    [Senate Hearing 118-571]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 118-571

                           ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT
                        APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025

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

                                    HEARINGS

                                    BEFORE A

                              SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                       ON

                               H.R. 8997/S. 4927

                AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOP-
                 MENT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2025, AND FOR
                 OTHER PURPOSES

                                   __________

                          Department of Defense--Civil
                              Department of Energy
                           Department of the Interior

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

            Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov

                                   __________

                       U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    55-296 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2025

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                          COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                        PATTY MURRAY, Washington, Chair
    RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois          SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Vice
    JACK REED, Rhode Island                  Chair
    JON TESTER, Montana                  MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
    JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire        LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
    JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
    CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       JERRY MORAN, Kansas
    BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii                 JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
    TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
    CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut      SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
    JOE MANCHIN, III, West Virginia          Virginia
    CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland           JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
    MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico          CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
    GARY PETERS, Michigan                BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
    KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              KATIE BRITT, Alabama
                                         MARCO RUBIO, Florida
                                         DEB FISCHER, Nebraska

                          Evan Schatz, Staff Director
                  Elizabeth McDonnell, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

                  Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development

                         PATTY MURRAY, Washington Chair
    JON TESTER, Montana                  JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana, Ranking
    RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois          MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky
    JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire        LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska
    JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
    CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware       JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
    TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin             CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi
    MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico          BILL HAGERTY, Tennessee
    KYRSTEN SINEMA, Arizona              KATIE BRITT, Alabama

                               Professional Staff

                                   Doug Clapp
                               Jen Becker-Pollet
                                 Aaron Goldner
                                  Laura Powell
                                 Maria Calderon
                           Lindsay Garcia (Minority)
                          Rachel Littleton (Minority)
                             Anna Newton (Minority)
                          Kathleen Williams (Minority)

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                                    HEARINGS
                            Wednesday, May 15, 2024

                                                                       Page

    Department of Defense--Civil: Department of the Army; Corps of
      Engineers--Civil...............................................     1
    Department of the Interior: Bureau of Reclamation................    13

                            Wednesday, May 22, 2024

    Department of Energy: Office of the Secretary....................    47

                                  ----------

                                  BACK MATTER

    List of Witnesses, Communications, and Prepared Statements.......    93

    Subject Index....................................................    95
        Department of Defense--Civil.................................    95
            Department of the Army...................................    95
            Corps of Engineers--Civil................................    95

        Department of Energy.........................................    95
            Office of the Secretary..................................    95

        Department of the Interior...................................    95
            Bureau of Reclamation....................................    95

        ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MAY 15, 2024

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Patty Murray (chair) presiding.
        Present: Senators Murray, Durbin, Shaheen, Heinrich,
    Sinema, Kennedy, Murkowski, Hoeven, Hyde-Smith, and Britt.

                          DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

                             Department of the Army

                           Corps of Engineers--Civil

    STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL L. CONNOR, ASSISTANT
                SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)

