[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


    OVERSIGHT OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: PROTECTING SMITHSONIAN 
           FACILITIES AND COLLECTIONS AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS

                                 OF THE

                           COMMITTEE ON HOUSE
                             ADMINISTRATION
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                           DECEMBER 16, 2021

                               __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration
      
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]      


                       Available on the Internet:
         http://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-administration
         
                              __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
47-062 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022                     
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------   
         
                   COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION

                  ZOE LOFGREN, California, Chairperson
JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland               RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois,
G. K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina      Ranking Member
PETE AGUILAR, California             BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia
MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania       BRYAN STEIL, Wisconsin
TERESA LEGER FERNANDEZ, New Mexico
                           
                           
                           C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                      THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2021

                                                                   Page
Oversight of the Smithsonian Institution: Protecting Smithsonian 
  Facilities and Collections Against Climate Change..............     1

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

Hon. Zoe Lofgren, Chair..........................................     1
    Prepared statement of Chairperson Lofgren....................     4
Hon. Rodney Davis, Ranking Member................................     7
    Prepared statement of Ranking Member Davis...................     8

                               WITNESSES

Nancy J. Bechtol, Facilities Director, The Smithsonian 
  Institution....................................................    11
    Prepared statement of Ms. Bechtol............................    14
Cathy L. Helm, Inspector General, The Smithsonian Institution....    18
    Prepared statement of Ms. Helm...............................    20
Phetmano Phannavong, Senior Project Manager, Atkins North America    26
    Prepared statement of Mr. Phannavong.........................    28

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

Nancy J. Bechtol, Facilities Director, The Smithsonian 
  Institution, responses.........................................    32
Cathy L. Helm, Inspector General, The Smithsonian Institution, 
  responses......................................................    37
Phetmano Phannavong, Senior Project Manager, Atkins North 
  America, responses.............................................    39

                       SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

August 13, 2021, The Smithsonian Institution, Climate Change 
  Action Plan, submission........................................    73
District of Columbia Department of Energy & Environment, Flood 
  Risk in the District of Columbia, submission...................    83
U.S. Geological Survey, 100-Year Flood--It's All About Chance, 
  submission.....................................................   103
November 2021, Smithsonian Magazine, How the Smithsonian Grapples 
  with Climate Change, submission................................   107
1793, Andrew Ellicott, 1793 topographic map of Washington, D.C. 
  presented to President George Washington, submission...........   110
November 25, 2021, The New York Times, Saving History with 
  Sandbags: Climate Change Threatens the Smithsonian, Christopher 
  Flavelle, submission...........................................   111
November 1, 2019, Letter to Chair McCollum and Ranking Member 
  Joyce re Interior-Environment Appropriations robust funding 
  request, submission............................................   124
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Map of Levee's effect on 
  Flood risk, submission.........................................   127
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Map of Washington, D.C. 
  Potomac Park Levee, submission.................................   128
Ranking Member Rodney Davis, Smithsonian Climate Plan Priority 
  Adaptation Action 3, submission................................   129
CO2 Coalition, Carbon Dioxide Benefits the World: See for 
  Yourself, submission...........................................   131
November 27, 2021, The Economist, Safeguarding Art: Grab and Go, 
  submission.....................................................   144
September 2013, The Smithsonian Institution, Roadmap for the 
  Development of a Climate Change Adaptation Plan, submission....   151
The Smithsonian Institution, Climate Change Adaptation Plan, 
  Phase 1+2 Executive Summary, submission........................   175
The Smithsonian Institution, Smithsonian Collections Space 
  Framework Plan, submission.....................................   179

 
   OVERSIGHT OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: PROTECTING SMITHSONIAN 
           FACILITIES AND COLLECTIONS AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE

                              ----------                              


                      THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2021

                  House of Representatives,
                         Committee on House Administration,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 12:31 p.m., via 
Webex, Hon. Zoe Lofgren [Chairperson of the Committee] 
presiding.
    Present: Representatives Lofgren, Raskin, Butterfield, 
Aguilar, Scanlon, Leger Fernandez, Davis, and Steil.
    Staff Present: Jamie Fleet, Democratic Staff Director; 
Khalil Abboud, Deputy Democratic Staff Director; Sean Jones, 
Legislative Clerk/Professional Staff; Peter Whippy, 
Communications Director; Daniel Taylor, General Counsel; Eddie 
Flaherty, Chief Clerk; Enumale Agada, Oversight Counsel; Hannah 
Carr, Professional Staff; Jose Morales, Staff Assistant; Sierra 
Norton, Press Secretary; Lauren Doney, Deputy Chief of Staff 
for Representative Raskin; Kyle Parker, Chief of Staff for 
Representative Butterfield; Becky Cornell, Chief of Staff for 
Representative Aguilar; Alyssa Innis, Staff for Representative 
Aguilar; Tim Monahan, Minority Staff Director; Caleb Hays, 
Minority General Counsel/Deputy Staff Director; Nick Crocker, 
Minority Deputy Staff Director; Rachel Collins, Minority 
Counsel; Gineen Breen, Minority Special Counsel; Mike 
Cunnington, Minority Policy Advisor; Elizabeth Arevalo, 
Minority Professional Staff; David Ross, Legislative Assistant 
for Representative Davis; and Brice Smith, Staff for 
Representative Steil.
    The Chairperson. The Committee on House Administration will 
come to order. I want to acknowledge that we have a quorum of 
the Committee present and say hello to everyone.
    As we begin, I want to note, we are holding this hearing in 
compliance with the regulations for Remote Committee 
Proceedings pursuant to House Resolution 8.
    We ask Committee Members and witnesses to keep their 
microphones muted when they are not speaking and to unmute 
themselves when seeking recognition. Our witnesses will also 
need to unmute themselves when recognized for their five 
minutes or when answering a question.
    We ask that everyone keep their cameras on at all times 
even if you need to step away for a moment because that is what 
the rules require. And, of course, we remind Members the rules 
also require that we cannot participate in more than one 
committee proceeding at the same time.
    At this time, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 
five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
have any written statements be made part of the record.
    And, hearing no objections, that is so ordered.
    I also ask unanimous consent the chair be authorized to 
declare a recess of the Committee at any time.
    And, hearing no objections, that is also ordered.
    I want to welcome today's Smithsonian Institution oversight 
hearing, and we will focus on the threat that climate change 
poses to the Smithsonian's facilities and the national 
treasures and historical artifacts they house.
    It seems that not a day goes by when we aren't reminded of 
the immense financial cost of climate change--floods, droughts, 
heat waves, extreme storms, and wildfires--each made more 
frequent and devastating by climate change. They are just some 
of the effects of climate change that we are now experiencing 
firsthand.
    According to a recent report by the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, weather and climate disasters in 
2021 alone cost over $100 billion. Experts agree that these 
costs will only increase over time, which is to say nothing of 
the human cost of climate change.
    In Washington, and in particular on the National Mall, the 
effects of climate change most significantly would be in the 
form of sea-level rise and flooding. According to the National 
Park Service, the sea level in Washington is projected to 
increase by two to six feet by the end of the century, bringing 
with it more extreme storms and powerful storm surges.
    The changing climate poses a danger to the Smithsonian's 
facilities and the irreplaceable treasures contained therein. A 
recent New York Times piece detailed how increasingly heavy 
rainstorms have greatly increased the risk of flooding on the 
National Mall, the site of eleven Smithsonian museums, and how 
rising sea levels will eventually push water from the Potomac 
River and submerge sections of the National Mall.
    Let me put that threat in context. Last week, many 
Americans visited the World War II Memorial both to commemorate 
the 80th anniversary of Pearl Harbor and to pay our respects to 
the late Senator Bob Dole. Senator Dole, was, as we all know, a 
decorated war veteran who was gravely wounded in combat and 
later played a key role in establishing the memorial.
    For those who have visited the memorial, you may recall 
seeing just steps away a curved stone wall built into the 
National Mall which extends into the slope below the Washington 
Monument near an old stone house. That wall is not simply an 
interesting architectural feature. It is a levy, built to 
protect an area of the National Mall that for much of human 
history was under water.
    When the city of Washington was settled, Tiber Creek, the 
second largest creek in the District met the Potomac River 
there, near today's World War II Memorial. In fact, as the map 
provided to President George Washington in 1793 shows, at that 
time, to get from the White House to where the iconic monument 
named for President Washington stands today, you would have 
needed a boat.
    Today, the water that used to run on the surface of Tiber 
Creek flows through underground sewers that run through much of 
the city, from near the Capitol and down the length of the 
National Mall. Today, the land has been filled in, and 
Constitution Avenue is lined by buildings, including the 
museums of the Smithsonian.
    The threat posed by the natural topography remains. The New 
York Times article described in detail how water has already 
started to intrude upon the National Museum of American 
History, seeping in through the basement floor, ceilings, gaps 
between ground-level windows, and the building's ductwork. The 
museum staff has struggled valiantly, but sometimes with little 
success, to keep the water out and away from the museum's 
exhibits and artifacts.
    The intruding water does not just threaten these cherished 
items directly but indirectly via the risk it poses to the 
building's electrical and ventilation systems, which keep the 
building's humidity at an appropriate level for the 
preservation of these artifacts.
    It is not an exaggeration to say that the threat climate 
change poses to the Smithsonian's facilities and collection is 
also a threat to our preserved history and future generations' 
access to it. Every piece held by the Smithsonian tells a story 
about the people and things that came before us. In what is 
known as our ``Nation's attic,'' we find the figurative thread 
that weaves together the narrative of our wonderful country.
    Much of the discourse surrounding climate change rightfully 
focuses on how it will impact our future. However, today, we 
focus on the possibility that climate change also threatens our 
past. We must do everything we can to reduce emissions and slow 
the rise of global temperature for the future of humanity. At 
the same time, our institutions must adapt to the changes in 
the climate already set in motion.
    And, to that end, I am eager to hear about the 
Smithsonian's efforts to date to protect its irreplaceable 
treasures and stunning facilities and to find out how Congress 
can help ensure that its collections remain safe, regardless of 
the climate change challenge.
    And, with that, I would like to recognize our Ranking 
Member, Rodney Davis, for any comments that he would like to 
make.
    [The statement of the Chairperson follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Mr. Davis. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairperson.
    Thank you to our witnesses for joining us today at our 
first hearing on the Smithsonian Institution this Congress, 
which is tailored to the very specific issue of climate change 
and how it affects the Smithsonian Institution and the National 
Mall.
    The last time this Committee held a hearing on the 
Smithsonian Institution was February 5th of 2020, nearly two 
years ago. The topic of that hearing was the potential creation 
of new museums.
    Prior to that, the Smithsonian came before us in September 
of 2019 for a discussion on the overall strategic plan and 
management of the Institution, which I also believe was the 
last time that Ms. Helm joined us.
    So thanks for being here again, Ms. Helm.
    A lot has happened since then. Museums have closed and 
reopened in response to a global pandemic. Two additional 
museums have been approved by acts of Congress. And 
longstanding institutional issues have continued, many of which 
have contributed to an over-$1-billion deferred maintenance 
backlog.
    Ms. Helm is quite familiar with these issues, having 
included them in her testimony before this Committee three 
years ago--longstanding management challenges related to 
collections management, facilities management, information 
security, and physical security.
    Unfortunately, that list has expanded to include mission 
creep of an increasingly one-sided, progressive educational 
agenda, as well as the shocking and saddening reports of sexual 
abuse and possible sexual assault at the Smithsonian Tropical 
Research Institute in Panama.
    There are many issues that this Committee needs to discuss 
with the Smithsonian, so I am disappointed that today's 
discussion has been designed to ignore more pressing issues.
    The Smithsonian's collections are priceless, but the long-
term health of the Smithsonian, its strategic plan, and the 
care of its employees as much as its collections should be part 
of this discussion. The outgoing majority is the one that 
controls the hearing schedule and topics for this Congress.
    Since we are here to talk about climate change and its 
impact on the Smithsonian, I do hope that as part of today's 
hearing we can get better understanding and clarity of how the 
Smithsonian can reconcile its position of needing more 
resources to mitigate the, quote, ``imminent threat'' of 
flooding on the National Mall while at the same time actively 
engage in efforts to build additional museums on or around the 
Mall. Common sense would tell you that those two things seem to 
be in conflict.
    In closing, I hope that we have the Smithsonian come before 
this Committee again soon so that we can conduct proper 
oversight of the Institution, rather than focus on just one 
report or respond to one New York Times profile.
    With that, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses, 
and I yield back, Madam Chairperson.
    [The statement of Mr. Davis follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chairperson. The Ranking Member yields back.
    Other Members are invited to submit their statements for 
the record.
    The Chairperson. I would now have the pleasure of welcoming 
our witnesses.
    Joining us this afternoon are Nancy Bechtol, Director of 
Smithsonian Facilities; Cathy Helm, the Inspector General for 
the Smithsonian; and Phetmano Phannavong, the Senior Project 
Manager at Atkins North America.
    Nancy Bechtol has served as the Director of Smithsonian 
Facilities since 2012. In this role, she manages all facilities 
planning, design, construction, engineering, operations, and 
maintenance needs across all Smithsonian facilities.
    To give you a sense of the size of that responsibility, the 
Smithsonian's worldwide portfolio is over twelve million square 
feet, with over 600 buildings and 43,000 acres of land. All 
this is maintained using an in-house workforce of over 1,000 
full-time employees and an operating budget of over $400 
million.
    Ms. Bechtol also oversees the Office of Safety, Health, and 
Environmental Management, Smithsonian Gardens, and the Office 
of Emergency Management. She serves as the Smithsonian's senior 
sustainability and climate change adaptation officer.
    She graduated from the University of Maryland with a 
Bachelor of Science degree in horticulture, and she received 
her Master's of Science from the University of Delaware. She is 
a certified facility manager through the International Facility 
Management Association.
    Cathy Helm has served as the Inspector General of the 
Smithsonian since 2014. Her office conducts audits and 
investigations relating to Smithsonian programs and operations. 
She keeps the Board of Regents and Congress informed about 
problems and deficiencies found. She promotes efficiency and 
effectiveness within the Smithsonian; prevents and detects 
cases of fraud, waste, and abuse; and makes recommendations 
regarding existing policies and regulations at the Smithsonian.
    Prior to this role, Inspector General Helm was Deputy 
Inspector General at the GAO and Assistant Director for the 
Office of Inspector General. She was the Assistant Director for 
the Human Capital Office and the Assistant Director for the 
Natural Resources and Environment Team.
    She graduated from George Washington University with a 
master's degree in public administration in 1980, and she 
earned her bachelor's degree in 1978 at Western Kentucky 
University.
    Finally, but not least, Phetmano Phannavong currently works 
as a Senior Projects Manager at Atkins North America and has 
twenty years' experience in water resources, engineering, 
project and program management, and national flood resilience 
policies.
    In his current role, he provides technical support as a 
subject-matter expert in Federal, State, and local governments 
on future conditions and climate science approach in flood 
hazard mapping, building codes strategies, and resilience 
policy in flood risk management.
    Prior to joining Atkins North America, he was a former 
District of Columbia National Flood Insurance Program 
coordinator and floodplain manager. He also co-founded the D.C. 
Silver Jackets, an interagency flood management team.
    He is a registered professional engineer in both D.C. and 
Virginia, a certified project management professional by the 
Project Management Institute, and a certified floodplain 
manager by the Association of State Floodplain Managers.
    Inspector General Helm testified before our Committee 
during a 2019 Smithsonian oversight hearing, as the Ranking 
Member has mentioned, so it is a pleasure to welcome her back. 
Ms. Bechtol and Mr. Phannavong, I am thrilled to welcome you 
both.
    And before turning to you, I would note once again that 
Members have, by unanimous consent, five legislative days to 
revise and extend their remarks.
    I will remind witnesses that your entire written statement 
will be made part of the record. We ask that your verbal 
testimony be five minutes. We have a clock that is on this 
virtual space that will help you keep track of the time. When 
your five minutes are up, we ask that you try and summarize so 
the next witness can be heard.
    We will turn to you, Ms. Bechtol, first for your testimony, 
and welcome.

