[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]






                           




 
   LEFT IN THE DARK: EXAMINING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S EFFORTS TO


       ELIMINATE THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST'S CLEAN ENERGY PRODUCTION

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

                           OVERSIGHT HEARING

                               before the

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES

                                 of the

                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                       Tuesday, December 12, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-86

                               __________

       Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
       
       
       [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 



        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
                                   or
          Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
          
          
          
                          ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 54-449          WASHINGTON : 2024
   
          
          
          
          


                     COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES

                     BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
                    DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
                 RAE1L M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member

Doug Lamborn, CO                      Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA                 Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 
Tom McClintock, CA                     CNMI
Paul Gosar, AZ                        Jared Huffman, CA
Garret Graves, LA                     Ruben Gallego, AZ
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS          Joe Neguse, CO
Doug LaMalfa, CA                      Mike Levin, CA
Daniel Webster, FL                    Katie Porter, CA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR          Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Russ Fulcher, ID                      Melanie A. Stansbury, NM
Pete Stauber, MN                      Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
John R. Curtis, UT                    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
Tom Tiffany, WI                       Kevin Mullin, CA
Jerry Carl, AL                        Val T. Hoyle, OR
Matt Rosendale, MT                    Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Lauren Boebert, CO                    Seth Magaziner, RI
Cliff Bentz, OR                       Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jen Kiggans, VA                       Ed Case, HI
Jim Moylan, GU                        Debbie Dingell, MI
Wesley P. Hunt, TX                    Susie Lee, NV
Mike Collins, GA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL
John Duarte, CA
Harriet M. Hageman, WY

  
                                     

                    Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
                      Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
                 Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
                   http://naturalresources.house.gov
                                 ------                                

             SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES

                       CLIFF BENTZ, OR, Chairman
                      JEN KIGGANS, VA, Vice Chair
                   JARED HUFFMAN, CA, Ranking Member

Robert J. Wittman, VA                Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Tom McClintock, CA                   Mike Levin, CA
Garret Graves, LA                    Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS         Kevin Mullin, CA
Doug LaMalfa, CA                     Val T. Hoyle, OR
Daniel Webster, FL                   Seth Magaziner, RI
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR         Debbie Dingell, MI
Jerry Carl, AL                       Ruben Gallego, AZ
Lauren Boebert, CO                   Joe Neguse, CO
Jen Kiggans, VA                      Katie Porter, CA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL                Ed Case, HI
John Duarte, CA                      Ra uAE1l M. Grijalva, AZ, ex 
Harriet M. Hageman, WY                   officio
Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio

                                 ------                                
                                CONTENTS

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on Tuesday, December 12, 2023.......................     1

Statement of Members:

    Bentz, Hon. Cliff, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Oregon............................................     1
    Huffman, Hon. Jared, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of California........................................     3
    Westerman, Hon. Bruce, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Arkansas..........................................     5

Statement of Witnesses:

    Maunu, Neil, Executive Director, Pacific Northwest Waterways 
      Association, Portland, Oregon..............................     7
        Prepared statement of....................................     9
        Supplemental testimony submitted for the record..........    10
    Falkenberg, Humaira, Power Resources Manager, Pacific County 
      PUD, Raymond, Washington...................................    28
        Prepared statement of....................................    29
    Slater, Lindsay, Vice President of Government Affairs, Trout 
      Unlimited, Arlington, Virginia.............................    37
        Prepared statement of....................................    38
        Supplemental testimony submitted for the record..........    44
    Simms, Scott, CEO and Executive Director, Public Power 
      Council, Portland, Oregon..................................    45
        Prepared statement of....................................    46

Additional Materials Submitted for the Record:

    Submissions for the Record by Representative Bentz

        Governor Greg Gianforte, Letter to President Biden dated 
          December 8, 2023.......................................    74
        NRECA and APPA, Letter to Secretary Granholm, Dept. of 
          Energy dated December 1, 2023..........................    75
        Public Utility District No. 2 of Pacific County, Letter 
          to Deputy Secretary Turk, Dept. of Energy dated 
          November 22, 2023......................................    76
        Public Power Council, Letter to NOAA dated June 9, 2023..    79
        Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, Letter to 
          Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services and CEQ 
          dated November 21, 2023................................    81

    Submissions for the Record by Representative Huffman

        National Congress of American Indians, Resolution #AK-21-
          009....................................................    85
        Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Resolution #2021-
          23.....................................................    89
        American Rivers, Statement for the Record................    93
        American Fisheries Society, Letter to the Committee dated 
          December 23, 2023......................................    95
        AFS News, ``Statement of the American Fisheries Society 
          and the Western Division of AFS About the Need to 
          Breach the Four Dams on the Lower Snake Rivers''.......    99

    Submissions for the Record by Representative Rodgers

        U.S. Government Commitments in Support of the Columbia 
          Basin Restoration Initiative and in Partnership with 
          the Six Sovereigns, Confidential Mediation Document....   102
                                     



      OVERSIGHT HEARING ON LEFT IN THE DARK: EXAMINING THE BIDEN 
                            ADMINISTRATION'S



  EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST'S CLEAN ENERGY PRODUCTION

                              ----------                              


                       Tuesday, December 12, 2023

                     U.S. House of Representatives

             Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries

                     Committee on Natural Resources

                             Washington, DC

                              ----------                              

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:48 p.m., in 
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Cliff Bentz 
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
    Present: Representatives Bentz, McClintock, LaMalfa, 
Gonzalez-Colon, Duarte, Hageman, Westerman; Huffman, Mullin, 
Hoyle, and Porter.
    Also present: Fulcher, Newhouse, Rodgers, Rosendale, and 
Zinke.

    Mr. Bentz. The Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and 
Fisheries will come to order.
    Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a 
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
    Good afternoon, everyone. I want to welcome our witnesses, 
Members, and our guests in the audience to today's hearing. The 
Subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on a hearing 
entitled, ``Left in the Dark: Examining the Biden 
Administration's Efforts to Eliminate the Pacific Northwest's 
Clean Energy Production.''
    I ask unanimous consent that all other Members' opening 
statements be made part of the hearing record if they are 
submitted in accordance with the Committee Rule 3(o).
    I also ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from 
Washington, Mrs. McMorris Rodgers; the gentleman from 
Washington, Mr. Newhouse; the gentleman from Idaho, Mr. 
Fulcher; and the gentlemen from Montana, Mr. Rosendale and Mr. 
Zinke be allowed to participate in today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I now recognize myself for an opening statement.

STATEMENT OF THE HON. CLIFF BENTZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 
                    FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

    Mr. Bentz. Again, I thank all of you for being here. As 
Chairman Conrad Burns said years ago regarding a somewhat 
similar situation, this dam case is back. And indeed, it is.
    To set the stage for today's hearing, here is a narrow 
snapshot of the last 3 years of the 22 years of litigation and 
politicalization of the Columbia and Snake Rivers power 
navigation and salmon conflicts. On July 24, 2020, NOAA's 
National Marine Fisheries Service issued its final biological 
opinion, as required by section 7(a)(2) of the ESA on the 
effects of the operation and maintenance of the Columbia River 
system of Federal dams.
    In that opinion, NMFS concluded that the operation and 
maintenance of the Columbia River system was not--and I repeat, 
was not--likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the 
Snake River spring, summer Chinook salmon, steelhead, sockeye 
salmon, fall Chinook salmon, and 11 other species of fish. The 
analysis upon which this opinion was based took 4 years to 
complete, involving an EIS that cost some $50 million. The 
document is 1,400 pages long.
    With total predictability, about 7 months later, in 2021, 
the National Wildlife Federation filed in Federal court the 
eighth supplemental complaint challenging NMFS's decision. Also 
with total predictability, NMFS, noting that there was a new 
president in the White House, promptly reversed course and, 
without a care about its credibility, issued a new report 
called ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and 
Steelhead,'' claiming in this document, ``The science robustly 
supports dam removal on the Snake River.'' It is astounding, 
just the opposite of what this very agency had decided a mere 
24 months earlier. It is enough to give the casual observer 
whiplash.
    Following the filing of the eighth amended complaint 
mentioned earlier, Federal District Court Judge Simon entered a 
stay of court proceedings in October 2021 based on the 
assertion that the parties to the lawsuit were ``in good faith 
discussions to resolve the entire litigation.'' His stay of 
proceedings has been extended several times. The most recent 
stay will end in just several days, on December 15, 2023.
    A few words about these ``good faith discussions'' upon 
which Judge Simon relied are in order. The so-called 
negotiations were closed to the public, the parties were bound 
by gag agreements, and the group was designed to leave out 
ratepayers, irrigators, navigational interests, and communities 
dependent upon the flow of commerce up and down the 465 miles 
of Columbia and Snake Rivers. Since all the parties at the 
table shared the same goals, it is difficult to understand why 
it took so long to create the so-called mediation document.
    The same ``good faith'' discussions were the focus of a 
hearing this very Committee held in Richland, Washington on 
June 26 of this year. Sadly, the government agencies who are 
parties to the lawsuit and deeply involved in the so-called 
mediation refused to answer my questions or, for that matter, 
any of the questions we Congressmen and women asked about the 
content of the secret agreement. These officials repeatedly 
refused to discuss or share any part of their sue-and-settle 
contrivance, the product of about 2 years of backroom collusion 
that we now know will cost billions of dollars, if enacted, 
perhaps double the $3 million Northwest ratepayers' electricity 
bills, cripple important parts of the Northwest economy, and 
decimate any number of river communities.
    About 2 weeks ago, the sue-and-settle document containing 
the collusive efforts of this narrow group of self-dealing 
plaintiffs led by President Biden's Council on Environmental 
Quality was leaked. And we have it in front of us today. This 
agreement, entitled, ``Confidential Mediation Document,'' is a 
narrow, elitist, top-down, big government, progressively 
burdened product of the first order. A worse approach than the 
one found in this instrument to solving the truly difficult and 
decades-long problems posed by the challenges to our 
communities and our fish would be hard to imagine.
    So, what is this hearing for today? Here is what we hope to 
accomplish.
    First, call out from the rooftops the incredible damage the 
provisions found in this mediation document will do to the 
billion-dollar negotiations now occurring between BPA and its 
millions of ratepayers as customers of the BPA, as they 
struggle to find certainty in an agreement that is 
intentionally and dangerously ambiguous.
    Second, call out the absolutely undeniable fact that this 
agreement will and already has led to even more litigation. It 
is not a settlement agreement so much as a litigation cluster 
bomb.
    Third, call out the incredible damage done by the CEQ in 
ignoring the APA and exceeding its statutory purpose. Director 
Mallory needs to re-read the provisions of NEPA that describe 
her CEQ's authority. The challenge of protecting the millions 
of ratepayers against dramatic increases in their utility bills 
and the thousands of businesses and communities that rely on 
river commerce on the one hand, and the fish on the other is 
not a problem that will be solved by unelected bureaucrats 
hiding behind the skirts of the Federal Court.
    Again, I thank all of you for being here. I look forward to 
your testimony.
    I now recognize Ranking Member Huffman for his opening 
statement.

   STATEMENT OF THE HON. JARED HUFFMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
             CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is something we 
should be shouting from the rooftops, and it is the fact that 
the status quo in the Columbia River Basin is not working.
    We are on the verge of losing iconic salmon runs. There are 
orca whale populations that will blink out if that happens. And 
unless you are comfortable with all of this extinction, unless 
you are comfortable with sticking it to the tribes that have 
depended on these resources for millennia, unless you are 
comfortable sticking it to the commercial and recreational 
fishing interests that are going to lose big-time if we 
continue to be in denial about the status quo, then I would say 
it is long overdue to move past this failed situation and start 
modernizing the Federal Columbia River Power System so that it 
can actually balance ecological, cultural, and economic 
benefits across the region.
    But rather than discussing ways to modernize our existing 
infrastructure, diversify our energy resources, and restore 
ecosystems, today's hearing focuses on confidential mediation 
documents leaked by Republicans on this Committee between 
parties engaged in active litigation over the operation of the 
Columbia River Basin Power System.
    It is important to point out that these leaked documents 
were drafted in early November, and may not even reflect the 
current state of the negotiations. I must say it is deeply 
inappropriate for Members of Congress to leak confidential 
documents in an apparent attempt to disrupt and sabotage 
ongoing negotiations.
    The same is true for the decision to hold today's hearing 3 
days before the December 15th settlement deadline in that case. 
And by the way, there have been decades of litigation over this 
broken, dysfunctional status quo in the Columbia River Basin.
    I expect today's discussion will also attempt to create a 
narrative that this Administration is somehow hiding its 
actions from the public by not being here today. I would like 
to remind everyone that it is standard practice to have 
confidential mediations in these things called lawsuits. It 
happens all the time. It is overseen by the courts, and there 
is nothing nefarious about it.
    If my colleagues were serious about making progress that 
moves us past failed status quo management in the basin, we 
could have held this hearing once settlement terms were 
publicly released, which could be as soon as Friday. Instead, 
we are here today talking about confidential mediation 
documents, which, again, is the standard in mediation and 
litigation.
    Not only is it concerning that my colleagues received a 
copy of these documents from one of the parties in the 
litigation, but more concerning is that they determined the 
best course of action was to leak them further and use this 
Committee's time and resources in an apparent attempt to hobble 
settlement negotiations that could, if they were successful, 
move us past this dysfunction, these decades of impasse and 
conditions that are trending toward extinction.
    While business as usual benefits a narrow few and some 
select industries, it harms a lot more. This is especially true 
for tribal communities that bear the greatest burden from 
current operations. Through signed treaties, the Federal 
Government made promises on tribal fishing rights and continued 
tribal access to salmon fisheries that are of great cultural 
and religious significance and a key source of sustenance. 
These promises continue to be broken. This follows a shameful 
history of the Federal Government forcibly displacing and 
prohibiting Indigenous people from practicing their own 
cultures, including traditional fishing.
    Today, the Columbia River Basin, which was once abundant 
with salmon, is facing decimated populations, with numerous 
tribes at risk of losing a significant component of their 
culture and their sustenance. The Federal Government has a 
legal and moral responsibility to honor the promises it made in 
treaties, and that is why we will hopefully see, as a result of 
the settlement discussions happening now between the Federal 
Government and tribal nations, a resolution.
    As we move forward in the self-determination era, it is 
essential that the Federal Government work with the tribes to 
ensure that the future management of the Columbia River is 
linked with the health and well-being of these impacted 
fisheries and of these impacted tribes.
    And finally, I should note that the management of this 
basin continues to be a contentious issue among many 
stakeholders. We may hear today that the Administration is 
trying to circumvent Congress through these negotiations to 
breach the lower Snake River dams. However, my colleagues know 
that breaching those dams requires an Act of Congress. They are 
not going to just go around us and somehow make this happen. If 
they read the documents that they themselves leaked, they would 
know that the agencies did not propose to breach the lower 
Snake River dams, but rather outlined actions to take if 
Congress authorized such action.
    I also think it is important to note that a member of the 
Republican Party is leading the only active proposal in 
Congress to remove Snake River dams, our colleague from Idaho, 
Congressman Simpson.
    While much of today's hearing will focus on unfinalized 
leaked documents, I hope moving forward we can have a 
discussion that acknowledges the historical trauma Indigenous 
people have faced due to broken promises from our government.
    Thankfully, mediation is being used as an alternative to 
costly and lengthy litigation. That is a good thing. I look 
forward to discussing serious solutions to modernize 
infrastructure, diversify our energy sources, and restore 
ecosystems across the basin, especially as climate change 
presents new management challenges in these areas.
    With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. I now recognize the Full Committee Chairman, Mr. 
Westerman, for his opening statement.

  STATEMENT OF THE HON. BRUCE WESTERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 
              CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

    Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Chairman Bentz. Good afternoon, 
everyone, and I want to thank the witnesses for their 
participation this afternoon and to the Members for their 
attention to this critical issue. And it is obvious, with the 
number of Members that asked to waive on to today's hearing, 
that there is a lot of interest in this hearing.
    Today's hearing is this Committee's latest effort to 
highlight the importance of hydropower to the United States' 
electric grid and the Biden administration's ongoing efforts to 
dismantle critical parts of our infrastructure. And let me 
repeat that again: the Biden administration's ongoing efforts 
to dismantle critical parts of our infrastructure.
    Who would have thought the administration that talks about 
green power and touts green energy would be pushing to tear out 
over 3,000 megawatts of the cleanest, greenest energy that we 
can produce, megawatts and infrastructure that is already paid 
for, when you look at the impact of these dams, compared to the 
number of windmills and solar farms it would take to produce 
this energy, the reliability of these dams, it is just mind 
boggling that we are actually having to have a hearing to talk 
about pushing back on the administration that is trying to tear 
out green energy from the Pacific Northwest.
    Over the summer, Congressman Bentz led a Subcommittee field 
hearing in Richland, Washington, where people described the 
real consequences of dam removal. They talked about the 
critical role the lower Snake River dams play in sustaining 
industries like trade and agriculture. These industries are 
vital to the Pacific Northwest economy.
    The four lower Snake River dams are part of the 31 
facilities that make up the Bonneville Power Administration's 
hydroelectric fleet. They play a vital role in providing 
carbon-free, reliable, and affordable electricity for customers 
across the Western United States. The hydropower generated by 
these dams makes up more than 80 percent of the Bonneville 
Power Administration's fuel mix, helping it to deliver 
electricity to more than 3 million people in the Northwest.
    Importantly, in addition to serving its 3 million 
customers, the flexibility of Bonneville's power generation 
allows hydropower to frequently be used across the entire West, 
including in California, during emergencies caused by weather 
or grid instability. The importance of this resource, 
particularly at a time where so many Americans are dealing with 
the impacts of the higher cost of living, the importance cannot 
be overstated.
    Unfortunately, over the last few years, this incredibly 
valuable public infrastructure has been placed under great 
threat. In a scheme that circumvents the role of Congress, and 
by design avoids public participation, the Biden administration 
ginned up a process that advances its preferred political 
outcome: the removal of these four dams and the expenditure of 
millions, if not billions, of rate and taxpayer dollars on 
partisan causes over sound science and real-world impacts.
    Organizations representing Bonneville's customers across 
the region, those of other impacted sectors, and members of our 
states' delegations have repeatedly tried to bring their 
concerns to the table. Inexcusably, they have been stonewalled 
by Biden administration officials here in Washington. And as we 
sit here, according to the leaked secret mediation document 
which most of you have, the Biden administration is preparing 
to aggressively move toward breaching four of the Snake River 
dams.
    Let me be clear. Dam removal would cause tremendous harm to 
the Pacific Northwest. Our witnesses here today will talk about 
the flawed process that the Administration has deployed and the 
impacts that the decision to breach would have in coming years 
and decades.
    Rather than rushing a decision through a closed-door 
process, a totally opaque, self-dealing process, the Biden 
administration must listen to every point of view on this 
issue, use the best available and most up-to-date science, and 
take actions that recognize the vital role that the lower Snake 
River dams play in the Pacific Northwest.
    We look forward to hearing testimony from our witnesses and 
our Members on this important issue, and I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will now introduce our 
witnesses.
    Mr. Neil Maunu, Executive Director of the Pacific Northwest 
Waterways Association in Portland, Oregon; Ms. Humaira 
Falkenberg, Power Resources Manager at Pacific County PUD in 
Raymond, Washington; Mr. Lindsay Slater, Vice President of 
Government Relations with Trout Unlimited in Arlington, 
Virginia; and Mr. Scott Simms, CEO and Executive Director for 
the Public Power Council in Portland, Oregon.
    Let me remind the witnesses that under Committee Rules, you 
must limit your oral statements to 5 minutes, but your entire 
statement will appear in the hearing record.
    To begin your testimony, please press the ``talk'' button 
on the microphone. We use timing lights. When you begin, the 
light will turn green. When you have 1 minute remaining, the 
light will turn yellow. And at the end of the 5 minutes, the 
light will turn red, and I will ask you to please end your 
statement.
    I will also allow all witnesses to testify before Member 
questioning.
    I now recognize Mr. Maunu for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF NEIL MAUNU, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PACIFIC NORTHWEST 
            WATERWAYS ASSOCIATION, PORTLAND, OREGON

    Mr. Maunu. Good morning, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member 
Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the 
opportunity to testify before you today.
    My name is Neil Maunu. I serve as the Executive Director of 
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, or the PNWA. PNWA 
is a non-profit, non-partisan trade association that advocates 
for Federal policies and funding supporting regional economic 
development. We represent ports, public utilities, farmers, 
forest products, producers, and public agencies that support 
navigation, energy, trade, and transportation.
    A subset of PNWA membership, the Inland Ports and 
Navigation Group, or IPNG, has been a defendant intervenor in 
the decades-long litigation surrounding salmon and 14 Federal 
dams in four Northwest states. That litigation has been under a 
stay since October 2021, during which time the litigants 
engaged in a so-called mediation process led by the White House 
Council on Environmental Quality and the Federal Mediation and 
Conciliation Service, FMCS.
    Early on, the mediation broke down into a series of 
bilateral discussions between the U.S. Government defendants 
and the plaintiffs, known as private caucuses. The subject 
matter of private caucuses within the FMCS mediation process is 
kept confidential to the participants therein, so the millions 
of Northwest residents that we represent were effectively cut 
out of any negotiations.
    We sought to participate in good faith and provided 
numerous documents outlining our concerns. Those documents are 
attached to my written testimony, including several letters 
raising process concerns, a scientific literature review 
regarding the controversial concept of delayed mortality, and a 
socioeconomic impact study regarding the devastating impacts to 
the Pacific Northwest if the lower Snake River dams are 
removed. None of these submissions appear to have had any 
impact on the mediation process or its outcome.
    The USG commitments document was shared with us in early 
November, and this was the first time in nearly 18 months we 
were presented with any substantive information. We have been 
given a very brief opportunity to provide feedback on a plan 
that intends to significantly impact the operation of 14 dams 
across four states for the next 10 years, and proposes massive 
new Federal programs and controversial dam breaching studies. 
This mediation process has been the complete opposite of the 
meaningful public involvement warranted for such a far-reaching 
and impactful plan for our region and our nation.
    We are frustrated. We have made it clear to CEQ, to FMCS, 
and to anyone who will listen, that we are tired of not being 
represented in this mediation process. We are tired of not 
being able to take part in meaningful negotiations. But we 
refuse to be sidelined. We could actually get behind a lot of 
what is in this document, but the rest, the parts that were 
negotiated in secret without proper stakeholder input, input 
from those of us who live and work in this region, are 
showstoppers.
    This is a failed process. I have outlined many of our 
primary concerns with the USG commitments document in my 
written testimony, but I would like to highlight a few here.
    First, the USG commitments relies on the fundamentally 
flawed NOAA Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and 
Steelhead Report. This unauthored report lacks the support of 
the scientific community and directly contradicts the existing 
NOAA biological opinion. They pursue an objective untethered to 
any lawful standard and that lacks any legal foundation. 
``Healthy and abundant salmon populations'' is a vague and 
undefined policy objective that is not required by the ESA.
    The USG commitments failed to address river navigation as a 
critically impacted, congressionally-authorized purpose of the 
current system. They failed to consider the carbon impacts of 
transitioning from river navigation to roads and rail.
    The USG commitments fail to ensure the many resilience 
needs of stakeholders across the region, and threatens the most 
disadvantaged populations.
    Finally, the complexity of the proposed operational changes 
in the commitment document's appendix B warrant a thorough 
study of their impacts on river navigation at the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineer Research and Development Center prior to 
implementation. Such a study was directed by the court in 2017 
out of safety concerns.
    A critical reassessment of this process is essential. The 
USG commitments lack specificity, rely on flawed science, and 
completely overlook the vital transportation, supply chain, and 
resiliency concerns of our membership. We demand a seat at the 
table. The CRSO BiOP and Record of Decision exemplified a sound 
approach to navigating complex issues and diverse stakeholder 
perspectives, and we advocate using that as a benchmark for 
ensuring a fair and transparent process.
    Beyond the immediate risks to river navigation, 
transportation, and safety, the very livelihoods of the 
hundreds of thousands reliant on this river system hang in the 
balance.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am happy to 
answer the Subcommittee's questions.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Maunu follows:]
Prepared Statement of Neil Maunu, Executive Director, Pacific Northwest 
                         Waterways Association

    Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members 
of the Subcommittee; thank you for the opportunity to testify before 
you today. My name is Neil Maunu. I serve as the Executive Director of 
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, or PNWA. PNWA is a non-
profit, non-partisan trade association that advocates for federal 
policies and funding supporting regional economic development. Founded 
in 1934, our membership has grown to over 150 entities, including 
ports, public utilities, farmers, forest products producers, and public 
agencies that support navigation, energy, trade, transportation, and 
economic development throughout the Pacific Northwest.
    A subset of PNWA membership, the Inland Ports and Navigation Group, 
or IPNG, has been a defendant-intervenor in the decades-long litigation 
surrounding salmon and 14 federal dams in four Northwest states. That 
litigation has been under a stay since October 2021, during which time 
the litigants engaged in a so-called mediation process led by the White 
House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Federal Mediation 
& Conciliation Service (FMCS). Early on, the mediation broke down into 
a series of bilateral discussions between the U.S. Government 
defendants and the plaintiffs known as Private Caucuses. The subject 
matter of private caucuses within the FMCS mediation process is kept 
confidential to the participants therein. The millions of Northwest 
residents that we represent were effectively cut out of any 
negotiations.
    We sought to participate in good faith and provided numerous 
documents outlining our concerns. Those documents are attached to my 
written testimony including several letters raising process concerns, a 
scientific literature review regarding the controversial concept of 
delayed mortality, and a socio-economic impact study regarding the 
devastating impacts to the Pacific Northwest if the Lower Snake River 
Dams are removed. None of these submissions appeared to have had any 
impact on the mediation process or its outcome.
    The USG Commitments document was shared with us in early November. 
It was the first time in nearly 18 months we were presented with any 
substantive information. We have been given a very brief opportunity to 
provide feedback on a plan that intends to significantly impact the 
operation of 14 dams across four states for the next ten years, as well 
as proposals for massive new federal programs, and controversial dam 
breaching studies. This mediation process has been the complete 
opposite of the meaningful public involvement warranted for such a far-
reaching and impactful plan for our region and nation.

    Our response to the Commitments document is a letter outlining six 
primary concerns:

     First, the USG Commitments relies on the fundamentally 
            flawed NOAA ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and 
            Steelhead Report'' (NOAA Paper). This is an unauthored 
            report that lacks the support of the scientific community 
            and directly contradicts the existing NOAA Biological 
            Opinion. It is not consensus science regarding the four 
            Lower Snake River Dams and salmon.

     The USG Commitments pursue an objective untethered to any 
            lawful standard, that is subjective, and that lacks any 
            legal foundation. ``Healthy and abundant'' salmon 
            populations is a vague and undefined policy objective that 
            is not required by the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

     The USG Commitments fail to address river navigation as a 
            critically impacted Congressionally authorized purpose of 
            the federal projects and proposes only a paltry $750,000 
            for a study. Washington state alone is spending $5M on a 
            similar study, and the Murray-Inslee report released last 
            year recommended a $10M study to fully analyze what it 
            would take to replace transportation on the Snake River 
            with rail and trucks. The Commitments fail to consider the 
            carbon impacts of transitioning from river navigation to 
            roads and rail. Removing the Snake River locks would cause 
            diesel fuel consumption to increase by nearly 5 million 
            gallons per year as barges are replaced by less efficient 
            truck-to-rail shipments, dramatically increasing carbon 
            emissions (to the tune of over 1.25M tons per year)--this 
            is the equivalent of building one large coal-fired plant 
            every two to three years. Assuming that barged wheat simply 
            shifts to non-existent truck and rail, it would be 
            unmarketable in the global market due to cost--destroying a 
            generation-long way of life.

     The USG Commitments fail to ensure the delivery of 
            affordable and reliable clean power as pledged by the USG 
            in their mediation guiding principles from August 2022. 
            While creating renewable tribal energy projects may be 
            laudable, they cannot replace the reliability and 
            pollution-free benefits of the four Lower Snake River Dams. 
            Removing carbon-free hydropower in a time of increasing 
            demand for renewable power generation is nonsensical.

     The USG Commitments fail to ensure the many resilience 
            needs of stakeholders across the region. The loss of clean, 
            reliable, and responsive hydropower and the removal of one 
            of only three transportation modalities (the cleanest among 
            them) available to support the region's economy cannot meet 
            the resiliency needs of impacted communities. We presented 
            a socio-economic study that found removing the four lower 
            Snake River Dams could jeopardize over 7,000 family farms. 
            This proposal threatens the region's most disadvantaged 
            populations and flies in the face of any concept of 
            community resilience.

     The complexity of the proposed operational changes in the 
            Commitments document's Appendix B warrant a thorough study 
            of their potential impacts on river navigation at the U.S. 
            Army Corps of Engineers' Engineer, Research and Development 
            Center (ERDC) in Vicksburg, MS prior to implementation, and 
            a new NEPA analysis. Such a study was directed by the Court 
            in 2017 out of safety concerns when operational impacts 
            were to be adopted.

    A critical reassessment of this process is essential. The USG 
Commitments lack specificity, rely on flawed and singular scientific 
data, and conspicuously overlook the vital concerns of our membership, 
particularly in areas of transportation, supply chain, and resilience. 
Active inclusion in the decision-making process is imperative; we 
demand a seat at the table. The CRSO BiOP and Record of Decision 
exemplified a sound approach to navigating complex issues and diverse 
stakeholder perspectives, and we advocate using it as the benchmark for 
ensuring a fair and transparent process. Beyond the immediate risks to 
river transportation, navigation, and safety, the very livelihoods of 
the thousands reliant on this river system hang in the balance.

    Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'd be most pleased to 
answer the subcommittee's questions.

                                 *****

The following documents were submitted as supplements to Mr. 
Maunu's testimony.

July 3, 2023

Council on Environmental Quality

Docket No. CEQ-2023-0002 via Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
        www.regulations.gov

Cover Letter for Comments on Columbia River Salmon & Other Native Fish 
        Request for Information

To Whom It May Concern:

The Inland Ports & Navigation Group (IPNG), a defendant intervenor in 
the litigation underlying the current mediation process, is pleased to 
submit the following comments regarding Columbia River Salmon & Other 
Native Fish. IPNG is comprised of ports, farmers, river pilots, 
transportation companies, terminals and water resources stakeholders 
who work to balance economic prosperity with environmental stewardship. 
They strive to protect inland navigation, hydropower, irrigation on the 
Columbia Snake River System (CSRS), while supporting a healthy 
environment and robust fish runs in the Northwest. IPNG is a subset of 
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA), a broad regional 
trade group representing over 150 members from Oregon, Washington, and 
Idaho.

The restoration of Columbia River Salmon & Other Native Fish can and 
must be achieved while also maintaining the maritime transportation, 
irrigation, hydropower, and other benefits provided by the current 
CSRS. The removal of the 4 lower Snake River dams (LSRD) is neither 
warranted nor necessary to recover ESA-listed salmon species. A 
comprehensive Columbia Basin-wide approach to salmon recovery including 
tributary habitat access and restoration, estuarine habitat 
restoration, predation and competitor control, hatchery improvements, 
reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph dams, harvest 
reductions, ocean life stage research, minimization & mitigation of 
non-point source pollution, and continued fish passage improvements at 
all CSRS projects, will provide more benefits to salmon at a lower cost 
than LSRD removal. As outlined in greater detail in the attachment, a 
coordinated effort across these areas will cost less than removal of 
the 4 LSRD, provide more benefit to salmon, and result in less adverse 
socioeconomic impacts.

    Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments.

            Sincerely Yours,

            Heather Stebbings,
            Inland Ports & Navigation Group
            Pacific Northwest Waterways Association

                                 *****

July 3, 2023

Council on Environmental Quality

Docket No. CEQ-2023-0002 via Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
        www.regulations.gov

Extended Comments on Columbia River Salmon & Other Native Fish Request 
        for Information

To Whom It May Concern:

    As mentioned in our cover letter, the restoration of Columbia River 
Salmon & Other Native Fish can and must be achieved while also 
maintaining the maritime transportation, irrigation, hydropower and 
other benefits provided by the current Columbia Snake River System 
(CSRS). The removal of the 4 lower Snake River dams (LSRD) is neither 
warranted nor necessary to recover ESA-listed salmon species. The 
principal argument for the removal of the LSRD is the theory of delayed 
mortality, which posits that fish passing through the CSRS dams are 
``beat up'' when they enter the estuary and the ocean. The science 
associated with this theory is unproven and widely disputed.

    A comprehensive Columbia Basin-wide approach to salmon recovery 
including tributary habitat access and restoration, estuarine habitat 
restoration, predation and competitor control, hatchery improvements, 
reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph dams, harvest 
reductions, ocean life stage research, minimization & mitigation of 
non-point source pollution, and continued fish passage improvements at 
all CSRS projects, will provide more benefits to salmon while 
maintaining the current federally authorizes purposes of the projects, 
as well as the greater benefits the dams provide for the region and the 
nation.

    The areas where we believe the biggest gains could be made for 
salmon without impacting the benefits of the CSRS include:
Tributary Habitat Access and Restoration

    Tributary habitat restoration plays a crucial role in the recovery 
of salmon populations in the CSRS. Tributaries serve as critical 
spawning and rearing grounds for salmon. They provide important 
features such as clean gravel beds for spawning, cool and clean water 
for incubation and growth, and sheltered areas for young salmon to 
develop before heading out to the ocean.

    Land use patterns have significantly impacted the tributary 
habitats basin-wide in the CSRS, resulting in blocked access to 
tributaries, degradation of riparian zones, and increased water 
pollution.

    Restoring tributary habitat is crucial for the recovery of salmon 
populations as it:

     Provides the necessary conditions for successful salmon 
            spawning and reproduction. By restoring gravel beds, 
            creating off-channel habitats, and improving water quality, 
            tributary restoration projects enhance the survival and 
            productivity of salmon populations;

     Contributes to the overall resilience of salmon 
            populations. By increasing the availability of diverse and 
            high-quality habitats, salmon have more options for 
            spawning and rearing, which can buffer against 
            environmental variability and improve their chances of 
            survival; and

     Can help address the key limiting factors that salmon face 
            in their life cycle. For example, culvert repair, 
            replacement, or removal can restore tributary flows and 
            connectivity, enabling salmon to access essential spawning 
            and rearing areas that were previously blocked.