                    opening statement of chair patty murray

        Chair Murray. This hearing of the Senate Appropriations
    Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development will please come
    to order.
        We are here today to discuss President Biden's fiscal year
    2025 budget request for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
    Bureau of Reclamation.
        I am pleased to welcome our witnesses today, who I will
    introduce shortly, to the subcommittee. And I am glad to be
    chairing a subcommittee that deals with so many issues that are
    incredibly important to folks back home in Washington State and
    all across the country.
        How we manage our resources has tremendous implications for
    our economic strength and our national security. Likewise, how
    we manage our water resources directly affects families, and
    farmers, our food supply, and even our fish. And how well we
    manage our Nation's ports and harbors has major implications
    for our economy as well as local ecosystems. So I look forward
    to working with Ranking Member Kennedy, and all of our
    colleagues to make sure these issues get the attention and
    funding they deserve.
        And today's hearing is an important part of that process.
    Now, I said from the start, I don't think we can make the
    investments our Nation truly needs under the constraints of the
    Fiscal Responsibility Act. I have listened as colleagues on the
    other side of the aisle have made the case for more defense
    funding.
        I want to be clear, as we discuss additional resources to
    meet our country's needs, I will be insisting on parity between
    new resources for defense and nondefense, because bottom line,
    our country's strength, its competitiveness, and its future all
    depend on so many of the essential investments we make on the
    nondefense side of the ledger. Today's hearing offers a stark
    reminder of how important so many of those nondefense
    investments are. That is because water resources managed by the
    Bureau and the Corps alike, irrigate crops, allow those crops
    and other goods to be transported to consumers here at home and
    around the world, they help sustain keystone species like
    salmon in Washington State, provide water to over 31 million
    Americans, and even, literally, keep the lights on with
    hydroelectric power.
        So when it comes to our Nation's competitiveness, this is
    something we cannot take for granted. For the sake of our
    economy as well as our environment, we need to protect and
    maintain our waterways for wildlife to thrive and for essential
    transportation to occur. We have to keep our water running, our
    ports bustling, our farms irrigated, and our fish thriving, and
    our electric grid reliable.
        These are investments in safety as well. We cannot
    shortchange safety. We need to make sure communities are safe
    and prepared for extreme weather events amid the worsening
    climate crisis, with levees, and sea walls, and nature-based
    infrastructure to prevent flooding.
        And let us not forget drought mitigation. We are seeing
    this issue get worse and worse with historic drought conditions
    in recent years. This is a challenge that ripples throughout
    our Nation, hurting farmers, threatening families and wildlife
    with wildfires, and undermining our economy.
        So when we talk about investments for the year ahead make
    no mistake water is just too important to our families, and our
    economy, and our Nation to take for granted.
        I am glad that despite tough funding caps, we were able to
    deliver critical resources for both the Bureau and the Corps in
    the fiscal year 2024 bill that Congress recently passed,
    including a historic funding level for the Harbor Maintenance
    Trust Fund to keep our Nation's ports and harbors in good
    condition.
        Of course, I have been working hard to make sure Washington
    State ports get their fair share of that HMTF (Harbor
    Maintenance Trust Fund). For too long that was not the case.
    And even after I authored and passed legislation to fix that in
    2020, I was frustrated to see the Army Corps Work Plan for
    fiscal year 2023 fall short. I raised this several times with
    Corps leadership, including at our hearing last year, and
    included language in our fiscal year 2024 bill on this matter.
    So I am pleased that we are finally seeing real progress.
        The Work Plan the Army Corps released Monday shows a much-
    needed course correction. It implements the law as Congress
    intended it, which makes a meaningful difference for ports like
    the Port of Seattle and the Port of Tacoma to the tune of $25--
    and $29 million from the HMTF this year alone.
        So I appreciate you taking my calls, Assistant Secretary,
    and working with me on this.
        Now, in addition to the Army Corps work plan, I should also
    mention how President Biden's budget request shows how he
    understands how important these issues are. I was especially
    pleased to see this budget include $500 million for the Howard
    Hanson Dam Fish Passage Project. Saving our salmon is a top
    priority for me, because salmon are a way of life in Washington
    State. This project will open up over 100 miles of prime
    habitat for salmon and has the potential to produce more salmon
    than any other project in our region.
        That is why I have worked so hard in our past bills to
    secure funding to move that forward, and I want to make sure we
    deliver this historic funding in this budget request so we can
    see that project through. And I look forward to hearing more
    from our witnesses about this work, and more, shortly.
        With that, I want to turn it over to my Ranking Member
    Kennedy. It is a delight to be working with you again on this.

                       statement of senator john kennedy

        Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Madam Commissioner, and General, and Mr. Secretary,
    welcome.
        The President has submitted a budget for our Corps of
    Engineers, $7.2 billion. That is a lot of money in anyone's
    book. That is the good news, I guess. The bad news is that I
    was looking last night. It is 17 percent less than the Corps'
    current budget. That makes no sense to me. The Corps actually
    saves us money. Your flood control projects mitigate damage
    that we would otherwise have to pay for, including, but not
    limited to, through FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency).
    The navigational dredging that you do facilitates commerce
    which grows our economy, workers pay taxes like everybody else.
    If their wages are higher and there are more workers, they pay
    more in taxes. So do the businesses.
        I don't want to belabor this point. I have got a lot of
    things to talk about today, but that is going to be my starting
    point, that this just makes no sense to me. We need a budget
    for the Corps of Engineers that looks like somebody designed it
    on purpose, and this budget doesn't do that.
        And with that, I look forward to hearing your responses.
        Chair Murray. Thank you, Ranking Member Kennedy.
        I will now briefly introduce our panel: We have Michael
    Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works;
    Lieutenant General Scott Spellmon, Chief of Engineers for the
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and Camille Touton, Commissioner
    of the Bureau of Reclamation.
        We will now proceed with witness testimony, from Assistant
    Secretary Connor. You have 5 minutes for your testimony.