   STATEMENTS OF NANCY J. BECHTOL, FACILITIES DIRECTOR, THE 
  SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION; CATHY HELM, INSPECTOR GENERAL, THE 
   SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION; AND PHETMANO PHANNAVONG, SENIOR 
             PROJECT MANAGER, ATKINS NORTH AMERICA

                 STATEMENT OF NANCY J. BECHTOL

    Ms. Bechtol. Thank you so much for the invitation to be a 
witness today.
    Chairperson Lofgren, Ranking Member Davis, and Members of 
the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today 
on the threat climate change poses to the Smithsonian.
    Climate change has long been important to the Institution, 
from conducting over 160 years of climate research to using 
that knowledge to adapt to a changing world.
    As part of Executive Order 14008, the Smithsonian completed 
the 2021 Climate Change Action Plan. From a One Smithsonian 
approach, it focuses on public programs, research, collections 
management, and facilities and infrastructure and highlights 
the topic of climate vulnerability.
    While these topics are interconnected, today I will discuss 
the risk to our collections and facilities as posed by climate 
change. These risks and our plans to limit their impact have 
been laid out in the Climate Change Action Plan as well as our 
Climate Change Adaptation Plan, the Roadmap for the Development 
of Climate Change Adaptation, and the Smithsonian's Collections 
Space Framework Plan.
    The recent New York Times article, ``Saving History With 
Sandbags: Climate Change Threatens the Smithsonian,'' has drawn 
attention to the risks we currently face--risks we are aware 
of--and the common concerns shared by this Committee and the 
Smithsonian.
    Based on our 2017 vulnerability assessment, our properties 
most at risk are the National Museum of American History and 
the National Museum of Natural History. They are flood-prone 
and have extensive lower-level spaces housing invaluable 
collections and building systems.
    The National Museum of the American Indian and the National 
Air and Space Museum, while at risk, they are not as vulnerable 
and have fewer critical lower-level spaces and no lower-level 
collections.
    The National Museum of African American History and Culture 
had flood-mitigation measures included in its original design.
    We must take steps to protect our collections. Flooding 
causes more than just water damage. High humidity and 
temperature fluctuations are possible if our climate-control 
systems or our generators are damaged, and this could impact 
the objects in our care.
    Beyond flooding, as the planet warms, it is becoming more 
challenging and expensive to maintain the environmental 
controls in these spaces. Even minor fluctuations can harm 
delicate items. To address these concerns, the Smithsonian's 
National Collections Program has been purchasing and installing 
gasketed storage cabinetry to replace substandard storage. 
These new enclosures can effectively protect the collections 
from flooding and buffer these environmental fluctuations.
    The Smithsonian is also developing flood-safe spaces to 
house at-risk collections. With construction to begin in fiscal 
year 2022, Pod 6 at the Suitland Collections Center in Maryland 
will provide space for collections now housed on the National 
Mall in our basements and at the National Gallery of Art. Once 
built, the Dulles Collection Center Module 2 will also provide 
more space for our Air and Space Museum collections. Your 
bipartisan support of our collections space expansion has made 
this all possible.
    Through master planning, flood-resilient renovations and 
revitalization projects, we identified--that I am going to 
mention next. For example, at the Air and Space Museum, the 
revitalization project includes large underground cisterns to 
manage stormwater and the addition of higher floodgates at each 
of our loading docks.
    At the National Museum of American History, in fiscal year 
2022, we planned for $500,000 studies in facilities planning 
and design. These studies will work on west-side drainage 
improvements and temporary flood protection, and this will 
increase our resiliency in those areas.
    Improving collections storage and making our facilities 
more climate-resilient has been incremental. It must be 
prioritized and phased over time to optimize Smithsonian's 
existing funding.
    The over $1 billion in deferred maintenance further 
jeopardizes our facilities. Nearly half of this backlog, 
though, will be addressed with the revitalization that is 
planned of our historic core as well as the National Air and 
Space Museum Revitalization Project we are right now in the 
middle of.
    The $35 million that Congress has also provided both in 
fiscal year 2020 and also 2021 for deferred maintenance tasks 
has been well-used. We thank you for the bipartisan letter of 
support from this Committee to our appropriators.
    We continue to identify strategies between our capital 
funding and our maintenance funding budget to address our 
deferred maintenance. While many are focused on the development 
of our new museums, we need and deeply appreciate your 
commitment to our existing properties and collections. Our 
future success depends on the stewardship of what we already 
have.
    Climate change is one of our greatest challenges, but we 
remain committed to facing it. The steps we take today will 
increase the resiliency of our institution, its impressive 
buildings, and our collections. With your continued support, 
this is a challenge that we will meet.
    Thank you again for giving us the opportunity to discuss 
the current and planned actions we are taking to protect the 
Nation's irreplaceable treasures. I am happy to answer any 
questions you may have.
    [The statement of Ms. Bechtol follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chairperson. Thank you very, very much.
    And we will turn now to Inspector General Helm.
    You are now recognized for five minutes. But your camera 
has turned off. There you are.

                    STATEMENT OF CATHY HELM

    Ms. Helm. Thank you, Chairperson Lofgren, Ranking Member 
Davis, and Members of the Committee.
    Today I will focus on OIG's oversight of the Smithsonian's 
longstanding challenges related to the management of its 
collections and facilities, as well as challenges that the 
Smithsonian has identified as threats from climate change.
    As a steward of the National Collections, the Smithsonian 
has the unique responsibility to manage and preserve these 
collections held in trust. Assembled over 175 years, the 
National Collections contain more than 155 million items.
    We have done extensive work concerning collections 
stewardship and found a pattern of issues, such as inadequate 
preservation practices, insufficient inventory controls, and 
security of collections that do not meet Smithsonian standards.
    In an audit of the National Museum of American History, we 
found that many collections were stored in substandard 
conditions not conducive to long-term preservation.
    We were particularly troubled by the collections storage 
conditions at the Garber Facility in Suitland, Maryland. Built 
in the 1950s and 1960s, these buildings have exceeded their 
intended useful lives as temporary storage. The collapse of one 
of the buildings from snow and wind in 2010 and damage to other 
buildings from the earthquake in 2011 clearly demonstrated the 
risk to the collections.
    We also found that improvements were needed to collections 
storage areas across the Smithsonian.
    In response to our recommendation, the Smithsonian 
completed in 2014 its first comprehensive survey of the 
condition of the spaces used to store Smithsonian's collections 
and found that 47 percent of this space was unacceptable. The 
Smithsonian developed a thirty-year plan to improve collections 
space conditions, which is now estimated to cost more than $1.5 
million to fully implement.
    The Smithsonian also faces challenges in the deferred 
maintenance of its more than 600 facilities. In 2016, we 
reported that the Smithsonian had not reduced the backlog of 
deferred maintenance because it is spending less than the 
recommended amounts to maintain the condition of its 
facilities.
    The National Research Council recommends that government-
funded organizations spend two to four percent of their current 
replacement value of their facilities on maintenance. The 
Smithsonian has been spending approximately 1 percent annually. 
Given the disparity, the Smithsonian estimates the deferred 
maintenance backlog will grow by 232 percent during this 
decade.
    The Smithsonian has facilities and collections in areas 
that may be affected by flooding, storm surge, and rising sea 
levels. In 2014, the Smithsonian released a statement that 
identifies ways that the Smithsonian will respond to climate 
change, such as by protecting its core asset, the National 
Collections, and operating its facilities and programs in a 
sustainable manner.
    This year, the Smithsonian issued its first annual Climate 
Change Action Plan. The plan identifies ongoing and planned 
projects to reduce the impact of flooding in vulnerable areas 
on the National Mall and in New York City. It also notes that 
the Smithsonian needs to update its vulnerability assessments 
related to flooding based on the latest National Climate 
Assessment.
    Finally, the plan identifies the challenges that the 
Smithsonian faces in maintaining ongoing resources for flood 
protection with competing priorities such as the development of 
two new museums and the major renovations of four museums and 
the Castle.
    We have not evaluated this action plan or its 
implementation. However, we will certainly consider this area 
for future work.
    Thank you, and I welcome any questions.
    [The statement of Ms. Helm follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chairperson. Thank you very much.
    Now we will turn to our final witness, Mr. Phannavong.
    You are now recognized for five minutes. We welcome your 
testimony.

