[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]