                  summary statement of hon. michael l. connor

        Mr. Connor. Thank you. Chair Murray, Ranking Member
    Kennedy, and distinguished Members, thank you for the
    opportunity to discuss the President's 2025 budget request for
    Army for Civil Works.
        I have submitted a full statement for the record, which I
    will quickly summarize. First, my appreciation and thanks for
    the strong bipartisan support for the Army Civil Works Program
    as represented in the 2024 appropriations bill. The 2025 budget
    request includes over $7.2 billion for the Civil Works Program,
    with a focus on investments to facilitate waterborne
    transportation, reduce coastal and inland flood risks, and
    restore significant aquatic ecosystems.
        These investments reinforce President Biden's ongoing
    commitment to protect, restore, and improve the Nation's water
    resources to strengthen our economy, protect people and
    property, and improve the environment.
        Current and future water resources challenges are not like
    those of the past. Weather extremes are increasingly the norm,
    creating risk to communities, the economy, and natural systems.
    As a result, understanding vulnerabilities and increasing
    preparedness is paramount. This budget will spur innovation by
    investing in research and development and will help ensure we
    improve our capabilities to assess risk and aggressively
    confront these challenges. Our infrastructure investments,
    through this budget, will support community resilience to
    better address these extremes while tackling climate change and
    promoting equity for underserved communities and Tribal
    Nations.
        With a focus on modernization and innovation, the budget
    continues to prioritize the highest performing work within the
    three main missions of the Civil Works' Program: commercial
    navigation, thereby supporting the Nation's supply chains;
    flood and storm damage reduction, protecting communities and
    building resilience; and aquatic ecosystem restoration,
    recognizing the important habitat, water quality, flood
    protection, and water supply functions of the Nation's
    watersheds keep healthy.
        Now, with an enacted 2024 appropriations bill and robust
    funding, as I earlier mentioned, I want to address the serious
    needs that were ignored in our 2024 budget, and therefore
    critically important in fiscal year 2025. The 2025 budget
    includes $6.4 million for the Office of the Assistant Secretary
    of the Army for Civil Works. Since 2009, my office has not
    received an appropriation larger than $5 million, and some
    years less.
        However, our costs, salary, services, rent, travel,
    supplies, have all continued to rise over the past 15 years.
    Using the latest CPI (Consumer Price Index), the $5 million my
    office received in 2009 equates to over $7.2 million in today's
    dollars. Nonetheless, funding remains flat even as our
    responsibilities grow. Full funding is critical for effective
    oversight of the Army Civil Works Program and to help us
    support timely and complete responses to your requests.
        It is also critical to address the many new
    responsibilities added to the Civil Works' portfolio through
    numerous statutory provisions enacted in the past five Water
    Resources Development Acts. I can assure you this is not the
    Empire Building, merely paying for the positions already in
    place to conduct our business.
        With my remaining time, I would like to highlight the Corps
    of Engineers' responsibilities in disaster and emergency
    response, a mission area with high visibility given recent
    events. Two months ago, I met with the Incident Command Team in
    Maui responding to 2023's devastating wildfires, and several
    weeks ago, I visited the Incident Command Center in Baltimore
    Harbor, working on the recovery and response efforts to the
    Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse disaster.
        In both situations, the Corps is just one of several
    agencies charged with critical responsibilities. In Maui, we
    have operated within the FEMA Disaster Response Framework,
    using FEMA's resources to carry out our assigned missions. Our
    responsibilities, whether emergency power, debris removal, and/
    or critical--building-critical infrastructure, require us to be
    prepared, and maintain the skills, and have contracts in place
    that are necessary to carry out the mission.
        With this preparation, the Corps is removing debris and
    setting the stage for rebuilding on over 1,600 properties in
    Maui that were devastated by wildfire. It also constructed a
    temporary, but I can assure you, a very impressive elementary
    school in 95 days for turnover to the local school district.
        In Baltimore, we are not working within a FEMA framework
    but using our own resources to quickly deploy and continue
    clearing the Federal Navigation Channel serving the Port of
    Baltimore to restore full operations, even while supporting the
    now completed recovery efforts associated with the loss of life
    caused by the disaster.
        One of our smaller accounts, the National Emergency
    Preparedness Program, was key to developing the existing
    contractual arrangement with Navy Supervisory Salvage that
    enabled the Corps to immediately post-disaster begin planning
    the actions necessary to clear the navigation channel.
    Thankfully, we received full-year 2024 funding in early March,
    just weeks before the disaster, providing Baltimore Harbor O&M
    (Operations and Maintenance) funds which have provided the
    resources to date to carry out channel clearing operations.