    Tributary habitat restoration can have broader ecological benefits 
beyond salmon recovery. Restoring riparian vegetation and improving 
water quality can enhance overall ecosystem health, benefiting other 
fish species, aquatic organisms, and wildlife that depend on healthy 
river systems.

    Tributary habitat restoration efforts can create the necessary 
conditions for successful salmon reproduction, enhance population 
resilience, and contribute to the overall health of the ecosystem.

    Federal programs to help protect and restore tributary habitat such 
as the USDOT Culvert Repair, Replacement, & Removal Grant Program, USDA 
Riparian Buffer Program, suite of applicable USFWS Programs (such as 
but not limited to the Ecosystem Restoration Program, National Fish 
Habitat Partnership, Wildlife & Sportfish Restoration Program, Pacific 
Region Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program), and NOAA Habitat 
Conservation Program should receive increased funding to better protect 
tributary habitat. A coordinated regional effort could be made to bring 
these dollars to the Columbia River basin.
Estuarine Habitat Restoration

    Restoring the estuary and other estuarine habitats is important for 
salmon recovery because they:

     Serve as a transition zone between freshwater and marine 
            environments, providing critical nursery areas for young 
            salmon. These habitats offer food resources, shelter, and 
            protection from predators, enabling juvenile salmon to grow 
            and develop before entering the open ocean. By restoring 
            estuarine habitats, we can ensure the availability of 
            suitable rearing areas, increasing the survival rates of 
            juvenile salmon and bolstering their overall population 
            numbers.

     Act as crucial stopover sites during the migration of 
            adult salmon. Adult salmon returning from the ocean to 
            their natal rivers rely on these habitats to rest and 
            regain energy before continuing their journey upstream to 
            spawn. The restoration of estuarine habitats ensures that 
            these resting areas are preserved and maintained, allowing 
            adult salmon to successfully complete their migration and 
            reproduce; and

     Play a significant role in the ecological connectivity of 
            the Columbia Snake River System. They provide a link 
            between upstream and downstream habitats, facilitating the 
            movement of salmon populations and maintaining genetic 
            diversity. Restoring estuarine habitats allows for natural 
            processes and connections within the ecosystem, supporting 
            the long-term viability of salmon populations.

    By restoring these critical habitats, we provide essential rearing 
areas for juvenile salmon, resting sites for adult salmon during 
migration, and facilitate the ecological connectivity of the entire 
system. It is a crucial component of comprehensive efforts to restore 
and conserve salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River System

    Federal programs to protect and restore the estuary and estuarine 
habitats such as the EPA National Estuary Program and NOAA National 
Estuarine Research Reserve System and Habitat Conservation Program, 
including Coastal Habitat Restoration and Resilience Grants, should 
receive increased funding.
Predation and Competitor Control

     Sea Lions: According to the Oregon Department of Fish & 
            Wildlife, sea lions consume significant numbers of fish--up 
            to 44 percent of the Columbia River spring Chinook run, for 
            example. The 2023 forecast for upriver spring Chinook is 
            198,600 fish according to the Washington Department of Fish 
            & Wildlife. 44% of that is 87,384 fish consumed by sea 
            lions. While the sex ratio of returning salmon can be 
            highly variable, they average 50% females. Therefore, sea 
            lions will eliminate nearly 44,000 egg-producing female 
            spring Chinook in 2023. Spring Chinook females lay between 
            1,500-10,000 eggs with an average of 2,500, sea lions 
            therefore remove 110 million eggs of spring Chinook. 8% of 
            these eggs survive to smolts that begin their migration to 
            the ocean for a total of nearly 9 million juvenile salmon 
            heading downriver if not for sea lions.

      In addition, the California sea lion population along the West 
            Coast (the `U.S. Stock') is no longer considered at risk 
            and has likely reached its ``optimum sustainable 
            population. Similarly, the Eastern stock of Steller sea 
            lion stock is considered healthy and has no special 
            designation under ESA or MMPA. The population has been 
            growing annually since the 1980s and the most recent 
            population estimate was 52,139 non-pups and 19,423 pups. 
            NOAA has concluded that the stock is likely at its Optimum 
            Sustainable Population. Like California sea lions, the 
            Steller sea lions that migrate upriver into the Columbia 
            Basin are all male. Lethal removal of salmon-predating sea 
            lions in the Columbia River occurs but should be a higher 
            priority for our salmon recovery efforts. In 2020, the 
            States and Tribes estimated that there may be up to 290 
            California sea lions and 130 Steller sea lions predating on 
            salmon in the Columbia Basin, which is less than 0.1 
            percent and 0.18 percent of their total populations, 
            respectively. Removal of these individuals will have no 
            impact on the population health of either sea lion species 
            and should therefore be expanded with increased funding and 
            implementation.

     Avian Predation: Double-breasted cormorants, Caspian terns 
            and other birds consume considerable numbers of juvenile 
            salmon. Evans et al. (2019) estimated that avian predation 
            accounts for 42% to 70% of total steelhead smolt mortality, 
            suggesting that more steelhead were consumed by avian 
            predators than died from all other mortality sources 
            combined. Results indicate that avian predation, although 
            not the original cause of steelhead declines in the basin, 
            is now a factor limiting the survival of upper Columbia 
            River steelhead.

      In December 2020, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) 
            established a new permit for States and Tribes for the 
            management of double-crested cormorants. The new permit 
            authorizes specific take activities to protect threatened 
            and endangered species from impacts from double-crested 
            cormorants. This permit should be used to its fullest 
            extent by the States and Tribes and should be expanded to 
            include the take of Caspian terns or other avian predators 
            of salmonids;

     Piscine Predation: Non-native species such as the Northern 
            Pike Minnow are known to consume juvenile salmon. Since 
            they are a non-native species to the Pacific Northwest, 
            management actions seeking their extirpation should be 
            maximally implemented; and

     Niche Competition: In addition to direct predation, non-
            native species such as Smallmouth bass, Largemouth bass, 
            Walleye, Northern pike, Brook trout, Brown trout, Channel 
            catfish, American shad, striped bass all compete for 
            habitat and food with native salmon species. As mentioned 
            above, given these species non-native status, management 
            actions seeking their extirpation should be maximally 
            implemented.

Hatchery Improvements

    Improving hatchery operations is of crucial importance to the 
recovery of salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River System. 
However, the traditional methods used in hatcheries have sometimes 
inadvertently contributed to the decline of wild salmon populations. 
Hatchery fish, bred and raised in captivity, often exhibit reduced 
genetic diversity, decreased fitness, and altered behavior compared to 
their wild counterparts. These factors can negatively impact the 
survival and reproductive success of hatchery-produced salmon.

    To address these issues, it is essential to focus on improving 
hatchery operations. Two key aspects contribute to the success of 
hatchery programs in supporting salmon recovery:

     Genetic Diversity: Maintaining and enhancing genetic 
            diversity in hatchery fish is critical. By incorporating 
            genetic management practices such as incorporating wild 
            broodstock, minimizing inbreeding, and using local fish 
            populations, hatchery-produced salmon can have a higher 
            chance of survival and adaptation to the natural 
            environment.

     Behavior and Fitness: Hatchery fish often lack the natural 
            behaviors and survival skills necessary for life in the 
            wild. Hatchery reform efforts aim to mimic natural 
            conditions and provide fish with opportunities for natural 
            selection and imprinting on their natal streams. By 
            incorporating environmental enrichment, reducing hatchery-
            related domestication, and implementing programs that 
            promote natural selection, the fitness and survival 
            capabilities of hatchery-produced salmon can be improved.

    By addressing genetic concerns, enhancing natural behaviors and 
fitness, hatcheries can play a more effective role in supporting the 
restoration and long-term sustainability of salmon populations in the 
region.
Reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph

    The reintroduction of salmon above Grand Coulee Dam and Chief 
Joseph Dam holds significant importance for the overall recovery of 
salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River System. The construction 
of Grand Coulee Dam in the 1930s and Chief Joseph Dam in the 1950s 
blocked access to vast stretches of historical spawning grounds and 
disrupted the natural life cycle of salmon.

    Reintroducing salmon above these dams will:

     Allow salmon to regain access to their historical spawning 
            grounds. By reintroducing salmon, we can restore their 
            natural migration patterns and provide them with the 
            opportunity to reproduce in the upper reaches of the 
            rivers. This is particularly significant as the upper 
            tributaries often offer more pristine and suitable habitats 
            for spawning and rearing;

     Help restore ecological balance within the Columbia Snake 
            River System. Salmon play a vital role in nutrient cycling, 
            as their carcasses provide essential nutrients to the 
            surrounding ecosystem when they return from the ocean and 
            spawn. The absence of these nutrients in recent decades has 
            had cascading effects on other species, including birds, 
            mammals, and even plants. Reintroducing salmon would 
            revitalize this nutrient cycle, benefiting the entire 
            ecosystem and promoting the recovery of other species.

    Furthermore, the reintroduction of salmon above the dams has 
cultural and socioeconomic significance. Indigenous communities in the 
region have long relied on salmon for sustenance, ceremonial practices, 
and cultural identity. The decline in salmon populations has 
disproportionately affected these communities, undermining their 
traditional ways of life. By restoring access to ancestral spawning 
grounds, we honor their rights and contribute to the preservation of 
their cultural heritage.

    Economically, the return of healthy salmon populations can have a 
positive impact on the fishing industry and tourism in the region. 
Salmon fishing has been a significant economic driver, attracting 
anglers and tourists from around the world. The revival of salmon runs 
would not only benefit commercial and recreational fishing but also 
stimulate local economies through increased tourism and related 
industries.
Harvest Reductions

    The reduction and/or elimination of both commercial and 
recreational non-tribal salmon harvests in the short-term with 
compensation to fishermen for their lost harvest opportunity would be 
far more cost effective and non-irrevocable when compared to removal of 
the 4 LSRD. Commercial fishermen could be compensated in cash while 
recreational fishermen might be compensated with cash, increased 
harvest opportunities on other non-salmonid stocks, or increased 
bounties on non-native fish. While dam removal would irrevocably 
eliminate maritime transportation and alter agricultural supply chains, 
forgone harvest opportunities could be restored upon salmon recovery.
Ocean Life Stage Research

    The ocean life stage of salmon is a critical and complex phase yet 
it remains relatively understudied compared to other stages such as 
spawning and freshwater rearing. There is an urgent need for increased 
research on the ocean life stage of salmon due to several important 
reasons.

    The ocean life stage represents a significant part of salmon's 
overall life cycle. During this stage, salmon undergo remarkable 
physiological changes, including rapid growth, adaptation to saltwater, 
and preparation for their return to freshwater for spawning. 
Understanding the factors that influence salmon survival, growth, and 
behavior in the ocean is therefore vital.

    The ocean life stage of salmon is increasingly impacted by various 
environmental stressors and human activities. Climate change, ocean 
acidification, pollution, habitat degradation, and overfishing are 
among the factors that can significantly affect salmon populations 
during their time in the Pacific Ocean. Robust research is necessary to 
comprehend the specific effects of these stressors on salmon during 
their oceanic journey and to develop effective conservation and 
management strategies.

    Advancements in technology and research methodologies present new 
opportunities to study the ocean life stage of salmon. Techniques such 
as acoustic telemetry, satellite tagging, genetic analysis, and remote 
sensing provide unprecedented capabilities for tracking salmon 
movements, identifying migration patterns, studying feeding habits, and 
examining the impacts of environmental factors. Leveraging these 
technological advancements can enhance our understanding of the oceanic 
phase and inform evidence-based management practices.

    Increased research on the ocean life stage of salmon is vital to 
comprehend the ecological, physiological, and environmental dynamics 
that shape their survival and population dynamics. By expanding our 
knowledge of this critical life stage, we can improve salmon recovery 
efforts.
Mitigation of Non-Point Source Pollution

    The mitigation of non-point source pollution plays a crucial role 
in the recovery of salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River 
System. But unlike point source pollution, which originates from 
identifiable and controllable sources, non-point source pollution is 
challenging to pinpoint and regulate.

    Salmon are highly sensitive to water quality. Excessive 
sedimentation caused by non-point source pollution can smother salmon 
eggs, suffocate aquatic vegetation, and hinder the ability of fish to 
find food. Nutrient pollution can trigger harmful algal blooms, 
creating low oxygen conditions that harm or kill salmon. Chemicals 
released by all facets of modern life can directly impact salmon by 
disrupting their reproductive systems, impairing their ability to 
navigate, and increasing their vulnerability to diseases.

    To achieve salmon recovery in the Columbia Snake River System, it 
is crucial to address and mitigate non-point source pollution. This 
requires implementing effective land and water management practices 
that minimize the runoff of pollutants into water bodies. Much has 
already been accomplished in agriculture with conservation practices in 
such as the adoption of best management practices including 
implementing buffer strips, cover crops, and precision application of 
fertilizers and pesticides to reduce nutrient and sediment runoff and 
protect water quality.

    Some key strategies in other areas include:

     Urban stormwater management: Implementing stormwater 
            management practices in urban areas, including green 
            infrastructure solutions such as rain gardens, permeable 
            pavement, and retention ponds. These measures help capture 
            and treat stormwater runoff, preventing pollutants from 
            entering streams and rivers.

     Riparian zone restoration: Restoring and protecting 
            riparian zones, the areas of land along rivers and streams, 
            helps filter out pollutants, stabilize stream banks, and 
            provide shade and cover for salmon. This can be achieved 
            through tree planting initiatives and fencing off sensitive 
            areas from livestock.

     Education and outreach: Raising awareness among 
            communities, landowners, and stakeholders about the impacts 
            of non-point source pollution on salmon and the importance 
            of implementing pollution reduction strategies. Providing 
            technical assistance and financial incentives can also 
            encourage voluntary adoption of mitigation practices.

    By mitigating non-point source pollution, we can improve water 
quality, enhance the resilience of salmon populations, and support 
their recovery in the Columbia Snake River System
Continued Fish Passage Improvements at All CSRS Projects

    The Corps of Engineers is currently installing fish friendly 
turbines to units at Ice Harbor dam, and they are already seeing 
improved juvenile passage. Future improvements are slated for McNary 
and John Day dams. The Snake River projects, including Lower 
Monumental, Little Goose and Lower Granite, are not anticipated to 
receive new turbines for at least 20 years. We recommend prioritizing 
fish friendly turbines at all of the CSRS projects, including Snake 
River dams, in the near-term to ensure maximum passage at the projects 
as quickly as possible.
Response to Key Questions for Input

Lower Snake River

     What constitutes ``restoration'' of the Lower Snake River 
            and what steps should the Federal Government take to 
            restore the lower Snake River?

        ``Restoration'' of the lower Snake River to a free-flowing 
        river such as existed prior to the completion of the 4 LSRD is 
        neither warranted nor justified in terms of the economic and 
        community impacts it would impose on the region. The objective 
        under federal law should be to increase the abundance of salmon 
        species such that they can be delisted from the ESA while 
        maintaining the current authorized purposes and benefits of the 
        CSRS. In this context, ``restoration'' consists of:

          +  Continued improvements of fish passage at projects while 
        maintaining their hydropower and transportation benefits;

          +  Maximizing access to and the quality of spawning habitat 
        in the many tributaries feeding the lower Snake River;

          +  Maximizing reductions in predators and non-native 
        competitive species;

          +  Increased and more effective hatchery practices;

          +  Mitigation of non-point source pollution where 
        appropriate; and

          +  Water quality management while maintaining an operational 
        transportation channel and preserving sufficient reservoir 
        capacity to generate hydropower.

     What considerations should inform the Federal Government's 
            approach to restoring the lower Snake River?

        Most importantly, the economic, climate, food security, trade, 
        national security, and underserved & underrepresented community 
        impacts should be fully considered before defining and 
        achieving lower Snake River ``restoration''. IPNG reiterates 
        that the legal objective should not be some form of lower Snake 
        River restoration but rather the recovery of ESA-listed salmon 
        species to the point that they can be delisted.

     What information should the Federal Government develop to 
            support discussions in the Northwest and in Congress on the 
            restoration of the Lower Snake River?

        The following information should be robustly developed and 
        assessed:


          +  A definition of ``restoration'' which maintains 
        hydropower, maritime transportation, irrigation and other 
        benefits of the CSRS;

          +  The total cost of ``restoration'' for the federal 
        government, States, and Tribes;

          +  The economic impact of ``restoration'' efforts to the 
        region and nation;

          +  Any infrastructure needs and cost to mitigate for lost 
        CSRS benefits;

          +  Impacts to BPA rate-payers, especially from underserved & 
        underrepresented communities;

          +  Impacts to the agricultural community, including farm 
        workers;

          +  Impacts to cities, counties and other municipalities, 
        including those related to reduction in land values, tax base 
        and municipal water supplies;

          +  Climate cost of deconstruction of the any federally 
        authorized projects, as well as the costs to construct any new 
        infrastructure needed to replace services;

          +  National security, food security, and international trade 
        implications; and

          +  Net carbon emission changes from the ``restoration'' 
        effort as well as associated mitigation measures for lost CSRS 
        benefits.

Upper Columbia River

     What considerations should inform the Federal Government's 
            approach to supporting the Upper Columbia River Tribes' 
            reintroduction plan?

        Reintroduction of salmonids, provided such are certain to be 
        non-listed and non-listable species, is an appropriate and 
        necessary step to aid in CSRS salmon recovery and to assist the 
        U.S. in fulfilling its obligations to the Upper Columbia River 
        Tribes. That said, the following considerations should inform 
        reintroduction:

          +  As stated, the need for reintroduced species to be non-
        listed and non-listable under the ESA;

          +  The cost of up- and down-river fish passage at projects;

          +  The implications of LSRD removal for habitat access and 
        restoration in the Upper Columbia; and

          +  The role of hatchery production.

Funding

     What steps should the Federal Government take in response 
            to this commitment (actions and funding to address 
            unmitigated Tribal needs, avoiding future issues with 
            respect to creating inequities, and actions supporting 
            salmon & other fisheries and fish & wildlife programs and 
            infrastructure)?

     What considerations should inform the Federal Government's 
            approach to funding and actions to restore fish populations 
            throughout the Columbia River Basin?

        As stated above, the Federal Government should be implementing 
        a comprehensive Columbia Basin-wide approach to salmon 
        including tributary habitat access and restoration, estuarine 
        habitat restoration, predation and competitor control, hatchery 
        improvements, reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief 
        Joseph, harvest reductions, ocean life stage research, 
        minimization & mitigation of non-point source pollution, and 
        continued fish passage improvements at all CSRS projects while 
        also maintaining the hydropower, maritime transportation, and 
        other benefits provided by the current CSRS.

    Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments.

            Sincerely,

            Heather Stebbings,
            Inland Ports & Navigation Group (IPNG)
            Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA)

                                 *****

                                                 March 28, 2023    

Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, DC 20250

    Dear Secretary Vilsack:

    We write to you today on behalf wheat farmers and agricultural 
producers to voice our concerns with the current state of the mediation 
regarding the Federal Columbia River Power System, which includes 
irrigation activity and barge transport through the dams on the 
Columbia Snake River System (CSRS). As you may be aware, the decades-
long litigation regarding Pacific Northwest salmon in the Columbia 
River Basin is currently under a stay agreement until August 31, 2023. 
During the stay, the primary parties to the litigation entered a 
mediation process led by the White House Council on Environmental 
Quality (CEQ) and the Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service (FMCS) 
in the hopes of reaching a settlement. Many of us are members of an 
organization that has served as a defendant intervenor since the 
beginning of this litigation nearly 30 years ago, and we have been 
active participants in the case on the side of the United States 
Government (USG).

    As part of the stay agreement, the federal government committed to 
``exploring'' removal of the four Lower Snake River dams (LSRD). Prior 
to the last several months, the USG has never supported a position of 
dam breaching; however, we are increasingly concerned that the USG 
position is shifting to support a dam breaching action that would 
completely devastate the Pacific Northwest agricultural community. Dam 
breaching would eliminate irrigation from the pool behind Ice Harbor 
Dam and would remove barge access for our farmers, requiring them to 
turn to either rail or truck to move their product. As you well know, 
neither form of transportation is as safe, efficient, or 
environmentally friendly as barge navigation.

    During the last several years the U.S. rail system has faced 
significant congestion and supply chain bottlenecks. The Columbia Snake 
River System moves more than 60 percent of the nation's wheat, as well 
as a large amount of corn, soybeans, lumber products, and crop inputs--
with harvested crops coming to the Pacific Northwest from as far as the 
Midwest via rail. Eliminating barging as an option for our Northwest 
goods would increase demand on limited Class 1 railroad capacity and 
exacerbate an already tenuous supply-chain balance across all cargo 
classes. This means further unpredictability for intermodal cargo, 
energy products, and agricultural movements. Additionally, the 
logistics of expanding rail access is not feasible in our Snake and 
Columbia River corridors due to the geographical landscape, cultural 
and historic land importance, and strict regulatory processes.

    It is important to note that barging also provides an important 
competitive check on the rail system. Losing barge access would give 
railroads the power to raise rates further, which will affect the long-
term competitiveness of U.S. wheat exports moving to global markets. As 
we saw in the April 2021 U.S. International Trade Commission report on, 
``The Effects of Rail Prices on U.S. Agricultural Exports'' higher rail 
transportation costs are often transferred to the producer, reducing 
the incomes and profit margins of producers and negatively affecting 
the competitiveness of U.S. grain exports. The report estimates that 
rail transportation may account for more than 40 percent of the price 
of wheat.

    These types of rising costs ultimately put small family farms out 
of business. As you very much understand, farmers are already facing 
significant increases in the cost of production. Fertilizer prices 
alone are up 12 percent in the last year, and while some operations can 
absorb increased costs, at the end of the day, smaller and family farms 
would bear the brunt of these increases and could be forced to shut 
down altogether. Increased costs to farmers due to a dam breaching 
scenario would only intensify the challenges we already face.

    It is also important to note the role that the Snake River dams 
play in irrigating more than 50,000 acres of Northwest crops. The 
Columbia Basin is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the 
world. The variety of crops we produce is second only to California. 
Washington State alone produces more potatoes, apples, and corn per 
acre than any other state in the nation.

    Removing acres irrigated by Ice Harbor Dam, located on the Snake 
River, would eliminate enough apples to feed 18 million people, sweet 
corn to feed 19 million people, potatoes to feed 6.4 million people, 
and so on. The farms irrigated by this pool directly and indirectly 
drive up to $2 billion in annual economic value and support more than 
10,000 jobs. You cannot measure the economic impact of dam removal 
solely on the impact to our irrigated land value. This has been done in 
the past, but land value is just a tiny fraction of the overall impact. 
It does not capture the devastating effect removal of these dams would 
have on the overall American economy and food security. In other words, 
any actions taken that impact these farms will have a reverberating 
effect on millions of Americans, not just the local community that 
produces the food.

    We strongly request that you engage on this issue, to provide an 
added USG perspective at the table to CEQ, the FMCS and others. Our 
concern as deeply affected stakeholders is the failure of USG to take 
the full regional and national agricultural and economic impacts of a 
pro-dam removal position into account. Despite our concerns, and many 
others being raised repeatedly throughout this process, the USG 
participants appear to be looking at this issue solely through the lens 
of salmon recovery and not through the greater public policy objectives 
of the Biden Administration such as food security, clean energy, de-
carbonized transportation, infrastructure capabilities, environmental 
justice, or international trade objectives.

    We therefore respectfully ask that you consider and respond to the 
following questions regarding LSRD removal in as timely a manner as 
possible. This process is moving very quickly, and it is important for 
us to understand the full position of the USG, including the Department 
of Agriculture, on this issue.

     The removal of the 4 LSRD will inevitably result in a 
            significant reduction in agricultural production in the 
            Pacific Northwest (PNW) from both irrigated and unirrigated 
            lands due to the loss of irrigation water as well as supply 
            chain disruptions and cost increases. How are such outcomes 
            consistent with USDA's priority to ``work every day to 
            strengthen the American agricultural economy'' (https://
            www.usda.gov/farming)?

     The removal of the 4 LSRD will by definition eliminate 
            barging as a transportation mode for moving PNW grain into 
            the global supply chain, forcing growers to depend on 
            increased rail and trucking. How is such an outcome 
            consistent with USDA's stated priority, ``to transform our 
            nation's food system to create more options for producers 
            and consumers and improve the resiliency of our food supply 
            chain'' (https://www.usda.gov/priorities)?

     The Columbia Snake River System trade gateway transports 
            60 percent of the nation's wheat export and is part of the 
            fully integrated inland and deep draft transportation 
            system. An action such as dam breaching would have rippling 
            effects throughout this trade gateway, likely resulting in 
            export reductions. How is such a reduction consistent with 
            USDA's stated priority of ``Creating More, Better, and New 
            Market Opportunities'' including overseas markets (https://
            www.usda.gov/priorities)?

     How is such a reduction in food exports consistent with 
            The Joint Declaration of Agriculture Exporters at the June 
            2022 Summit of the Americas Agricultural Producers stating 
            that one-third of the world's food is produced in the 
            Americas, and the current global food crisis is an 
            opportunity and responsibility for the region to step up to 
            supply a greater share of the world's commodities and the 
            United States commitment during the Summit to work together 
            to increase food production for export, increase fertilizer 
            production and transportation, and to improve agriculture 
            efficiency through technical solutions and information 
            exchanges?

    In closing, we feel it is important to also recognize that we 
strongly consider ourselves good stewards of the environment. We 
support broader salmon recovery throughout the Columbia River basin and 
are actively looking for areas where we can support science-based 
efforts by the states, federal government, and Tribal Nations. Our 
Lower Snake River dams have state-of-the-art fish passages, and the 
Army Corps is continuously looking at how they can improve their 
efforts to get the salmon returns desired by so many in our region. We 
support those efforts and many more throughout the basin, but we cannot 
support the removal of the Snake River dams and this critical trade 
gateway for the region's and nations agricultural products.

    Thank you for your leadership on our issues in so many areas, and 
for considering these questions going forward. We look forward to your 
response.

            Sincerely,

        AgriNorthwest                 Oregon Farm Bureau

        Almota Elevator Company       Oregon Wheat Growers League

        Columbia Grain                Pacific Northwest Farmers 
                                      Cooperative

        Highline Grain Growers        Pomeroy Grain Growers

        Idaho Farm Bureau             TEMCO

        Lewis and Clark Terminal 
        Association                   The McGregor Company

        McGregor Land and Livestock   United Grain Corporation
        Mid Columbia Producers        Washington Association of Wheat 
                                      Growers

        Montana Grain Growers 
        Association                   Washington Farm Bureau

        Morrow County Grain Growers   Washington Grain Commission

        Northwest Grain Growers       Washington State Potato 
                                      Commission

                                 *****

                                                 April 19, 2023    

Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary
U.S. Department of Transportation
West Building
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, 9th Floor
Washington, DC 20590-9898

    Dear Secretary Buttigieg:

    As you may be aware, the decades-long litigation regarding Pacific 
Northwest salmon in the Columbia Snake River System is currently under 
a stay agreement until August 31, 2023. During the stay, the primary 
parties to the litigation have entered into a mediation process led by 
the Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service (FMCS) in hopes of 
reaching a settlement. We write on behalf of the defendant intervenors, 
whose members include ports throughout Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, 
consumer-owned utilities, farmers, s, transportation companies, 
terminals, and water resources stakeholders. The defendant intervenors 
entered the litigation on the side of the United States Government 
(USG) but were excluded from all negotiations leading up to the stay 
agreement. Nevertheless, we have remained as engaged as possible during 
the mediation process, although our concerns have not been prioritized 
to date.

    The primary topic of discussion throughout the mediation has been 
the removal of the four Lower Snake River Dams (LSRD). While this 
proposal lacks consensus, it remains a topic of great consideration in 
this process, and we understand may be advocated for by elements of the 
USG. The removal of the LSRD would eliminate barging on the Columbia 
Snake River System (CSRS), requiring its replacement by rail and truck. 
As deeply affected stakeholders, our concern is the apparent failure of 
the USG to take freight transportation issues into consideration in any 
meaningful way. These issues include replacement infrastructure 
feasibility and cost, carbon and other pollution impacts resulting from 
the required mode shift, shipping rate impacts on agricultural 
producers and suppliers, and the impacts on underserved and 
underrepresented communities.

    The replacement of barging would require a substantial expansion of 
road and rail infrastructure, the scope and scale of which has not been 
fully calculated but would most certainly include rail line extensions 
and expansion, the addition of railcar capacity, road expansion and 
extension, and substantial bridge modifications over the CSRS. There 
are real concerns regarding the geographic/topographic feasibility of 
such infrastructure projects in areas such as the Columbia River Gorge 
and the Snake River Canyon. There are also serious concerns regarding 
the political feasibility of such projects given state and federal 
permitting processes such as the National Environmental Policy Act.

    We are particularly concerned that the developing USG mediation 
position stands in contradiction with other Administration policy 
objectives. For example, in February the Administration released its 
Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization.\1\ That Blueprint notes 
in Figure B (Page 5) and elsewhere that maritime transportation 
(including river barging) accounts for only 3% of transportation-
related emissions and in Figure 6 (Page 43) that maritime 
transportation has the lowest emissions per ton mile for freight. The 
Blueprint calls for actions before 2030 (Pages 7, 78) to ``provide 
incentives to support greater use of efficient travel modes and 
vehicles . . .'' (underline added). Given that maritime movement of 
freight is the most efficient mode of transportation we fail to 
understand how removal of the 4 LSRD could be consistent with this 
Blueprint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/climate-and-
sustainability/us-national-blueprint-transportation-decarbonization

    Even if a shift from barge to rail and truck were feasible, 
increased reliance on truck and rail will result in an increase of 23.8 
million miles of travel per year on county, state, and federal 
highways, increasing net transportation costs substantially.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ National Transportation Impacts & Regional Economic Impacts 
Caused by Breaching Lower Snake River Dams. January 2020. 
www.fcsgroup.com Contracted by Pacific Northwest Waterways Association.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Some of the impacts of such a shift are that:

     Total truck transit times would increase by at least 
            408,262 hours per year;

     The expanded trucking activity will increase fuel costs, 
            highway maintenance costs, terminal facility and 
            maintenance costs, driver time, and vehicle maintenance 
            costs, to the tune of $63.6 million per year;

     The shift in ton-miles from barge to rail and truck will 
            increase fuel consumption by 4.67 million gallons per year, 
            thereby reducing our nation's ability to achieve energy 
            independence; and

     Increased transportation and storage costs will put more 
            than 1,100 farms at risk of bankruptcy.

    Shifting commodity flows from barge to truck and rail will be bad 
for the environment. Annual emissions will increase as follows:

     860,000 additional tons of CO2 per year;

     306.5 additional tons of NOx per year;

     7.5 additional tons of PM per year;

     69.7 additional tons of CO per year; and

     7 additional tons of VOC per year.

    These increased emissions would be equivalent to cumulative impact 
of the Boardman coal-fired power plant every 5-6 years. The region has 
made the collective decision to close the Boardman plant because it 
generates 4.6 million tons of CO2 annually. Removing the Snake River 
dams would reverse the environmental progress associated with its 
closure. It would also have an environmental impact equivalent to:

     Adding 90,365 standard size homes;

     Adding 181,889 passenger cars; or

     Removing 6,927 acres through deforestation.

    Such infrastructure projects commonly adversely impact low-income 
and other underserved/unrepresented communities residing adjacent or in 
close proximity to such projects. These communities suffer during land 
acquisition and construction of new projects as well as from exposure 
to increased pollutants from exhaust emissions, tire wear, and other 
environmental exposures. In addition, the agricultural impacts outlined 
above will not only impact landowners but also their workers, the 
majority of whom are Hispanic. Tribal treaty rights and environmental 
justice for Native Americans are crucially important, but the impacts 
on other underserved/underrepresented communities must also be taken 
into account. We therefore urge DOT and the mediation participants to 
engage with the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council 
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/white-house-
environmental-justice-advisory-council/) to assess the full suite of 
environmental justice concerns related to LSRD removal.
    We believe it is imperative that DOT lean into the mediation 
process, as the process appears to be operating in a vacuum separate 
from broader public policy objectives such as these transportation 
issues as well as other issues like clean energy, environmental justice 
concerns, agricultural impacts, international trade objectives, and 
even national security concerns. Thank you.

            Sincerely Yours,

        The McGregor Company          Diversified Marine, Inc

        Great Northwest Transport     Port of Longview

        Tidewater                     Port of Whitman

        Shaver Transportation         Port of Clarkston

        Port of Lewiston              Port of Benton

        Port of Woodland              Port of Walla Walla

        Columbia River Towboat 
        Association                   Port of Pasco

                                 *****
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


.epsThe full document is available for viewing at:

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II13/20231212/116632/HHRG-
118-II13-20231212-SD009.pdf

                                 *****

        REGIONAL & NATIONAL IMPACTS TRIGGERED BY LSRD BREACHING
  QUICK SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION, CLIMATE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE CONCERNS

Introduction

    LSR dam breaching would have detrimental economic, climate and 
social justice impacts for local governments, communities, property 
owners, farmers and businesses in Washington, Oregon and Idaho.

    Pacific Northwest Waterways Association contracted with FCS GROUP 
(financial and economic consultants) to provide an independent and 
economically conservative evaluation of the social/infrastructure/
transportation/farm impacts that would be caused by Lower Snake River 
(LSR) dam breaching and closure of four LSR locks.

    With the elimination of the Snake River barge transportation option 
and reduction in the aquifers that over 7,640 farms in Washington, 
Oregon and Idaho depend upon, LSR dam breaching will fundamentally 
change this tri-state region. The paper evaluates the expected economic 
and social justice impacts on 12 counties and several cities located in 
the tri-state region.