                STATEMENT OF PHETMANO PHANNAVONG

    Mr. Phannavong. Good afternoon, Chairperson Lofgren, 
Ranking Member Davis, and Members of the Committee. My name is 
Phetmano Phannavong. I am a Senior Project Manager at Atkins 
North America, former D.C. National Flood Insurance Program 
coordinator and floodplain manager.
    Atkins is a member of the SNC-Lavalin Group, one of the 
world's leading professional services in project management 
organization with more than 30,000 employees worldwide. Our 
primary focus is on the built and natural environment as we 
provide services in sectors such as power, renewable, and 
water.
    I would like to thank you for the opportunity to talk about 
climate resilience that I am passionate about and also to 
discuss how the Smithsonian might enhance its facilities 
against the effects of climate change.
    I will divide my testimony into three distinct sections: 
first, Federal Triangle flooding in 2006; second, interagency 
flood risk management team in D.C.; and, lastly, collaborative 
governance and comprehensive solutions that are needed.
    Washington, D.C., particularly in the Federal Triangle 
area, is vulnerable to three types of flooding: first, riverine 
flooding, where floodwater overflows the Potomac and Anacostia 
Rivers; second, coastal flooding, where hurricane storm surges 
push floodwater from the Atlantic Ocean to the city; and, 
lastly, interior flooding that is caused by heavy rainfall that 
cannot be absorbed by the ground and overwhelms the drainage 
system. Floods of each type have occurred in the recent past in 
D.C., including interior flooding in Federal Triangle in 2006 
and recently in 2019.
    These floods can have a significant impact on buildings and 
infrastructure. The 2006 Federal Triangle flood destroyed 
critical parts of the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, 
headquarters' electrical and mechanical equipment and submerged 
the basement level under 5 feet of water. The 2006 flood 
exposed the collections of Smithsonian museums, National 
Gallery of Art, and National Archives, as these facilities are 
vulnerable to water damage.
    Future flood risk in Federal Triangle is expected to 
increase because of climate change, including changes in 
precipitation and sea-level rise. According to Climate Ready 
DC, developed by the D.C. Department of Energy and Environment, 
the climate projections indicated annual rainfall and the 
frequency and severity of storms will change over time. Sea-
level rise is expected to make D.C. flooding more frequent and 
severe.
    In the past decade, D.C. has implemented multiple 
initiatives and maintained interagency collaboration and 
coordination to enhance climate resilience. Established in 
2014, the D.C. Silver Jackets is an interagency team that 
coordinates and collaborates among many Federal, regional, and 
D.C. agencies and is co-led by the D.C. Department of Energy 
and Environment, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the 
National Park Service. The Smithsonian is also an active member 
of D.C. Silver Jackets.
    Following the 2006 flood, there was significant interest in 
mitigating the flood threat in the area. Several studies were 
conducted; various actions were taken. Some entities with 
facilities and infrastructure in the area implemented flood-
proofing measures specific to their own facilities.
    The 2011 Federal Triangle Stormwater Drainage Study 
identified system-wide solutions such as constructing storage 
tanks under the National Mall, pumping stations, and new 
tunnels that would reduce the impact of flooding.
    In 2018, the D.C. Silver Jackets reengaged their 
stakeholders, reviewed new strategies, and identified barriers 
to implement the system-wide solutions that I mentioned, 
including lack of ownership and authority and funding and 
financing of projects.
    Managing D.C. flood risks, particularly in Federal 
Triangle, requires integrated approaches in terms of, one, 
governance in developing policies, and two, comprehensive 
solutions that serve multiple purposes. Despite multiple 
efforts so far, there is a need for a single agency or a body 
that has the authority needed to coordinate, manage, and 
implement flood risk projects in Federal Triangle.
    Managing flood risks falls not only under floodplain or 
emergency management but also stormwater, land-use planning, 
and many other programs within Federal and D.C. agencies. In 
addition to individual measures, system-wide solutions are 
required to manage the complexity of flooding in that area.
    Thank you again for affording me the opportunity to speak 
with you today, and I look forward to answering any questions 
you may have.
    [The statement of Mr. Phannavong follows:]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    The Chairperson. Well, thank you.
    And thanks to all three of our witnesses for their very 
excellent testimony.
    Now is the time when Members of the Committee can pose 
questions to the witnesses. And I will turn first to our 
Ranking Member, Mr. Davis, for questions that he may have.
    Mr. Davis. Thank you again, Madam Chairperson.
    I would like to start with Mr. Phannavong.
    Mr. Phannavong, thanks again for being here today.
    In the November 25th article by The New York Times, 
``Saving History With Sandbags: Climate Change Threatens the 
Smithsonian,'' you know, the author includes the image of a 
100-year floodplain which engulfs most of the northern half of 
the National Mall, all the way to the Capitol. And, frankly, it 
looks like the balcony outside of my office and my colleague on 
the Committee Mr. Butterfield's office, if this is correct and 
this happens, we might have some waterfront property off that.
    I would like unanimous consent, Madam Chairperson, to 
insert this article into the record.
    The Chairperson. Without objection, that will be made part 
of the record.
    Mr. Davis. Thank you.
    Mr. Phannavong, how likely do you think it is that we will 
experience flooding as depicted in the zone shown in that 
image?
    Mr. Phannavong. The flood zone that you mention, that is 
considered a 100-year floodplain, or 1 percent chance. It is a 
regulatory flood level that the National Flood Insurance 
Program determined many decades ago.
    Mr. Davis. Okay.
    Mr. Phannavong. So it is a chance, though that wouldn't 
likely happen.
    Mr. Davis. All right.
    In your opinion, does this image portray what is expected 
as a worst-case scenario, or can we expect there to be more 
extreme flooding threats to the National Mall?
    Mr. Phannavong. No, this is not the worst case. Again, this 
area that is depicted, what you see is a regulatory flood level 
that we as a Nation determined, or Congress, or, you know, the 
program determined as a regulatory in terms of flood insurance 
and also flood-plain management regulation in terms of 
development.
    Also, with the way that the flood map has been developed in 
the past, in looking at the historical data to map it out, we 
haven't begun to look at the future conditions that I 
mentioned, right? According to many science-based reports, 
including DOEE, we have projected rainfall, to look at the 
future, what the future will look like.
    And that needs to be part of the conversation now, whether 
or not historical data is enough to be able to design a system, 
to be able to plan an area. To answer your question, more--
the--it will get worse.
    Mr. Davis. Okay. Thank you.
    So, if you think it could be worse, I mean, then we should 
be considerate about the other portions of the National Mall 
and what sort of threat does this pose for the collections 
placed on the National Mall already. Should the Smithsonian 
change how it is storing its historical artifacts and art, and 
should they change plans for new museums being built on the 
Mall?
    Mr. Phannavong. I would add to that, as I mentioned, the 
complexity of the area--think about the area as the bottom of a 
boat. You have water coming from all sides, coming from 
upstream Potomac watershed, coming down through the Potomac and 
Anacostia River. You have tidal water from Atlantic coming up. 
And you have the rainfall that is coming down from the sky that 
we cannot manage with our own system.
    And another type of flooding--and I think we have some--
Chairperson Lofgren mentioned is the Tiber Creek. We have 
rebuilt the area in D.C. on top of the creek. And water, they 
like to go to the low spot. We have water coming all sides.
    Mr. Davis. Yeah.
    Mr. Phannavong. There should be a system to be able to 
figure out how to manage and be able to predict this type of 
flooding.
    Mr. Davis. You know, sir, I have some more questions I need 
to ask some more people, so I am going to reclaim my time from 
you. I appreciate your responses.
    Mr. Phannavong. Thank you.
    Mr. Davis. Ms. Bechtol, the Smithsonian's Climate Change 
Action Plan agrees with The New York Times that the National 
Mall is at risk of becoming a floodplain in the coming years. 
How is the Smithsonian using this information on deciding 
locations for future museums?
    Ms. Bechtol. Thank you for this question.
    We are taking all environmental aspects to a possible site 
location for our new museum. So we are currently looking at a 
site evaluation study where we are looking at 24 different 
