bill are
important?
Mr. Davis. I think the timeframes are important just
because of the cost that the time, extended timelines, it
finally--those entities that are trying to get these structures
constructed either run out of money, run out of time, run out
of interest, run out of, you know, it's finally--the stalling
process can have an effect of completely stopping a project
from ever getting built. And so, the timeline is important.
The other important thing about this bill, it allows the
states to be involved. These projects have been and often
involve, not only federal land, but state land and private
land, and the states are often the ones that are stuck with the
later management of some of these areas and it allows the
states to help speed up the time process maybe by pumping some
money into the process and maybe also putting in some timely
information as far as data and scientific studies. So it allows
the states to be a partner there and be involved which is, I
think, absolutely necessary to get one of these projects done
in the future.
Senator Barrasso. Yes. I would also like to ask a couple of
questions on behalf of Senator Flake who, as you know, has been
preoccupied with the tragic events that took place earlier
today.
To you, Mr. Davis, this is a question from Senator Flake
about the Western Area Power Administration customers who are
interested in providing input into the capital investment
projects. But it doesn't sound like there is a similar input in
the operations and maintenance budget. Would you please run
through some of the customer concerns and frustrations with the
lack of transparency on headquarters' O&M budget?
Mr. Davis. Yes, you know, the customers have always had
pretty good input, at least some veto power into the capital
projects, and we review those annually on a 10-year basis.
It seems that our cost increases and the cost increases to
my WAPA transmission costs have been about six percent a year
for the last five years. And it seems to be most of that is in
the operations and maintenance side of the equation which we
have very little input into.
I like the idea of transparency, but I like even more the
idea of customer involvement. And that's one thing that we're
working out in the Desert Southwest region of Western. We have
a very customer-oriented manager there and he's been very open.
He's been supportive of Mr. Gabriel to be very open, to the
customers involving themselves in the process, not only of
helping select capital projects to be put into the 10-year
queue, but also to looking at staffing needs and other type O&M
costs that are ongoing.
We want to be careful with this transparency legislation,
that it is meaningful but it doesn't increase cost to the point
that it's not economic to do so.
So we want transparency, but we also want to be actually
involved in, somehow, decision-making in the process. And this
technical, Customer Technical Committee we've put together
working with the Desert Southwest Office, I think, is going to
get to the bottom of this. I think it's going to be a good
example or a good showcase for other regions to follow to get
more customer involvement to help control rates and yet do the
necessary maintenance and operation that needs to be done.
We're not trying to let our systems run down. We want them to
be maintained, state-of-the-art, but we want the money to be
spent efficiently.
Senator Barrasso. Well I appreciate all of you here. I am
going to submit a couple additional questions from Senator
Flake for the record, and I am going to have one for you, Mr.
Cameron, that I will also submit for the record. There are a
couple reservoir projects in Wyoming that are well behind
schedule due to lengthy federal approval processes. On May 2nd
I sent a letter to the Acting Director of the Bureau of Land
Management asking about the status. We have not received a
response yet. I am hoping that you can help make sure we get
that response in a more timely manner, and we will submit that
in writing.
Mr. Cameron. Yes, sir, I'll follow up when I get back to
the Department as well.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much.
Well, thank you all for being here today. This is a great
start for the work of this Subcommittee that we are going to do
during this Congress.
For the information of other members, questions may be
submitted for the record before the close of business on
Thursday. The record will remain open for two weeks. I hope you
will be able to get your questions submitted to us in a quick
manner. We ask the witnesses to respond promptly when you do.
I thank all of the Subcommittee members who are here as
well as those of you who were able to appear to testify. We
apologize for the inconvenience it caused you earlier, and
thank you all very much for being with us today.
The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:58 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]