    Overall findings illustrate that dam breaching would exacerbate 
existing climate and social justice issues in a tri-state region that 
includes 350,183 people and 90,124 jobs. It is expected that existing 
social justice concerns will grow exponentially should the land be left 
without a reliable, consistent supply of surface water.

Social Justice Findings

     The tri-state study region includes 350,183 residents 
            (U.S. Census, ACS, 2021). The majority of residents are 
            White (83.5%). Other races include Latino/Hispanic (17.2%) 
            and American Indian (2.03%).

     The share of the study region's population that is 
            disabled (15.3%) is higher than the national average (13%).

     The median age of the region's residents is older (41.2) 
            than the national median (38.8).

     Net cash income for farms reporting receipts averaged only 
            $52,695 in 2017.

     In addition to households experiencing poverty (16.5%), 
            United Way indicates that 31% of the study region's 
            households are Asset Limited Income Constrained and 
            Employed (ALICE). The combination of poverty and ALICE 
            measurements indicate that nearly half of all households in 
            the region are living ``on the edge''--going paycheck to 
            paycheck to make ends meet relative to housing, childcare, 
            health care and transportation costs.

     Regional income is lower and poverty rates are higher in 
            the study region compared with the nation. In 2021, 16.5% 
            of the study region's residents between the age of 18 and 
            64 were below the poverty level--compared to 11.9% for the 
            nation. Exhibit 1 reflects Census Tracts within the region 
            that have ``Persistent Poverty.''

     Home ownership rates in the region (58.7%) are lower than 
            the national average (69.4%).

     The share of regional households experiencing severe rent 
            burden (with over half of annual income paid towards 
            housing) is higher (24.4%) than the national average 
            (22.9%).

     The share of households participating in SNAP 
            (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs) is higher in 
            the study region (13.4%) than the nation (12.3%).

     The share of unemployed civilians in the region is higher 
            than the national average. The crucial jobs at risk of 
            being lost include hard working haulers, planters, pruners, 
            harvesters--all crucial for providing agricultural produce 
            to consumers. They are already in short supply with first 
            generation Americans, seasonal farm workers, and 
            disadvantaged workers.

     According to current White House Climate and Social 
            Justice data, the region is at a relative disadvantage in 
            terms of unemployment, poverty, energy cost burdens, risk 
            of natural hazards (such as fire), asthma and travel 
            barriers. See Exhibit 2.

Economic Impacts

     Removal of the locks is likely to bankrupt thousands of 
            farms (producers) as they attempt to change their freight 
            distribution network from efficient river barges to far 
            more costly long-haul truck or rail service.

     The existing highway and rail network would need a short-
            term capital investment of $1.3 billion to handle the 4.2 
            million tons of annual shipments to and from the tri-state 
            region. (Source: Appendix A, engineering cost estimates 
            prepared for the Washington Transportation Commission, 
            adjusted to 2023 dollars).

     If billions in federal dollars were somehow appropriated 
            to increase the highway and rail capacity and address 
            required local street and infrastructure needed to mitigate 
            the impact of LSR locks/dam removal, the design and 
            permitting time would take several years and inflationary 
            pressure would push these cost estimates up even higher.

     Potentially shifting commodity exports from barge to truck 
            and rail would increase the overall cost of shipping 
            commodities to export terminals along the Pacific. Moving 
            commodities by truck/rail would increase the cost per 
            bushel of wheat by 8% or more. An increase in the wholesale 
            cost of grain would push the breakeven price for grain up 
            to nearly $8.00 per bushel--well above the spot price of 
            $7.19 in today's market (per USDA, Wheat Index, July 26, 
            2023).

     Because the market price for grain is determined by global 
            factors such as international demand, global supplies, and 
            currency rates, increasing wholesale prices for commodities 
            is not really an option and has a high probability of 
            bankrupting over 7,600 farms, unless U.S. farm subsidies to 
            the tri-state region increased by $55M/year or $1.65 
            billion over 30 years (FCS Group estimates).

     Removal of the LSR dams would also impact underground 
            aquifers by requiring irrigation water for crops to be 
            pulled from groundwater sources. Non-irrigated land in this 
            region is inhospitable for food production. With nearly 
            352,000 acres of irrigated farmland in the tri-state 
            region, the loss of irrigated farmland would potentially 
            reduce land value by $1.1 to $1.6 billion (values reported 
            by the USDA, Land Values Summary, Aug. 2022).

     As farmland valuation is reduced, local assessed values 
            will decline in the tri-state region. This will in-turn 
            reduce local property tax revenue by over $17 million per 
            year in the tri-state region--$520 million over 30 years. 
            The consequential negative fiscal impact would devastate 
            local municipalities, schools and special districts--as 
            municipal and county tax revenue is reduced by $12M/year 
            ($360M over 30 years) and public-school tax revenue is 
            reduced by $6M/year ($180M over 30 years) in the tri-state 
            region.

     Regional farm and government sectors account for nearly 
            15% of the tri-state GDP with 15,700 jobs. The long-term 
            permanent job losses in the tri-state region attributed to 
            LSR breaching is difficult to quantity but would likely 
            place 15,000 jobs at risk. The secondary and tertiary 
            impacts of these job losses would be far greater.

     The Port of Clarkston has identified six specific 
            businesses and cruise ship operations at risk, which 
            support 6,811 workers. These businesses generate $625.7 
            million in total annual GDP. A subset of GDP includes $65.5 
            million in state and local tax payments and $86.6 million 
            in annual Federal tax payments.

     Multiple cruise lines would cease ALL operations if the 
            Snake River portion of the waterway is unavailable. This 
            would cause a ripple effect on local economies and at 
            several ports of call along the lower Columbia River in 
            Oregon and Washington.

     At least three cities (Clarkston, Lewiston and Asotin), 
            regional counties and major industrial businesses have 
            permits for discharge of treated wastewater into the river. 
            A share of the economic contribution of these communities 
            will be at-risk with dam breaching, with nearly $1.5 
            billion in combined annual GDP. Note, this is a 
            conservative estimate of the regional GDP, since many other 
            communities in Washington and Idaho will also be impacted.

Transportation Impacts

     The removal of four lower Snake River dams are expected to 
            increase transportation and related environmental costs in 
            the U.S. by over $8.1 billion over 30 years. This equates 
            to a net present value of $4.2 billion (based on standard 
            7.0% annual discount rate).

     Removing the Snake River locks would cause diesel fuel 
            consumption to increase by nearly 5 million gallons per 
            year as barges are replaced by less efficient truck-to-rail 
            shipments.

     The current distribution of commodities moving out of the 
            10-county bi-state region to deep draft export ports as 
            follows: 90% barge and 10% rail. With removal of the LSR 
            locks, commodities transported by barge would decrease--as 
            producers try to shift commodity freight from efficient 
            river barge to truck and rail.

     Even if billions in federal and state transportation 
            mitigation was appropriate, LSR dam breaching would require 
            at least 201 additional unit trains and 23.8 million miles 
            in additional trucking activity annually.

     Related engineering studies have concluded that over $1.3 
            billion in infrastructure investments would need to be 
            constructed in the near-term to address transportation, 
            railroad, grain storage capacity and local infrastructure 
            changes that would result with LSR dam breaching.

     Increased reliance on truck-to-rail or truck-to-barge 
            terminal shipping (on Lower Columbia) is expected to result 
            in an increase of 23.8 million miles of travel per year on 
            county, state and federal highways. The increased trucking 
            activity will increase fuel costs, highway maintenance 
            costs, terminal facility maintenance cost, driver time, and 
            vehicle maintenance costs by over $69 million per year.

     Diesel fuel consumption will increase by nearly 5 million 
            gallons per year; thereby reducing our nation's ability to 
            achieve energy independence.

     An increase in unit trains of 1-2 per day enhances the 
            probability of train related incidents and fatalities, the 
            cost of train safety incidents has not been included in 
            this study.

Climate Impacts

    Shifting commodity flows from barge to truck and rail will result 
in increases in NOx, CO2 and other harmful emissions by over 1,251,000 
tons per year (source: Appendix C, FCS Group).

    This annual amount of harmful air emissions is equivalent to:

     Removing 6,927 acres of trees through deforestation

     Adding 181,889 passenger cars

     Adding 90,365 standard size homes

     Adding one new large coal fired power plant every 2-3 
            years--such as the recently decommissioned PGE plant in 
            Boardman, Oregon.

                                 *****
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

.The full document is available for viewing at:

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II13/20231212/116632/HHRG-
118-II13-20231212-SD011.pdf

                                ------                                

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I now recognize Ms. Falkenberg for 5 
minutes.

   STATEMENT OF HUMAIRA FALKENBERG, POWER RESOURCES MANAGER, 
            PACIFIC COUNTY PUD, RAYMOND, WASHINGTON

    Ms. Falkenberg. Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz, Ranking 
Member Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is 
Humaira Falkenberg, and I am the Power Resource Manager at 
Pacific PUD. With significant weight and responsibility, I am 
here today to plead the case for not-for-profit utilities, 
including millions of consumers in communities across the 
Pacific Northwest.
    The pending settlement between the U.S. Government and the 
six sovereigns just became public, and is alarming. Pacific PUD 
is an 80-year-old utility serving the coastal communities at 
the confluence of the Columbia River and the Pacific Ocean in 
Southwest Washington. Nearly one-third of the county's 
population is over the age of 65. Poverty is rampant among 
families in our community; 14.7 percent of all families with 
related children under the age of 18 live in poverty. Nearly 40 
percent of all households with children under the age of 18 are 
headed by single women living in poverty. Over 70 percent of 
our total school enrollment is considered low-income. Layering 
on additional costs from the settlement serves as a 
disproportionate, regressive energy burden for our most 
vulnerable members in our community.
    Using CEQ's climate justice tool, we rank in the 97th 
percentile for energy costs and 85th percentile for low-income 
households. Using the same exact tool over the entire Pacific 
Northwest reveals that vast areas of BPA's customer communities 
are also marginalized and under-resourced.
    Currently, our coastal communities bear the brunt of 
climate change, and experience increasingly regular atmospheric 
rivers. Heavy winds routinely damage our transmission lines and 
other critical infrastructure.
    Because we purchase 100 percent of our wholesale 
electricity from BPA, Bonneville power rates have the single 
greatest impact on our retail rates. The greatest threat to our 
utility and the people we serve is uncertainty.
    The settlement threats come in three distinct forms: (1) 
lack of clarity on BPA costs; (2) lack of operational 
certainty; and (3) lack of meaningful litigation forbearance. 
We are already in an operational and cost environment that is 
extremely challenging from adequacy, reliability, and 
affordability perspectives. It becomes even more difficult as 
we work to meet the strict decarbonization goals of the region.
    The injection of intolerable uncertainty in managing and 
planning future electric rates for our customers is causing us 
to evaluate the viability of a 20-year contract with BPA. The 
intergenerational impacts of uncertainty will be felt beyond 
2044.
    Given the poverty in our community, not surprisingly, our 
customers expect us to hold the line on electric rates. We are 
committed to the concept of restorative justice and ensuring 
all communities, particularly our most vulnerable, benefit from 
our existing renewable infrastructure as we advance our clean 
energy transition. In confronting the need for justice in 
particular situations, we should avoid deepening injustice 
elsewhere. We remain empathetic to the origin story and the 
importance of salmon to the First Nations of Columbia River and 
the needs of consumers for affordable, reliable, clean power. 
We support scientific, cost-effective mitigation efforts for 
fish and wildlife that have a clear nexus to the impacts of the 
hydropower system.
    But the U.S. Government must exercise moral courage and use 
principles of distributive justice while honoring BPA's organic 
enabling statutes, specifically, its rate-making directive, to 
set the lowest possible rates to ensure that potential burdens 
resulting from a settlement process are fair and responsive to 
the needs of the entire region.
    Thank you.

    [The prepared statement of Ms. Falkenberg follows:]
  Prepared Statement of Humaira Falkenberg, Power Resources Manager, 
      Public Utility District No. 2 of Pacific County, Washington

    Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz and members of the Subcommittee. My 
name is Humaira Falkenberg. I am the Power Resources Manager of Pacific 
PUD. I also serve as the Chair of the Allocation, Rates and Contract 
Committee of the Public Power Council and as the Vice Chair of 
Northwest River Partners. With significant weight and responsibility, I 
am here today to plead the case for not-for-profit utilities, our 
consumers and communities in the Pacific Northwest in light of the 
potential settlement between the U.S. Government (USG) and Six 
Sovereigns by December 15, 2023.
    As Pacific County PUD's (Pacific) Power Resources Manager, I manage 
and oversee all wholesale power supply costs for our utility. 
Currently, wholesale purchase power makes up nearly 50% of our total 
annual operating expenses. We have a $31.1 million operating budget 
where $14.2 million is attributed to purchased power. As a Full 
Requirements customer of Bonneville Power Administration, we rely on 
BPA to provide 100% of our wholesale electricity. Therefore, BPA power 
rates have the single greatest impact on the rate we must charge to our 
customers to recover costs.
    As a not-for-profit consumer owned utility for 80 years, Pacific 
has relied on BPA to supply reliable, affordable, and low carbon 
wholesale electric power. Recently, Pacific engaged with BPA on the 
next ``Provider of Choice'' 20-year contract, as our current contract 
expires in 2028. Accepting long-term power sales contracts is among our 
utility's most significant actions; we do it with utmost care and 
thought towards long-term intergenerational impacts that will last well 
beyond 2044.
Procedural Injustice

    When we learned that the USG was in secret negotiations with select 
parties from the CRSO litigation and drafted commitments without our 
knowledge, we were outraged at the lack of procedural justice 
demonstrated by FMCS and CEQ. The Council on Environmental Quality 
(CEQ) engaged the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) to 
attempt to make progress in resolving issues in the long-running CRSO 
litigation in the Federal District Court. Yet, those processes have not 
been fair, transparent or impartial and have not allowed other parties 
to have a voice. The collective voice of millions of people in the 
Pacific Northwest was silenced as the USG spent more than six months 
behind doors negotiating with the plaintiffs without meaningful 
engagement with us. As a result, any USG's potential agreement 
resulting from these proceedings carries a shroud of procedural 
injustice. Any aspirational hope of genuine mediation and conflict 
resolution was abandoned.
    Nevertheless, we remain empathetic to both the origin story and the 
importance of salmon and other fish to the Columbia River Basin Tribes 
and the needs of stakeholders for affordable, reliable clean power. 
However, Pacific's customers demand decision making to be guided by 
impartiality, ensuring that biases and politics do not influence the 
decision and, ultimately, any outcomes. Under challenging negotiations, 
it would not be uncharacteristic for parties to sit in extreme 
discomfort jointly. Still, the responsibility of FMCS and CEQ would 
have been to preserve procedural fairness and to allow adequate time to 
review positions. The fruit from a procedurally unjust tree is unjust. 
It is with this frustration we plead with Congress.
Strategic Ambiguity

    When the commitments made by the USG in the ``U.S. Government 
Commitments in Support of the Columbia Basin Restoration Initiative and 
in Partnership with the Six Sovereigns'' (USG Commitments) came into 
the public domain on November 29th, 2023, we were alarmed at the 
strategic ambiguity contained therein. The implications of the 
potential commitments by the USG in the CRSO litigation pose 
significant threats to the long-term value of the FCRPS. This strategic 
ambiguity within the USG Commitments is revealed in three key areas: 1) 
lack of clarity on the costs confronting BPA and its customers 2) lack 
of operational certainty and 3) lack of litigation forbearance.
    Given the massive uncertainty regarding the future of the Federal 
Columbia River Power System (FCRPS), it becomes painfully challenging 
for us to consider signing the next 20-year contracts in light of 
unknown costs in the out years. The document creates intolerable 
ambiguity in predicting and planning future electric rates for our 
customers. A shorter-term contract with BPA may help us better limit an 
unacceptable exposure to risk, given so many unknowns created through 
this agreement.
Lack of Clarity on the Costs Confronting BPA and Its Customers

    Many of the USG commitments made in the document do not have an 
underlying specific appropriations strategies or budget commitments or 
named federal agencies for such responsibilities, creating the concern 
that BPA and its ratepayers will be the default funding source if and 
when Congress fails to act. The document labeled as ``draft'' dated 
``11/2/2023'' exposes at least $100 million in long term additional 
Fish and Wildlife expenses, and $200 million in capital investments. 
These costs are in addition to the $200 million of Phase 2 
Implementation Plan (P2IP), various other long-term and short-term 
funding agreements, the Fish Accords, and the existing Fish and 
Wildlife Program. Additionally, BPA could bear an undefined share of 
the $200 million ``Mid C Restoration Plan'' costs per year. It is still 
being determined whether BPA would be left to fill the gap if Congress 
does not make the expected appropriations. BPA could be the payer of 
last resort.
    Separately, the USG Commitments propose an Advanced Tribal Energy 
Sovereignty program. We want and need all communities to expand efforts 
to promote a clean energy future while doing so reliably and 
affordably. While we support Tribal Energy independence and would 
welcome the collaboration with LRTT to realize their goals, in the 
document, the Department of Energy is charged supporting tribal 
development of 1-3 GW of new renewable energy resources to be 
``accounted'' for as replacement for the output of the LSRDs. The 
commitments presume LSRD breaching and as a remedy create the 
problematic optics of BPA's role as the off taker of such 
``replacement'' resources.
    It is reckless energy policy to presume that 1-3 GW of wind or 
solar could be considered ``replacement'' of LSRD output. The LSRDs 
provide nearly 1,000 aMW of energy at average water and provide 25% of 
the ancillary services of the FCRPS. These projects are equipped with 
Automatic Generation Control (AGC) making them an important part of the 
sixty-second demand and supply balance necessary for power grid 
stability and operations. These projects' operating reserves aid BPA in 
meetings its Balance Area Authority functions. As more intermittent and 
variable renewable resources are integrated into the grid, flexible and 
controllable hydroelectric dams become even more critical for grid 
reliability--removing them isn't the answer; quite the contrary, it is 
their very existence that allows the abundant integration of variable 
fuel-saving resources and accelerates the clean energy transition.
    Besides contributing to grid reliability, according to BPA, the 
LSRDs generate electricity at a cost of $14 MWh, which is well below 
the cost of developing new renewable resources. These legacy resources 
are vital to maintaining affordable rates in the region and thereby 
contributing to economic justice for those the most financially 
marginalized.
    In conclusion, there is great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty as 
how the USG commitments in the document would impact BPA's rates. There 
is no plain and explicit language in the document that cabins BPA's 
financial obligation; given the extreme uncertainty of funding 
obligations in the agreement, we estimate potential rate impacts from 
5% to over 50%.
Lack of Operational Certainty

    We have significant concerns pertaining to the vulnerability of 
hydro operations to other lawsuits, including river temperature 
lawsuits that the plaintiffs and their colleagues have threatened. The 
USG commits to developing and using a Sovereign-driven process for 
``durable operations'' without any protections or standards for the 
power system impacts. The language, ``(The) USG is committed to 
developing and using a Sovereign driven process to focus on maintaining 
and adaptively implementing (managing) the durable set of operations 
agreed to that govern at the lower Snake River and lower Columbia River 
dams prior to potential breach of the lower Snake River dams,'' is 
alarming.
    That being said, ambiguity still arises with the following sentence 
``USG commits to working with the Six Sovereigns on potential changes 
such as interim project operations, more aggressive advancement of mid-
Columbia River habitat restoration, and fish passage,'' which can be 
implemented after supplemental or additional environmental compliance 
documents are completed.
    We also reject the need to conduct a new FCRPS related Biological 
Opinion, conduct new USACE feasibility studies, and an EIS. The USG 
spent more than $45 million on the CRSO EIS in 2020 and a related 
Biological Opinion.
    Furthermore, the agreement does not firewall BPA from exposure to 
further operational changes through the CRSO claims not excluded by the 
agreement such as the Clean Water Act claims.
Lack of Litigation Forbearance

    We have learned several lessons from the failed Columbia Basin Fish 
Accords. To provide a much more predictable path forward for the 
region, this document needs to require that the plaintiffs commit to 
discontinuing their ESA litigation for the ten-year duration of the 
agreement; they should commit to refraining from other litigation that 
could adversely impact FCRPS operations and BPA power customers. The 
plaintiffs should be bound to be co-defendants with the USG in case of 
lawsuits from other organizations that seek to reduce the value of the 
FCRPS capabilities. A piecemeal approach to litigation forbearance will 
invariably result in future concessions on part of BPA. BPA's customers 
should only have to pay higher electric rates if they are receiving 
commensurate financial and legal protections in the future.
    In summary, the USG commitments document is repeatedly ambiguous. 
The strategic ambiguity will lead to decades of litigation and 
represents irresponsible public policy. It is imperative that the 
language in the agreement be made simple, clear, and precise if it were 
to advance.
BPA Rates and Impacts to Pacific

    The nexus of cost and operational uncertainties coupled with lack 
of litigation forbearance could result in BPA's ratepayers being held 
responsible for undefined future liabilities. Unlike other Federal 
agencies, BPA funds its operations entirely though the rates it charges 
its customers like Pacific and BPA's customers repay all costs 
associated with the production and transmission of power from the 
multipurpose federal projects. This includes the costs related to 
mitigating the impact of federal hydropower generation on threatened 
and endangered fish species. About 25 percent of BPA's Tier 1 rate, 
which includes foregone revenue for the cost of lost generation, is 
paid by BPA's consumer owned utilities for BPA's fish and wildlife 
programs; in the last ten years, we have paid an average of $685 
million per year and during the course of the current power sales 
contract, BPA's Tier 1 power rates have already increased 24 percent.
    While Pacific takes its obligation to fund the largest and most 
comprehensive environmental mitigation program in the United States 
seriously, BPA's authority to undertake any costs is restrained by its 
organic, enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set 
``the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent with sound business 
principles.'' In other words, BPA is a creature of its statutes, and it 
cannot, despite the nobleness of the cause, improperly use ratepayer 
funds. The use of rate payer funds for potential USG commitments is not 
a matter of ``ends justify the means'' but rather about the impact on 
the people in our community, and I care deeply about the residents of 
Pacific County.
    Our rate payer funds are not dividend checks from the shareholders 
of for-profit companies; instead, rate payer funds are monies that 
represent the sweat of labor from the vast majority of our blue-collar, 
working-class customers employed in seafood processing, cranberry bogs, 
and agricultural farms, including those members of our community that 
are most marginalized like migrant workers, elderly, disabled, and 
Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed (ALICE) populations.
    ALICE populations earn more than the Federal Poverty Level but not 
enough to afford the basics where they live. ALICE workers were 
celebrated as essential heroes during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet they 
do not earn enough to support their own families. 45% of Pacific County 
residents qualify as ALICE. Pacific County has the largest percentage 
of ALICE population in all of Washington state. ALICE populations have 
insufficient income. When households can't afford the basics, they are 
forced to make difficult choices and trade-offs every day--impossible 
decisions like whether to pay for prescriptions or keep enough food on 
the table. The larger the gap between income and expenses, the more 
extreme the decisions and the greater the risks to a family's immediate 
health, safety, and financial stability. The slightest impact to the 
cost of an essential service like electricity can have significant 
consequences for both ALICE populations and those below the federal 
poverty line.
Pacific County Service Territory, Demographics, and Electric Rates

    Pacific County spans nearly 1,000 square miles with a population of 
less than 25,000 individuals sparsely dispersed (fewer than 25 people 
per square mile) along the mouth of the Columbia River. Nearly 70% of 
the county's population resides in unincorporated areas, with only four 
small municipalities (South Bend, Raymond, Long Beach, and Ilwaco) 
defined by urban growth areas. Because of the inherent costs of 
electrical infrastructure investment in areas lacking concentrated 
population centers, we face significant pressures in capital costs. Our 
low number of customers per mile of transmission and distribution lines 
means we have a higher proportion of fixed costs. Further these are 
precisely the areas most affected by supply chain issues and inflation. 
This makes any BPA rate increases more challenging for us to absorb, as 
there are limited opportunities in our cost structure for offsetting 
reductions.
    Separately, the county experiences extreme weather events due to 
the proximity of the Pacific Ocean, and high wind events are common.\1\ 
We are also at severe risk of disruption of roads and services by 
earthquake and/or tsunami \2\ and susceptible to ever frequent impacts 
of climate change. Between December 3rd and 5th, 2023, Pacific County 
and the adjacent communities experienced 12 to 16 inches of heavy rain 
resulting in severe flooding due to increasing regular atmospheric 
rivers affecting the region. Conditions were so dire that a U.S. Coast 
Guard rescue swimmer was lowered by a helicopter to save a person 
stranded on a partially submerged vehicle in Western Wahkiakum County. 
In addition, winter storms typically include hours of 60-100 mph winds, 
causing trees to fall and damage lines and structures. Our coastal 
communities are taking the brunt of climate change impacts while the 
USG is ambiguously envisioning a future without the LSRD that provide 
carbon free electricity and aides the nation in clean energy 
transition. When we solve for climate change, we will solve for salmon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://mynorthwest.com/3937904/what-is-washingtons-windiest-
city/
    \2\ https://mil.wa.gov/asset/
5ba420aa1c85c#::text=For%20example%2C%20the%20 
unincorporated%20areas,could%20have%20county%2Dwide%20repercussions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Separately, the topography of our county includes a mountainous 
landscape with heavily forested terrain, dense canopy cover, numerous 
wetlands, and geologic hazard areas. Furthermore, there are prevalent 
corrosive aerial salts that degrade free-standing outdoor assets; with 
all these challenges, we still strive to have the most affordable rates 
in the state of Washington at 6.3 cents per kWh versus the state's 
average at 8.5 cents. But despite our best efforts to have the lowest 
rates for a non-generating PUD in Washington, 2,805 households are 
below the 200% Federal Poverty Level and hence have an energy burden of 
more than 6%.
    We must do more with less because nearly one-third (34%) of the 
county's population is over the age of 65. The median household income 
of $50,873 is 35% lower than the state median income of $80,219. These 
earnings translate into considerable poverty across the county. Nearly 
15% of the population lives at or below the poverty line, approximately 
11% of the population has no health insurance and 25% of residents 
claim a federal disability and 17% of the people under the age of 65 
are disabled.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/
pacificcountywashington/AGE775222# AGE775222
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Furthermore, poverty is rampant amongst families in our community: 
14.7% of all families with related children under the age of 18 live in 
poverty. Nearly 40% of all households with children under the age of 18 
and headed by a sole female live in poverty. Every school in Pacific 
County qualifies for Title I federal funding. Over 70% of our total 
school enrollment is considered ``Low Income.'' Layering on avoidable 
energy burden is a disproportionate regressive tax for our most 
vulnerable community members.
    Per the Biden Administration's Justice 40 Initiative \4\ and CEQ's 
Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, Pacific County has 
multiple tracts considered disadvantaged because the meet more than one 
burden threshold and the associated socioeconomic threshold. Pacific 
County's multiple census tracts rank 97th percentile for energy costs 
and 85% percentile for low-income households where income is less than 
or equal to twice the federal poverty level. Our customers expect us to 
hold the line on electric rates. For us to do that, BPA costs must be 
kept as low as possible while continuing to responsibly fund fish and 
wildlife mitigation efforts that are effective and proportionately 
funded by all who benefit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/justice40/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Separately, when using CEQ's Climate and Economic Justice Screen 
Tool over the entire Pacific Northwest, the geospatial mapping tool 
reveals vast areas of BPA's customer communities are some of the most 
marginalized and under resourced.\5\ In the screen shot image below, 
areas highlighted in blue in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana are 
identified as disadvantaged communities that are overburdened. The USG 
must be mindful of minimizing adverse rate impacts to these communities 
to access essential human services like electricity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/#4.64/46.7/-114.77
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It was centuries of oppression by the USG against Native Americans 
under the Doctrine of Discovery and subsequent Congressional policies 
of allotment and termination that cost Native Americans and First 
Nations hundreds of millions of acres of homelands of spiritual, 
ceremonial, and ancestral significance. Now, the federal taxpayer 
should bear potential commitments made by the USG as part of the CEQ-
FMCS settlement process, for the atonement of past actions.
    Respectfully, the USG must reconcile the uncertain financial burden 
of its extensive potential commitments in support of the Columbia Basin 
Restoration Initiative to the ratepayers of the BPA in the Pacific 
Northwest considering the results presented from CEQ's geospatial map. 
Any rate increases on BPA's customers will result in regressive harm to 
the communities most disproportionally disadvantaged and overburdened.
    The USG's potential assurances in the CRSO litigation also pose 
significant threats to the long-term value of the Federal Columbia 
River Power System (FCRPS). Considering the substantial financial 
reliability and FCRPS operational uncertainty, committing to a 20-year 
Provider of Choice take or pay contract is difficult when long-term 
intergeneration impacts that will last beyond 2044 remain unknown.
    While we support scientific, cost-effective mitigation efforts for 
fish and wildlife impacts that have a clear nexus to the impacts of the 
hydropower system, I humbly request that USG exercise moral courage and 
use principles of distributive justice while honoring BPA's organic, 
enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set the 
``lowest possible rates'' to appropriately ensure that potential 
burdens resulting from a settlement process are squarely cabined to the 
federal taxpayer.
    The future of an urgent clean energy transition must prioritize 
important procedural, distributive, and restorative justice components 
that embraces equity and does not leave people behind. Hydropower 
remains the centerpiece of the Northwest's energy infrastructure and 
provides reliable, affordable, carbon-free power. We can only achieve 
our multiple policy objectives with it.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 



                               .eps*****

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 



                               .
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


                               
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 



                                 
                                 
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I now recognize Mr. Slater for 5 
minutes.