sites as possible locations for these two new museums. Two of 
those sites could potentially have flood risk involved in their 
selection.
    So it is part of our criteria that we are taking very 
seriously in analyzing all 24 of those locations.
    Mr. Davis. Great.
    I see I am out of time, but I certainly believe, Madam 
Chair of this Committee, if these flood levels are going to 
happen in the next six to eight years or whatever time period 
these so-called experts want us to address, then this Committee 
needs to start talking about the mosquito abatement issues that 
we are going have in and around the Rayburn Building, what type 
of threats we are going to have to deal with as a campus.
    So, I mean, at some point, we must stop the hypocrisy of 
building new museums and planning to build new museums on the 
National Mall, at the same time talking about flood levels that 
we have yet to see and that we clearly are discussing today in 
what the majority wants to plan for.
    So, with that, thank you all very much, and I yield back.
    The Chairperson. The gentleman yields back.
    I now would turn to the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Raskin 
for five minutes.
    Mr. Raskin. Chairperson Lofgren, thank you so much for 
calling this important hearing.
    Thank you, Mr. Davis.
    Mr. Phannavong, let me start with this. Don't we already 
have some levies that we have built? And how well are those 
levies working? Do they need to be updated or refurbished for 
the future? I think about what happened in New Orleans.
    Mr. Phannavong. Thank you for the question.
    Again, I want to mention about the different types of 
flooding, right? And the levies that the Corps of Engineers 
built and the National Park Service maintains that you mention 
is to protect the water that overflow from the Potomac River. 
That addresses two types flooding, the riverine and coastal. We 
still have--that area still have issue with the interior 
flooding from the rainfall behind it that the levy doesn't 
protect.
    So that is another type of flooding. You know, there needs 
to have a comprehensive looking at the area, rather than just 
one system that may not protect them all.
    Mr. Raskin. I got you.
    In your testimony, you underscored the importance of 
creating a central body or authority that could make flood 
management decisions, both preventive and then also corrective. 
Do you have a specific proposal that is on the table?
    Mr. Phannavong. Based on my experience when I was with D.C. 
government, working with multiple agencies, including many 
agencies under the D.C. Silver Jackets, we--in my opinion, we 
need an agency, a Federal Government agency, that be able to 
communicate with other Federal agencies and have subject-matter 
experts on the issue, the technical subject experts.
    And understand a lot of information that can be shared 
among agencies that can be very sensitive issues that--you 
know, we have D.C. government agency, we have regional agencies 
like D.C. Water and WMATA, the Washington Metro agency.
    So perhaps, in my opinion, as the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers has already been involved with coordination under the 
D.C. Silver Jackets in the issue and be able to get everyone at 
the table and have a subject-matter expert on the flood issue, 
perhaps they would be the appropriate agency to take a close 
look at the issue----
    Mr. Raskin. Okay.
    Mr. Phannavong [continuing]. In my opinion and my 
experience working with many agencies.
    Mr. Raskin. Have you worked with the National Mall 
Underground Coalition, which is a group that I have consulted 
with in the past on this issue?
    Mr. Phannavong. I have been in the past. I have talked to 
them and have seen their proposal and their----
    Mr. Raskin. What has happened with their proposal, their 
multi-use proposal for preparing for flooding and then also 
dealing with other issues?
    Mr. Phannavong. That type of solution, I think that that 
needs to be looked at, right, the comprehensive and system-wide 
solution looking at different issues and provide co-benefits.
    I think it deserve to be looked at, the feasibility of it, 
of whether it can be--speaking in the engineering kind of 
technical terms, it is a project that tries to solve the 
problem that we have, not just the technical engineering 
solution but also the--provide benefits. When we think about 
climate change, like, we talk about both mitigation and 
adaptation, mitigation in terms of cut greenhouse gas 
emissions.
    I think any solution we propose in this area would need to 
be able to provide those benefits as well, not just address 
funding, but maybe address air pollution, address other needs 
of the area, because we have so much limited resources. I think 
that solution did try to capture that, and, in my opinion, it 
deserves to be looked at.
    Mr. Raskin. Thank you.
    I yield back to you, Madam Chairperson.
    The Chairperson. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Steil is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Steil. Thank you very much, Madam Chairperson. I 
appreciate you holding today's hearing. I would love an 
opportunity to have a broad hearing, but let's dive in on the 
topic as presented today.
    Mr. Phannavong you know, we saw a lot of rain in March. 
There was a recent New York Times article--I don't know if that 
was some of the impetus for the majority bringing this specific 
of a hearing--that came out recently kind of looking at the 
March rain, its impact on the Smithsonian.
    Was the amount of rain that we experienced in March out of 
line for, kind of, broad storms in the D.C. area, maybe for 
March but maybe not for July?
    Mr. Phannavong. We start seeing more and more now, not 
just----
    Mr. Steil. Understood the frequency, sir, but was the 
amount of rain that came down, like, very abnormal to you, in 
terms of what the facility should be able to handle?
    Mr. Phannavong. Yes.
    Mr. Steil. It was? How far outside the norm would you 
consider that March storm?
    Mr. Phannavong. I don't have the number to be able to look 
at--to answer you right now, but it is something that it 
wasn't--the design----
    Mr. Steil. Tell you what, I would love a little bit of a 
flavor--maybe you can provide some comments into the record 
when we are done--as to how significantly different this storm 
was than previous storms that would occur each year. I think 
that would be helpful for us to understand the risk level.
    Because what we are looking at, as you correctly said 
earlier, you know, we are sitting--many of the Smithsonian 
buildings are sitting in a 100-year flood zone, which really 
means that it has a 1 percent chance in any given year to 
experience significant flooding. So, meaning, over a thirty-
year period, almost a one-in-three chance that you are going to 
see a flood during that thirty-year period.
    And so, I think it is interesting that we have the 
Smithsonian, on one hand, investing significantly in buildings 
on the Mall, many of these areas a 100-year flood zone, and, at 
the same time, trying to talk about how do we mitigate the 
current infrastructure. I think it is a challenge that we need 
to hit head-on.
    And so, if I can, I would like to jump over to you, Ms. 
Bechtol. In particular, it was noted that the backlog has been 
building dramatically. I believe the Smithsonian has been 
setting aside roughly one percent of the annual budget to 
address maintenance facilities. Is that correct?
    Ms. Bechtol. That is correct.
    Mr. Steil. What would be--I am more familiar residentially. 
Kind of the general rule of thumb, as somebody who buys a 
house, is that it is going to be about two percent of the value 
of the house that you must set aside for maintenance.
    I am not uniquely familiar on museum properties. What would 
be kind of the industry average or the industry recommended 
percent that one would set aside in a given year?
    Ms. Bechtol. So cultural facilities such as ourselves, it 
would be between two and four percent. So----
    Mr. Steil. And so is the request, though, one percent? Or 
has that been the funded amount and the request has been 
between two percent and four?
    Ms. Bechtol. The request, we are currently at the 1 
percent, and we were fortunate enough to receive that $35 
million plus-up in fiscal year 2020 and 2021----
    Mr. Steil. But it would beg the question, though, and maybe 
you could just enlighten me, as to, why would the request be 
one percent when the general average would be two to four 
percent and we are seeing a significant backlog? It seems like 
the request may be quite low.
    Ms. Bechtol. Well, the surge in funding both in fiscal year 
2020 and 2021, there is a lot of work that goes into preparing, 
essentially, to execute that funding. And we were able to 
execute that funding in both fiscal years by over 90 percent, 
even though we had two-year funding at that time.
    So we are really pleased with this incremental approach. 
And it just allows us to really identify and work our scopes of 
work and correctly plan for how to execute that money so that 
we execute it correctly.
    Mr. Steil. So is it fair to say, then, that the reason the 
request is less than half of kind of what you consider the 
industry average is because there is not a capacity to be able 