        Once that mission is complete, those funds, along with any
    others used, will need to be restored to carry out other
    critical operations.
        The Corps of Engineers is at its best when called upon to
    work with others within the Nation's Emergency and Disaster
    Response Frameworks. The resources that you, as appropriators,
    provide us on a timely basis are key to our, and thus the
    Nation's success in responding in times of crisis as well as
    preparing for future challenges.
        Thank you for the time. I look forward to questions.
        [The statement follows:]
                  Prepared Statement of Mr. Michael L. Connor
        Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and distinguished members of
    the committee, thank you for the opportunity to be here today to
    discuss the President's Budget request for the Army Civil Works
    program.
        The Fiscal Year 2025 Budget request includes over $7.2 billion for
    the Army Civil Works program, with a focus on investments to facilitate
    waterborne transportation, reduce coastal and inland flood risks, and
    restore significant aquatic ecosystems. These investments reinforce
    President Biden's ongoing commitment to protect, restore, and improve
    the nation's water resources that will strengthen our economy, protect
    people and property, and restore key ecosystems. This Budget will also
    spur innovation by investing in research and development and ensuring
    we improve our capabilities to assess risk and aggressively confront
    the nation's water resource challenges in a manner that broadly
    supports community resilience, tackles climate change, and promotes
    equity for underserved and overburdened communities and Tribal Nations.
        The water resources challenges of today and tomorrow are not like
    yesterdays. Weather extremes are increasingly the norm, creating risk
    to communities, the economy, and natural systems.
        As a result, understanding vulnerabilities and increasing our
    preparedness is of paramount importance. For that reason, the Budget
    includes $79 million for research and development to support
    constructing and maintaining critical infrastructure. These investments
    will help to improve capabilities in assessing risk, address emerging
    water resources challenges including climate change, and achieve
    significant cost savings in the Civil Works program.
        With a focus on modernization and innovation, the Budget continues
    to prioritize the highest performing work within the three main
    missions of the Civil Works program:
      --commercial navigation,
      --flood and storm damage reduction, and
      --aquatic ecosystem restoration.
        The Budget also advances three key objectives: 1) decreasing
    climate risk for communities and increasing ecosystem resilience to
    climate change based on the best available science; 2) promoting
    environmental justice in underserved and overburdened communities and
    Tribal Nations in line with the Justice40 Initiative; and 3)
    strengthening the supply chain.
        Flood and storm damage reduction is at the center of the Civil
    Works program's actions to support the Administration's goal of
    tackling the climate crisis and building community resilience.
    Accordingly, the Budget contains over $1.5 billion for flood and storm
    damage reduction, including funding to provide technical and planning
    assistance to local communities to enable them to understand and better
    manage their flood risks. The Budget proposes to assist these local
    efforts, with an emphasis on non-structural approaches.
        For priority two, the Budget supports the Administration's
    Justice40 Initiative to help underserved and overburdened communities
    address their water resources challenges--including funding for the
    Tribal Partnership Program. The Army is committed to helping to achieve
    the broader goals of the Administration regarding equity and
    environmental justice and will continue to improve outreach and access
    to Civil Works information and resources, including technical and
    planning assistance programs. The Army is committed to maximizing the
    reach of Civil Works projects to benefit underserved and overburdened
    communities and ensuring that updates to Civil Works policies and
    guidance will not result in a disproportionate negative impact on
    underserved and overburdened communities.
        Through this Budget, the Administration also reaffirms its vision
    of facilitating safe, reliable and environmentally sustainable
    commercial navigation to improve the resilience of our nation's
    manufacturing supply chain. In doing so, the Budget will create good
    paying jobs that provide the free and fair chance to join a union and
    collectively bargain. In support of the Administration's commitment to
    our nation's coastal ports and inland waterways, the FY 2025 Budget
    includes over $3 billion for the study, design, construction, operation
    and maintenance (O&M) of inland and coastal navigation projects. Of
    this amount, roughly $1.7 billion is derived from the Harbor
    Maintenance Trust Fund. This total includes $1 billion to operate and
    maintain the top 50 U.S. coastal ports, which handle around 90 percent
    of the nation's waterborne cargo that is shipped to or from the United
    States in foreign commerce. The FY25 Budget includes $60 million,
    financed through the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, for donor and
    energy transfer ports. Also, of significant note, the Budget includes
    $264 million to continue construction of the Sault Ste. Marie
    replacement lock to provide efficiency and redundancy for a critical
    trade route for iron ore in the Great Lakes region.