   STATEMENT OF LINDSAY SLATER, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT 
         AFFAIRS, TROUT UNLIMITED, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA

    Mr. Slater. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Huffman, and 
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me today to 
speak. My name is Lindsay Slater. I am the Vice President of 
Government Affairs for Trout Unlimited, and I am here today on 
behalf of our more than 300,000 members and supporters across 
the country. We are a bipartisan cold water conservation 
organization made up of members who invest in their communities 
through stream restoration and collaborative conservation.
    I grew up in Wallowa County in Chairman Bentz's district on 
my family's fifth-generation farm, where salmon pass on their 
way up the Wallowa River. I worked for 26 years in Congress, 
first in Chairman Bentz's district for the late Congressman Bob 
Smith and then Congressman Greg Walden. I spent the next 22 
years with Congressman Mike Simpson of Idaho as his chief of 
staff, leaving last March.
    Six years ago, during another dust up in the region over 
salmon and dams, Congressman Simpson said, ``Let's roll up our 
sleeves and figure out what this conflict is about.'' We went 
down a rabbit hole we could never imagine. To the extent my 
participation in this hearing implies familiarity or even 
expertise with this issue, it is because we ended up spending 
the next 4 years holding over 300 meetings with stakeholders 
across the spectrum of all relevant touch points to salmon, 
dams, agriculture, and energy.
    We learned a few things, that wild salmon are 
irreplaceable, they stitch together the fabric of an ecosystem 
that stretches from the continental shelf to the continental 
divide.
    We learned that not going extinct isn't a recovery goal we 
should be striving for, that salmon have faced many obstacles 
over the last 200 years, including dams, fish wheels, over-
fishing, timber harvesting, predation, non-native fish, water 
pollution, over-production of hatcheries, climate change, and 
poor ocean conditions, that we have spent over $20 billion in 
the last 30 years trying to address these problems and it 
hasn't worked.
    We concluded that dams were the problem by looking at 
salmon populations that passed through three dams that are 
doing much better than salmon populations that pass through 
eight. Salmon need a river, not a series of warm, slow moving 
lakes. If we allow salmon to go extinct, we are breaking the 
covenant with the Pacific Northwest sovereigns. This covenant 
is not an implied responsibility to the tribes. It is an 
explicit legal obligation and treaties as enshrined in the U.S. 
Constitution.
    So, we looked at the lower Snake dams as part of the 
Federal Columbia River Power System. We asked three questions: 
Who or what interests would be affected if the dams were 
removed; could the benefits from the dams be replaced; and what 
would it cost to replace those benefits?
    Some people in this room might have seen the walls in my 
office covered top to bottom and corner to corner in big, 
laminated puzzle pieces of the Pacific Northwest that came 
together in a concept that would replace energy, protect 
stakeholders, and provide a free-flowing river for salmon. We 
believed a win for each party and stakeholders was preferable 
to the existing status quo of lawsuits, appeals, and 
uncertainty.
    In February 2021, Congressman Simpson released his vision 
as the Columbia Basin Initiative that determined the benefits 
of the dams could be replaced. A year later, Governor Inslee 
and Senator Murray came to a similar conclusion. Despite the 
ominous title of this hearing, ``Left in the Dark,'' the lights 
in the Northwest are not going to go out when the four lower 
Snake dams are removed. It has been made clear by Congressman 
Simpson, Senator Murray, and Governor Inslee that the energy 
and capacity of the dams must be replaced prior to dam removal.
    Climate change is already reducing overall flow, and the 
Northwest must diversify its generating mix beyond snowpack-
dependent hydropower, and invest in expanded and modernized 
transmission and distribution systems to ensure reliability. At 
the same time, we can take this opportunity to examine and 
address the Federal hydropower system's legacy of injustice.
    For almost 100 years, the Federal energy system has thrived 
at the expense of the Northwest tribes, whose villages and 
fishing grounds were submerged and salmon decimated. It is 
unacceptable for any administration to continue prioritizing 
the competitive position of BPA at the expense of tribal 
interests in salmon. We should all welcome any extent to which 
the Federal Government is contemplating a leadership position 
for regional tribes. They are due and ready for an elevated 
role in delivering a future of shared abundance through 
restored salmon runs and delivering a clean energy future. The 
government took the rivers and salmon from the tribes, but they 
could never figure out how to take the wind and the sun.
    I will conclude with a message from our CEO, Chris Wood. We 
can save salmon. We can take care of stakeholders and develop 
and build new sources of energy while modernizing our 
electrical grid. But doing nothing is failing future 
generations in the Pacific Northwest, tribes, and salmon.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Slater follows:]
  Prepared Statement of Lindsay Slater, Vice President of Government 
                        Affairs, Trout Unlimited
    Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members of the 
Subcommittee: Thank you for the invitation to testify. My name is 
Lindsay Slater. I am the Vice President of Government Affairs for Trout 
Unlimited and I am here today on behalf of our more than 300,000 
members and supporters across the country. Trout Unlimited is a 
bipartisan, coldwater conservation organization made up of members who 
invest in their communities through stream restoration, collaborative 
conservation, and spreading the joy of fishing and the outdoors. Our 
diverse membership grounds us in the places where our supporters and 
staff live and work, including the Snake River and Columbia River 
basins.
    I grew up in Chairman Bentz's district in eastern Oregon's Wallowa 
County on my family's fifth generation farm where salmon pass on their 
way up the Wallowa River.
    Through last March, I worked for 26 years in Congress. First, in 
Chairman Bentz's district for the late Congressman Bob Smith, next for 
Congressman Greg Walden as his Legislative Director, and then for 22 
years with Congressman Mike Simpson of Idaho as his Chief of Staff. I 
was fortunate to have a career working for three great men and 
legislators.
    During my years working in Congress, I helped to develop solutions-
focused legislation that created outcomes for interests and 
stakeholders that I believe were more favorable than the zero-sum game 
of picking winners and losers in the stewardship of our federal lands. 
The Steens bill with Congressman Walden and the Boulder White Clouds 
with Congressman Simpson are two examples of bills with outcomes more 
favorable to all parties.
    I also learned from some of the best energy experts in the United 
States. There is an informal network of Northwest energy experts--many 
who are former Congressional staff--who educate the staff of the 
Northwest delegation through meetings and tours. I took my first PNGC 
power tour across Oregon and Idaho in 1998. This network is important 
to educate Congressional staff about very complex issues related to the 
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the Northwest energy system. 
In the late 90s, the first pieces of BPA legislation I helped work on 
with the Northwest delegation were JOE and SLICE. We worked as a 
bipartisan team in those days.
    Trout Unlimited has been involved in the dams and salmon discussion 
for decades. In conjunction with our Washington State Council, we 
recently held our annual meeting in Spokane, Washington, which is in 
Congresswoman McMorris-Rodgers's district. More than 300 people from 
around the country turned out to learn about Trout Unlimited's work in 
the Northwest and our efforts to recover wild salmon and steelhead 
populations. Approximately 70 people made the long bus ride to tour 
Lower Granite Dam to learn about what role the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers plays in trying to mitigate the impacts of the four lower 
Snake River dams.
    Trout Unlimited has 25 chapters and nearly 10,000 members in local 
communities across the Pacific Northwest. Our members in Idaho, 
Washington and Oregon want to see wild salmon and steelhead return to 
their home rivers each year and want the same for their children and 
grandchildren. Many utilize electricity brokered by Bonneville Power 
Administration (BPA) through local public utility districts and 
electric cooperatives. They live in the very communities that rely on 
the agricultural economies of the fertile Palouse and Camas Prairies. 
They live in communities with seasonal economies that once were fueled 
by abundant salmon and steelhead. They want a region with a thriving 
economy; abundant, clean, and affordable energy, and wild salmon. And 
with the right investments and a strong commitment we can have all 
three. We can save salmon. We can develop and build new sources of 
energy, while modernizing our electrical grid. We can give the 
stakeholders the certainty they need for a strong economic future. But 
we cannot have all three as long as the four lower Snake River dams and 
the deadly reservoirs behind them remain. There is no future for wild 
Snake salmon and steelhead with the dams in place. So long as they 
block the rivers, the communities that rely on them for their well-
being--especially the northwest tribes who have been sustained by wild 
salmon spiritually and materially for millennia and have federal 
treaties guaranteeing them the right to salmon harvest--will continue 
to be harmed.
    It is important to note there are many dedicated people and 
organizations across the region who have spent years working to 
proactively solve this problem. A coalition of conservation groups has 
spent countless hours working with stakeholders and local communities 
to find solutions and provide the needed services for the region. 
Currently, the state of Washington--at the behest of these advocates 
and inspired by the work of Gov. Inslee and Sen. Murray--is leading a 
planning effort to design the infrastructure, irrigation, and energy 
services that will move the region into the 21st century.
    I want to note that this hearing is driven by a leaked draft 
document from the settlement negotiations between the Biden 
Administration and the plaintiffs in a long-running court case. Trout 
Unlimited is not a party to those negotiations and as such I am unable 
to respond to any questions directly related to them. As the members of 
the committee are certainly aware, settlement negotiations are by their 
nature confidential. That said, the discussion around the need for dam 
removal should not come as a surprise. It has been a topic of 
scientific inquiry and regional discussion since the dams' 
authorization in the 1945 Rivers and Harbors Act. I would urge this 
committee to join the dialogue about the services needed to replace the 
benefits provided by the lower four Snake River dams.
The science of dam impacts on salmon is clear.
    The Columbia River Basin once hosted the largest salmon runs on the 
West Coast, with 10 to 16 million fish returning to the mouth of the 
Columbia River from the ocean each year. Half of them returned to the 
Snake River watershed in Idaho, where the thousands of miles of 
coldwater, high elevation forested streams that produced this 
remarkable abundance of fish are still largely intact.
    The potential for recovery of Snake River wild salmon and steelhead 
is enormous. The Snake's thousands of miles of high-quality habitat and 
cold, clean water could support thriving wild salmon and steelhead 
populations if they could safely access it. Currently, Snake River 
spring chinook, Snake River fall chinook, Snake River sockeye and Snake 
River steelhead are listed as threatened or endangered and wild Snake 
River spring/summer Chinook runs are approaching a ``quasi-extinction 
threshold.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Northwest Power and Conservation Council (2021). Nez Perce 
Tribe staff presentation on their analysis of Snake River Basin Chinook 
and Steelhead--Quasi-Extinction Threshold and Call to Action. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2021_05_4.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For 50 years, we have attempted to mitigate the harmful impacts of 
the dams and hydro-system by barging, adult fish ladders, juvenile 
bypass, turbine screens, spillway modification increased spill, 
hatcheries, and dozens of other mitigation efforts. But since the 
completion of the dams, we have never reached two percent fish returns; 
in fact, wild Snake River salmon and steelhead are near all-time lows. 
Stakeholders have spent half a century of rate payer money (including 
$24 billion in mitigating funds from Bonneville Power Administration) 
and taxpayer money in the form of the Lower Snake River Fish and 
Wildlife Compensation Plan (LSRFWCP) doubling down on a failed system 
while some of the most miraculous and prolific wild salmon and 
steelhead runs in the world circle the drain.
    The simple fact is that the four lower Snake River dams and their 
deadly reservoirs kill too many salmon and steelhead. Smolt (juvenile 
salmon and steelhead) are forced to swim to the ocean rather than drift 
backward as they do in a free-flowing river, letting the current carry 
them. These small fish--carrying distinct genetic code thousands of 
generations old that will lead them back to Idaho--die in turbines or 
are predated on by invasive smallmouth bass, walleye, and birds. 
Despite our best attempts, they die in the holding tanks of barges that 
attempt to move them past the dams, and others fail to return as adults 
because their ocean entry timing is disrupted. In fact, nearly 50 
percent of smolts from Idaho never make it past the 8 dams that stand 
between the ocean and the Snake Basin.
    The best coldwater salmon habitat left in the contiguous United 
States is in the Snake River Basin. Within the current native 
distribution of salmon and steelhead on the West Coast, the Snake's 
30,000 miles of stream habitat represents 40 percent of all Pacific 
salmon habitat in the lower 48. Take a second to think about that. The 
Snake River Basin makes up 40 percent of Pacific salmon and steelhead 
habitat on the entire West Coast. And it's blocked by four aging, fish-
killing dams.
    Salmon recovery requires dam removal. The upper Snake River basin 
is the largest piece of intact coldwater habitat left for wild salmon 
in the lower 48. If we want to provide salmon with access to the 
critical high elevation coldwater spawning grounds, the easiest path is 
the removal of the lower four Snake River dams. The National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) noted in their September 2022 
report, ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead,'' 
that the four lower Snake River dams would have the most significant 
impact for salmon recovery.\2\ Specifically the report noted, ``For 
Snake River stocks, the centerpiece action is restoring the lower Snake 
River via dam breaching.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2022). 
Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead. https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/rebuilding-interior-columbia-
basin-salmon-and-steelhead

    Removal would accomplish three important things for wild salmon.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Trout Unlimited (2023). Why We Need a Free-Flowing Snake River. 
https://www.tu.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/TU_SnakeRiverReport_F2-
2.pdf

     Would reduce water transit time. The science is clear: a 
            natural outmigration closer to historical norms of two days 
            minimizes exposure to predators, reduces unmitigated energy 
            expenditure, and results in healthier smolts when they 
            arrive at the estuary. Outmigration time has increased by 
            tenfold, from 2 days in a free-flowing riverine 
            environment, to upwards of 20 days in the current system of 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            dams and slack water.

     Would reduce lethally elevated water temperatures. The 
            140-mile-long chain of reservoirs created by the hydro 
            system are a deadly heatsink for migrating adult salmon and 
            steelhead. These elevated temperatures cause migration 
            delays by blocking access to adult ladders. In 2015, an 
            estimated 4,000 returning endangered Snake River sockeye 
            were exposed to lethal thermal maximums. Only around one 
            percent escaped to spawning grounds, compared to the annual 
            average of 25 to 50 percent.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ Northwest Power and Conservation Council (2016). Presentation 
on NOAA Fisheries' 2015 Adult Sockeye Passage Report. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2016_0412_5.pdf

     Would eliminate mortality from dam contact, including 
            direct or indirect contact with turbines, spillways, and 
            bypass facilities. The U.S. Army Corps currently estimates 
            a 96 percent survival rate through a given dam facility but 
            fails to account for mortality once smolt depart the 
            tailrace. BPA and the U.S. Army Corp acknowledge that 
            measured cumulative mortality through the hydro system is 
            48 percent, though latent mortality likely drives that 
            number higher before smolt reach the ocean. Some estimates 
            show that latent mortality through the hydro system can 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            kill up to 67 percent of out-migrating smolt.

    The impacts of the four lower Snake River dams cannot be put into 
any starker contrast but to compare the John Day and Grande Ronde 
Rivers of Oregon. Each have headwaters in the Blue Mountains, the John 
Day flowing west into the Columbia River, the Grande Ronde flowing east 
into the Snake River. The difference is that salmon and steelhead 
returning to the John Day River have three dam passages on the Columbia 
River while the Grande Ronde salmon and steelhead pass eight dams. John 
Day smolt-to-adult returns (SAR) are approximately three and four 
percent for wild Chinook salmon and steelhead, while Snake returns--
including the Grand Ronde--hover at 0.7% SAR (Appendix A). Currently, 
the SAR goals for ESA-listed salmon populations established by the 
Northwest Power and Conservation Council are set at two percent to six 
percent, with an average of four percent.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ Northwest Power and Conservation Council (2020). Columbia River 
Basin Fish and Wildlife Program: 2020 Addendum. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/reports/2020-9/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We have spent billions of dollars and it's not working. Neither of 
Congress' attempts to remedy the dams' long-acknowledged impacts--the 
Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 and the 
Lower Snake River Fish and Wildlife Compensation Plan (LSRCP)--have 
stopped the tragic decline of wild Snake River salmon and steelhead.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ Public Law 96-501 96th Congress (1980). Pacific Northwest 
Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act. https://www.Congress.gov/
96/statute/STATUTE-94/STATUTE-94-Pg2697.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since the completion of the dams in the 1970s,\7\ runs of Snake 
River wild salmon and wild steelhead have declined precipitously from 
their historical numbers, prompting each of their ESA listings 
throughout the 1990s. Today, both remain listed and hover ever closer 
to extinction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ BPA Fact Sheet. (2023) https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/
publications/general-documents/bpa-facts.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPA is failing to meet objectives for recovery and blocking investments 
        for the future of the region.
    These dams contribute less than 1,000 megawatts annually, but cost 
billions to operate and mitigate. The Bonneville Power Administration, 
which operates the lower four dams, has spent $24 billion in ratepayer 
funds on unsuccessful mitigation efforts over the past two decades.
    The current resources for the BPA grid are 87 percent 
hydroelectric.\8\ Drought and reduced snowpack are likely to further 
impact capacity. BPA must start planning a future that includes new, 
reliable, and robust sources of energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ BPA Fact Sheet. (2023) https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/
publications/general-documents/bpa-facts.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal sovereignty
    The tribes are the voice that must be heard and listened to. These 
rivers were theirs and their cultures have been devastated when the 
rivers and salmon were taken from them when their traditional fishing 
grounds, villages and cultural sites were flooded by the dams.
    The tribal nations of the Pacific Northwest, have treaty rights for 
``the exclusive right of taking fish in the streams running through and 
bordering said reservation is hereby secured to said Indians; and at 
all other usual and accustomed stations, in common with citizens of the 
United States.'' These rights were guaranteed by the United States 
through agreement, in the Treaties of Hellgate, Medicine Creek, Neah 
Bay, Point Elliott, Point No Point , Quinault , Walla Walla, Wasco, 
Treaty of 1855--Yakima Nation and Treaty of 1855--Nez Perce. These 
agreements between the US government and the sovereign nations of the 
Pacific Northwest are a constitutional mandate.
    The guaranteed right to salmon was ratified by this body in 1859. 
The courts have continually upheld this right and the urgent 
requirement to meet our treaty obligations are not in question. We must 
uphold the constitutional and ethical obligations to all sovereign 
nations of the Pacific Northwest.
Moving Forward
    Three years ago, U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) said what 
conservationists have long known: we can remove the dams, reopen 
hundreds of miles of rivers to recover wild salmon and steelhead, and 
replace all the dams' socio-economic benefits: irrigation, power, 
barging for agricultural products.\9\ This was later affirmed by 
Washington Gov. Mike Inslee and U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ Congressman Mike Simpson (2021). Columbia Basin Initiative. 
https://simpson.house.gov/salmon/
    \10\ Lower Snake River Dams: Benefit Replacement Report (2022). 
https://governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/
LSRD%20Benefit%20Replacement%20Final%20Report_August%202022.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    But other elected leaders and policymakers, building on decades of 
inaction, are choosing the status quo over the most promising 
opportunity in decades to recover imperiled Snake River salmon and 
steelhead, and in the process failing to make good on America's treaty 
obligations to tribal nations and people of the Northwest. We must 
seize the opportunity now and figure out how to make it work.
    Representatives Simpson, Murray, and Inslee each showed that we can 
have our salmon and protect the Northwest energy system and river 
stakeholders. This is not a zero-sum game of winners and losers. We are 
presented with an opportunity to diversify and reset all aspects of the 
energy and transportation system to prepare for the next 50 years in 
the Columbia basin. We should seize this opportunity rather than 
clinging to the status quo of biological opinions, lawsuits, appeals, 
and Congressional hearings. If we adhere to status quo, salmon, tribes, 
and stakeholders lose.
    We can do better. For the salmon, the tribes, and the people of the 
Northwest. We can give the Snake River salmon their free-flowing river 
back.

               Appendix A: Smolt to Adult Returns (SARs)
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 


                           

The following document was submitted as a supplement to Mr. 
Slater's testimony.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

.The full document is available for viewing at:

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II13/20231212/116632/HHRG-
118-II13-20231212-SD012.pdf

                                ------                                

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I now recognize Mr. Simms for 5 
minutes.

 STATEMENT OF SCOTT SIMMS, CEO AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PUBLIC 
                POWER COUNCIL, PORTLAND, OREGON

    Mr. Simms. Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member 
Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Scott 
Simms, and I serve as the CEO and Executive Director of the 
Public Power Council, or PPC.
    PPC is the non-partisan trade group representing the 
interests of non-profit, consumer-owned electric utilities in 
the Pacific Northwest which serve millions of people in 
Washington, Oregon, Idaho, western Montana, and parts of Nevada 
and Wyoming. PPC's member utilities in rural and urban areas of 
the Northwest purchase electricity and transmission services 
from the Bonneville Power Administration, or BPA, and they 
collectively pay 70 percent of BPA's $3.9 billion annual 
revenue requirement.
    Our utilities fund is the largest ESA effort in the nation, 
and we have a keen interest in ensuring that fish mitigation 
measures are science-based, cost-effective and have a clear 
nexus with the operations of the Federal Columbia River Power 
System, or FCRPS. We are fully committed to paying our fair 
share of mitigation responsibilities, no more and no less. This 
balance is what enables PPC members to offer affordable, 
reliable, clean, and environmentally responsible power to the 
communities they serve.
    Unfortunately, as we have heard here today, the FCRPS 
operations have been mired in long-running litigation. Roughly 
18 months ago, the Federal District Court judge overseeing 
litigation on the Columbia Basin System approved a stay, while 
the Council on Environmental Quality, or CEQ, engaged Federal 
mediators to resolve the issues being litigated.
    We are now facing a U.S. Government agreement that could be 
devastating for Northwest electricity consumers. We anticipate 
under the best case scenario the impact to rates would be 5 
percent and in the worst case it would be 50 percent. PPC 
entered the CEQ-led Federal mediation process with guarded 
optimism that it would be operated in a fair, confidential, and 
collaborative manner. Regretfully, it has been the contrary.
    Now, this region must grapple with an agreement between the 
U.S. Government and six selected sovereign parties forged in 
secret many months ago, and only recently made public thanks to 
the brave acts of a few Northwest congressional leaders who are 
in this room today. This U.S. Government agreement shows a path 
toward lower Snake River dam breaching was always CEQ's master 
plan for the process. PPC has repeatedly raised new ideas and 
proposed tangible solutions. CEQ clearly wasn't interested.
    The fiasco began when CEQ conveniently floated NOAA's so-
called latest science as a basis to push a specific, breach-
focused agenda. That new NOAA report paved over NOAA's prior 
decades of established record of scientific evidence. Many, 
including PPC, have pointed out its long list of inaccuracies, 
but CEQ pressed on.
    Then, at the end of October, the U.S. Government abruptly 
signaled a package of actions and commitments that had been 
developed for the region with the six sovereigns. Other 
parties, like us, in the process scrambled to understand the 
sweeping impacts of the agreement. Even both sides of the aisle 
in Congress were left in the dark.
    With my limited time left, let me share why it is the 
single greatest threat to Northwest hydro in decades, which is 
expanded upon, by the way, in my written testimony.
    No. 1, there is no limit to BPA's and Public Power's cost 
exposure. Again, our members anticipate that under the best 
case scenario the impact on power rates would be 5 percent and 
in the worst case 50 percent. This agreement is riddled with 
unacceptable risks and a range of potential extra costs for 
Northwest ratepayers. For example, the $2 billion mid-Columbia 
restoration plan says all government sources will be pursued. 
BPA and its customers are in no way spared. As well, there are 
numerous other mitigation commitments with no defined funder.
    No. 2, the agreement does not provide operational certainty 
for the hydro system. Within its own framework the commitments 
call for adaptive management driven by the six sovereigns with 
no protection or standards for power system impacts. As well, 
others outside this agreement can bring claims and apply other 
limitations to hydro operations.
    No. 3, this agreement does not limit litigation risk or get 
us out of the courtroom. Other claims and lawsuits can be 
brought at any time. Forbearance does not exist here. Parties 
not bound to the agreement can bring lawsuits not barred by the 
agreement such as under the Clean Water Act. Parties also not 
in this agreement might bring forth separate agreements 
outlining new costs and operational constraints in a 
compounding effect. Other than the six sovereigns, the 
opportunity for more litigation concessions is endless.
    The agreement implies that BPA will be induced to acquire 
tribal energy resources to replace lower Snake River dam 
output. These resources are described specifically as 
replacement resources and implicate BPA's statutory acquisition 
authority under the Northwest Power Act. This $2-$6 billion 
endeavor to bring on 1 to 3 gigawatts of renewables ignores the 
fact that reliable 24/7 hydro might be replaced by variable and 
intermittent resources, a setup for serious grid reliability 
problems.
    This U.S. Government agreement is evidence of CEQ's failure 
in this process.
    Thank you for your leadership and for hosting this hearing 
today, and I will gladly answer any questions.

    [The prepared statement of Mr. Simms follows:]
      Prepared Statement of Scott Simms, CEO & Executive Director,
                          Public Power Council

    Good morning, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and members 
of the Subcommittee. My name is Scott Simms, and I serve as the CEO and 
Executive Director of the Public Power Council (PPC). While it is 
always a pleasure to testify before this Committee, I wish it was under 
better circumstances. The topic we are discussing today is the single 
greatest threat to the Northwest's hydropower system in decades.
Background

    PPC is the non-partisan trade association representing the 
interests of non-profit, consumer-owned electric utilities in the 
Pacific Northwest, which together serve millions of people and 
businesses in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, western Montana, and parts of 
Nevada and Wyoming. These large and small utilities in rural and urban 
areas of the Great Pacific Northwest purchase electricity and 
transmission services at cost from the Bonneville Power Administration, 
or BPA--which is one of four U.S. federal Power Marketing Agencies 
(PMA). BPA is the clean energy frontrunner among these PMAs, with a 95 
percent emission-free power portfolio. The consumer-owned utilities 
served by BPA collectively pay 70 percent of BPA's $3.9 billion annual 
revenue requirement, with the remainder of BPA's budget covered by 
sales to others, such as through short term surplus power sales to 
other Western states. BPA is unique among the PMAs in that all of its 
revenue requirements are provided by its customers and operations. As 
well, all of BPA's consumer-owned utility customers are invested in 
BPA's success, which includes ensuring BPA complies with its statutory 
obligation to provide the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent 
with sound business principles.
    BPA markets power from 31 federal hydroelectric dams on the 
Columbia River and its tributaries, plus the output of the Columbia 
Generating Station, a nuclear power plant located on the Hanford Site 
in Eastern Washington. BPA has more than 15,000 miles of high voltage 
transmission lines and 261 Substations with a footprint of about 75% of 
the total transmission resources in the Northwest.
The State of Salmon Today

    As stewards focused on affordability and reliability, PPC member 
utilities also have a solid environmental interest and are committed to 
mitigating the impacts of Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS) 
operations. As the most significant single contributor to the nation's 
Endangered Species Act effort, we have a keen interest in ensuring that 
fish mitigation measures are science-based, cost-effective, and have a 
clear nexus with the operations of the FCRPS. Such actions serve dual 
purposes--they promote the restoration of the region's valued 
endangered and threatened species and, ultimately, reduce the impacts 
on fish and wildlife and costs associated with FCRPS operations. We are 
committed to paying our total mitigation share--no more and no less. 
This balance enables PPC members to offer their communities affordable, 
reliable and clean power in an environmentally responsible manner.
    As a matter of perspective, BPA's total fish and wildlife expense 
category, supported by public power revenues, stands at an average of 
$685 million a year over the past 10 years. These funds and operational 
concessions result in better habitat, critical land set-asides, 
thriving hatcheries, robust fish predation reduction programs, Tribal 
program partnerships that provide Tribal community jobs and the 
application of on-the-ground Indigenous Basin expertise, fish friendly 
hydro turbines and an exhaustive list of other meaningful 
contributions. Sadly, in today's world, these steady and extensive 
science-led investments in the Columbia River Basin do not grab the 
headlines, though the achievements over time are certainly notable and 
undeniable.
    While these Columbia River Basin fish mitigation efforts are 
producing measurable improvements in certain salmon runs--especially 
when compared to the decimation of salmon from aggressive Columbia 
Basin harvesting and cannery operations in the late 1800s to early 
1900s before the FCRPS dams were constructed \1\--the successes of 
today's mitigation efforts are rejected by those who refuse to 
acknowledge the decades of steady progress. Even in recent years, the 
Columbia River Basin recorded banner years of salmon returns in 2014 
and in 2022. These successes are especially notable, though, when 
considering the strong headwinds of continued off-shore and in-river 
salmon harvesting, unfavorable ocean conditions, predation and impacts 
from pollution that these fish face, among other factors. 
Interestingly, as side note, recent news coverage of the pristine Yukon 
River in Alaska is showing massive declines in Chinook and Chum salmon 
varieties.\2\ This is very recent news on top of ongoing similar media 
coverage of analysis of salmon returns up and down the West Coast, 
which is a cause for overall concern. As context, continued Columbia 
River salmon returns--though varied by year given factors mentioned 
above--stand out as a bright spot in comparison to these other downward 
trending West Coast stocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Northwest Power & Conservation Council Website, ``Canneries,'' 
https://www.nwcouncil.org/reports/columbia-river-history/canneries/
    \2\ Marlena Sloss and Dino Grandoni, ``There's a crisis in the 
Yukon River,'' Washington Post, December 3, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    With so much concern about the state of the world's climate and the 
desire among many of our nation's utilities and communities to have a 
clean, reliable power portfolio such as ours in the Pacific Northwest, 
why in the world would the US Government set out a path to breach these 
highly productive, emission-free hydro projects?
FMCS Process Flawed from the Start

    It's unfortunate that FCRPS operations have been mired by long-
running litigation, and that a lack of logic and reason seems to 
prevail. Roughly 16 months ago, the federal district court judge 
overseeing litigation on the Columbia Basin System Operations approved 
a stay in that litigation. At the same time, the Council on 
Environmental Quality (CEQ) engaged the Federal Mediation and 
Conciliation Service (FMCS) to resolve the litigated issues. The stay 
in litigation was launched with this US Government commitment:

    ``The Biden Administration is committed to supporting development 
of a durable long-term strategy to restore salmon and other native fish 
populations to healthy and abundant levels, honoring Federal 
commitments to Tribal Nations, delivering affordable and reliable clean 
power, and meeting the many resilience needs of stakeholders across the 
region.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ ``United States Commitments,'' Case 3:01-cv-00640-SI, Document 
2423-2, Filed August 4, 2022.

    Now, almost two years later, we are fully aware the US Government 
fell far short of that mark, failing to meet ``the many resilience 
needs of stakeholders in this region.'' In fact, one could legitimately 
argue that the divisions between various stakeholders in the region 
have only worsened as a direct result of the US Government's efforts 
during this stay in litigation.
    PPC entered these negotiations with guarded optimism that the 
process would finally be pursued in a fair, confidential, and 
collaborative way led by skilled third-party mediators. Regretfully, 
our experience has been to the contrary. What has resulted is a 
frustrating bureaucratic process with little discussion of new ideas 
and much less progress toward a regional compromise. Confidentiality 
has been conveniently used to protect ``private caucuses'' between CEQ 
and select parties. Meanwhile, many official participants in the 
process and their stakeholders have been left in the dark and have yet 
to be equal parties despite, continued efforts to advance new ideas, 
explore compromise solutions and share further information. Our voice 
was not sought out, despite the dire financial and operational 
consequences--and even health and human safety risks--that electric 
utilities and their customers would face from ill-conceived 
``agreements.'' Again, it's worth noting that public power utilities 
pay the lion's share of FCRPS costs. Yet, we've been walled off from 
CEQ and plaintiff party conversations inevitably involving future cost 
obligations of Northwest ratepayers either from further operational 
constraints; direct cash outlays--or both.
    On November 27, 2023, PPC and other parties in the region \4\ 
received a copy of the 34-page confidential document titled ``U.S. 
Government Commitments in Support of the Columbia Basin Restoration 
Initiative and Partnership with the Six Sovereigns'' (US Government 
Commitments). Simply put, PPC believes these commitments are egregious 
and put into question our utilities' core mission of system reliability 
and affordability. Further, PPC continues to be gravely concerned about 
the ambiguity surrounding these obligations and the continued 
uncertainty and associated risks that jeopardize the long-term value of 
the Federal Columbia River Power System. The level of concern in the 
region has risen in recent weeks as a group of Congressional offices 
posted the U.S. Commitments document on November 29, 2023,\5\ widening 
the aperture to the greater public and uncovering the secrecy 
surrounding the development of these commitments over many months and 
involving a very small number of interests in conjunction with the US 
Government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ PPC received a copy of the USG Commitments from an email 
forwarded by a reputable media organization on Nov. 27, 2023. Other 
regional stakeholders stated they received a similar email that same 
day.
    \5\ ``Washington Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Dan Newhouse, 
Oregon Rep. Cliff Bentz, and Idaho Rep. Russ Fulcher published the 
draft mediation document Wednesday . . .''; Jennifer Yachnin, ``GOP 
leaks draft settlement in Pacific Northwest dam dispute,'' E&E Daily, 
November 30, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
US Government Commitments Are Problematic In Many Ways

    From the perspective of BPA customers, what the US Government has 
proposed is an unthinkable venture with no upsides, only downsides. 
Imagine being expected to sign a 20-year commercial real estate lease 
when the landlord and the adjoining tenant negotiated the terms--you, 
as the funder, were not present. The deal says the square footage can 
be dramatically reduced at any point in the future. You may show up at 
the space 1 day and find out that it's no longer wired for internet. 
With vague initial lease price estimates and unknown hidden fees, you 
are told the lease rate can change at any point, with the landlord 
loading on even more additional costs later. Also, the adjoining tenant 
can sue you at any moment, whether you've violated your lease terms or 
not. No one would sign such a lease, yet the US Government expects PPC 
member utilities and their customers to do so. Adding insult to injury, 
the US Government keeps telling us and the rest of the region that it's 
a ``good deal.'' Clearly, this agreement is anything but that.
    The foundation for the US Government Commitments is built on sand. 
On the first page, the agreement cites a 2022 report by the National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) titled ``Rebuilding 
Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead'' and says the ``science 
is clear''--in reality, the opposite is true. Over a year ago, PPC 
submitted (and has received no response to date) a detailed letter 
citing official technical and scientific documents that pointed out the 
many inaccuracies and shortcomings of the report.
    Essentially, the NOAA report ignores the substantial increases in 
salmon and steelhead abundance observed since ESA protections were 
established in the 1990s--including some stocks returning in numbers 
not marked before the construction of the dams. Abundance goals also 
neglect to account for millions of adult anadromous and non-native fish 
that are now part of the Basin's ecosystem. The report ignores 
substantial contributions, neglecting to cite the considerable contrary 
research from organizations that did not contribute to the report's 
development. PPC remains committed to scientific and cost-effective 
mitigation for the effects of the CRSO, but this single, unattributed 
NOAA report should not be the foundation.
    The US Government agreement itself is not an agreement at all. 
Public power has no certainty or benefits from its sweeping actions yet 
is poised through seemingly purposeful ambiguous language to leave the 
door open to nearly all the costs and risks to be borne by public power 
ratepayers. The deal features a ``Partnership with the Six 
Sovereigns.'' The Six Sovereigns include the State of Oregon, the State 
of Washington, the Nez Perce Tribe, Confederated Tribes and Bands of 
the Yakama Nation, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian 
Reservation, and the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs 
Reservation.
No Forbearance = No Certainty

    The basis for the mediation was to bring to an end the decades long 
CRSO litigation. While the US Government Commitments seek to hold the 
parties accountable for this specific litigation, there is no legal 
forbearance for BPA, and it is unlikely to result in regional 
certainty. Specifically, there is no protection in the agreement for 
BPA and its customers from exposure to further operational changes 
through CRSO claims not barred by the contract. For example, a claim 
through the Clean Water Act would trigger a different court to order 
new functional changes to address LSRDs' water temperature impacts that 
could result in additional operational changes. The fact that the US 
Government is settling with six parties does not preclude other non-
signatory parties or non-parties from bringing claims. As well, this 
agreement does not rule out the prospect of other agreements the US 
Government might accept from other parties, which could saddle 
Northwest public power ratepayers with additional cost or operational 
impacts--or, again, both.
The US Government Selects A Chosen Few Among Many Interests

    This agreement also calls into question the US Government's secret 
and prejudiced approach to recognizing certain interests and ignoring 
others, notably the majority of federally-recognized Tribes and 
multiple Northwest states--who are their own sovereign entities--along 
with a long list of other interests that include navigation, water 
users, recreation, ports, farmers, and--the party that has been 
historically expected to pick up the majority of costs from such 
ventures as this agreement--our non-profit, community-owned public 
power utilities and their customers.
    It's notable how few Tribes in our region were included by the US 
Government as part of this agreement, considering the wide array of 
sovereign Tribes and their lands that cover the Pacific Northwest. 
Specifically, the US Government agreement describes that only four 
federally recognized Tribes were part of this agreement out of a total 
of well more than 40 Tribes and other Tribal interests in the Pacific 
Northwest. To that end, as the secret agreement is starting to get more 
exposure in the public domain, we are hearing more and more news from 
other Tribes in the region who are expressing concern about this 
narrowly-structured agreement that was developed in the absence of 
consultation or consideration of other Tribes' interests.
    Additionally, the two sovereign states of Oregon and Washington in 
BPA's service territory were apparently involved in the formulation of 
the agreement with the US Government, but the other sovereign states in 
BPA service territory--Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and Nevada--were left 
out. Interestingly, though the states of Oregon and Washington are part 
of this agreement, ironically, many of these state's residents--
including low income and economically disadvantaged citizens in both 
rural and urban areas--would likely see the most severe negative 
impacts from increased electricity rates if this proposed agreement 
moves forward.
BPA And Ratepayers Largely On The Hook For Costs

    Among the most appalling components of the US Government 
Commitments are the costs borne by ratepayers and the operational 
impacts that will inevitably impact system reliability. The definite 
BPA cost commitments are approximately $370 million. It breaks down to:

     $20 million in combined capital and expense increases for 
            Fiscal Year 2024-2025,

     $100 million for expenses over ten years for additional 
            projects,

     $200 million in capital over ten years for Lower Snake 
            hatchery improvements, and,

     $50 million for funding ``backlog'' projects from the U.S. 
            Army Corps of Engineers.