to maintain the maintenance levels that one would normally like 
to see?
    Ms. Bechtol. Well, our plan is to actually get up to that 
two percent mark----
    Mr. Steil. Okay.
    Ms. Bechtol [continuing]. So we hope for this incremental 
increase each year.
    Mr. Steil. And how do you compare that to what I would 
consider the pretty significant overhauls that we are seeing 
either at the Hirshhorn, which is undergoing significant 
overhauls right now, or Air and Space, versus kind of the 
incremental year-to-year maintenance? How are you balancing 
those two issues?
    Ms. Bechtol. And you are right, it is a balancing act, and 
both are imperative. So we talked about the deferred 
maintenance increase and that gradual increase, much needed, 
but, in addition to that, it is also the capital dollar.
    So, both for our Air and Space Revitalization Project that 
we are about 50 percent complete right now, in addition to when 
we begin our Castle and our Arts and Industries renovations 
that we are calling that Historic Core Revitalization Project, 
both of those projects, when we complete them, will take fifty 
percent of that deferred maintenance away. So----
    Mr. Steil. Okay. I----
    Ms. Bechtol [continuing]. They are large capital projects.
    Mr. Steil. Appreciate that I am only being cognizant of the 
time. Otherwise, I would like to have this conversation much 
longer.
    Madam Chairperson, I will yield back.
    The Chairperson. The gentleman yields back.
    I would ask unanimous consent to put in the record the 
letter that I wrote--and I was so pleased that the Ranking 
Member signed on with me--to the Appropriations Committee 
asking for robust funding, really a huge increase, in the 
maintenance budget for the Smithsonian. Our Committee has been 
very firm on that.
    The Chairperson. At this point, I would like to recognize 
the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Butterfield for five 
minutes.
    Mr. Butterfield. Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
    Let me say good afternoon to all of you and just thank you 
so much for your friendship. Thank you for the incredible work 
that all of you do, on both sides of the aisle. You know, we 
are running up now to the Christmas holidays, and let me just 
wish all of you a very, very merry Christmas and a prosperous 
and productive new year.
    And to our witnesses today, thank you, as well, for your 
testimony.
    Let me begin, if I can, Madam Chairperson, by speaking to 
the Facilities Director, Ms. Bechtol.
    Ms. Bechtol, we have talked a lot over the last few minutes 
about flooding and the effects that climate change can have on 
our assets, and certainly this is an important conversation to 
have. But are there other concerns that we may have, other than 
flooding, that may be connected to climate change? Are there 
any other matters that we need to talk about, other than the 
flooding potential?
    Ms. Bechtol. Absolutely, I would say two that are in the 
forefront of our planning. And that is around the increased 
intensity of the storms that we are seeing. And, of course, 
whether that is through wind, through those terrible storms we 
just had, or whether that is through rain, that is something 
that we have all our risk mitigations in place to protect 
ourselves from.
    So that is something we are also very concerned about and 
planning all kinds of training, all kinds of in-house 
mitigations from the standpoint of just, if it happens, we will 
be ready for it.
    Mr. Butterfield. Thank you.
    I think you may have mentioned that the National Museum of 
African American History and Culture, since it has been 
recently built, that it was built with certain protections in 
mind, that it was built to protect against this type of 
catastrophe. Is it 100 percent safe, or we do need to do any 
fortification of the African American Museum?
    Ms. Bechtol. We feel very comfortable with our African 
American Museum and the mitigations that we built into the 
design.
    So, just as two examples, we have flood walls that are 
built into the design. They serve also security functions, they 
also hold water back, and they are beautiful. So, they serve 
all three purposes.
    We also built in redundancy in our equipment. So, in 
several of our things such as our water pumps and several of 
our pieces of major maintenance equipment, we actually built in 
redundancy so that, if something happens to one piece of 
equipment, I will be able to run another pump and to be able to 
keep pumping that water out if that water table was to come up, 
whether it is through flooding or some other emergency.
    Mr. Butterfield. Thank you.
    Now, we have museums across the country. And, of course, 
our museum here in Washington is the premier of all the 
museums. But is the Smithsonian collaborating with other 
museums in other States and jurisdictions about climate 
change's impact on their facilities?
    Ms. Bechtol. Absolutely. I would say we communicate and 
collaborate within all the cultural museums and zoos that are 
throughout our country, as well as the world.
    In addition to that, it is very important to continue our 
collaborations with the District government, with all of the 
surrounding Federal agencies. It was already talked about, the 
Silver Jackets organization; that is an organization that 
brings us all together.
    We must understand that this is a regional problem. This is 
not just the Smithsonian's problem, though we are a piece of it 
and an important piece of it. But, really, the entire--this 
affects the entire government. So, we have to come together to 
work on these solutions.
    Mr. Butterfield. That is kind of what I suspected, and I 
thank you for that.
    Let me conclude with the Inspector General.
    Is there a relationship, sir, between the Smithsonian's--I 
mean, ma'am, Ms. Helm--is there a relationship between the 
Smithsonian's collections management challenges, the challenges 
that we face, and the backlog of deferred maintenance? Is there 
a connection there?
    Ms. Helm. I would say there is a connection. Many of the 
projects that are going to be used to address flooding are 
maintenance projects. And, I think our work has also pointed 
that our collections are at risk because they are in inadequate 
storage spaces that are vulnerable to flooding and weather. So, 
there is a connection.
    Mr. Butterfield. Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I am going 
to yield back and wish all a very merry Christmas. I think it 
is proper to say happy holidays. Yes. Thank you.
    The Chairperson. Thank you, Mr. Butterfield.
    Mr. Aguilar is recognized for five minutes.
    Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Madam Chairperson.
    And thank you to our witnesses for being here.
    Ms. Bechtol, I want to just talk a little bit more about 
that New York Times article that the Ranking Member mentioned. 
It stated that several entities, including the National Park 
Service, the Army Corps, and the District of Columbia Water 
Utility, and the National Capital Planning Commission, share 
the responsibility for controlling flooding on the National 
Mall.
    Are there ongoing conversations or discussions that would 
create a single employee designation for someone on our side to 
specifically manage these risks, including how to mitigate 
those ongoing issues to protect our Nation's history?
    Ms. Bechtol. I don't know about a single person, but I 
would probably think that the problem is so vast that the Army 
Corps of Engineers would probably be the agency that is the 
most experienced and has the most expertise in this area.
    I think it is also important to understand that every unit, 
so a Smithsonian Institution, must have mitigations in place to 
protect its property. And it is also important to understand 
that we need redundancy. So, even with that, you know, global 
government response, which I highly recommend, we would also 
need to take care of our own facilities too.
    Mr. Aguilar. I appreciate it.
    I feel a little put on notice by the Chairperson, as an 
appropriator on the Committee, relating to her letter with the 
Ranking Member. I did want to talk a little bit about costs.
    To Ms. Bechtol and Ms. Helm, the New York Times article 
mentioned that the Smithsonian is looking for a half a million 
dollars to begin working on the separate $39 million plan for 
flood walls and other structural changes to fortify the 
American History Museum.
    Can you talk about the timeline that the repairs could take 
if funding was secured? And if we fail to address these issues, 
what would be the total cost to retroactively protect these 
artifacts?
    Ms. Bechtol. I guess, Cathy, I will maybe start with the 
answer, and then Cathy can follow on.
    At our American History Museum--so we master-planned first, 
and then after this master planning, it really puts into a 
period of flow from essentially the beginning of the planning 
to execution. Inside our 10-year capital plan, we have a plan 
to take care of that museum with flood-mitigation measures when 
we do the revitalization of the entire east side of that 
museum.
    We are in the process of building a new collections storage 
facility so that we can swing that collection on the east side 