        The Budget includes $1.239 billion for the aquatic ecosystem
    restoration mission, including $444 million for the South Florida
    Ecosystem Restoration program, which will enable significant progress
    in restoring America's Everglades and building climate resilience in
    South Florida. The Budget also includes, over $75 million for the
    Columbia River Fish Mitigation program, and $33 million for
    construction of a fish passage at Albeni Falls Dam, all to support
    restoration of salmon and other native fish species in the Northwest.
    In addition, the Budget includes $500 million for a fish passage at the
    Howard Hanson Dam.
        The Army seeks to increase support for aquatic ecosystem
    restoration projects, including those under Section 206 of the
    Continuing Authorities Program (CAP 206). The Budget includes $13
    million within the CAP 206 program for small aquatic ecosystem
    restoration projects to help protect wetlands that may be negatively
    impacted by the Supreme Court's Sackett v. Environmental Protection
    Agency decision.
        Other significant initiatives include continuing the investment in
    the phased replacement of the Cape Cod Canal Bridges. The FY 2024
    enacted appropriations included the $350 million proposed in the FY
    2024 Budget for the phased replacement of the Cape Cod Canal bridges,
    toward a commitment of $600 million. The FY 2025 Budget continues this
    commitment of the phased replacement of the Sagamore and Bourne bridges
    by including $5 million for design work associated with the
    rehabilitation of the Bourne Bridge.
        In total, the FY 2025 Construction program is funded at more than
    $2 billion, continuing the President's focus on enhancing the country's
    infrastructure. The majority of that amount is provided in the
    Construction account, but also $29 million from the Harbor Maintenance
    Trust Fund, and more than $49 million from the Mississippi River and
    Tributaries account. The Construction program uses objective,
    performance-based criteria to give priority to the projects with the
    highest economic, environmental, and safety returns.
        Of course, in addition to construction projects, the Budget focuses
    on maintaining the key features of the vast water resources
    infrastructure that the Corps owns and manages. Specifically, the FY
    2025 Budget funds the Operation and Maintenance program at over $4.3
    billion, consisting of nearly $2.5 billion from the Operation and
    Maintenance account, nearly $1.7 billion from the Harbor Maintenance
    Trust Fund, and nearly $183 million from the Mississippi River and
    Tributaries account. For Operation and Maintenance, the Budget
    emphasizes maintaining and improving the performance of existing
    projects. The allocation of funding among projects for maintenance
    reflects a risk-informed approach that considers both project and
    project component conditions and the potential consequences of a
    failure. The Budget also gives priority to the maintenance of coastal
    ports and inland waterways with the highest commercial traffic.
        As I wrap up, I'll note the FY 2025 Budget provides $124 million
    for the Investigations program, consisting of nearly $111 million from
    the Investigations account and over $13 million from the Mississippi
    River and Tributaries account. This level of sustained investment is
    critical given the increasing demand by communities across the nation
    for resilience building. Within this $124 million total, the Budget
    includes $35.5 million for technical and planning assistance programs.
    These programs help local communities, including underserved and
    overburdened communities, identify and address their flood risks,
    including risks associated with climate change. The Budget also
    includes funding to continue studies intended to investigate climate
    resilience along the Great Lakes coast as well as in Central and
    Southern Florida.
        Additionally, and extremely important, the FY 2025 Regulatory
    Program is funded at $221 million to protect the nation's waters and
    wetlands and provide efficiency in permit processing. The Recreation
    program is funded at $282 million to ensure the Corps-- which operates
    and maintains a large percentage of Federal recreation areas--can
    continue to effectively serve the public's desire to experience the
    great outdoors.
        Lastly, I would like to note that $6.4 million is included for the
    Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. Since
    2009, my office has never received an appropriation larger than $5
    million, and some years less. However, our costs--salaries and
    retirement, services and rent, and travel and supplies--have all
    continued to rise over the past 15 years. Using the latest U.S.
    government Consumer Price Index data (at a 44.6% cumulative rate of
    inflation), the $5 million my office received in 2009 equates to over
    $7.2 million in today's dollars. However, this funding has remained
    flat. Full funding is critical to provide effective oversight of the
    Army Civil Works program.
        To summarize, the Budget makes critical investments in water
    resources that will benefit the American people and promote greater
    prosperity and economic growth for decades to come. From solving water
    resources challenges facing communities, to nurturing aquatic
    ecosystems, the Corps is delivering on its mission to serve the public.
        I am very honored to implement the President's priorities for the
    Army Civil Works program and excited to be a part of a great team--
    serving our Nation.
        Thank you for inviting me here today. I look forward to your
    questions.