    Additional cost implications are unknown and could have a heavy 
price tag borne by ratepayers, as there are references to other federal 
agencies providing support, but no details on the appropriations and 
budgeting strategy. There are also sizable and ambiguous cost 
commitments, including an estimated $2 billion responsibility for a 10-
year ``Mid-Columbia Restoration Plan.'' Again, promises like this one 
in the document are undefined and do not have a funding source.
    The concerns continue to compound with the US Government committing 
in this proposed agreement to develop between 1-3 GW of Tribal-owned 
renewable ``replacement'' generation for the Lower Snake River Dams. 
While the costs are unknown, initial estimates are that such an 
investment could range from $2-6 billion in overnight capital costs 
without addressing capacity replacement for dispatchable resources. 
While the encouragement of Tribal-owned energy projects is a positive 
and noble policy goal in its own right, the implication in this 
agreement is that BPA would ultimately be the off-taker of these 
resources, despite limitations in the Northwest Power Act allowing it 
to do so. The agreement does not state that BPA shall NOT be compelled 
to acquire the replacement resources. If the agreement did not intend 
to compel BPA to acquire the replacement resources, then the agreement 
should very specifically say so.
    Energy and Environmental Economics Consulting (E3) conducted an 
analysis on behalf of BPA that puts replacing the Lower Snake River 
Dams at $415 million to $860 million annually by 2045. Rash decisions 
to remove these hydro projects pose devastating consequences. The LSRDs 
regularly are the defining line between keeping the power flowing and 
parts of the West or being plunged into rolling blackouts. This was 
certainly the case during the massive heatwave that gripped California 
on Labor Day Weekend of 2022, when surplus electricity--including from 
the Lower Snake River Dams--was sent to California just in time, 
helping the state narrowly escape blackouts from its new historic peak 
of 51 gigawatts of demand. We need more stable, available generation 
capacity in the West, not less of it. And remember this point: as our 
nation explores policy decisions that will require electricity to play 
an even more prominent role in our lives, such as through vehicle 
electrification, we will depend even more on the clean, reliable 
capacity generation produced by our emission-free Northwest hydro 
projects as part of the overall electricity supply in the West.
Conclusion

    In total, BPA's cost exposure is significant. Our members 
anticipate that under the best-case scenario, the impact on rates would 
be 5%, and in the worst case, it would be 50%. Again, the costs and 
operational uncertainty in this agreement as-is represents unacceptable 
risks and a range of potential extra costs for Northwest ratepayers. 
Because of so many encumbrances, quite simply, this proposed agreement 
as it exists should be scrapped.
    What we must do is return to the government's official record on 
this matter. The September 2020 Record of Decision (ROD) from the US 
Government on the CRSO Environmental Impact Statement is the decisional 
document developed after a multi-year, transparent engagement overseen 
by US Government officials who are based in the Northwest and who 
engaged a wide array of stakeholders from the Northwest. The outcome of 
this ROD arrived at a non-dam breaching solution, but outlined helpful 
steps that can be taken for fish and for river operations.
    This established CRSO ROD is the blueprint we should be following, 
not a half-baked proposal developed in secret between federal agencies 
in DC and just a handful of sovereign parties in the Northwest, and 
then released to the public only after members of Congress--who also 
had been kept in the dark--received a copy and shared it in the 
interest of the public at large. This CEQ-led process was clearly a 
failure from the start, throughout the duration, and now to this 
unfortunate crossroads in which we grapple with this untenable proposed 
US Government agreement.
    The utilities I represent need to understand what the unknown 
provisions and vague references in the USG Commitments mean, and we 
need assurances that protect regional electricity consumers from 
bearing the brunt of national policy commitments by their US 
Government. Let's scrap this agreement as it stands, and do the hard 
work necessary in a truly transparent and inclusive way that engages 
all of us and our full range of perspectives in the Great Pacific 
Northwest.
    Thank you for your leadership and for hosting this hearing today. 
We greatly appreciate the Committee's attention to this critical topic.

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I will now recognize Members for 5 
minutes for questions. The Chair recognizes Mr. McClintock for 
5 minutes.
    Mr. McClintock. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Simms, hydroelectric power is one of the cheapest 
possible ways to produce electricity, is it not?
    Mr. Simms. Yes, sir.
    Mr. McClintock. It produces zero emissions, does it not?
    Mr. Simms. Yes, sir.
    Mr. McClintock. And it can be added or withdrawn from the 
grid at a moment's notice. And since electricity depends on an 
integrated grid, having such reliable electricity available at 
a moment's notice is essential to support intermittent power 
such as wind and solar, is it not?
    Mr. Simms. Absolutely, sir. We always say that when the 
wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine, at least we have 
hydro.
    Mr. McClintock. And you have to have something to 
immediately replace that hydro or the grid collapses. The 
alternative is intermittent blackouts, is it not?
    Mr. Simms. That is correct, sir.
    Mr. McClintock. And we are seeing that more and more 
wherever green energy is imposed on consumers, are we not?
    Mr. Simms. Correct, sir. The capacity resources are 
becoming even more important.
    Mr. McClintock. So, what is to replace the lost 
hydroelectricity when these dams are destroyed?
    Mr. Simms. We don't quite know the blueprint of what would 
be replacing these resources, frankly. There are talks.
    Mr. McClintock. So, we are replacing the cheapest, 
cleanest, and most reliable power, and have no idea how we are 
going to replace it.
    Mr. Simms. That is the concern, sir.
    Mr. McClintock. And you said the potential cause for this 
could be as high as a 50 percent increase in consumers' 
electricity bills. Is that correct?
    Mr. Simms. Adding $1 billion a year annually. Yes, sir.
    Mr. McClintock. How much is that going to cost, just for an 
average consumer's electricity bill every year? Have you 
figured that out?
    Mr. Simms. Well, I would easily ask Ms. Falkenberg for, 
potentially, a consumer bill breakdown. But certainly, you 
could see prices skyrocketing for families.
    We know from northwestern Montana, Northwestern Energy just 
had a 28 percent increase in their residential rates. And 
families are really struggling to get by in that situation. 
They don't have access to Bonneville's clean hydropower.
    Mr. McClintock. California has now paid twice the rate for 
electricity as the national average, precisely because of this 
kind of environmental lunacy. And the result is that the 
state's manufacturing base is disappearing, families and 
businesses are now leaving. And one of the principal reasons 
given is the outrageous price for electricity. The population 
is now shrinking for the first time in the state's history.
    This is the hell that the environmental left produces 
wherever it seizes control. They obsess over a 1 degree 
increase in global temperatures over the next century, but they 
couldn't care less that they are making it impossible for 
working families to heat their homes in freezing winters. It 
seems to me there is a nihilistic vision of rationing, 
shortages, skyrocketing electricity costs.
    Let me ask you, what is your vision for the future, and how 
do we get there?
    Mr. Simms. My vision for the future is that we need every 
resource that we can get in terms of clean, reliable power like 
hydro. We don't need less of our hydro. We need more of it.
    We have a situation in which we are seeing more 
electrification across the country, more demands for 
electricity as a basic human need, and we are needing every 
kind of resource out there. Wind and solar have been certainly 
a helpful addition; they are by no means the mover of the big 
electrons.
    Mr. McClintock. Well, when you say a helpful addition, at 
enormous expense. Aren't those two of the most expensive ways 
we have ever discovered to produce electricity?
    Mr. Simms. A diversified portfolio of power is best, but 
you need baseload resources like hydro, nuclear, and natural 
gas.
    Mr. McClintock. Well, but those are precisely the sources 
of electricity that the left is forbidding, are they not?
    Mr. Simms. If I may, sir.
    Mr. McClintock. What does this mean?
    Mr. Simms. I have a California example for you.
    Mr. McClintock. Yes, sure.
    Mr. Simms. When California gets in trouble, they often call 
upon us to receive our hydropower in exchange.
    Mr. McClintock. Yes.
    Mr. Simms. Recently, on Labor Day of 2022, California 
turned on every available natural gas generator, diesel 
generators. They asked folks to take ships from the ports out 
to sea to get rid of them so they didn't have to be in shore 
power, and they desperately asked for every megawatt we could 
provide from the Northwest Power System, which we did.
    Mr. McClintock. In fact, we have depended for years on 
surplus Bonneville hydroelectricity, have we not?
    Mr. Simms. Absolutely, sir, and you still do.
    Mr. McClintock. So, what does this mean to California 
consumers?
    Mr. Simms. California's consumers and Southwest consumers 
absolutely depend on BPA hydro from the surplus reserves.
    Mr. McClintock. We are told this is all for the salmon, but 
we are about to tear down the iron gate to dam on the Klamath 
River under this exact same kind of lunacy. The interesting 
thing about that is when the Iron Gate dam goes, so goes the 
Iron Gate fish hatchery that produces 5 million salmon smolts 
every year, with 17,000 returning to the Klamath every year to 
spawn. All of that will be gone. And then you do have a 
catastrophic decline in the salmon population.
    Why can't we just build a fish hatchery to replace these 
fish?
    Mr. Simms. If I may just answer the question very quickly, 
Federal dams do provide the revenues to support a myriad of 
things, including habitat production, hatcheries, and other 
estuary actions that make the fish stronger.
    Mr. McClintock. And the cold water that is necessary for 
those fish hatcheries. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Simms. Thank you.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Huffman, 
Ranking Member Huffman, for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Slater, I know we don't have an actual settlement 
proposal yet. We are shadow boxing here with a hypothetical. 
But is it your understanding of that potential settlement that 
any lost hydropower capacity would have to be replaced before 
dam removal could happen?
    Mr. Slater. Yes. Congressman Simpson, Governor Inslee, 
Senator Murray, conservation community, everybody agrees that 
those dams could not be removed. The power cannot be taken off-
line until the power was replaced.
    Mr. Huffman. And since Congress would have to authorize the 
dam removal, Congress would have an opportunity to make sure 
that that is a prerequisite. Correct?
    Mr. Slater. Absolutely. It has always been my position that 
Congress, only Congress, can authorize the removal of those 
dams.
    Mr. Huffman. So, all of this end-of-the-world, nihilist 
hysteria is not only hypothetical, but not even possible, given 
the way this type of deal would have to come together.
    Mr. Slater. Yes, the lights are not going to go out in the 
Pacific Northwest because those dams are removed.
    Mr. Huffman. Do you feel it is appropriate to talk about 
these leaked documents from a confidential settlement 
negotiation?
    Mr. Slater. Trout Unlimited is not a party to the 
settlement. I don't know if the documents that were leaked are 
accurate or what is going to come out in a couple of days. 
Ironically, I think if it was a reverse, the Democrats leaked 
it, I think we would be in Chairman Jordan's Committee right 
now talking about this.
    Mr. Huffman. Yes, I think there is about a 100 percent 
chance of that.
    Mr. Slater, I have been in your office with your former 
boss, Mr. Simpson. I have seen that crazy wall that you have, 
the beautiful mind wall where you have it all worked out. You 
have clearly thought about every aspect of this, including the 
complex challenges of making it work for all of the 
stakeholders, and all of the interests, and all the 
considerations that have been discussed here today. It is not 
simple, but you and others have been giving a lot of thought to 
this for a long time.
    How should Congress engage in this discussion about the 
future management of the Columbia River, including these lower 
Snake River dams?
    Mr. Slater. Congress needs to have an open and honest 
discussion about the Northwest energy system, about the 
Bonneville Power Administration, about fish recovery.
    What we saw was that, in my belief, we need to reset the 
Bonneville Power Administration. In 1937, the Bonneville Act 
started building Bonneville Dam. It took whoops in the late 
1970s to create the Northwest Power Planning Act. That was 
about 50 years after the original. We are 50 years later now, 
and we are trying to make this system work now. We should reset 
it for the next 50 years, and instead we are trying to force 
everything to work.
    And it is absurd that this is the Bonneville fact sheet. 
Those of us in the energy world love it. Best thing Bonneville 
produces, as far as I am concerned. And when you look at it, 
Bonneville is spending $932 million this year on fish costs. 
And that is both direct, replacement, and purchased power.
    Mr. Huffman. I was going to ask you about that. There have 
been decades of litigation. Each new court order seems to 
require some new attempt to keep these salmon runs on life 
support, and it is not working so well, but it is hugely 
expensive, right?
    And is it fair to assume that those costs are only going to 
increase, especially if the salmon populations continue to 
decline because of inherent impacts from these lower Snake 
River dams?
    Mr. Slater. If salmon were doing well, we wouldn't be 
spending that much money a year, nearly $1 billion. That is 20 
percent of Bonneville's revenue that is going to fish and 
wildlife costs.
    Mr. Huffman. And it is not working.
    Mr. Slater. It isn't working, and it is going to get more 
expensive. And I contend the last salmon that goes to Idaho, 
they are going to spend $1 billion trying to save it.
    Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Slater.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Mr. LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Mr. Slater, from testimony of colleagues and 
others' letters and comments, et cetera, there is indeed 
substantial opposition in the local area for a wide variety of 
reasons. As was mentioned earlier, we can expect power rates to 
increase up to 50 percent in an already strapped economy. 
People are already struggling. So, that will just be passed 
right along to them. As what my colleague, Mr. McClintock, was 
speaking about, reliable, baseload, the cleanest possible power 
at the lowest possible price, we are going to eliminate that in 
order to breach these dams as is currently happening on the 
Klamath in my own district, and part in Mr. Bentz's district, 
to replace it with an unknown source of power. In this case 
here that we are talking about, we will probably bankrupt 
nearly 8,000 farms and lose $2 billion in revenue that farms 
provide, as well as the food that people need and 15 percent of 
the local workforce. So, it seems like the locals are being run 
over in this process.
    In the preamble of the Declaration of Independence, 
``Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just 
powers from the consent of the governed.'' Mr. Slater, when you 
hear these sorts of things and say, oh, we have all the 
stakeholders at the table and such, and environmental community 
and the tribes, it sounds like the local residents who really 
have an expensive stake in this are not part of this.
    So, if the obligation to get the consent of the governed 
was removed, would you advocate for removing the dams tomorrow?
    Mr. Slater. Well, the dam should come out. The salmon need 
a river to get from the high elevation mountains of Idaho, 
northeast Oregon to the ocean.
    Mr. LaMalfa. At what price?
    Mr. Slater. Well, I have a hard time with the premise that 
power rates are going up that much when we are taking, at most, 
15 percent of Bonneville's hydro off the system.
    Mr. LaMalfa. But they don't build back the power.
    Mr. Slater. But we can replace the power. It is already 
being done.
    Mr. LaMalfa. With expensive, unreliable solar or, even 
worse, wind.
    Mr. Slater. Frankly, it is being done----
    Mr. LaMalfa. That is the only thing they will allow.
    Mr. Slater [continuing]. In your state, California.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, and my state is a freaking disaster.
    Mr. Slater. It is a freaking disaster. And Elliot Mainzer, 
the former Bonneville Power Administrator, is now in charge of 
CAISO, the California Independent System Operator, and Elliot 
Mainzer in the last 3 years has put in 6,000 megawatts of 
battery storage and 3,000 megawatts of solar.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Something has to charge the batteries.
    Mr. Slater. Wind and solar do. If you are on the east side 
of the Cascades, you get a lot of sun and very good wind.
    Mr. LaMalfa. God, this place.
    All right, Mr. Simms, Moody's credit rating agency 
downgraded BPA's outlook to negative. In their analysis, 
Moody's noted that the risk of a potential removal of the four 
lower dams of the Snake River played a notable part in the 
downgraded outlook. Annual costs associated with the 
compliance, we have heard a number as much as $900 million. We 
see at least $500 million.
    The radicals have not yet succeeded in their desire to 
breach the dams. But let's just skip to this, can you tell us 
how the Public Power Council views this downgraded outlook? Is 
it a small bump in the road, or is it a red flag warning for 
power not only there, but for everywhere else?
    Mr. Simms. Congressman, thank you for the question. 
Obviously, Moody's downgraded BPA because they explicitly said, 
``We are concerned about the lower Snake River dams and the 
loss of that resource.'' The uncertainty presented caused 
Moody's to put forth that downgrade.
    If I may also just quickly address the issue around 
California resources, I think that Mr. Slater conveniently left 
out that there are new natural gas plants that have been added 
and an emergency authorization for those plants. There is a 
system to dispatch diesel generation there. There is a plan to 
retire natural gas plants, and that was shelved, as well as a 
nuclear plant that has been shelved because they need those 
resources. Thank you.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Barely. We barely, with aspirations by certain 
individuals in California, they are looking at the numbers and 
our grid is going to be in bad shape without 9 percent of the 
whole grid being Diablo Canyon. We already lost 9 percent in 
San Onofre. And we are finding out we are going to pay the 
price.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congresswoman 
Hoyle for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Hoyle. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a comment as 
opposed to a question.
    I represent southwest Oregon, so the Columbia River and the 
Snake River are not my district. But the issue we are 
discussing today is a big deal for everyone in the Pacific 
Northwest. The U.S. Government has been using confidential 
mediation to reach a settlement following decades of litigation 
on the Federal Columbia River Power System's impact on 
endangered salmon, steelhead.
    And normally we would have a more public process that we 
would engage in with stakeholders. And that hasn't happened 
because this is a response to litigation, which is problematic 
for people that are impacted, but it is what it is. It is the 
nature of things.
    I do support salmon recovery in the Columbia River Basin. I 
also recognize the need for affordable, reliable, clean energy, 
as well as a strong regional supply chain so farmers can 
efficiently get their products to market.
    We need to find a way to power the grid and balance those 
things, but we need to pick something to power the grid and 
then move forward with that, because we can't just keep saying 
no.
    I am looking forward to seeing the results of the mediation 
when they are released on Friday. And I hope that there is a 
balance, because there really is a need to balance all of these 
things. But I haven't seen the settlement, I have seen leaked 
documents, but no one from the Federal Government or the state 
of Oregon can speak to that yet. So, until Friday I am going to 
wait and, hopefully, when we see what comes out on Friday, it 
will be something that balances all of these needs.
    And I don't envy anyone that has been in the position to 
have to balance this, because it is very difficult. Thank you.
    Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Ms. Hageman for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Hageman. Thank you.
    Mr. Simms, I have long expressed concern with the sue-and-
settle process, where third parties enter litigation in hopes 
of reaching a certain outcome. However, this process often 
occurs behind closed doors, outside of public view, and without 
the input of all stakeholders. In your testimony, you note that 
the Biden administration has engaged in private caucuses 
between the Council on Environmental Quality and select 
parties, while leaving other official participants and 
stakeholders in the dark.
    Mr. Simms, can you talk about the dangers of this process, 
and what its results could be?
    Mr. Simms. Yes, thank you for the question, Representative.
    As Chairman Bentz outlined in the beginning of this 
discussion, we did have a public process that culminated in 
2020 with a Record of Decision. We do know the blueprint and 
the template for good public process. It was more than 2 years 
in the making. It was tens of millions of dollars. But it was a 
process in which it was run from the Northwest for the 
Northwest, and citizens had opportunities to turn out in 
community meetings, they had a chance to go to meetings after 
work, because there are a lot of working citizens out there 
where every day and every dollar counts. And we had a terrific 
process that came about with a resolution that was a non-breach 
solution with some additional tactics and strategies that need 
to be taking place.
    As Chairman Bentz outlined, folks didn't like that answer. 
So, now we find ourselves in litigation with the closed room 
door exercise where six parties, the U.S. Government, and some 
advice from the plaintiffs have apparently been involved in 
creating this U.S. Government agreement that is now in the 
public domain. And it is highly concerning.
    I would add as well that the projections around costs not 
are just from power, but from additional costs that would be 
ladled upon BPA and its ratepayers from, again, the program 
like the Mid-Columbia Restoration Program, which identifies 
some government entity is going to pay for it. And in our 
region, typically, the default, unfortunately, is Bonneville 
and its customers.
    Ms. Hageman. Well, and that segues into my next question, 
which is what kind of opportunity cost economic analysis was 
done in relation to this proposal to breach the lower Snake 
River dams? Was there any?
    Mr. Simms. To my knowledge, I do not know of any cost 
analysis that was conducted by the U.S. Government for release 
in this document.
    Ms. Hageman. OK. That is one of the things that is so 
bizarre to me in the entire discussion about global warming and 
the climate crisis and all of the nonsensical words that are 
thrown at us, is that nobody ever talks about the opportunity 
costs associated with going down that road.
    Do you believe in energy poverty?
    Mr. Simms. Absolutely.
    Ms. Hageman. Do you think energy poverty is a good thing?
    Mr. Simms. I absolutely believe in energy poverty, and I 
know it absolutely exists in the communities that my utilities 
serve, both urban and rural. Absolutely.
    Ms. Hageman. Would this proposal exacerbate energy poverty?
    Mr. Simms. It would massively exacerbate it.
    Ms. Hageman. Mr. Slater, do you believe in energy poverty? 
Do you think that is a good thing?
    Mr. Slater. There must be energy poverty where people are 
paying higher prices, yes. Energy poverty couldn't be a good 
thing.
    Ms. Hageman. Do you think that is a good thing?
    Mr. Slater. No.
    Ms. Hageman. You don't think that is a good thing? Well, I 
don't, either.
    Ms. Falkenberg, do you believe energy poverty is a good 
thing?
    Ms. Falkenberg. No. And the impacts for those that are most 
marginalized, that make the least amount of income, it ends up 
being a regressive burden.
    Ms. Hageman. Yes, it does.
    And for our last witness, do you think that energy poverty 
is a good thing?
    Mr. Maunu. Not a good thing. No, ma'am.
    Ms. Hageman. Almost every policy that this Administration 
pursues results in energy poverty. In fact, they have adopted 
and are pursuing policies that are intended to increase the 
cost of energy because it is the only way that they can make 
wind and solar appear to be cost effective.
    I am going to read something here, because I think it is 
very important for us to keep going back to the moment that we 
are living in. This is a quote from an article that I read a 
couple of years ago. ``The notion that government should 
impoverish actual human beings as a means of promoting `the 
welfare of humanity' is a pagan superstition on par with 
sacrificing individuals to the sun god.'' I think that kind of 
describes where we are at this moment in time.
    I will read it again. ``The notion that government should 
impoverish actual human beings as a means of promoting `the 
welfare of humanity' is a pagan superstition on par with 
sacrificing individuals to the sun god.''
    I have one final question. Mr. Simms, do you think 
prosperous countries do a better job of protecting the 
environment than poor countries?
    Mr. Simms. That is a great question. I think that we have 
energy problems throughout the world, frankly. And I think that 
for us and this country, I think we have great opportunity if 
we don't squander it like removing the lower Snake River dams.
    Ms. Hageman. Well, let's compare the Congo and the United 
States. Who do you think does a better job of protecting their 
environment?
    Mr. Simms. The Congo or the United States?
    Ms. Hageman. Yes.
    Mr. Simms. I think presently I would say that right now we 
have the United States, but we could lose that if we don't 
watch it.
    Ms. Hageman. And we would lose it because, if we lose our 
prosperity and adopt and pursue policies that destroy our 
economy, is that right?
    Mr. Simms. We absolutely could have that prospect if we 
don't watch our energy system closely.
    Ms. Hageman. Thank you very much, and I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congressman 
Duarte for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the 
panelists today.
    I represent a district in California's Central Valley that 
is a farm district. We have our water challenges there. We also 
have some of the lowest income populations in the country. Our 
poverty rate is the 18th highest in the country. We would like 
that to be different, but it is not.
    We know in California, well throughout the United States, 
the lowest 20 percent income earners are spending about 33 
percent or so on their food right now. You would think, with 
food inflation the way it is, that would have gone up, but it 
simply can't. So, we may well be the first generation in the 
history of the United States to have our working families 
taking produce, protein, dietary diversity, and nutrition off 
their dinner plate in favor of a starch diet simply to make 
ends meet.
    We know that water scarcity is not only food scarcity, we 
know it is energy scarcity. We have talked about that a lot. It 
is also housing scarcity. We can't meet our housing needs in 
California because we simply don't have the water resources to 
permit new home building to meet market demand. Therefore, our 
homeless rate is going through the roof, working families are 
exodus.
    We think tech entrepreneurs and government retirees are 
retiring elsewhere with their pensions following them, but a 
great deal of our exodus is actually working families simply 
seeking the American dream someplace more welcoming than 
California.
    Now, we come here and we see in Washington, I guess 
California sends us our immigrants as well as our policies, but 
this isn't the first regulatory hurdle you have had. We live in 
an area with a lot of reservoirs.
    Tell me, if you will, Mr. Maunu, Mr. Simms, or Ms. 
Falkenberg, are you going through FERC re-licensing?
    Are you are already seeing other water grabs, other 
hindrances on these dams?
    We just heard that, hey, nothing is going to happen to 
these dams until Congress allows it. But I think there is quite 
a lot happening to our water energy resources without Congress 
allowing it. So, I will take response from any of you on that.
    Mr. Simms. Yes, it is a great question, and I would say it 
goes back to the issue of we need more of what we have. 
Essentially, you asked the FERC licensing question. The Federal 
facilities that we are involved with, they have a little bit of 
a different process than the other dams that are FERC federally 
licensed. But I would say that, in general, licensing is 
becoming more difficult. It is becoming much more of an 
impediment. There are many more challenges than there used to 
be.
    So, all of those things add costs, they add time. And we 
desperately need every resource we can, given, again, that we 
have weather patterns that are changing, we have the needs of 
electricity for fleets, we have a dramatic amount of needs 
that, frankly, we need a wide array of electricity resources.
    Mr. Duarte. I often find myself posing these arguments 
similar to Representative Hageman's here, as the champions of 
abundance are kind of in a death struggle right now on behalf 
of the working families, mainly in America with the lords of 
scarcity. Do you see yourself taking up sides in that battle?
    Mr. Simms. I will tell you one that I watch very carefully 
that I am very worried about is, and it is a world away from 
us, but the African state of South Africa, they have been 
plunged into blackouts and darkness because they did not invest 
in their energy infrastructure. They are having rotating 
blackouts where families with means are able to go to each 
other's homes on a rotating basis, but their kids don't want to 
stay there, they want to go to other countries where they have 
a reliable system. And the poor folks, the impoverished folks, 
they are the ones that are suffering the most.
    Mr. Duarte. And that is a developing country. That is one 
of our BRICs, right?
    But even in the modern world today, I was reading an 
article a few weeks ago in one of the major papers titled, 
``Europe is Getting Poorer,'' and we have modern nations, 
Germany and northern European nations, that were once rich 
nations 30 years ago, kind of matching us here in the United 
States, following these green energy policies, coming down to a 
very human level, where young women are literally, at a very, 
very alarming rate, freezing their eggs in their 20s and 30s so 
that they can hope to afford to have children in their 40s and 
50s. This is where these lords of scarcity policies get us.
    And I thank you, three of you, for being the champions of 
abundance. I won't give up our future generations. I won't give 
up working family affordability. I won't give up on championing 
for abundance so that somebody can try to save a few fish that 
we may well be able to save through the efforts you are already 
undertaking.
    You are welcome to respond.
    Mr. Maunu. Congressman, if I could just add one point to 
the economic piece that you mentioned, and it was mentioned 
earlier around any economic or socioeconomic studies that were 
completed in this process.
    I submitted in our record a report that the IPNG Group had 
commissioned this summer. We believe it is the only 
socioeconomic study done which really outlines and focuses on 
potential poverty. It focuses on the 7,600 farms that would go 
out of business just because the water table would drop, and so 
many other points. Your point hit home on how much this impacts 
farmers, and how much those secondary and tertiary effects can 
reach. Thank you.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Bentz. Mr. Mullin, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Mullin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hello, all. Thank you for 
taking the time to be here today.
    I have been relieved to hear several witnesses acknowledge 
the importance of clean energy, and I look forward to 
discussing how diversifying clean energy sources can help our 
country's needed transition. My question is for Mr. Slater.
    In your testimony, you brought up a point that decades of 
inaction have led us to where we are today in the Columbia 
River Basin, and briefly mentioned what is at stake if we don't 
look towards diversifying the energy and transportation system. 
I wonder if you could further elaborate on the need to look 
towards the future to plan new, reliable, and robust energy 
sources, and how diversifying energy sources would positively 
impact the entire region.
    Mr. Slater. Thank you. I just really quick would like to 
interject. I do think we have to recognize that the tribes in 
the Northwest have also faced social economic impacts, and that 
shouldn't be forgotten, either, in this conversation.
    On diversification of the Northwest Power System, 
especially Bonneville, when I was young, a long time ago, in 
northeast Oregon, I would go up to the fair in early August, 
and you would look at the mountains, the Wallowa Mountains at 
Enterprise, there would be snowpack at the top of the 
mountains, and it was always there. And now when you go there 
in July, 3 weeks, 4 weeks earlier, the snowpack is nearly gone.
    And we have a critical problem in the Northwest that, with 
climate change, the snowpack is leaving earlier, a couple of 
weeks, 3 weeks earlier than it used to. And I think the 
greatest threat to Bonneville Power Administration and the 
Northwest Energy System is not taking out these four dams. It 
is the fact that 80 percent of Bonneville's generation is 
hydropower, and that is all your eggs in one basket. And if we 
have really, really short water years, the water comes out by 
end of June, you can have serious problems come September, 
October, November, well, it starts raining again around 
September, October in Oregon. But that is a huge problem.
    I actually think what the Biden administration is trying to 
do with the renewable program is what we need. We need more 
wind and solar. We especially need storage. That is what is 
finally coming around. We have had the wind and solar. It is 
the storage so that we can have firm power to deliver when the 
wind isn't blowing and the sun is not shining. So, the 
diversification of the portfolio is critical.
    Mr. Mullin. Thank you, sir.
    I yield back.
    [Pause.]
    Mr. Mullin. I yield back the balance of my time to Mr. 
Huffman.
    Mr. Huffman. I thank the gentleman for giving me just a 
little bit of time, and I wanted to follow up with Mr. Slater 
because we just heard some interesting hyperbolic flourishes 
about pagan human sacrifice and lords of scarcity, young women 
freezing their eggs because of radical environmental policies.
    Mr. Slater, did you have any response to some of these?
    They are giving hyperbole a bad name at this rate, but 15 
percent, at most, of BPA's hydropower generating capacity if 
these four lower Snake River dams are removed, and all of it 
would have to be replaced before a single shovel breaks ground. 
I mean, seriously? Do you think there may be hyperventilating 
here?
    Mr. Slater. Hydropower? Congressman Simpson, like myself, 
hydropower is a good energy source. In this case, it doesn't 
work. It doesn't work for the tribes, it doesn't work for the 
salmon.
    These four dams wouldn't be built today. They are not the 
right place. And when we look at salmon going to the ocean, 
they can get through four dams up to Yakima Basin and live in 
sustainable growing numbers. John Day Basin does even better. 
But the Snake River Basin, less than 1 percent of the salmon 
return because of the smolt to adult ratio. So, that is not 
sustainable.
    And we can definitely replace the power of these dams.
    Mr. Huffman. Without human sacrifice or forcing women to 
freeze their eggs?
    Mr. Slater. Yes, and we would probably be better off 
diversifying about half of Bonneville's power to other sources.
    Mr. Huffman. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Congressman Fulcher for 5 
minutes.
    Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the panelists, 
thank you for your testimony. I thought it was really good. 
And, quite frankly, I don't have a lot of questions. I think, 
between what you submitted in writing and your testimony, it 
was very thorough and very good. We just all, obviously, don't 
agree.
    I would make some observations, however. Mr. Chairman, I 
think it is really unfortunate that the guests that you 
invited, the other guests, didn't appear. Yes, I had invited 
one from NOAA, one from Council on Environmental Quality and, 
obviously, they didn't come. I am not surprised, given the 
circumstances. I know confidentiality, supposedly, is the 
issue, but there are other issues, too. It would be awkward to 
be in their situation. NOAA has flipped on this issue before. 
There are some personnel transfers between one of the 
plaintiffs, Earthjustice, and CEQ that would be awkward to 
discuss. So, I understand why they are not here.
    But what we have is a sue-and-settle mediation process. 
And, yes, it is designed to bypass Congress. And it may not be 
in the traditional breach of the dams or removal, but in how 
the water is managed and controlling the flow or bypassing and 
going around.
    I am concerned about that. This is, in my view, another 
attempt by the current Administration to promote an 
unreasonable and irrational agenda for their energy policy. The 
problem with this one is it would gut the Pacific Northwestern 
economy as we know it.
    Consider some facts. In year 2000, NOAA, National Oceanic 
and Atmospheric Administration, basically said we needed to 
breach these dams in order to save the salmon. Yet, in 2008, 
2014 they reversed that position. In year 2022, the Biden 
administration goes back to the notion that we have to do a 
breach. So, what changed? Nobody told the fish.
    What changed is the administration and the energy agenda. 
It was political.
    Some ramifications, and some of this has been touched on 
but not all of it, 3,000 megawatts of hydropower right now, if 
that were to go away, that is about 3 million solar panels or 
1,830 windmills. We did some mapping. There is a poster that my 
staff put together on that where just within Idaho, where that 
would have to be, just geographically, and you see that 
referenced on the map behind me, 1,830 windmills. And even 
then, as has been pointed out, that is expensive peaking power. 
That is not reliable baseload and water-stored energy.
    Irrigation has not been talked about, or at least not in 
any substantial degree. But the Columbia Basin, the Ag base 
there is approximately 1 million irrigated acres. Removing that 
control would be devastating for that.
    Flood control, we haven't talked about that. What happens 
during runoff with flood control? In Lewiston and Clarkston, 
which are ports, Lewiston is within my district, Clarkston is 
right across the border in Washington. Burgeoning industry for 
recreation, cruising in particular, 25,000 passengers in 2019. 
Tens of millions of dollars in industry. That would be gone.
    Barging. We haven't talked about that in any great level of 
detail, the impact on the barging. The Ag in the West exports 
with barges across the country. That would have to be replaced 
with about 200 train loads or 23 million miles of trucking. 
Think of the carbon impact of that.
    So, this idea of the breach is not good for people.
    And there is one other thing. The science says there is not 
even confirmation that it will work for salmon. That is why 
NOAA has flipped on this issue. There have been studies of the 
Fraser River system, which is just north, without dams with 
similar fish flows. So, the ocean conditions and predators and 
pollution, wildfire, the whole thing. There are so many factors 
here.
    To gut an economy, Mr. Chairman, to gut an economy with no 
assurance of success is just a really bad bet for the 
taxpayers, and for the ratepayers, and for people.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Rosendale 
for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Rosendale. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Chairman 
Bentz and Ranking Member Huffman, I appreciate you holding this 
hearing, and allowing me the opportunity to address these 
extremely harmful policy decisions from the Biden 
administration.
    This issue is not just important, it is a slap in the face 
of the hard-working people of Montana and the entire Northwest. 
I find it fascinating that our colleagues across the aisle were 
perfectly comfortable with the information about a pending U.S. 
Supreme Court decision putting our justices in grave danger, 
and potentially inciting hundreds, if not thousands to violate 
the law by using intimidation tactics to try to change a 
pending judicial decision, but are aghast by information which 
affects the dismantling of critical infrastructure, and feel it 
should be kept secret.
    The secretive mediation surrounding litigation and 
potential removal of these dams is an outright betrayal of the 
citizens who depend upon this infrastructure. It is another 
example of the Biden administration's cowardly attempt to 
conceal its extremist agenda under the cover of darkness. Their 
consistent denial of meaningful public feedback reveals a 
blatant disregard for the public will, a will they are well 
aware stands firmly against their destructive extremist 
policies.
    The Administration's exclusion of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, 
and Nevada from the agreement, confining negotiations to Oregon 
and Washington, exposes the purely partisan nature of their 
decision-making. The Administration's willingness to let 
politically-aligned states dictate terms on behalf of others 
with conflicting interests is a testament to their favoritism, 
prioritizing political allies over the well-being of the entire 
region.
    There is no other country in the world that would spend 
billions of dollars that have been invested in the improvement 
of these dams which would provide affordable, reliable 
electricity, irrigation for productive farm ground, feeding 
millions, flood control to protect local communities, locks for 
the transportation of products that we export around the world, 
and, yes, fish passage both upstream and downstream to protect 
fisheries, and then even have a conversation or consider 
destroying all of that. It is insanity. No other country in the 
world would do it.
    The Administration's purported concern for the Columbia 
Basin salmon and the steelhead trout lacks scientific 
consensus, and their continued refusal to consider contrary 
scientific evidence is infuriating and irresponsible. Their 
continued usage of the phrase ``the science is clear'' reflects 
their manipulative strategy trying to convince the public to 
support their disastrous policies, dismissing any scientific 
evidence that challenges their agenda. Despite strong salmon 
returns in 2014 and 2022, the Administration continues to 
disregard the resilience of these species.
    Curiously, while claiming a policy of environmental 
protection and reducing reliance on fossil fuels, breaching 
these dams would exponentially increase fossil fuel usage in 
our region, leading to an astronomical increase in truck 
transit hours, soaring costs, and countless farms on the brink 
of bankruptcy. The repercussions for producers, particularly 
the increased cost and reduced marketability of crops like 
wheat, will further disrupt the fragile supply chain, causing 
potential catastrophe with elevated prices and decreased 
availability nationwide.
    Removal of irrigation capabilities from the river will 
directly impact farms that contribute more than $2 billion to 
the economy annually, and provide over 10,000 agriculture jobs. 
Replacing these dams through alternative transportation modes 
is projected to cost up to $860 million annually until 2045, 
with an estimated total cost of $18 billion for the region.
    The potential loss of jobs and industries further compounds 
this damage. Energy costs could be skyrocketed up to 50 
percent, as has already been mentioned, affecting over 100,000 
Montanans relying on the Bonneville Power Administration and 
jeopardizing the essential baseload power for many Montana co-
ops, especially during harsh winter months, when temperatures 
remain below freezing for extended periods of time.
    Mr. Chair, I see that I am out of time. I am going to yield 
back. I have much more that I could say about this disastrous 
idea, but I hope that we can, as they say, kill it in the 
cradle. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Gonzalez-
Colon for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I understand 
that this is the district of my good friend, Mr. Newhouse, and 
I do have questions, and I agree with the statements that have 
been made.
    My first question will be to my new Executive Director of 
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association. In your testimony, 
you stated one of the primary concerns with the proposed U.S. 
Government commitment documents is that it fails to address 
river navigation as a critically impacted, congressionally 
authorized purpose. Can you tell me the difference or elaborate 
and discuss the potential impacts that breaching or removing 
the lower Snake River dams could have on transportation 
emissions supply chains, among other implications?
    Mr. Maunu. Sure, thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
    The short answer is it is drastic, it is dramatic. It is 
hard to quantify. We have heard some numbers already around 
economic impacts to farmers, to citizens.
    I think the biggest, when you look at the document that is 
public now, that has been leaked, it is clear that navigation 
is missing from that document. If you do a word search for how 
many times ``navigation'' and ``infrastructure'' are brought 
up, I don't know that it is even once that navigation is 
discussed.
    So, when we look at a 37-page document, and we look at all 
the money that is thrown at this plan, and again, it is out 
there in public, anyone can read it, it is disheartening. And 
it just points to the fact, as I said in my testimony, that 
transportation and barging in particular has been completely 
left out of this process.
    Just as the Congressman from Montana said, as Idaho and 
Montana have not been included, we, though we are defendant 
intervenors, have not been included in this process. And it is 
devastating to our members, from farmers, to barge operators, 
to cruise ship lines, to ports. It is up and down, up and down 
the area.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you.
    Ms. Falkenberg, could you tell us how the proposed 
agreement or settlement will impact the affordability and 
reliability of electrical power on your customers?
    Ms. Falkenberg. Thank you, Congresswoman, for the question.
    The uncertainty in the delivery of power has significant 
impacts to us as we negotiate with BPA our 20-year contract. We 
take something called a take-or-pay contract for the duration 
of 20 years with a fixed system size. Should that system size 
diminish, we are still on the hook to pay for the costs 
associated with that. That is first.
    Second, there is an issue of reliability, particularly 
related to the lower Snake River dams. I understand that some 
of my colleagues associate the production from renewable 
resources as being the same as the production from the lower 
Snake River dams. In fact, they are not. Twenty-five percent of 
ancillary services come from the lower Snake River dams. Those 
ancillary services provide operating reserves. Those are 
emergency services in order to keep the grid stable. Those are 
laws of physics to balance 60-second demand and load curve. 
Those are absolutely necessary.
    And that is not to diminish the value of fuel-saving 
resources like wind and solar. They are just different. They 
provide a different form of energy.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. And they will be more expensive.
    Ms. Falkenberg. Yes. The lower Snake River dams, according 
to Bonneville, cost about $14 to $15 a megawatt hour, which is 
1.4, 1.6 cents a kilowatt hour. Our retail customers pay 6.3 
cents a kilowatt hour. That is a considerable value to having 
them in our resource portfolio to help reduce the overall cost 
for purchased power. It is a significant impact, especially for 
those that are most marginalized.
    Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. I totally agree with you. Having said 
that, I will yield the rest of my time to the Chairman.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you for yielding.
    I just want to mention how odd it is that folks would be 
flailing out at the fact that we have this document in front of 
us when it is of such importance to all of those that are here. 
Thank goodness we have it. I am not sure what value would occur 
to those who developed it by keeping it hidden for another 3 
days, but I am very happy we have it in front of us.
    The Chair recognizes Mr. Zinke for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Zinke. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for showing 
up.
    As was just discussed with my colleague from Idaho, dams 
are not just power, although much of the discussion has been 
power. But dams provide water, irrigation, flood control, 
recreation, and infrastructure. In fact, it is a system, 
transportation being one of them. And we built a system over 
years to do just that, provide a system.
    In one case on fish, when the lower Columbia, I believe, 
needed more water, they took water out from Hungry Horse Dam in 
2001. So, it is a system. When one part of the system needs 
more water because we store it, we can. And I don't think there 
is any question that hydropower is reliable, it is affordable, 
it is abundant.
    And affordability should not be overlooked, not just for 
those communities that are in the poverty line, but also 
manufacturing. You can't build anything in this country unless 
you have cheap power, because we pay about the same price for 
commodities, but we pay a higher price for labor, and we have 
to make up the difference to be competitive with power.
    I guess my concern really is sue, settle, and seal. And 
when I was Secretary, there was a policy in place previous that 
sometimes the Department would make a rule that perhaps would 
invite a lawsuit. Those lawsuits were immediately met by 
colleagues on the radical side, and would sue. And then what 
would be most disturbing is that sue would then be settled and 
sealed.
    I recall one time, the President of the United States and I 
had a discussion. ``Mr. President, what is this settlement? I 
would like to see it, sir. It came from seal by the Department 
of Justice.''
    And the President of United States did not have the 
authority to see it. Not only the President and executive not 
have an authority to see it, but neither did Congress. And such 
acts of sue, seal, and settle, to me, is a violation of the 
Constitution, particularly Article I, section 9 that says no 
money should be withdrawn for the Treasury unless by 
Consequence of appropriations.
    So, now what I smell is, if not by law, we are going to 
develop a lawsuit with a path to settle and seal. That is 
disturbing. It is disturbing because it breaks that 
transparency of stakeholders, and there are many stakeholders 
in a dam, and not just the fish. And believe me, I respect and 
love the salmon. But salmon is not the only interest in our dam 
system.
    So, I guess my question to you, Mr. Slater, is because you 
are an expert, and you worked with Chairman Simpson. I have 
long enjoyed his remarks. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we 
don't agree. But I know where his heart is, and I deeply 
respect Chairman Simpson. And you, as the chief of staff, have 
an enormous knowledge, and this is not your first rodeo. So, 
given that you are an expert in this field, and CEQ came up 
with this document, did you or Trout Unlimited participate in 
this formation of this document?
    Mr. Slater. Nobody asked me what I thought, and Trout 
Unlimited was not a participant in that document at all.
    Mr. Zinke. Do you know anyone that is in the non-profit 
world which we deal with that participated in this?
    Mr. Slater. I know that the plaintiffs were Idaho 
Conservation League and National Wildlife Foundation. And 
Sierra Club might have been a part of that, as well.
    Mr. Zinke. Isn't it troubling that the Congress of the 
United States is not a participant, that we have energy, we 
have transportation, we have recreation, none of these bodies 
were in participation. Does it bother you?
    Because you are an expert. I would have figured as a SEAL, 
I can tell you I was never the best jumper, diver, explosive 
expert, but I always knew who was. And the art of leadership is 
you find the best people. And I always said on this issue, I 
can't think of anyone that is more competent in knowing the 
ground, the history, the goals, and the consequences than you. 
So, do you find it strange that Trout Unlimited was not at the 
table?
    Mr. Slater. Well, we are not plaintiffs to the lawsuit.
    Mr. Zinke. But even to the advice of what is going on?
    Mr. Slater. No, they are secret. I mean, they are not 
secret, they are settlement talks.
    Mr. Zinke. Well, the trouble I have, they are secret.
    Mr. Slater. They are settlement talks, yes. And we are not 
included in those discussions. They are legal discussions.
    Mr. Zinke. Well, what bothers me is we weren't, either. And 
we are a branch, and we have reasonable people on both sides of 
the aisle, believe it or not. But we should be a part of it. To 
me, it is skirting the law.
    So, let me ask Ms. Falkenberg, and thank you for coming. Do 
you know of anyone that was involved with it? Were you ever 
called and said, well, maybe we should have some data on this 
before they put this draft out?
    Ms. Falkenberg. Thank you, Congressman. The plaintiff 
intervenors include Northwest River Partners and Public Power 
Council. However, the information shared with the plaintiff 
intervenors was extremely limited. The procedural justice 
demonstrated between FMCS and CEQ essentially precluded direct 
communication between the plaintiff intervenors to nearly 3 
million people in the Pacific Northwest.
    We were unable to speak to our ratepayers. It wasn't until 
November 27, when the document became into the public domain 
related to the U.S. commitments that we actually learned what 
was in the documents. And it was at that time, upon reading the 
content of the document, that I actually became quite alarmed. 
Up until that point, I was like maybe this isn't such a big 
deal. But when I read those documents, and they are one of 
three, the other two are not public yet, the commitments, I was 
significantly alarmed for the future uncertainty of our 
ratepayers in Pacific County and the Northwest.
    Mr. Zinke. Thank you. It doesn't sound like we, the people.
    And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the extension of time.
    Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Newhouse for 
5 minutes.
    Mr. Newhouse. Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, I 
appreciate the chance to be a part of this hearing. I also 
appreciate the other Members and guests, both questions and 
answers on something that is very, very important to me and to 
my constituents.
    The Columbia River System, the operation of that system, 
including the lower Snake River dams, I can't think of anything 
more critical to central Washington and the rest of the Pacific 
Northwest. If these dams were breached, either literally or 
functionally, those that would be negatively impacted would be 
electricity customers, transportation stakeholders, river-
dependent ports, communities up and down the Pacific Northwest, 
farmers, recreationalists, practically everyone living in the 
region.
    Back in September, I participated in another hearing by the 
Natural Resources Committee, Mr. Chairman, on this very issue, 
and I asked Mr. Simms questions about the CEQ, or the Council 
for Environmental Quality, their lack of transparency regarding 
the litigation and the inadequate solicitation of stakeholder 
input, something that Mr. Zinke was just asking some good 
questions about.
    So, Mr. Maunu, I wanted to ask you a similar question.
    Going into the mediation, tell me some of the expectations 
that your organization had for this process and for how CEQ 
handled it.
    And then, in addition to that, in your testimony, you 
stated that the intervenors were effectively excluded, the 
defendant intervenors were, and I think Ms. Falkenberg just 
said that too, from the litigation negotiations that were 
taking place in this process.
    So, how early in the process did this mediation break down 
to the point where you and fellow stakeholders were excluded? A 
couple questions there.
    Mr. Maunu. Sure, thanks for the questions, Congressman.
    I think as far as for expectations, first and foremost, our 
organization, like was mentioned previously, we looked at this 
as an opportunity for a collaborative process, for a fair 
process, and a transparent process. That is not too much to 
expect. If you are in a court-ordered mediation, a normal 
mediation is a negotiation. It may be confidential, but there 
is give-and-take, there is sharing of information, there is 
collaboration toward an end goal.
    And very early on, though, there were some working groups, 
I guess they called them at the time. There were some working 
groups that really quickly dissolved within the first few 
months into the private caucuses. And as was mentioned in some 
of our testimonies here, those private caucuses are 100 percent 
just between CEQ and FMCS and either the defendant intervenor 
or plaintiff interveners. And anything that is shared in those 
is not shared, nor discoverable, or anything else.
    We, as I mentioned, throughout that process kept submitting 
information. We have a lot of records of the studies that we 
did and what we submitted. And we heard nothing back on our 
side.
    Mr. Newhouse. Thank you.
    Mr. Simms, prior to the December 15 deadline, this draft 
settlement agreement was released. And shortly thereafter, a 
handful of Northwest public power utilities published a press 
release where they threatened to pause discussions with BPA, or 
Bonneville Power, over the post-2028 contracts because of the 
contents of the settlement agreement.
    Specifically, you expressed concerns regarding the impact 
the draft settlement would have on taxpayers. Could you tell us 
a little bit of detail about that, and how ratepayers might be 
negatively impacted?
    Mr. Simms. Sure, Congressman, and thank you for the 
question.
    I think what you see from the utilities is a response to 
this overwhelming uncertainty that was essentially foisted upon 
them from seeing this agreement in public, realizing the 
massive expanse of exposure from costs, from operational 
uncertainty, from other commitments that the U.S. Government 
was making on behalf of the U.S. Government writ large, but no 
express provisions of how different agencies might take on that 
burden.
    And I think you, Congressman, know well that in our region 
often the BPA ratepayers and BPA become beholden to U.S. 
Government commitments. And this was definitely one of those 
concerning elements.
    So, the utilities very quickly formed a strategy to say to 
Bonneville we need a 5-year contract option on the table so we 
can compare it to the 20-year contract option. And our Chairman 
at PBC, Bear Prairie from Idaho Falls, said it very well, ``Why 
would I write a 20-year blank check when I could write a 5-year 
blank check?''
    And the point is the utilities are facing such extreme 
uncertainty that they want to make sure that they can keep 
Bonneville a little bit more on a short leash and see what is 
coming at them.
    Mr. Newhouse. Thank you for that.
    And I appreciate you allowing me to go over time, Mr. 
Chairman.
    Thank you guys for your testimony today.
    Mr. Simms. Thank you.
    Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Chair McMorris Rodgers for 
5 minutes.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for 
allowing me to join today on a very important discussion, a 
very important topic for the people that I represent in eastern 
Washington and the Pacific Northwest.
    Hydropower accounts for more than 80 percent of the energy 
in our region and yet ``dam breach'' or ``dam breaching'' is 
mentioned 11 times through this exclusionary and secretive 
package of commitments, which I would like to submit for the 
record, Mr. Chairman.
    The package also calls for including and advancing an 
``urgent, comprehensive strategy to restore salmon and 
steelhead to healthy and abundant levels.'' Mr. Maunu, from 
your understanding, how is the Administration defining the 
terms ``healthy'' and ``abundant?''
    Do you think that this is the correct measure to be using?
    Mr. Maunu. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. A 
super short answer is no, I don't know.
    We think everyone can agree that healthy and abundant 
sounds great. It is the goal, one of the goals that our 
organization has is to invest in healthy habitat restoration 
and to see salmon runs flourish. But for this specific 
litigation, it is around the ESA, and it is around jeopardy. It 
is not around healthy and abundant.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. And I would just note that term is 
not included in ESA, that term has never been defined by 
Congress.
    Mr. Maunu. Right.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Last month, we wrote a letter to the 
President asking questions to help us determine exactly what 
this agreement means for those whose livelihoods depend on the 
dams. And although we have yet to receive a response, it seems 
that the U.S. Government plans to replace 24/7 baseload energy 
provided by the dams with intermittent renewable energy under a 
new Pacific Northwest Tribal Energy Program.
    Ms. Falkenberg, in his testimony Mr. Slater states that, 
``These dams contribute less than 1,000 megawatts annually.'' 
Is that accurate?
    And can you speak to the value these dams bring to the 
region?
    Ms. Falkenberg. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
    At average water, a thousand average megawatts of 
electricity is generated out of the lower Snake River dams. The 
nameplate capacity for these projects is between 2,500 to maybe 
3,000 megawatts. These projects provide, as I mentioned 
earlier, 25 percent of ancillary services, specifically the 
Automated Generation Control, AGC. These are operating reserves 
that trigger on demand on an emergency-need basis.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
    Ms. Falkenberg. So, when there is a polar vortex, we need 
to turn them on, they go on.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
    Mr. Simms, in a recent statement you said, ``This package 
of commitment poses the single greatest threat to the viability 
of the region's hydropower system we have ever faced.'' Would 
you briefly explain what you mean by that?
    Mr. Simms. Absolutely. Thank you for the question, 
Congresswoman. It is a package of issues between the 
operational side and the uncertainty it faces, the monstrous 
costs that would be foisted upon public power, and, of course, 
the litigation uncertainty that would continue to pervade. 
There is no forbearance, meaning other parties could simply 
pile on lawsuits and other operational constraints for BPA and 
its customers.
    I might quickly add, as well, today there was a mention of 
the Endangered Species Act elements and mitigation work. We 
take our mitigation investments very seriously, and folks were 
sort of downplaying what have we gotten. We have gotten tribal 
employment, we have gotten habitat set-asides, we have gotten 
hatcheries, we have predation reduction programs with the local 
employment. We have a lot of things that are coming out of that 
$700-million-a-year investment.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
    Mr. Slater, I would like to ask what Trout Unlimited has 
done to help clean up water pollution in places like Puget 
Sound, which, according to GAO, is a mass contributor to the 
lethal and non-lethal effects on salmon most critical to the 
endangered orca.
    Mr. Slater. Trout Unlimited, we are doing significant 
conservation projects and work in the Puget Sound. You are 
right to point out the rivers became disconnected from the 
sound, and we have to reconnect it. We have to get the culverts 
replaced with salmon, safe, passable passage. And there is a 
lot of work to be done. And we are doing it.
    Mrs. Rodgers. What salmon runs are most important to the 
orcas?
    Mr. Slater. Snake River runs are apparently important to 
the orcas.
    Mrs. Rodgers. Which ones are most important?
    Mr. Slater. Well, on a scientific basis I couldn't tell you 
which exact one.
    Mrs. Rodgers. OK, I believe it is Puget Sound.
    Mr. Slater. OK.
    Mrs. Rodgers. And those salmon runs are on decline because 
of the mass lethal and non-lethal effects of pollution on the 
salmon in Puget Sound. Those are the most important salmon to 
the endangered orca, and the salmon runs on the lower Snake are 
improving.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Bentz. I thank you. The Chair recognizes himself for 5 
minutes.
    I am annoyed by this constant reference to the fact that it 
is Congress and only Congress that can authorize breaching of 
the dams, because I take that as a red herring. Probably the 
wrong word in this hearing.
    But the point of the matter is there is a memo floating 
about which I had the opportunity to look at before we held our 
hearing up in June. And the memo was utilized and is being 
utilized in the litigation that led to this mediation document. 
The memo suggests that, if Judge Simon so desires, he can 
operationally reduce the pools behind the dam, reduce the 
ability to generate power, and reduce the ability to use the 
river for navigation. And that would not be an Act of Congress, 
would it?
    So, it irks me that there is this constant repetition of 
the fact that everything is fine because Congress will have to 
act, when in point of fact there are already memos floating 
about that suggest that the dams can be basically prevented 
from operating through judicial fiat. So, really, what I see 
when I saw the so-called secret document, and someone else 
leaked it, we didn't. When I saw it, I thought, well, this is 
merely a means of creating a framework so when the judge does 
choose to operate, and I hope he doesn't, in that fashion, 
there are things in place to try to dampen the unfortunate 
effects of such a thing.
    But I am going to set that aside and go back to the healthy 
and abundant standard, because I find that so amazing. It is 
not in the leaked document, is it? It is in the document that 
was cranked out just a few months after NMFS had found that 
there was no jeopardy. And then suddenly we see this document 
that rebuilding interior Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead to 
healthy and abundant levels. And as Chairwoman McMorris Rodgers 
pointed out, that has no business in this particular 
litigation.
    But my real question to you, Mr. Simms, is who pays? Who 
pays to re-establish these runs to a level probably not seen in 
the last couple of hundred years, given the nature of the fish?
    Please put up the chart that has the fish runs in it.
    [Chart.]
    Mr. Bentz. But the point is, who pays? Isn't it the 
ratepayers of the Northwest that are now going to be saddled 
with the burden of bringing these fish back to these healthy 
and abundant levels? Is that correct?
    Mr. Simms. It is certainly our concern that it could be the 
default, as I have said before, that when appropriations are 
not outlined, when agencies don't step up for budgets, and we 
clearly did not see any of that in the documents that were made 
public, that very often Bonneville and its ratepayers are put 
on the hook for all of those costs.
    Mr. Bentz. Yes, but this is what we would call a 
progressive goal to achieve, healthy and abundant. It is not 
certainly to avoid jeopardy.
    Mr. Simms. That is right.
    Mr. Bentz. So, what is going on? It is kind of a means of 
imposing an obligation upon the people of the Northwest to pay 
millions, if not billions to reach healthy and abundant. What 
is going on with that?
    Mr. Simms. Congressman, it is an unachievable standard, and 
it is not a defined standard, I think, as Neil from PNWA 
outlined earlier. It is one in which it is an aspirational and 
not at all rooted in the ESA.
    Mr. Bentz. And forgive me for interrupting, but you also 
used the phrase ``BPA induced to acquire'' some of the 
electricity that is going to be generated by these green 
sources that would be paid for under the so-called mediation 
agreement, ``induced to acquire.''
    Now, I know there is a law that suggests that the power 
needs to be purchased from tribes in certain situations.
    Mr. Simms. Right.
    Mr. Bentz. But this document goes quite a bit further than 
that. Can you share your thoughts?
    Mr. Simms. Sure, absolutely, yes. As I said in my written 
and oral testimony, basically the induced to acquire and the 
replacement resource label seems very highly inappropriate, 
given that the Northwest Power Act clearly defines Bonneville's 
acquisition authority for additional resources. There are many 
hoops that Bonneville must go through and many processes that 
it must go through in order to acquire energy.
    My belief, having looked at the document, is it is very 
muddy, and walks right up to the edge, and will potentially 
harness a future administrator or the current administrator to 
have to look myopically at one source.
    Mr. Bentz. Right. And forgive me, but I need to go to Ms. 
Falkenberg for just a moment.
    Mr. Simms. Yes.
    Mr. Bentz. You mentioned in our pre-hearing discussion that 
the lack of certainty was already creating difficulties in how 
you are representing your ratepayers. Can you share your 
thoughts?
    Ms. Falkenberg. Yes, thank you for the question, Mr. 
Chairman. When we have uncertainty on our power supply, that 
has downstream implications to how we are going to create our 
tariffs for our customers.
    If the proposed rate increase is anywhere from 5 percent to 
50 percent, our wholesale power supply makes up 50 percent of 
our total budget. So, if that is making up 50 percent of our 
budget, then we need to pass on those direct costs to our 
ratepayers. And it creates an untenable uncertainty for us, 
sir.
    Mr. Bentz. I am going to have to stop you there. And I want 
to share all of it. We have to go vote, but I have to read a 
few things in before we can run out the door. I want to thank 
all of you for your testimony. I truly want to thank you for 
traveling here and, of course, the Members for their questions.
    Members may have additional questions for witnesses. I ask 
you to please respond to them in writing. Under Committee Rule 
3, members of the Committee must submit questions to the 
Subcommittee Clerk by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December 
14. The hearing record will be held open for 10 business days 
for those responses.
    I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record documents 
received by the Committee which are: a letter to President 
Biden from Montana Governor Greg Gianforte expressing concern 
over the far-reaching implications of the Biden 
administration's commitment document for Montana residents; a 
letter to Secretary Granholm from the American Public Power 
Association and the National Rural Electric Cooperative 
Association expressing concern that the Biden administration's 
commitments would jeopardize electric reliability and increase 
costs for millions of Americans throughout the Pacific 
Northwest; a letter from the Pacific County PUD to DOE Deputy 
Secretary David Turk expressing concerns with the mediation 
process; a letter from the Public Power Council members to NOAA 
from June of this year talking about the importance of the 
lower Snake River dams; and finally, a letter from the Pacific 
Northwest Waterways Association to the Federal Mediation and 
Conciliation Service and Council on Environmental Quality 
expressing concern regarding the Biden administration's 
proposed commitments.
    Without objection, so ordered.