of the museum, as well as all the collections that are still in 
the basement, out to our Pod 6 facility in Suitland, Maryland. 
Once those collections are removed, that entire revitalization 
will begin. That is all within our next ten-year capital plan.
    Mr. Aguilar. Ms. Helm.
    Ms. Helm. And what I would like to add is that our work led 
to the recommendation that Smithsonian develop a comprehensive 
plan looking Smithsonian-wide to identify the collections space 
needs.
    And, given the decentralized nature of the Smithsonian, the 
most prudent, cost-effective way to approach that is through a 
comprehensive plan that looks for what are the highest risks 
and allocates the available funds in the most cost-effective 
way. And that has been our contribution.
    Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Ms. Helm.
    Ms. Helm, talking about that prioritization and your role, 
are we aware of any types of, you know, salvage plans, or what 
type of prioritization, if an event were to occur, would the 
Smithsonian undertake?
    And, again, I guess this is for both of you, but wanted to 
start with Ms. Helm. Any prioritization of a salvage plan in 
case we needed to protect artifacts if an event was occurring?
    Ms. Helm. So, I think that would probably fall under the 
implementation of the collections space framework. And, as I 
mentioned, our work led to the development of that plan, and we 
have not yet gone back to look at its implementation.
    Mr. Aguilar. Ms. Bechtol.
    Ms. Bechtol. Okay. I would just interject that we have 
established, starting in 2016, a training program for 
preparedness and response in collection emergencies. And we 
have stood up an SI-wide team of professionals that would come 
in--in any type of emergency, would come in to respond. That 
team is made up of our security workforce, our maintenance 
workforce, our operations cleaning workforce, as well as those 
collections managers. And so, with this team approach, we feel 
comfortable in being able to respond to really any sort of 
emergency.
    We practice this response in training sessions. And then we 
have also had, unfortunately, several different emergencies, as 
we mentioned in the testimony earlier, that we have gotten 
practice through response, whether it has been through snow 
issues or flooding issues.
    Mr. Aguilar. Thank you, Ms. Bechtol.
    I yield back, Madam Chairperson.
    The Chairperson. The gentleman yields back.
    The gentlelady from Pennsylvania is recognized for five 
minutes.
    Ms. Scanlon. Thank you so much.
    And thank you to our witnesses.
    You know, this is very deja vu for us here in the Delaware 
Valley because, at the end of the summer, when Hurricane Ida 
tore through here, we had tornadoes, we had not once-in-100-
year floods but once-in-1,000-year floods.
    One of the big victims of that flooding--I see Ms. Bechtol 
nodding her head; I think she knows where I am going. The 
Brandywine River Art Museum, which houses the Andrew Wyeth 
collection, was inundated. Every one of the ten buildings on 
that property were flooded. They had about $6 million worth of 
damage. I mean, the heart-stopping part of it is that none of 
the Wyeths were damaged. They were all above the second-floor 
level, but this flood went up to the second-floor level. All 
the HVAC systems and everything got ruined.
    So, Mr. Phannavong, I guess the first question is, we were 
talking a little bit earlier about these 100-year flood plains, 
but what we are reading in the wake of the flooding that we had 
here is that those predictors aren't so useful anymore, because 
they are based on historic data and we are seeing ahistorical, 
atypical water flooding, et cetera.
    Can you speak a little bit to that?
    Mr. Phannavong. Sure. Thank you for your question.
    You are right. A lot of--particularly in D.C., we have a 
lot of data looking at the future, what the future will look 
like, in terms of precipitation and sea-level rise. As part of 
the planning, we need to start to incorporate these new 
numbers, new projection, in our planning.
    Yes, we have the 100-year flood map, you know, as a 
regulatory flood map, as something that, you know, many 
facility managers have been using, the city had been using for 
planning. In fact, the D.C. new Comprehensive Plan and the 
Federal Elements by National Capital Planning Commission 
recognized the future conditions due to the climate change and 
projection.
    We need to start to take that science down to the 
engineering level and planning level, what it would look like 
in different scenarios, so that we can plan for, you know, 
either we want to be there, or we want to strengthen our 
buildings, existing buildings, against that new reality.
    I think that is where we are right now. Are we ready to--I 
mean, the technology and science is there? I think we just need 
our policies and the way that we design and construct things to 
meet that new challenge.
    Ms. Scanlon. Thank you. I couldn't agree more that we need 
to use the data and the science we must project the future. And 
I find it interesting that, in the business world, the 
capitalist side of it, insurance companies are using that data, 
insurance companies are using that science to project risk. So, 
I think we in the government need to get on track as well.
    Ms. Bechtol, can you speak a little bit to any lessons 
learned from the Brandywine River Museum situation?
    Ms. Bechtol. Yeah, I was horrified to hear about that day. 
And, of course, we didn't have a lot of notice in that storm, 
so that was one where the weather didn't really project that 
level of water.
    You know, the New York Times article mentioned sandbagging. 
And, honest to goodness, if you have time, that is really a 
mitigation measure that could have been used around that 
museum, but it is so close to the water.
    I guess, in my lessons learned, it has been to really 
prepare the Smithsonian for every possible--right?--outcome and 
to really have an in-house work staff. So, we work 24/7 at the 
Smithsonian Institution, and sometimes these storms happen in 
the middle of the night. And when the 2006 flood occurred along 
Constitution Avenue on our Nation's Capitol, that flooding also 
affected our Smithsonian Institution, but we had staff that was 
able to respond instantaneously when that water started to come 
up.
    So that is something that I understand is--it costs money 
to staff things, but, with irreplaceable artifacts, the in-
house staff is critical. And then it must be trained, and they 
have to have the materials right available in order to respond 
right away.
    Ms. Scanlon. Yeah. And, unfortunately, with a 21-foot 
flood----
    Ms. Bechtol. Right.
    Ms. Scanlon  [continuing]. Sandbags weren't going to do it. 
But the fact that they had preplanned to keep the art on the 
higher floors, at least, was helpful.
    Ms. Bechtol. That is right. That is right.
    Ms. Scanlon. So, we do appreciate your efforts and see the 
need to proceed.
    And the Brandywine River Museum has reopened for the 
holidays, which is an important part of its year, so I would 
urge folks to visit if they are able.
    Thank you. I yield back.
    The Chairperson. The gentlelady yields back.
    The Representative from New Mexico is recognized for five 
minutes.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you so much, Chairperson 
Lofgren.
    And thank you to our witnesses.
    As we have heard earlier, as the New York Times article 
said it, as we all believe it in our core, that, you know, our 
history, our art, our culture, it is an integral part, both in 
the bad part of that history and culture and the good part of 
that history and culture, and it needs to be protected.
    And, you know, then we have the concept of being honest, 
being very honest, about what climate change is doing to all 
parts of our lives, and that, in so many different ways that we 
might not have thought of, we need to both address the 
underlying cause of the climate change and then do whatever we 
can to protect us.
    I really did appreciate Mr. Phannavong's assessment that 
technology and science is there; you know, we just need to put 
it into action. We need to fund it. We need to get those plans 
in place and then actually make it happen.
    We have heard today a lot about how the Smithsonian plans 
to protect its existing work, but I would like to pivot to 
future collections and the latest museums. As you were talking 
about the museums that are most at risk, the newest museums are 
in a better position.
    But I want to talk about the National Museum of the 
American Latino and the American Women's History Museum. There 
are many, me included, who want these museums to be located on 
the Mall, right? Because that is where all the key stories are 
told. And if we are going to have, sort of, equality in 
geographic setting to tell those stories, having it on the Mall 
is key.
    So we can plan. We can use science to how do we now build 
those museums in a way that protects them as we look at the 
future, so that they are part of the planning and part of the 
building of how we protect them and all the museums.
    So, Director Bechtol, can you discuss how you are 
incorporating resiliency into your plans as you look at those 
facilities? And I understood that when you were thinking about 