        Chair Murray. Thank you very much.
        Lieutenant General Spellmon.
    STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL SCOTT A. SPELLMON,
                CHIEF ENGINEERS FOR THE U.S. ARMY CORPS OF
                ENGINEERS
        General Spellmon. Good morning, Chair Murray, Ranking
    Member Kennedy, and distinguished Members of the Subcommittee.
    I am honored to testify before you today and thank you for the
    opportunity to discuss the President's fiscal year 2025 budget
    requests for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works
    Program.
        But before I begin my prepared remarks, I sincerely want to
    thank members of the committee for your ongoing support, as Mr.
    Connor mentioned, related to our Francis Scott Key Bridge
    response in Baltimore. Foremost, our thoughts remain with those
    who were impacted by the collapse of the bridge, and our
    condolences go out to the families who lost loved ones.
        We, along with our many partners, continue to work around
    the clock to remove wreckage in an expeditious and safe manner
    to ultimately restore navigation to the Port of Baltimore. We
    remain on track to meet our commitment of restoring the full
    navigation channel by the end of this month.
        But today, I look forward to discussing the status of
    important Corps projects and programs, as well as answering any
    questions the committee may have regarding our fiscal year 2025
    budget request. I will start by saying that we greatly
    appreciate Congress' continued support of the Corps Civil Works
    Program. Recent appropriations have enabled significant, and I
    would say historic, investments in water resource projects
    around our country. And they have allowed us to further develop
    innovative approaches to address our most pressing challenges
    through focused research and development.
        The fiscal year 2025 budget reflects a targeted approach to
    continue investment in our water resource infrastructure while
    also incorporating climate resilience into our commercial
    navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and aquatic
    ecosystem restoration missions.
        The budget also supports Assistant Secretary Connor's
    priorities for the Corps by strengthening our supply chains,
    increasing ecosystem resilience, promoting environmental
    justice in underserved communities and Tribal Nations,
    investing in R&D (Research and Development), and finally,
    sustaining and improving our relationships with our many
    partners. Our budget reflects an emphasis on work that provides
    the highest economic, environmental, and public safety returns
    to the Nation, and we continue to strive for bold, innovative
    actions to improve our performance and help us achieve our
    vision of engineering solutions for our Nation's toughest
    challenges.
        Our teams remain hard at work seeking out new and better
    ways to mitigate or eliminate project risks so we can further
    strengthen the safety and security of communities across our
    country and its territories.
        And this morning, I want to once more highlight the
    importance of research and development in this effort, whether
    it is flood risk management, drought, water supply, navigation,
    or ecosystem restoration, R&D is a critical effort in all that
    we do.
        Many members of this committee are from coastal States
    where most of our Nation's largest cities are located, and I
    will just use that as my brief example. Over the years, without
    investment in basic coastal engineering research, this type of
    land use today, having large cities on our coastlines, would
    not be possible, nor would the existence of our Nation's
    precious beaches and our coastal protections.
        The lessons that we learn in our Corps laboratories and
    university laboratories, where we partner, are critical to
    getting the job done right out in the field. And this
    investment in basic research is even more important today as we
    look at the impacts of sea level rise and changing
    precipitation patterns that are very real, and our communities
    are already experiencing.
        So I thank both Secretary Connor for his leadership, the
    Administration and Congress for recognizing this challenge, and
    significantly increasing our R&D investment as we move ahead.
    We have to build upon this momentum.
        I will conclude by saying the Corps does not accomplish
    anything on its own. Delivering successful Civil Works projects