    [The information follows:]

                         OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR

                            STATE OF MONTANA

                                               December 8, 2023    

President Joe Biden
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500

    Dear President Biden:

    I am concerned that the recently proposed settlement with the Nez 
Perce and other lower Columbia River Treaty tribes has negative, far-
reaching implications for Montana residents and the economy of the 
entire northwest United States. This proposed settlement will impact 
the operations of federal dams located in the Columbia River system and 
thereby impact the Montana citizens that rely on these dams for 
reliable, low-cost electricity. Montanans simply cannot afford higher 
electricity rates.

    I am frustrated that the negotiations for this settlement were 
carried out in secret. Both the states of Montana and Idaho, as well as 
the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) were locked out of these 
discussions and were not given a chance to defend their respective 
interests in the matter. This closed-door process excluded the State of 
Montana despite our long-term status as an intervenor-defendant 
supporting the federal government, public power interests, and BPA 
itself. It is impossible to have confidence that this proposed 
settlement reflects an honest balancing of the interests at stake here.

    The result of this flawed negotiation process is a proposed 
settlement that will likely have significant negative economic impacts 
across the region. The operational changes in the settlement by the 
federal government entities will likely reduce electricity supply at a 
time when the region is facing ever increasing demand and reliability 
concerns. This almost guarantees that rates will rise for Montanans 
that purchase power from BPA. Over the long term, this settlement 
proposal could pave the way for breaching the Lower Snake River Dams 
(LSRD), which would be catastrophic for Montana electricity consumers 
and the agriculture industry in the northwest United States. The cost 
of replacing the clean, reliable electricity produced by these dams 
would be staggering, not to mention the loss of such a key shipping 
corridor for Montana agricultural products.

    For these reasons, I request that your administration take the 
steps necessary to rescind this proposed settlement and reopen 
negotiations on these critical issues. The State of Montana has been 
heavily involved in the discussions surrounding salmon recovery and the 
operations of the federal dams in the Columbia River drainage for 
decades. It is unacceptable that Montana is locked out of decisions 
that will impact its citizens.

            Sincerely,

                                            Greg Gianforte,
                                                           Governor

                                 ______
                                 

            National Rural Electric Cooperative Association

                                  and

                   American Public Power Association

                                               December 1, 2023    

Hon. Jennifer Granholm, Secretary
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave. SW
Washington, DC 20024

    Secretary Granholm:

    The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (``NRECA'') and 
American Public Power Association (``APPA'') are alarmed by the Draft 
Mediated Agreement, entitled ``U.S. Government Commitments in Support 
of the Columbia Basin Restoration Initiative and in Partnership with 
the Six Sovereigns'' (``Draft Agreement'') recently released by 
Congress. If this Agreement is ratified, it would jeopardize electric 
reliability and increase costs for millions of Americans throughout the 
Pacific Northwest.

    The Draft Agreement clearly shows that the Administration's goal is 
dam breaching, a conclusion that runs counter to decades of studies, 
science, and governmental actions, and an outcome that would 
destabilize the economy of an entire region of the nation. Not only 
does this expose a severe lack of understanding about the importance of 
keeping the lights on, it also reveals a misplaced desire to undermine 
our nation's essential emissions-free hydropower system without 
considering the cost.

    The Draft Agreement would weaken the Administration's stated 
greenhouse gas reduction goals by undermining hydropower, an always 
available, emissions-free source of electric generation critical to 
grid stability. As our nation depends on electricity to power more of 
the economy, we need more generating resources--not fewer. This 
proposal flies in the face of common sense and would make hydroelectric 
operations unnecessarily costly and unstable. BPA's hydropower system 
forms the backbone of reliability in the region. Communities across the 
West, including those in rural America, many of which are located in 
persistent poverty counties, would suffer the brunt of these impacts.

    In addition to the severely questionable obligations of the Draft 
Agreement, NRECA and APPA also have significant concerns about the lack 
of transparency inherent in this Columbia River System Operations 
(CRSO) mediation, as well as the Council on Environmental Quality's 
(CEQ) Request for Information on the management of the CRSO (Docket No: 
CEQ-2023-0002). This process has shut critical stakeholders and parties 
out of this Agreement and the administrative process. It has deprived 
our members in the Northwest, intimate stakeholders in CRSO operations, 
and millions of their customers of having fair representation in these 
proceedings.

    We strongly oppose the ratification of the Draft Agreement. The 
reliability of the Western electric grid is critical to continued 
national security, stability of our domestic food and mineral supplies, 
national economic stability, and our nation's energy security. 
Reliability should be prioritized as the U.S. Government moves forward 
in assessing the legality and appropriateness of these proposed 
obligations.

    Moreover, the Administration should engage in an open and 
transparent process with our members, all CRSO stakeholders, and 
Congress to address our concerns going forward.