the National Museum of African American History you also 
included that. Can you tell us, you know, how you are using 
those lessons as you plan for the Latino History Museum and the 
Women's History Museum?
    Ms. Bechtol. Absolutely. I think our African American 
History and Culture Museum has essentially showcased that, if 
we know what that science is and where that location is and we 
can study it, then we can build in design measures to protect 
that facility.
    In relationship to both new museums, we are also planning 
on not housing the collections in these facilities. So, the 
collections will be housed in state-of-the-art facilities that 
are built to house collections, and they will be off the 
National Mall, so both in Dulles, Virginia, as well as in our 
Suitland, Maryland, campuses. Both of those campuses do not 
have flood issues. There are other risks, as you can imagine, 
but flood risk is not one of them.
    So that is really what we are doing with the new museums. 
And we are not really worried about being able to place those 
museums. If the sites are selected that are on the Nation's 
Mall, we will design in flood resiliency into those two new 
museums.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you very much. I think that is 
just so very wise. You are taking that off the table. There are 
other considerations, but let's focus on the wise, leaving that 
out.
    I don't have a lot of time, but it seems to me that, as I 
have been listening to this hearing, as I read the testimony, 
it is Congress that needs to give you some money to be able to 
get this done. What are some of the other major barriers to 
implementing the plan? If I told you, what do you need from 
Congress, what is your answer going to be?
    Ms. Bechtol. If I was to answer first up, it is your 
continued support. I would say that the Smithsonian Institution 
is extremely fortunate to have the Federal support that it 
does.
    We are also very fortunate to be able to fundraise and have 
private and corporate support. So, we sort of get the best of 
all worlds.
    I think it behooves us to plan accordingly, have solid 
planning, and be able to give notice both to Congress, as well 
as OMB, what our requirements actually are.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. Thank you.
    In the twenty seconds I have left, what would you add to 
that, Mr. Phannavong?
    Mr. Phannavong. Me? Sorry.
    Ms. Leger Fernandez. My time is up. I was asking what you 
thought Congress should do to do the protections, but my time 
is up, and I will yield back.
    Thank you, Madam Chairperson, for holding this hearing.
    The Chairperson. Thank you very much.
    And I will now ask just a couple of questions.
    First, let me say, I think this has been a very helpful 
hearing. And it was important to focus on this threat, because, 
you know, you have a broad discussion and this can be lost in 
the shuffle, but this is a very important element of our 
future.
    Let me just ask you, Ms. Bechtol, have any items in the 
Smithsonian collection already been damaged or destroyed 
because of flooding or other climate-related issues?
    Ms. Bechtol. Not a single item has been affected by 
flooding. So we have been very fortunate, with all of our 
responsiveness, to be able to protect even when we have had 
flooding threats.
    The Chairperson. Well, I want to thank you for that good 
news and also thank the staff of the Smithsonian for the 
extraordinary work that they have done to protect America's 
heritage and the artifacts that are so important to us.
    Let me just ask: Last week, we had historic tornadoes that 
devastated parts of the central United States, including--and 
our prayers are with our ranking member's constituents. There 
was a tornado that killed people in his district.
    We know from our review--and the Science Committee, which I 
also serve on, has looked at these issues--weather events are 
becoming more extreme because of climate change.
    Now, the D.C. area isn't historically affected by tornadoes 
like other parts of the country. However, they can and do 
strike here. A few years ago, a tornado damaged the National 
Mall, and this summer there were several tornadoes in this 
area, including one just a mile from the Capitol.
    To what extent has the Smithsonian planning for climate 
change and extreme weather also addressed this potential 
threat?
    Ms. Bechtol. I will start with that, and Cathy may have 
others to add.
    We look at all risk. And, certainly, climate change has 
multiple factors, even from the standpoint of fire is a 
potential for some of our facilities that are in the Arizona 
area.
    We are looking at, certainly, wind risk or something like 
that when it comes to--we are open to the public every day. So 
it isn't just safeguarding our collections, but it is also, of 
course, safeguarding our staff and safeguarding our public. So 
we also drill and have whole safety protocols that we 
communicate out, not just to our Smithsonian staff but also to 
our public, in the event that a storm such as a tornado would 
be imminent. We practice this communication throughout our 
facilities on a routine basis. And it is really to, like I 
mentioned, not just to protect our collection. We are also 
trying to protect that wonderful public that comes to see us 
every single day.
    So I would say it is in training, but it is also just being 
aware of what is potentially possible, and then drilling that 
throughout our staff to prepare.
    The Chairperson. Ms. Helm, do you have anything to add to 
that?
    Ms. Helm. I would like to add one thing. And our work has 
demonstrated that the Smithsonian collections and facilities 
are already at risk. It is not really a future--there are 
future risks that could be magnified with climate change, but 
they are currently at risk.
    There are collections in the basement at the American 
History and Natural History Museum, which are two of the most 
vulnerable museums on the Mall to flooding. As I mentioned, out 
at the Garber Facility, there was a building that collapsed 
about ten years ago during a weather storm.
    So I just want to emphasize that the risk is now as well.
    The Chairperson. Right.
    Let me ask: We focused on the Federal Triangle, as is 
appropriate, but we have also another Smithsonian Institution 
in Washington, D.C., and that is the Zoo. Now, it is not near 
the flood plain, but it is right near Rock Creek.
    And I am wondering--you know, maybe this question is to 
you, Mr. Phannavong, but is that a flood risk as well up there, 
the National Zoo? Are we prepared up there as well?
    Mr. Phannavong. The location of the National Zoo next to 
Rock Creek also has, you know, flood plain area, but it is not 
as a threat like in the Federal Triangle. I think that there is 
some area further down closer to the creek that needs to be 
paid attention to, maybe potential erosions and some other 
types of measures to protect that. But, in terms of flood risk, 
it is not as high, I would say, in comparison with the Federal 
Triangle area.
    The Chairperson. Well, first, I want to thank all of the 
witnesses for the testimony here today. You know, it is very 
clear that we have a real-time, now, need to take steps to 
protect the Smithsonian. I think that we have a blueprint for 
doing that.
    I am encouraged that the planning--you know, we had 
bipartisan support for the two new museums that are being 
pursued, and the location will be very deeply informed by the 
climate change challenge that we face. We don't want to create 
new problems.
    But what has been made clear to me is that this is an issue 
beyond--clearly beyond the Smithsonian threat, but, you know, 
the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Education 
is right along in this flood plain as well. The Botanic Gardens 
is not built to withstand this flooding.
    So I do think that we need to contact, I think it would be 
the Oversight Committee, but there needs to be a broader 
examination of this that includes the GSA, Army Corps of 
Engineers, as well as the Architect of the Capitol, so that we 
can plan for climate resiliency sooner rather than later.
    Because we know, as was mentioned by one of my colleagues, 
it is very clear that the historical records that we have 
relied on are not reliable anymore. The pace of change, because 
of climate change, has made those predictions unreliable. So, 
we need to pick up the pace on this.
    Our Committee has just a small piece of the jurisdiction, 
but I will be in touch with the Oversight and Reform Committee, 
because there are many other aspects to this.
    I also note that the Committee--I think Mr. Steil had 
additional questions, and others of us may have additional 
questions. If so, we will send them to you in writing, each of 
our witnesses. We would ask that if you could respond promptly 
we would appreciate that. We will keep the hearing record open 
so that that exchange of questions and answers can be 
completed.
    The Chairperson. Now, if there is no further business 
before the Committee, I would like to thank once again all the 
Members and the witnesses and note that the Committee, without 
objection, will stand adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 1:47 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
                         [all]