            Respectfully,

        Jim Matheson, CEO             Scott Corwin, CEO
        National Rural Electric 
        Cooperative Association       American Public Power Association


                                 ______
                                 

                     PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2

                                   OF

                             PACIFIC COUNTY

                                              November 22, 2023    

David Turk, Deputy Secretary
U.S. Department of Energy

    Dear Deputy Secretary Turk:

    I had the pleasure of meeting you and your staff twice this year. 
Our first meeting on March 8th, 2023, convened at U.S. Department of 
Energy headquarters with Public Power Council (PPC). Our second meeting 
on June 14th, 2023, held with Senior Policy Advisor John Podesta at 
Bonneville Power Administration offices in Vancouver convened for the 
Pacific Northwest meeting on the Federal Columbia River Hydropower 
System.
    As Pacific County PUD's (Pacific) Power Resources Manager, it is my 
responsibility to manage and oversee all wholesale power supply costs. 
Pacific is a full requirements customer of Bonneville Power 
Administration (BPA), and we are members of Public Power Council (PPC) 
and Northwest River Partners (NWRP). We are a not-for-profit consumer 
owned utility. For the past 80 years, Pacific has relied on BPA to 
supply reliable, affordable, and low carbon wholesale electric power. 
For the past few years, Pacific has in earnest engaged with BPA on the 
next ``Provider of Choice'' 20-year contract as our current contract 
expires in 2028. Accepting long-term power sales contracts is amongst 
the most significant actions our utility undertakes; we do it with 
utmost care and thought towards long-term intergenerational impacts 
that will last well beyond 2044.
    Also, as an Officer and Vice Chair of Allocations, Rates and 
Contracts Committee for PPC, I'm concerned at the lack of procedural 
and distributive justice on part of the concealed negotiations between 
the U.S. Government (USG) and the select parties from the Columbia 
River System Operation litigation (CRSO). Council on Environmental 
Quality (CEQ) engaged Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) 
to attempt to make progress in resolving issues in the long-running 
CRSO litigation in the Federal District Court. Yet, those processes 
have not been fair, transparent, impartial and have not allowed for the 
intervener defendants to have a voice. Our collective voice was 
silenced as USG spent five months behind doors negotiating with the 
plaintiffs without meaningful engagement with us. Any aspirational hope 
of genuine mediation and conflict resolution was abandoned.
    As a result, any USG's potential commitments resulting from these 
proceedings will carry a shroud of procedural injustice. Nevertheless , 
we remain sympathetic to both the origin story and importance of salmon 
and other fish to the Columbia River Basin Tribes and the needs of 
stakeholders for affordable, reliable clean power. However, Pacific's 
customers demand decision making to be guided by impartiality, ensuring 
that biases and politics do not influence the decision and ultimately 
any outcomes. It would not be uncharacteristic in difficult 
negotiations for parties to sit in extreme discomfort jointly but the 
responsibility on part ofFMCS and CEQ would have been to hold separate, 
independent, and concurrent caucuses with both the plaintiffs, 
defendants, and intervenor defendants to preserve procedural fairness 
and to allow for adequate time to review of positions. The fruit from a 
procedurally unjust tree is unjust.
    With respect to distributive justice, it was centuries of 
oppression by the USG against Native Americans under the Doctrine of 
Discover; and subsequent Congressional policies of allotment and 
termination that cost Native Americans and First Nations hundreds of 
millions of acres of homelands of spiritual, ceremonial, and ancestral 
significance. Now, potential commitments made by the USG as part of the 
CEQ-FMCS settlement process, for the atonement of past actions should 
be borne by the federal taxpayer, and/or fees on non-Tribal harvest 
and/or pursue private grants and/or advance Corporate Social 
Responsibility program.
    Unlike other Federal agencies, BPA funds its operations entirely 
though the rates it charges its customers like Pacific and BPA's 
customers repay all costs associated the production and transmission of 
power from the multipurpose federal projects. This includes the costs 
associated with mitigating the impact of federal hydropower generation 
on threatened and endangered fish species. About 25 percent of BPA's 
Tier 1 rate, which includes foregone revenue for the cost of lost 
generation, is paid by BPA's consumer owned utilities for BPA's fish 
and wildlife programs; in the last 10 years, we have paid an average of 
$685 million per year.
    While Pacific takes its obligation to fund the largest and most 
comprehensive environmental mitigation program in the United States 
seriously, BPA's authority to undertake any costs is restrained by its 
organic, enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set 
``the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent with sound business 
principles.'' In other words, BPA is a creature of its statutes, and it 
cannot, despite the nobleness of the cause, improperly use ratepayer 
funds. Use of ratepayer funds for potential USG commitments is not a 
matter of ``ends justify the means'' but rather about the impact to the 
people in our community and I care deeply about the residents of 
Pacific County.
    Our ratepayer funds aren't dividend checks from the shareholders of 
for-profit companies; rather, ratepayer funds are monies that represent 
the sweat of labor from vast majority of our blue-collar working-class 
customers employed in seafood processing, cranberry bogs, and 
agricultural farms, including those members of our community that are 
most marginalized like migrant workers, elderly, disabled, ESL, and 
undocumented populations.
    Pacific County spans nearly 1,000 square miles with a population of 
less than 25,000 individuals sparsely dispersed (fewer than 25 people 
per square mile) along the mouth of the Columbia River. Nearly 70% of 
the county's population resides in unincorporated areas, with only four 
small municipalities (South Bend, Raymond, Long Beach, and Ilwaco) 
defined by urban growth areas. Because of the inherent costs of 
electrical infrastructure investment in areas that lack concentrated 
population centers, we face significant pressures in capital costs.
    Separately, the county experiences extreme weather events due to 
proximity of the Pacific Ocean, high wind events are common.\1\ We are 
at severe risk of disruption of roads and services by earthquake and/or 
tsunami.\2\ Winter storms typically include hours of 60-100 mph winds, 
causing trees to fall and damage lines and structures. The topography 
of the county includes a mountainous landscape, with heavily forested 
terrain, dense canopy cover, numerous wetlands, and geologic hazard 
areas. In addition, there are prevalent corrosive aerial salts that 
degrade free standing outdoor assets; with all these challenges, we 
still strive to have the most affordable rates in the state of 
Washington. But despite our best efforts to have the lowest rates for a 
non-generating PUD in Washinton, 2,805 households are below the 200% 
Federal Poverty Level and hence have an energy burden of more than 6%. 
We must do more with less because nearly one-third (34%) of the 
county's population is over the age of 65. The median household income 
of $50,873 is 35% lower than the state median income of $80,219. These 
earnings translate into considerable poverty across the county. Nearly 
15% of the population lives at or below the poverty line, approximately 
11% of the population has no health insurance and 25% of residents 
claim a federal disability and 17% of the people under the age of 65 
are disabled.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ https://mynorthwest.com/3937904/what-is-washingtons-windiest-
city/
    \2\ https://mil.wa.gov/asset/
5ba420aa1c85c#::text=For%20example%2C%20the%20 
unincorporated%20areas,could%20have%20county%2Dwide%20repercussions.
    \3\ https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/
pacificcountywashington/AGE775222# AGE775222
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Furthermore, poverty is particularly widespread amongst families in 
our community: 14.7% of all families with related children under the 
age of 18 live in poverty. Nearly 40% of all households with children 
under the age of 18 and headed by a sole female live in poverty. Every 
school in Pacific County qualifies for Title I federal funding. Over 
70% of our total school enrollment is considered ``Low Income.'' 
Layering on avoidable energy burden increases serves as a 
disproportionate regressive tax for our most vulnerable community 
members.
    Per the Biden Administration's Justice 40 Initiative \4\ and CEQ's 
Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, Pacific County has 
multiple tracts that are considered disadvantaged because it meets more 
than 1 burden threshold and the associated socioeconomic threshold. 
Pacific County's multiple census tracts rank 97th percentile for energy 
costs and 85% percentile for low-income households where income is less 
than or equal to twice the federal poverty level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/justice40/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Separately, when using CEQ's Climate and Economic Justice Screen 
Tool over the entire Pacific Northwest, the geospatial mapping tool 
reveals vast areas of BPA's customer communities are some of the most 
marginalized and under resourced.\5\ In the screen shot image below, 
areas highlighted in blue in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana are 
identified as disadvantaged communities that are overburdened. The USG 
should be mindful to minimize adverse rate impacts to these communities 
to access an essential human service like electricity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/#4.64/46.7/-114.77

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    
   Source: https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/#4.64/46.7/-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
114.77

    Respectfully, the USG must reconcile the uncertain financial burden 
of its extensive potential commitments in support of the Columbia Basin 
Restoration Initiative to the ratepayers of BPA in the Pacific 
Northwest considering the results presented from CEQ's own geospatial 
map. Any rate increases on BPA's customers will result in regressive 
harm to the communities most disproportionally disadvantaged and 
overburdened.
    The USG's potential assurances in the CRSO litigation also poses 
significant threats to the long-term value of the Federal Columbia 
River Power System (FCRPS). Considering the significant financial, 
reliability and FCRPS operational uncertainty, it's difficult to commit 
to a 20-year Provider of Choice take or pay contract when long term 
intergeneration impacts that will last beyond 2044 remain unknown.
    While we support scientific, cost-effective mitigation efforts for 
fish and wildlife impacts that have a clear nexus to the impacts of the 
hydropower system, I humbly request that USG exercise moral courage and 
use principles of distributive justice while honoring BPA's organic, 
enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set the 
``lowest possible rates'' to appropriately ensure that potential 
burdens resulting from a settlement process are squarely cabined to the 
federal taxpayer, and/or fees on non-Tribal harvest and/or pursue 
private grants and/or advance Corporate Social Responsibility program.
    The future of an urgent clean energy transition must prioritize 
important procedural, distributive, and restorative justice components 
that embrace equity and don't leave people behind. We need remarkable 
partnerships to fight the existential threat of climate change. 
Hydropower remains the centerpiece of the Northwest's energy 
infrastructure and it provides reliable, affordable, and clean power. 
We can't achieve our multiple policy objectives without it.
    Thank you for your consideration.

            Sincerely,

                                Humaira Falkenberg, She/her
                                          Power Resources Manager  
                                                 Pacific County PUD

                                 ______
                                 

                          PUBLIC POWER COUNCIL

                              Portland, OR

                                                   June 9, 2023    

Richard Spinrad, Administrator
NOAA
1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Room 5128
Washington, DC 20230

Janet Coit, Assistant Administrator
NOAA Fisheries
1315 East-West Highway, 14th Floor
Silver Spring, MD 20910

Michael Tehan, Assistant Regional Administrator
NOAA Fisheries
Interior Columbia Basin Office
1201 Northeast Lloyd
Portland, OR 97232

    Dear Dr. Spinrad, Ms. Coit, and Mr. Tehan:

    The Public Power Council (PPC) represents the interests of non-
profit, consumer-owned electric utilities that rely on the Federal 
Columbia River Power and Transmission System to deliver reliable, 
economic, and environmentally responsible power to their communities. 
PPC member utilities repay all the costs the Bonneville Power 
Administration (BPA) incurs in generating and transmitting the power 
from the federal hydro system. Indeed, Northwest public power utilities 
fund approximately 70 percent of BPA's $3.9 billion annual revenue 
requirement through their power and transmission rates and--given their 
nonprofit nature--have a keen interest in ensuring that BPA complies 
with its statutory obligation to offer ``the lowest possible rates to 
consumers consistent with sound business principles.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ 16 U.S.C. Sec. 838(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, the cost of Federal power is not a matter of dry economics 
for us. PPC members are community-owned utilities delivering an 
essential human service of electricity to their consumers. In many 
cases, PPC members serve some of the most economically vulnerable, 
underserved, and underrepresented communities in the Pacific Northwest. 
In the last 15 years, BPA's Tier 1 power rates have already increased 
24 percent, requiring PPC members to figure out how to continue to 
deliver affordable electric power to ratepayers who already struggle 
with their electric bills. There are no shareholders, investors, or 
profit margins to absorb increasing power costs--every cost must 
ultimately be recovered from the ordinary folks in our region, 
including those who must choose between feeding their children, 
purchasing life-saving medication, or heating their homes in subzero 
temperatures. Some see the latter as a luxury they simply cannot 
afford.
    At the same time, PPC and its members have an abiding and vital 
interest in the recovery of the endangered fish species because many of 
PPC's members have declared their commitment to environmentally-
friendly and sustainable power generation and usage. This commitment 
stems in part from the genuine environmental interests and values of 
the communities they serve, who desire environmentally-responsible but 
also affordable and reliable power. Through BPA's Fish and Wildlife 
Program, consumer-owned utilities have funded all of BPA's costs for 
mitigating the impacts of federal hydropower generation on threatened 
and endangered fish species. Over the last 10 years, the consumer-owned 
utilities have paid on average $685 million per year for BPA's program, 
which constitutes one quarter to one third of their BPA power rates. In 
total, over the last 10 years, the consumer-owned utilities in the 
Pacific Northwest have paid more than $6.8 billion for fish and 
wildlife mitigation measures.
    We know that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 
Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) is currently under intense 
pressure to succumb to single-issue advocates demanding the removal of 
the Lower Snake River Dams, without either offering credible scientific 
evidence of the benefits to the endangered species or addressing the 
massive consequences to the communities and businesses served by public 
power. The inconvenient truth that these NGOs simply refuse to 
acknowledge because it counters the narrative they have created is that 
the survival rates at the Lower Snake River Dams are at their record 
highs right now. Indeed, as was recently reported, for adult fish 
swimming upstream, the survival rate is above 90% and 75 of every 100 
young chinook and steelhead that head downstream and past the four dams 
survive.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Matthew Weaver, Amid a Battle Over Snake River Dams, a Look at 
How the Salmon Are Doing, CAPITAL PRESS, May 18, 2023, retrieved from 
https://www.capitalpress.com/ag_sectors/grains/amid-a-battle-over-
snake-river-dams-a-look-at-how-the-salmon-are-doing/article_c76c740a-
dadd-11ed-ad18-9fb96a214c52.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    We applaud NOAA Fisheries, and specifically Mr. Ritchie Graves, the 
Columbia Hydropower Branch Chief, for doing what NOAA Fisheries does 
best--sticking to science and using fact-based data, research, and 
analysis--to acknowledge that the Lower Snake River Dams are achieving 
required performance standards. In reference to the tremendous passage 
rates at the Lower Snake River dams on the Columbia River, Mr. Graves 
said that: ``In a lot of river systems, that would be something they 
would shoot for.'' \3\ The truth is that the mitigation measures we 
have invested so heavily in are working and contrary to the claims that 
the endangered species are at the brink of extinction, we appreciated 
Mr. Grave's recognition of the real fact that ``we haven't lost any 
populations in 25 to 30 years of listing, either.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ Id.
    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    NOAA Fisheries has a long and established history of conducting 
research and analysis designed to help scientists understand the 
variety of conditions affecting the nation's oceans and their 
inhabitants. The NOAA Fisheries scientists have historically been 
protected from politics allowing them to focus on the facts and pursue 
endangered species mitigation strategies that were truly scientifically 
driven. That is why we were so surprised when on July 11, 2022, NOAA 
Fisheries released a ``Regional Fishery Co-manager Review Draft'' of a 
report entitled ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and 
Steelhead.'' That report was out of character for NOAA Fisheries and 
not consistent with the agency's historical practices. It was unusual 
in its process, having been prepared in consultation with fishery 
managers for the Nez Perce tribe and the State of Oregon, and 
unattributed in terms of authorship within NOAA. In response to that 
report, PPC sent NOAA Fisheries a letter raising science-based concerns 
and laying the report's shortcomings. That letter is attached. To this 
day, PPC has not received a response from NOAA Fisheries.
    We urge you to resist the undue political pressure to endorse 
actions not supported by the facts and the science and to protect NOAA 
Fisheries and its scientists from unprecedented and increasing attacks 
by environmental extremists to censor their official, science-based 
findings.

            Regards,

        Bear Prairie, General 
        Manager                       Joe Morgan, General Manager
        Idaho Falls Power             Modern Electric Water Company
        Chair, PPC Executive 
        Committee                     Vice Chair, PPC Fish & Wildlife 
                                      Committee

        Jim Anderson, General 
        Manager                       Max Beach, General Manager
        Midstate Electric 
        Cooperative                   Idaho County Light and Power 
                                      Cooperative

        Libby Calnon, General 
        Manager                       Megan Capper, Energy Resource Mgr
        Hood River Electric & 
        Internet Co-op                Eugene Water and Electric Board

        Rick Dunn, General Manager    Scott Rhees, General Manager
        Benton PUD                    Franklin PUD

        Jason Zyskowski, Asst 
        General Mgr                   Scott Simms, CEO & Exec Director
        Snohomish County PUD          Public Power Council

                                 ______
                                 

             Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA)

                                              November 21, 2023    

        Mr. Gregory Goldstein         Ms. Brenda Mallory
        Acting Director               Chair
        Federal Mediation & 
        Conciliation Services         Council on Environmental          
                                            Quality
        2100 K Street NW              730 Jackson Place NW
        Washington, DC 20427          Washington, DC 20503

Subject: Concerns Regarding Proposed Commitments for the CRSO EIS 
        Litigation Mediation Process

    Dear Mr. Goldstein and Ms. Mallory,

    I am writing on behalf of the Inland Ports and Navigation Group 
(IPNG), a group of thirty-one entities that includes barge operators, 
farmers, ports, cruise ships, and many other businesses within the 
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA, www.pnwa.net). As one of 
the defendant intervenors--who have the same rights as defendants 
(USG)--in the Columbia River Systems Operations Environmental Impact 
Statement (CRSO EIS) litigation, whose members will be devastated, we 
are obliged to voice our serious concerns over the secretly negotiated, 
recently circulated, confidential proposed commitments (Exhibit 2, 
United States Government (USG) Commitments) set forth by the U.S. 
Government.
    Our members are the experts on Columbia River system navigation, 
river-based commerce, river system safety, and irrigated farming. The 
USG Commitments disregard our expertise on river operations, threaten 
human life, ignore studies necessary to ensure spill will provide safe 
fish passage, and risk environmental disasters from unsafe cargo 
passage. The USG Commitments are founded on directing action toward an 
assumption of future dam breaching that will devastate the rural 
communities in which nearly 50% of households are living paycheck to 
paycheck, according to the United Way and the White House Climate and 
Economic Justice Screening Tool, without any concern for these social 
justice impacts. We will not be co-opted into a process that has left 
us out of negotiations for the past 18 months by providing detailed 
proposed edits to the proposed USG Commitments. Further, our objections 
to those commitments are not just in the details but rather stem from 
fundamental overarching assumptions and untenable positions. These 
overarching assumptions and an initial response to Appendix B of the 
USG Commitments are included below.
    Before we discuss these concerns, there are components of the USG 
Commitments that we strongly support. We have embodied a spirit of 
finding opportunities for solutions. However, we have been given 
virtually no opportunity to do so, so we want to make clear that there 
are provisions in the USG Commitments that PNWA would likely support 
upon seeing a final proposed agreement. PNWA supports many of the 
objectives in the USG Commitments, such as energy resiliency, 
bolstering Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead populations, 
meeting decarbonization goals, supporting tribal energy initiatives, 
and investment in rural communities. Contingent upon final 
negotiations, PNWA would potentially support the list of measures in 
the USG Commitments for which Northwest River Partners voiced detailed 
support. (Northwest River Partners Letter the USG via FMCS, pages 3-7 
(Nov. 17, 2023)). PNWA will not reproduce an exhaustive list of those 
numerous areas of potential agreement.

    Unfortunately, this flawed process has produced a USG Commitments 
document that we cannot agree with due to the following overarching 
assumptions and positions.

     The USG Commitments rely on the fundamentally flawed NOAA 
            ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead 
            Report'' (NOAA Paper). This is a political report that 
            lacks the support of the scientific community. It is not 
            consensus science regarding the four Lower Snake River Dams 
            (LSRD) and salmon. Rather, the science is strongly 
            disputed. The USG Commitments pursue an objective 
            untethered to any lawful standard, that is subjective, and 
            that lacks any legal foundation. ``Healthy and abundant'' 
            salmon populations is a vague and undefined policy 
            objective not required by the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

     The USG Commitments fail to address river navigation as a 
            critically impacted benefit of the current system, 
            providing only a paltry $750,000 for a study of impacts. 
            This is inadequate to account for impacts that could be as 
            much as $30 billion, according to one study.

     The USG Commitments fail to ensure the delivery of 
            affordable and reliable clean power as pledged by the USG 
            on the August 8, 2022, Commitments commonly referred to as 
            Exhibit 2.

     The USG Commitments fail to ensure the many resilience 
            needs of stakeholders across the region will be met as 
            pledged by the USG in the August 8, 2022, Commitments 
            commonly referred to as Exhibit 2.

     The complexity of the proposed operational changes 
            warrants a thorough study of their potential impacts on 
            river navigation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
            Research and Development Center (ERDC) in Vicksburg, MS, 
            prior to implementation, as well as a completely new NEPA 
            analysis.

The Science is Not Clear

    The 2022 NOAA Paper calls for breaching the four LSRD in direct 
contradiction of the findings of the 2020 Final Environmental Impact 
Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD), despite the paper itself 
stating there is no new science. The NOAA Paper is based on a new, 
undefined, policy-driven objective of ``healthy and abundant'' salmon 
populations instead of the ESA jeopardy standard (further discussed 
below). The 2022 NOAA Paper also suddenly endorses the scientific 
hypothesis of delayed mortality, again with no new science, which was 
rejected in the FEIS and ROD for not being adequately demonstrated. 
IPNG submitted a scientific analysis by well-regarded PNWA scientist, 
Mr. Ian Coulter, concluding that the evidence supporting delayed 
mortality is contradictory and inconclusive. Mr. Coulter outlined the 
significant deficiencies in the delayed mortality hypothesis, including 
the mechanism(s), scale, and lack of significance of delayed mortality.
    Until these deficiencies in the research are addressed, delayed 
mortality cannot be the basis for decisions or commitments by the USG.
``Healthy and Abundant'' has no Enforceable Legal Basis

    The proposed USG Commitments establish the goal of ``healthy & 
abundant'' salmon populations without a quantitative definition. What 
constitutes ``healthy & abundant''? Who is the judge of when it is 
achieved? These questions have gone unanswered. Further, there is no 
legal justification for the modification of the goal. The ESA requires 
agency actions that do not ``jeopardize the continued existence of the 
species.'' ``Healthy and abundant'' is an undefined standard with no 
enforceable legal basis. We cannot agree to its adoption as an 
objective.
Navigation is a Critically Impacted Authorized Purpose of the Current 
        System

    The USG Commitments propose river-system operational changes that 
raise serious safety concerns, as discussed below. It also treats the 
replacement of river-based transportation as barely a footnote, failing 
to acknowledge the harmful emissions and nationwide economic impact 
that will result if navigation is eliminated. The river-based 
transportation system cannot be replaced with alternatives if the four 
LSRD are removed while still meeting the USG's clean energy goals. 
Removal of the four LSRD will increase transportation and related 
environmental costs in the U.S. by well over $7.3 billion over 30 
years. (FCS Group, Aug. 13, 2023). Removal of the four LSRD would 
require at least 23.8 million miles in additional trucking activity 
annually and more than 201 additional unit trains. (FCS Group, Aug. 13, 
2023). This would increase harmful greenhouse gas emissions by the 
equivalent of adding one new coal-fired power plant to the grid every 
2-3 years. The USG Commitments also fail to account for the likelihood 
that the river-based navigation system cannot be replaced by train and 
truck transit due to geographic constraints and environmental concerns 
in the region.
    River barging and river cruising would disappear along with the 
jobs and economic contributions they make to the regional and national 
economy. Farms will be bankrupted by the shift in freight costs and the 
lack of irrigation water caused by removal of the locks and dams. These 
impacts will devastate local schools and emergency services-reducing 
local tax revenue by $18 million annually and likely eliminating 15% of 
the regional workforce. (FCS Group, Aug. 13, 2023).
    Despite these devastating impacts, the USG Commitments recommend a 
paltry $750,000 for transportation infrastructure impact studies. It is 
imperative that the US Government conduct a thorough and complete study 
that includes all the region's stakeholders and experts and analyzes 
numerous factors, including engineering and permitting of new 
infrastructure; environmental impacts from greenhouse gases; 
environmental justice; rail and road safety; and workforce 
accessibility and readiness. The pragmatic consequences of impeding the 
movement of goods via the Columbia Snake River System--integral to our 
national trading efficacy--are being overlooked. The intricate network 
of river barging, which is pivotal for thousands of farms and a vast 
twelve-county region across three states, is integral to our economy 
and global, national, and regional food security. The proposed USG 
Commitments ignore these concerns.
Affordable and Reliable Energy Cannot be Assured Under these 
        Commitments

    The USG Commitments fail to address how new renewable energy will 
replace hydropower reliability and responsiveness. The Commitments also 
fail to address how newly proposed power sources will be effectively 
integrated into the regional power system nor how such massive 
infrastructure projects and associated high-voltage transmission lines 
will get permitted.
    We had some assurances through the August 8, 2022 Commitments that 
the region's and nation's clean power needs would be adequately 
addressed. Public Power Council's and Northwest River Partners' 
comments demonstrate the impossibility of meeting these USG 
Commitments. The failure of the USG to meet these objectives compels us 
to reject much of the USG Commitments document as it relates to energy 
production.
Resiliency for Impacted Communities cannot be Assured

    The loss of clean, reliable, and responsive hydropower and the 
removal of one of only three transportation modalities (and the 
cleanest among them) available to support the region's economy cannot 
meet the resiliency needs of impacted communities, as committed to by 
the USG on August 8, 2022.
    IPNG submitted a well-researched paper (FCS Group) outlining the 
adverse impacts on underserved and underrepresented communities along 
the Snake River if the four LSRD were breached. The paper also outlined 
the damaging effects of their energy replacements. The failure of these 
USG Commitments to seriously estimate the aftermath of dam breaching 
compels us to reject the overall document.
Safety of CSRS River Operators

    We have serious concerns about the proposed spill and operational 
changes in the Commitments document on the eight Federal Columbia Snake 
Hydropower Projects. The proposed operational changes do not contain 
information like spill patterns and scheduled times of new spills, 
which is critical information that is standard in these types of 
operational changes. Even more concerning is that these changes are not 
undergoing any study at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Engineer 
Research and Development Center (ERDC). Expert river Captains and 
Pilots with decades of experience have reviewed the proposed changes 
and they have safety concerns related to the lack of modeling of these 
significant changes. These proposed operational changes pose a genuine 
threat to life and property and effective fish passage if these changes 
are implemented without first being fully understood. The river system 
changes in Appendix B of the USG Commitments ignore Judge Simon's 
previous Order requiring that operational and spill changes be modeled 
at ERDC because the Court's ``concerns for both human safety and the 
listed species require calculating appropriate spill patterns in 
advance of increasing spill.'' The Judge's rationale in 2017 holds true 
to the changes being proposed in Appendix B.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ In his 2017 Order (ECF No. 2194, Amended Opinion and Order, 
Apr. 3, 2017) Judge Simon stated ``The Court recognizes that concerns 
for both human safety and the listed species require calculating 
appropriate spill patterns in advance of increasing spill. As 
Defendants describe, the Corps implements spill using particular spill 
patterns at each dam, and any change to spill can change the spill 
pattern and result in eddies or other flow issues that might delay or 
preclude juveniles from downstream migration, prevent adults from 
upstream migration, and negatively affect navigation through the lock 
systems.
    . . .

    The Court also recognizes that each dam is unique and an ``across-
the-board'' approach to spill is not the most effective means to 
increase salmonid survival at each dam. There are specific 
considerations at each dam that affect both juvenile and adult 
migration, and providing time to study and prepare for the increase in 
spill will allow proper analyses on the best methodology for each dam. 
Additionally, it also allows sufficient time to consider whether there 
may be other unintended negative consequences unrelated to salmonid 
survival.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Some of the proposed changes are also unlawful because they would 
eliminate the congressionally authorized Federal navigation channel. 
The proposed reservoir elevations at McNary Pool and The Dalles Dam 
will prevent the maintenance of the Congressionally required 14-foot 
navigation channel due to natural shoaling and will prevent river 
operators from accessing their docks in the McNary Pool. The USG cannot 
modify the Flood Control Act of 1962, by which Congress authorized the 
Federal navigation channel, and yet knowingly or unknowingly, Appendix 
B of the USG Commitments unlawfully does just that.
    Further, these changes are so significant as to warrant a new NEPA 
process and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before implementation.
    It is imperative to reassess the proposed USG Commitments to 
account for the substantial economic, infrastructure, and environmental 
ramifications that might ensue. We advocate for a balanced approach 
that honors our environmental responsibilities while safeguarding the 
region's economic viability. We are discouraged that agriculture, 
water-borne commerce, and rural economies, which depend so heavily on 
the LSRD, are not accounted for in the proposed USG Commitments.
    We urge the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service and the 
White House Council on Environmental Quality to reconsider the proposed 
USG Commitments, with a realigned focus on achieving a robust, clean 
power system and valuing all the region's stakeholders. Our commitment 
to a sustainable and thriving Pacific Northwest remains resolute, and 
we request, with respect, that our position be given serious 
consideration in your ongoing deliberations.

            Sincerely,

                                              Neil Maunu,  
                                             Executive Director    
                 Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA) &  
                           Inland Ports and Navigation Group (IPNG)

                                 ______
                                 

    Mr. Bentz. If there is no further business, without 
objection, the Subcommittee stands adjourned.

    [Whereupon, at 4:39 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

            [ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD]

Submissions for the Record by Rep. Huffman

                 NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS

                         RESOLUTION #AK-21-009

TITLE: Calling On The President and Congress to Invest in Salmon And 
River Restoration In The Pacific Northwest

WHEREAS, we, the members of the National Congress of American Indians 
of the United States, invoking the divine blessing of the Creator upon 
our efforts and purposes, in order to preserve for ourselves and our 
descendants the inherent sovereign rights of our Indian nations, rights 
secured under Indian treaties and agreements with the United States, 
and all other rights and benefits to which we are entitled under the 
laws and Constitution of the United States and the United Nations 
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to enlighten the 
public toward a better understanding of the Indian people, to preserve 
Indian cultural values, and otherwise promote the health, safety and 
welfare of the Indian people, do hereby establish and submit the 
following resolution; and

WHEREAS, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) was 
established in 1944 and is the oldest and largest national organization 
of American Indian and Alaska Native tribal governments; and

WHEREAS, many of the Tribal Nations of NCAI are united by salmon; by 
the Northwest rivers that salmon, steelhead, lamprey, and other native 
fish depend upon; and by the interconnectedness of salmon with their 
ecosystems--from the orca in the ocean and Puget Sound, to the 
nutrients salmon supply to the furthest inland streams; and

WHEREAS, through legislation and executive orders, the United States 
took land from tribal peoples. Tribal Nations also ceded lands through 
treaties, but in so doing reserved certain rights to protect their 
cultural way of life; and

WHEREAS, Tribal cultures and lifeways are deeply rooted in place and 
tied to their homelands. As such Tribal Nations cannot simply relocate 
to access traditional resources or ceremonial places; and

WHEREAS, beginning in the 1930s, and through the use and destruction of 
the lands, rivers, and fisheries Tribal Nations have lived with for 
thousands of years, the modern Northwest is a maze of massive 
irrigation, hydropower, and storage systems built on the backs of 
Tribal peoples; and

WHEREAS, the United States has a unique political relationship with 
Tribal Nations. Through this special relationship, the United States is 
bound to honor the obligations it has made in Treaties, Executive 
Orders, adjudicated through numerous federal court decisions, and its 
trust responsibility to sovereign Tribal Nations; and

WHEREAS, the fate of many Tribal Nations and the Northwest salmon are 
intertwined; and

WHEREAS, in the Columbia Basin, the Northwest Power Act and its promise 
of ``equitable treatment'' for energy and fish and wildlife did prevent 
the mid-Columbia fall chinook from being listed under the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA) but failed to prevent the subsequent listings of 
salmon and steelhead under the ESA; and

WHEREAS, U.S. District Court for Oregon in its 2016 ESA and National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ruling (Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Nat'l 
Marine Fisheries Serv., 186 F.Supp 3d. 861 (D. Or. 2106))--rejecting 
the federal government's salmon plan for the Columbia River System dams 
for the fifth time emphasized that the Federal Columbia River System 
remains a system literally crying out for a major overhaul, as that 
Court observed twenty years earlier in the same case; and

WHEREAS, the prior Administration's 2020 salmon plans in response to 
Oregon District Court's 2016 ruling--the 2020 Columbia River System 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Biological Opinion (BiOp), and 
Record of Decision (ROD)--were politicized with election-driven 
timelines, and used the prior Administration's weakened NEPA and ESA 
regulations to justify flawed conclusions and attempt to lock in 
inadequate dam operations for the next 15 years; and

WHEREAS, Columbia Basin Tribes expressed special concerns with the 
prior Administration's Columbia River System EIS with respect to its 
inadequate consideration of Tribal rights, interests, resources, trust 
lands; its failure to reveal environmental and social justice system 
impacts on Tribes; its failure to address fish restoration above dams 
that block fish passage; and its inadequate consideration of the 
impacts of climate warming; and

WHEREAS, Tribal Nations and Congress has a once-in-a-lifetime 
opportunity--a historical legacy moment--to secure funding to invest in 
salmon recovery and river restoration throughout the Northwest; and

WHEREAS, Tribal Nations throughout the Columbia Basin have supported 
legislative proposals that:

     Engage with Tribal Nations directly and regularly;

     Emphasize the very real and imminent salmon extinction 
            crisis;

     Recognize a singular, generational legislative moment, 
            because of the current Administration and current 
            leadership in the Senate and the House, and that this is a 
            moment for action, not for more process;

     Offer a comprehensive framework that embraces actions that 
            have been long-standing priorities for Tribes throughout 
            the Basin: restoring the lower Snake River by breaching the 
            four lower Snake River dams and optimizing spill to benefit 
            salmon at the mainstream federal Columbia River Dams; 
            restoring salmon behind blocked areas in the Upper Columbia 
            and Upper Snake basins; and ensuring that Tribes and State 
            co-managers become responsible for implementing salmon 
            restoration;

     Offer a solution that invests in a stronger, better 
            Northwest that goes beyond salmon, ensuring that 
            communities impacted by river restoration are made whole--
            and in doing so offering additional opportunities for 
            Tribes within other sectors--from infrastructure and 
            technology development to energy production;

     Highlights that an interest-based solution will involve 
            legal certainty;

     Engages in a bipartisan manner against the backdrop of 
            these foundational elements;

     Speaks the truth that failure to act this critical 
            historical moment will be looked back on as the tragedy of 
            the extinction of Snake River salmon populations; and

WHEREAS, the status of Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead species are 
dire and getting worse. Many populations of Snake River spring Chinook 
salmon and steelhead at the tipping point of extinction--identified by 
biologists as the Quasi-Extinction Threshold (QET);

     42% of the Snake Basin spring/summer Chinook populations 
            are at or below the QET; that is, 50 natural origin 
            spawners or less on the spawning grounds for four 
            consecutive years;

     77% of the populations are predicted to drop below the QET 
            level by 2025; and

WHEREAS, climatic warming shortens the time to act. Restoring the lower 
Snake (now a series of slow-moving, easily warmed lakes) to a naturally 
flowing river that connects fish to cold, high-altitude, near-pristine 
Salmon and Clearwater Basin habitat is the best possible solution for 
ecological resilience to warming temperatures; and

WHEREAS, the initiatives of Tribal Nations to restore salmon behind 
dams that block fish passage in the Upper Columbia and Upper Snake 
River have been limited by availability of funding and assertions of 
inadequate authorizations; and

WHEREAS, on April 14-15, 2021, the Columbia River Tribes gathered and 
reached agreement on a set of ``common ground'' principles underlying 
their support for Congressman Simpson's Columbia Basin Initiative:

     The true wealth of our region begins with the health of 
            our rivers, fish, and the ecosystem they support, which is 
            our culture, history and future;

     Agriculture is an important part of our region's economy;

     Affordable and reliable power is important to regional 
            families and businesses, tribal and non-tribal;

     Providing legal certainty for the vast majority of federal 
            dams in the Columbia/Snake River basins is a necessary 
            element of a lasting solution;

     Providing legal certainty for the vast majority of federal 
            dams in the Columbia/Snake River basins is a necessary 
            element of a lasting solution;

     A significant federal infrastructure investment in 
            alternative energy and transportation provides a unique 
            opportunity to restore salmon while keeping power 
            affordable and maintaining agricultural commerce;

     A comprehensive legislative solution is preferable to all 
            other avenues and is urgently needed;

     The time for action is now. The Columbia Basin cannot 
            become another Klamath Basin crisis; and

WHEREAS, the Southern Resident orcas of Puget Sound that are sacred to 
many Northwest Tribes, are starving to death because culverts and dams 
block and impair Chinook salmon migrations and limit the orcas' food 
source; and Governor of the State of Washington's Orca Recovery Task 
Force recommended--in addition to other dam and culvert removals--
reviewing the need to breach the four lower Snake River dams to help 
recover the struggling Puget Sound orcas, which resulted in the Lower 
Snake River Dams Stakeholder Engagement Report and informed Washington 
States' statement of management goals and principles for the Columbia 
and Snake rivers:

     Protecting and restoring abundant, harvestable salmon and 
            steelhead and other native fish species, including 
            contributing to a reliable source of prey for southern 
            resident orcas;

     Honoring Tribal rights, including a future for salmon that 
            supports Tribal cultural, spiritual, ceremonial, 
            subsistence, and economic needs;

     Providing for a clean, affordable, and reliable energy 
            system that meets our clean energy and climate goals;

     Ensuring affordable and reliable transportation 
            alternatives for wheat farmers in the Palouse and Tri-
            Cities areas;

     Ensuring reliable irrigation supplies for eastern 
            Washington farms; and

WHEREAS, implementation of federal court rulings upholding Treaty-
reserved fishing rights and ordering the state of Washington to replace 
culverts that block fish passage require funding to implement, as do 
Tribal habitat, hatchery, and salmon restoration efforts; and

WHEREAS, NCAI stands united in supporting investment in salmon and 
river restoration in the Northwest and throughout Indian Country.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the National Congress of American 
Indians (NCAI) calls on the Executive Branch and Congress to ensure 
that funding is set aside now at this critical ecological juncture for 
salmon and orca, to implement the bold actions for salmon and river 
restoration identified in the framework of the Columbia Basin 
Initiative legislative proposal, including restoring the lower Snake 
River by breaching the four lower Snake River dams; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NCAI requests the Executive Branch and 
Congress ensure that Tribal species restoration actions are prioritized 
and fully funded; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NCAI calls for the timely convening of a 
Tribal Salmon and Orca Summit, at an NCAI location, with invitations to 
Executive Branch Officials and to Congressional Members, to meet and 
take timely action with respect to the salmon and orca restoration 
priorities of Tribal Nations; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NCAI requests the Executive Branch and 
Congress prioritize working on actions to protect salmon, and other 
culturally and economically important fish and wildlife, and river 
restoration actions, and withdraw any federal court defense of the 
prior Administration's 2020 Columbia River System EIS, BiOp, and ROD's 
and other environmental decisions that are inconsistent with Tribal 
environmental principles and priorities; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that this resolution shall be the policy of 
NCAI until it is withdrawn or modified by subsequent resolution.

                             CERTIFICATION

The foregoing resolution was adopted by the General Assembly at the 
2021 Mid Year Conference of the National Congress of American Indians, 
held June 20, 2021-June 24, 2021, with a quorum present.

                                      Fawn Sharp, President

ATTEST:

Juana Majel Dixon, Recording Secretary

                                 ______
                                 

                 AFFILIATED TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS

                    2021 Virtual Mid-Year Convention

                          RESOLUTION #2021-23

``CALLING ON THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE 117TH CONGRESS 
TO SEIZE THE ONCE-IN-A-LIFETIME CONGRESSIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN 
SALMON AND RIVER RESTORATION IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST, CHARTING A 
STRONGER, BETTER FUTURE FOR THE NORTHWEST, AND BRINGING LONG-IGNORED 
TRIBAL JUSTICE TO OUR PEOPLES AND HOMELANDS''

                                PREAMBLE

We, the members of the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians of the 
United States, invoking the divine blessing of the Creator upon our 
efforts and purposes, in order to preserve for ourselves and our 
descendants rights secured under Indian Treaties, Executive Orders and 
benefits to which we are entitled under the laws and constitution of 
the United States and several states, to enlighten the public toward a 
better understanding of the Indian people, to preserve Indian cultural 
values, and otherwise promote the welfare of the Indian people, do 
hereby establish and submit the following resolution:

WHEREAS, the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians (ATNI) are 
representatives of and advocates for national, regional, and specific 
tribal concerns; and

WHEREAS, ATNI is a regional organization comprised of American Indians/
Alaska Natives and tribes in the states of Washington, Idaho, Oregon, 
Montana, Nevada, Northern California, and Alaska; and

WHEREAS, the health, safety, welfare, education, economic and 
employment opportunity, and preservation of cultural and natural 
resources are primary goals and objectives of ATNI; and

WHEREAS, the Tribes of ATNI are united by salmon; by the Northwest 
rivers that salmon, steelhead, lamprey, and native fish depend upon; 
and by the interconnectedness of salmon with their ecosystems--from the 
orca in the ocean and Puget Sound to the nutrients salmon supply to the 
furthest inland streams; and

WHEREAS, the United States used federal legislation and executive 
orders to take land from tribal peoples, and tribes ceded most of their 
land through treaties but reserved certain rights to protect their 
cultural way of life; and

WHEREAS, tribal cultures and lifeways are rooted in place and tied to 
their homelands, but tribes cannot just relocate to access traditional 
resources; and

WHEREAS, the modern Northwest with its massive irrigation, hydropower, 
and storage systems was built on the backs of tribal peoples from the 
1930s on, through the use and destruction of the lands, rivers, and 
fisheries we have lived with for thousands of years; and

WHEREAS, the United States shares a unique relationship with the Tribes 
of ATNI, with the United States being bound to honor the obligations to 
tribes made in Treaties, Executive Orders, adjudicated through numerous 
federal court decisions and its trust responsibility to tribal 
sovereign nations; and

WHEREAS, the fate of our Tribes and the Northwest salmon are 
intertwined; and

WHEREAS, in the Columbia Basin, the Northwest Power Act and its promise 
of ``equitable treatment'' for energy and fish and wildlife did prevent 
the mid-Columbia fall chinook from being listed under the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA) but failed to prevent the subsequent listings of 
salmon and steelhead under the ESA; and

WHEREAS, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon in his 2016 ESA and 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ruling--rejecting the federal 
government's salmon plan for the Columbia River System dams for the 
fifth time--emphasized that the Federal Columbia River System remains a 
system literally crying out for a major overhaul, as Judge Marsh 
observed twenty years earlier; and
WHEREAS, the prior Administration's 2020 salmon plans in response to 
Judge Simon's ruling--the 2020 Columbia River System Environmental 
Impact Statement (EIS), Biological Opinion (BiOp), and Record of 
Decision (ROD)--were politicized with election-driven timelines, and 
used the prior Administration's weakened NEPA and ESA regulations to 
justify flawed conclusions and attempt to lock in inadequate dam 
operations for the next 15 years; and

WHEREAS, Columbia Basin Tribes expressed special concerns with the 
prior Administration's Columbia River System EIS with respect to its 
inadequate consideration of Tribal rights, interests, resources, trust 
lands; its failure to reveal environmental and social justice system 
impacts on Tribes; its failure to address fish restoration above dams 
that block fish passage; and its inadequate consideration of the 
impacts of climate warming; and

WHEREAS, the new Administration and the 117th Congress face a once-in-
a-lifetime opportunity--a historical legacy moment--to secure 
congressional funding to invest in salmon recovery and river 
restoration throughout the Northwest; and

WHEREAS, Tribes throughout the Columbia Basin have supported 
Congressman Mike Simpson's initiative and his ``Columbia Basin 
Initiative'' legislative proposal for:

     Identifying this historic moment and opportunity;

     Engaging with Tribes directly and regularly;

     Emphasizing the very real and imminent salmon extinction 
            crisis;

     Recognizing a singular, generational legislative moment, 
            because of the current Administration and current 
            leadership in the Senate and the House, and that this is a 
            moment for action, not for more process;

     Offering a comprehensive framework that embraces actions 
            that have been long-standing priorities for Tribes 
            throughout the Basin: restoring the lower Snake River by 
            breaching the four lower Snake River dams and optimizing 
            spill to benefit salmon at the mainstem federal Columbia 
            River Dams; restoring salmon behind blocked areas in the 
            Upper Columbia and Upper Snake basins; and ensuring that 
            Tribes and State co-managers become responsible for 
            implementing salmon restoration;

     Offering a solution that invests in a stronger, better 
            Northwest that goes beyond salmon, ensuring that 
            communities impacted by river restoration are made whole--
            and in doing so offering additional opportunities for 
            Tribes within other sectors--from infrastructure and 
            technology development to energy production;

     Highlighting that an interest-based solution will involve 
            legal certainty;

     Engaging in a bipartisan manner against the backdrop of 
            these foundational elements;

     Speaking the truth that failure to act this critical 
            historical moment will be looked back on as the tragedy of 
            the extinction of Snake River salmon populations; and

WHEREAS, the status of Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead species is 
dire and getting worse, with many populations of Snake River spring 
Chinook salmon and steelhead on a steep slope to extinction; the point 
where populations become doomed to extinction is identified by 
biologists as the Quasi-Extinction Threshold (QET); and

     right now, 42% of the Snake Basin spring/summer Chinook 
            populations are at or below the QET; that is, 50 natural 
            origin spawners or less on the spawning grounds for four 
            consecutive years; and

     77% of the populations are predicted to drop below the QET 
            level by 2025; and

WHEREAS, time may be even shorter as climate warming advances, and 
restoring the lower Snake (now a series of slow-moving, easily warmed 
lakes) to a naturally flowing river that connects fish to cold, high-
altitude, near-pristine Salmon and Clearwater Basin habitat is exactly 
what is needed for the best possible ecological resilience to warming 
temperatures; and

WHEREAS, tribal initiatives to restore salmon behind dams that block 
fish passage in the Upper Columbia and Upper Snake River have been 
limited by availability of funding and assertions of inadequate 
authorizations; and

WHEREAS, on April 14-15, 2021, the Columbia River Tribes gathered and 
reached agreement on a set of ``common ground'' principles underlying 
their support for Congressman Simpson's Columbia Basin Initiative:

     The true wealth of our region begins with the health of 
            our rivers, fish, and the ecosystem they support, which is 
            our culture, history and future;

     Agriculture is an important part of our region's economy;

     Affordable and reliable power is important to regional 
            families and businesses, tribal and non-tribal;

     Providing legal certainty for the vast majority of federal 
            dams in the Columbia/Snake River basins is a necessary 
            element of a lasting solution;

     A significant federal infrastructure investment in 
            alternative energy and transportation provides a unique 
            opportunity to restore salmon while keeping power 
            affordable and maintaining agricultural commerce;

     A comprehensive legislative solution is preferable to all 
            other avenues and is urgently needed;

     The time for action is now. The Columbia Basin cannot 
            become another Klamath Basin crisis; and

WHEREAS, the Southern Resident orcas of Puget Sound, a being sacred to 
many Northwest Tribes, are starving to death because culverts and dams 
that block and impair Chinook salmon migrations are limiting the orcas' 
food source; and Governor Inslee's Orca Recovery Task Force 
recommended--in addition to other dam and culvert removals--reviewing 
the need to breach the four lower Snake River dams to help recover the 
struggling Puget Sound orcas, which resulted in the Lower Snake River 
Dams Stakeholder Engagement Report and informed Washington's statement 
of management goals and principles for the Columbia and Snake rivers:

     Protecting and restoring abundant, harvestable salmon and 
            steelhead and other native fish species, including 
            contributing to a reliable source of prey for southern 
            resident orcas;

     Honoring tribal rights, including a future for salmon that 
            supports tribes' cultural, spiritual, and economic needs;

     Providing for a clean, affordable, and reliable energy 
            system that meets our clean energy and climate goals;

     Ensuring affordable and reliable transportation 
            alternatives for wheat farmers in the Palouse and Tri-
            Cities areas

     Ensuring reliable irrigation supplies for eastern 
            Washington farms; and

WHEREAS, implementation of federal court rulings upholding Treaty-
reserved fishing rights and ordering the state of Washington to replace 
culverts that block fish passage require funding to implement, as do 
other Tribal habitat, hatchery, and salmon restoration efforts; and

WHEREAS, ATNI stands united in supporting investment in salmon and 
river restoration in the Northwest; now

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that ATNI calls on the President of the 
United States (POTUS) and the 117th Congress to ensure that funding is 
set aside now at this critical ecological juncture for salmon and orca, 
to implement the bold actions for salmon and river restoration 
identified in the framework of Congressman Simpson's Energy and Salmon 
legislative proposal, including restoring the lower Snake River by 
breaching the four lower Snake River dams; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ATNI requests the POTUS and 117th Congress 
to ensure that the salmon restoration priorities of the Tribes of ATNI 
are prioritized and funded; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ATNI calls for the timely convening of a 
Northwest Tribal Salmon and Orca Summit, at an ATNI location, with 
invitations to Presidential Administration Officials and to Northwest 
Congressional Delegation Members, to meet and take timely action with 
respect to the salmon and orca restoration priorities of the Tribes of 
ATNI; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that ATNI requests the POTUS to prioritize 
working on the actions for salmon and river restoration identified as 
the framework of Congressman Simpson's Energy and Salmon legislative 
proposal, and withdraw any federal court defense of the prior 
Administration's flawed 2020 Columbia River System EIS, BiOp, and ROD 
as otherwise a defense of methods and conclusions inconsistent with the 
new Administration's environmental and tribal principles and 
priorities; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that this resolution be forwarded to the 
National Congress of American Indians.

                             CERTIFICATION

The foregoing resolution was adopted at the 2021 Virtual Mid-Year 
Convention of the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Portland, 
Oregon, on May 24-May 27, 2021, with a quorum present.

        Leonard Forsman, President    Norma Jean Louie, Secretary

                                 ______
                                 
                        Statement for the Record
                            American Rivers
                     Tom Kiernan, President and CEO

    Thank you for the opportunity to share American Rivers' perspective 
on the Pacific Northwest economic, energy, and ecological future. Since 
1973, American Rivers has protected wild rivers, restored damaged 
rivers, and conserved clean water for people and nature. With 
headquarters in Washington, D.C. and 355,000 supporters, members, and 
volunteers across the country, we are the most trusted and influential 
national river conservation organization in the United States. As the 
nation's leading river advocate, American Rivers seeks to ensure our 
nation's rivers and floodplains are protected.

    The lower four Snake River dams, which stretch between Tri-Cities, 
WA and Lewiston, ID, were constructed between 1957 and 1972. These dams 
provide around 900 average megawatts of power--around 4% of the 
Northwest's energy generation. They also provide irrigation for crops 
grown around the Tri-Cities, as well as transportation for barge 
traffic between the Tri-Cities and Lewiston. While the services the 
lower four Snake River dams provide are valuable to surrounding 
communities, those services can be replaced with alternative, and less 
damaging to the river, technologies. Science shows us that ``breaching 
the four lower Snake River dams is necessary to (1) substantially 
improve the probability of recovering these cultural and ecological 
keystone species to healthy and harvestable populations and (2) 
safeguard those fishes from extinction.'' (American Fisheries Society 
2023 citing Williams et al. 1989; Nehlsen et al. 1991; Thurow 2000; 
NOAA 2017, 2022; Isaak et al. 2018; Storch et al. 2022; TU 2022). 
Losing these iconic keystone species of the Pacific Northwest would be 
an economic, cultural, and ecological disaster with long-ranging 
implications for Columbia Basin Tribes, and for the coastal communities 
of Oregon and Washington, to the uppermost reaches of the Salmon River 
in the Sawtooth Mountains of Idaho.

    American Rivers applauds the Biden administration for working with 
the Yakama, Nez Perce, Umatilla and Warm Springs Tribes and the states 
of Washington and Oregon to develop solutions to end the decades-long 
logjam of litigation over operation of the Snake River dams. We have 
moral, ethical, and environmental obligations to follow the science and 
honor our Tribal treaty obligations in pursuit of a solution in the 
Snake Basin.

    According to fisheries scientists and government agencies, 
including the American Fisheries Society and the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration, the only way to save ESA-listed populations 
of salmon and steelhead in the Snake River Basin from extinction and 
return them to abundance, is to breach the lower four Snake River dams. 
The Columbia Basin Partnership Task Force, a collaboration of states, 
Tribes, federal agencies, and stakeholders across the region, adopted 
targets for achieving abundant and harvestable salmon and steelhead in 
the Columbia Basin. The only way to achieve these agreed upon targets 
is to breach the lower four Snake River dams.

    The financial burden of recovering of Snake River salmon and 
steelhead must not fall only on ratepayers in the Pacific Northwest. 
Much like recovery of the Florida Everglades, the Great Lakes, and 
Chesapeake Bay, recovering salmon populations in the Snake Basin is a 
national responsibility that should be borne by the U.S. Government. 
Only the U.S. Government has the obligations and resource ability to 
honor Tribal treaties, support communities who will be impacted by the 
transition of services, and restore the basin to support salmon 
populations.

    Efforts to scare the public with outsized estimates of impacts on 
utility bills are both misleading and disingenuous. If costs of 
replacing the power provided by the lower four Snake River dams are 
borne by the US Government, the results will be minimal impacts on 
utility bills and greater certainty for utility providers for decades 
to come. We have already seen a transformation in our energy portfolio 
with new wind, solar, and storage resources that seemed impossible 20 
years ago. With unprecedented federal funding available through the 
Inflation Reduction Act and the bi-partisan Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act, there has never been a better time to invest in a bold 
new vision for the future of power in the Pacific Northwest.

    The longer we continue to delay, obfuscate, and distract with 
misinformation, the more drastic becomes the need, and more urgent the 
timeline, for action to invest in a sustainable economic future to save 
these fish from extinction. We have an opportunity to come together as 
a region to develop solutions to large-scale challenges involved with 
replacing the services provided by the lower four Snake River dams, in 
a manner that will keep stakeholders and impacted communities whole and 
position the region to move boldly into the next century. American 
Rivers stands with Tribal Nations of the Northwest, our NGO partners, 
local communities, and impacted stakeholders to help make that vision a 
reality. The actions and commitments from the Biden Administration are 
a meaningful step in that direction.

American Fisheries Society 2023. Statement of the American Fisheries 
Society (AFS) and the Western Division AFS (WDAFS) About the Need to 
Breach the Four Dams on the Lower Snake River. https://fisheries.org/
policy-media/recent-policy-statements/statement-of-the-american-
fisheries-society-afs-and-the-western-division-afs-wdafs-about-the-
need-to-breach-the-four-dams-on-the-lower-snake-river

Isaak, D.J., C.H. Luce, D.L. Horan, et al. 2018. Global warming of 
salmon and trout rivers in the northwestern U.S.: road to ruin or path 
through purgatory? Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 
147:566-587.

Nehlsen, W.J., J.E. Williams, and J.A. Lichatowich. 1991. Pacific 
salmon at the crossroads: stocks at risk from California, Oregon, 
Idaho, and Washington. Fisheries 16:4-21.

NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2017. ESA 
recovery plan for Snake River spring/summer Chinook and Snake River 
Basin steelhead. National Marine Fisheries Service, Portland, OR. 
https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/dam-migration/final-snake-river-
spring-summer-chinook-salmon-and-snake-river-steelhead-recovery-plan-
2017.pdf.

Storch, A.J., H.A. Schaller, C.E. Petrosky, et al. 2022. A review of 
potential conservation and fisheries benefits of breaching four dams in 
the Lower Snake River (Washington, USA). Water Biology & Security 1(2). 
doi.org/10.1016/j.watbs.2022.100030

Thurow, R.F., T. Copeland, and B.N. Oldemeyer. 2020. Wild salmon and 
the shifting baseline syndrome: application of archival and 
contemporary redd counts to estimate historical Chinook Salmon 
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) production potential in the central Idaho 
wilderness. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 77:651-
665.

Williams, J.E., J.E. Johnson, D.A. Hendrickson, et al. 1989. Fishes of 
North America endangered, threatened, or of special concern: 1989. 
Fisheries 14:2-20.

                                 ______
                                 

                    American Fisheries Society (AFS)

                              Bethesda, MD

                                              December 23, 2023    

Hon. Cliff Bentz, Chairman
Hon. Jared Huffman, Ranking Member
Committee on Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Water, Oceans and Wildlife
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515

Re: Examining the Biden Administration's Efforts to Eliminate the 
        Pacific Northwest's Clean Energy Production

    Dear Chairman Bentz and Ranking Member Huffman:

    On behalf of the American Fisheries Society (AFS), we submit this 
information for the record in follow-up to the December 12 hearing of 
the Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Subcommittee of the U.S. House of 
Representatives Committee on Natural Resources entitled ``Examining the 
Biden Administration's Efforts to Eliminate the Pacific Northwest's 
Clean Energy Production.''
    AFS is the world's oldest and largest professional society of 
fishery scientists and resource managers. At its core, AFS is a science 
organization. AFS promotes the conservation and sustainability of 
fishery resources and aquatic ecosystems through dissemination of 
fisheries science via scientific journals on fisheries, conferences, 
and continuing education. Many of AFS' members live and work in the 
western United States and have long-studied salmon and their declining 
populations.
    The science is indeed clear and compelling, supported by decades of 
rigorously peer-reviewed published reports and manuscripts, and 
demonstrates removing the four lower Snake River dams is essential to 
restore critically at-risk populations of wild Snake River salmon and 
steelhead. Snake River populations are currently hovering on the brink 
of extinction and action is urgently needed.
    After carefully reviewing the science on this issue, AFS adopted a 
policy statement in support of breaching the lower four Snake River 
dams in January 2023 (Winters 2023). We attach it here for your 
consideration. The policy statement concludes that ``[i]f Snake River 
basin salmon and steelhead are to be saved, then policymakers and 
stakeholders at all levels will need to implement appropriate processes 
and funding provisions to breach the four dams on the Lower Snake 
River, as well as implement all necessary habitat rehabilitation.''
    Today, only 1-2% of formerly abundant, historic wild salmon and 
steelhead return to the Snake River to spawn (Winters 2023). Despite 
billions of dollars spent to date on Snake River anadromous fish 
restoration (including hatchery stocking), recovery efforts have not 
been effective (Hatch Magazine 2021; Storch et al. 2022; Jaeger and 
Scheuerell 2023; Winters 2023). Recent reports demonstrate that 42% of 
Snake River wild spring/summer Chinook Salmon and 19% of steelhead 
populations have declined to the threshold where extinction is highly 
likely (O'Toole 2021) and will continue to decline without breach.
    The climate crisis increases the urgency for action and will 
continue to worsen conditions for these and other coldwater species. 
Ensuring access to the Snake River basin's intact and high elevation 
habitat provides the best opportunity for broadscale population 
recovery and persistence in the face of the climate crisis (Storch et 
al. 2022).
    In the 1990s, 30 scientists from state, federal, tribal, and other 
entities participated in the PATH (Plan for Analyzing and Testing 
Hypotheses) process that evaluated smolt-to-adult ratios and the 
probability of achieving the interim survival and recovery standards of 
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries 
(Marmorek et al. 1998). The PATH analyses concluded that the Natural 
River option to restore the Snake River (via breaching the four lower 
Snake River dams) was the only option that would provide recovery. This 
option was found to have the ``highest certainty of success and the 
lowest risk of failure.'' (Storch et al. 2022). The PATH conclusions 
have been reaffirmed by scientific review panels, agencies, and 
scientists for the past 25 years (ISAB 2019, Hatch Magazine 2021, NOAA 
Fisheries 2022).
    In 2020, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council ``reaffirmed 
the prior benchmark of smolt-to-adult returns (SAR) averaging 4% 
(range: 2%-6%) for spring/summer Chinook Salmon . . . (A) minimum SAR 
of 2% is required to consistently maintain existing populations, 
whereas SARs greater than 2% indicate degrees of population growth . . 
. Smolt-to-adult return rates equal to or greater than 4% achieved on a 
regular basis should promote a high likelihood of recovery (i.e., 
consistent generational increases in abundance . . . The Independent 
Scientific Advisory Board . . . has reviewed . . . the 2-6% SAR 
objective and identified extensive evidence to support these goals . . 
.''
    The need to breach the four lower Snake River dams is further 
confirmed by comparisons of SARs versus the number of dams anadromous 
fish must pass. Recent SARs for Snake River wild spring/summer Chinook 
Salmon have averaged 0.7% above eight dams, in comparison to SARs for 
non-ESA listed, wild spring Chinook Salmon that pass fewer dams in the 
mid-Columbia River and continue to meet sustainable SAR objectives 
(McCann et al. 2019). From 2000-2017, wild Chinook Salmon SARs averaged 
3.6% in the John Day River above three dams, 2.5% in the Yakima River 
above four dams, and 0.7% in the Snake River above eight dams (McCann 
et al. 2019). Importantly, temporal analysis also demonstrates that the 
productivity of Snake River Chinook salmon declined much more 
precipitously after construction of the Federal Columbia River Power 
System compared to productivity of Chinook salmon in the John Day River 
(Schaller et. al 2014). The John Day, Yakima, and Snake River 
populations experience the same treaty and nontreaty fisheries, 
pinniped predation, and ocean conditions; the primary difference among 
them is the number of dams they must pass (Storch et al. 2022). Wild, 
Snake River anadromous salmon above eight dams are unable to meet SAR 
goals and are declining toward extinction. Importantly, recent models 
also demonstrate the population's ability to recover and grow with SARs 
approaching 2% (Jacobs et al. 2023).
    The Columbia Basin Partnership established healthy and harvestable 
levels as the population goal for wild Chinook salmon and steelhead 
recovery (NMFS 2020). During the December 12 hearing, recent salmon 
returns were falsely characterized as ``strong.'' Clearly, returns are 
not meeting established healthy and harvestable populations. Indeed, 
2022 was a very low return year for wild Chinook salmon in Central 
Idaho. The Middle Fork Salmon River total redd count was n=322. That 
number is only 1.3% of estimated wild Chinook salmon returns to the 
drainage that occurred into the mid-1960s. Many areas with 
exceptionally high quality and connected natal habitat had zero fish 
return to spawn. These very low returns emphasize the severe threat of 
extinction and the urgency of restoring the Snake River migration 
corridor.
    Hatcheries can provide harvest opportunities, especially in 
ensuring Treaty-protected tribal harvest that would not exist otherwise 
with the dams in place. However, a recent science review of Snake River 
spring/summer Chinook Salmon Hatchery Programs confirms hatchery 
mitigation efforts are unable to produce sufficient adult returns to 
meet goals and, often, basic broodstock needs (Independent Scientific 
Review Panel Review of the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan for 
Spring/Summer Chinook, 2022-2023).
    Additionally, detrimental effects of hatcheries to wild populations 
are well documented (McMillan et al. 2023). For example, hatchery fish 
reduce subsequent reproductive capacities by up to 40% of hatchery fish 
and wild-born fish from hatchery parents (Araki et al. 2009). 
Nonetheless, in the short term, hatcheries serve as a means for tribes 
to harvest salmon for cultural, social, and economic reasons and for 
states to provide angling opportunities. However, a long-term solution 
requires restoring wild populations via breaching the four lower Snake 
River dams followed by reduced dependence on hatcheries.
    Breach of the lower Snake River dams will also help meet broader 
ecological benchmarks for migratory fish rehabilitation (Storch et al. 
2022). The lower Snake River dams and reservoirs produce lower and 
warmer flows that negatively affect adult immigration and juvenile 
emigration. Consequently, increased connectivity in the lower Snake 
River is critical for steelhead, Bull Trout, White Sturgeon, and 
Pacific Lamprey (Storch et al. 2022). Restoring the Snake River 
migration corridor will reestablish opportunities for repeat spawning 
to enhance populations (Vadas 2000; Vadas et al. 2016; Storch et al. 
2022). This approach has been successfully used in Maine, where dam 
breaching increased abundances of repeat spawning Atlantic Salmon and 
non-salmon species (Winters 2023).
    Despite often considered a ``green energy'' source, hydropower dam/
reservoir systems have profound negative effects on water quality, 
cyanobacteria, instream flow, habitat blockage, and greenhouse-gas 
(methane/nitrous oxide) emissions (Storch et al. 2022; Winters 2023).
    AFS supports actions to breach the four dams on the Lower Snake 
River and we further support a clear roadmap for ameliorating the 
economic (energy/transportation/irrigation) impacts of breach on those 
who rely on the dams (Hatch Magazine 2021; Storch et al. 2022; Winters 
2023). To safeguard Snake River salmon and steelhead for future 
generations, we urge policymakers to embrace the science, implement 
urgent actions to breach the four lower Snake River dams, and to take 
additional actions to replace dam services. As a precedent, similar 
actions have recently been implemented to recover Klamath River fishes 
and to assist the diverse sets of stakeholders collaborating to restore 
that system (Davidson 2023; FERC 2022).
    Thank you for your consideration. For additional questions, please 
contact Drue Banta Winters, [email protected].

            Sincerely,

                                  Douglas J. Austen, Ph.D.,
                                                 Executive Director

References

Araki H, Cooper B, Blouin MS. 2009. Carry-over effect of captive 
breeding reduces reproductive fitness of wild-born descendants in the 
wild. Biological Letters 5: 621-624.

Davidson, S., 2023. First of the Klamath dams comes down. Trout 
Unlimit. Mag. https://www.tu.org/magazine/conservation/barriers/dam-
removal/first-of-the-klamath-dams-comes-down.

FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), 2022. Final Environmental 
Impact Statement For Hydropower License Surrender and Decommissioning 
for the Lower Klamath Project. https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/
filelist?accession_number= 20220826-3006&optimized=false.

Jacobs, G.R., R.F. Thurow, C.E. Petrosky, et al. 2023. Life-cycle 
modeling reveals high recovery potential of at-risk wild Chinook salmon 
via improved migrant survival. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and 
Aquatic Sciences.

Hatch Magazine. 2021. Scientists draft letter calling on governors to 
tear down the lower Snake River dams: for salmon and steelhead to 
survive, the dams must go. Hatch Magazine (San Diego, CA), January 14. 
Available: https://www.hatchmag.com/articles/scientists-draft-letter-
calling-governors-tear-down-lower/7715196 (August 2023).

ISAB (Independent Science Advisory Board). 2019. ISAB review of the 
Comparative Survival Study (CSS) Draft 2019 annual report. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/reports/isab-review-comparative-survival-study-css-
draft-2019-annual-report/.

ISRP (Independent Science Review Panel). 2023. ISRP review of the lower 
Snake River Compensation Plan Spring/Summer Chinook Program, 2022-2023. 
Available: https://www.nwcouncil.org/reports/isrp2023-01/.

Jaeger, W.K., and M.D. Scheuerell. 2023. Return(s) on investment: 
restoration spending in the Columbia River Basin and increased 
abundance of salmon and steelhead. PLoS (Public Library of Science) ONE 
[online serial] 18(7):e0289246. Available: https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0289246.

Marmorek, D.R., C.N. Peters, I. Parnell (Eds.), PATH Final Report for 
Fiscal Year 1998, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR (1998). 
Available: http://www.essa.com/documents/1998_Final_Report.pdf.

McCann, J., B. Chockley, E. Cooper, et al. Rawding Comparative survival 
study (CSS) of PIT-tagged spring/summer/fall Chinook, summer steelhead 
and Sockeye. 2019. Annual Report to the Bonneville Power 
Administration, Contract 19960200. Portland, OR. (2019). Available: 
http://www.fpc.org/documents/CSS/2019_Final_ CSS.pdf.

McMillan, J.R., B. Morrison, N. Chambers, et al. 2023. A global 
synthesis of peer-reviewed research on the effects of hatchery 
salmonids on wild salmonids. Fisheries Management & Ecology 30:446-463.

NOAA Fisheries. 2022. Rebuilding interior Columbia Basin salmon and 
steelhead. U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, 
National Marine Fisheries Service. Silver Spring, Maryland. Available: 
https://www.fisheries. noaa.gov/resource/document/rebuilding-interior-
columbia-basin-salmon-and-steelhead (August 2023).

NPCC (Northwest Power and Conservation Council). Columbia River Basin 
Fish and Wildlife Program 2014: 2020 Addendum. 2020. Available: https:/
/www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2020-9.pdf

O'Toole, P., editor. 2021. Nez Perce Tribe staff presentation on their 
analysis of Snake River basin Chinook and steelhead--quasi-extinction 
threshold and call to action (memorandum and presentation). Northwest 
Power and Conservation Council. Portland, Oregon. Available: https://
www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2021_05_4.pdf (August 2023).

Schaller HA, Petrosky CE, Tinus ES. 2014. Evaluating river management 
during seaward migration to recover Columbia River stream-type Chinook 
salmon considering the variation in marine conditions. Canadian Journal 
of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 71:259-271.

Storch, A.J., H.A. Schaller, C.E. Petrosky, et al. 2022. A review of 
potential conservation and fisheries benefits of breaching four dams in 
the Lower Snake River (Washington, USA). Water Biology and Security 
[online serial] 1(2):100030. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.watbs.2022.100030. Twidell, J. 2022. Renewable energy sources. 4th 
ed. Routledge. New York. Available: https://www.routledge.com/
Renewable-Energy-Resources/Twidell/p/book/9780415633581.

Twidell, J. 2022. Renewable energy sources. 4th ed. Routledge. New 
York. Available: https://www.routledge.com/Renewable-Energy-Resources/
Twidell/p/book/9780415633581.

Vadas, R.L. Jr. 2000. Instream-flow needs for anadromous salmonids and 
lamprey on the Pacific Coast, with special reference to the Pacific 
Southwest. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 64:331-358. 
Available: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006486920036.

Vadas, R.L. Jr., H.A. Beecher, S.N. Boessow, and J.H. Kohr. 2016. 
Coastal Cutthroat Trout redd counts impacted by natural water supply 
variations. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 36:900-912. 
Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/02755947.2016.1173138.

Whittum, K.A., J.D. Zydlewski, S.M. Coghlan, Jr., et al. 2023. Fish 
assemblages in the Penobscot River: a decade after dam removal. Marine 
and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science 
[online serial] 15:e10227. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/
mcf2.10227.

Winters, D.B., editor. 2023. Statement of the American Fisheries 
Society (AFS) and the Western Division of AFS about the need to breach 
the four dams on the lower Snake River. Fisheries 48:215-217. 
Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/fsh.10906; and https://
fisheries.org/policy-media/recent-policy-statements/statement-of-the-
american-fisheries-society-afs-and-the-western-division-afs-wdafs-
about-the-need-to-breach-the-four-dams-on-the-lower-snake-river (August 
2023).

                                 ______
                                 
                                 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

                                 

Submission for the Record by Rep. Rodgers

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]