    is a shared responsibility. It is a team sport. We draw from
    our 249 years of engineering expertise and build upon our
    relationships with our non-Federal partners, project
    stakeholders, and certainly Congress, to enable us to succeed.
        I look forward to continuing to work with this committee,
    with Congress, and the administration to address the Nation's
    critical water resource infrastructure needs.
        And thank you again, Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy,
    and Members of the Committee. I look forward to answering your
    questions.
        [The statement follows:]
           Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon
        Chairman Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and members of the
    subcommittee, I am honored to testify before your committee today,
    along with the Honorable Michael Connor, Assistant Secretary of the
    Army for Civil Works, regarding the President's Fiscal Year 2025 (FY
    2025) Budget (Budget) for the Army Civil Works Program.
        Through the Civil Works program, the United States Army Corps of
    Engineers (Corps) works with other Federal agencies, and with state,
    Tribal, and local agencies, as well as others, to develop, manage,
    restore, and protect water resources, primarily through the study,
    construction, and operation and maintenance of water-related
    infrastructure projects. The Corps focuses on work that provides the
    highest economic, environmental, and public safety returns to the
    Nation. The Corps also regulates development in waters of the United
    States and works with other Federal agencies to help communities
    respond to, and recover from, floods and other natural disasters. The
    FY 2025 Budget invests in the Nation's water resources infrastructure,
    including at U.S. coastal ports, while incorporating climate resilience
    efforts into the Corps' commercial navigation, flood and storm damage
    reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration work.
        The Corps uses its engineering expertise and its relationships with
    project sponsors and stakeholders to address some of the most pressing
    water resources challenges facing the Nation. I am committed to the
    Secretary's priorities for the Army Civil Works program, including
    decreasing climate risk for communities and increasing aquatic
    ecosystem resilience to climate change based on the best available
    science; promoting environmental justice in underserved and
    overburdened communities and Tribal Nations in line with the Justice40
    Initiative; and strengthening the supply chain.
                       summary of fiscal year 2025 budget
        The Civil Works program is performance-based and focuses on high-
    performing projects and programs within its three main water resources
    missions: commercial navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and
    aquatic ecosystem restoration. It uses a targeted approach to invest in
    our water resources and promote climate resiliency, which will benefit
    the Nation's economy, environment, and public safety--now and in the
    future.
        The Budget includes $7.22 billion in discretionary funding for
    Civil Works activities throughout the Nation.
                                 investigations
        The Budget includes $124 million for the Corps' Investigations
    program. The Corps uses these funds to evaluate water resources
    problems and opportunities, design projects within the three main Civil
    Works mission areas, and support related work. The Budget funds 63
    individual efforts including feasibility studies, dam safety
    modification studies, preconstruction engineering and design (or PED),
    and dredged material management plans. The Budget funds 18 studies to
    completion. It also completes PED on four projects the Valley Creek
    Flood Risk Management study in Alabama; the Kinzua Dam and Alleghany
    Reservoir Floor Risk Management study in Pennsylvania; the Arkansas
    River Corridor Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration study in Oklahoma; and the
    Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity hurricane protection study in
    Louisiana.
                                  construction
        The goal of the Army Civil Works program is to produce as much
    value as possible for the Nation from the available funds. We continue
    to take bold actions to improve our performance, and engineer solutions
    for the nation's toughest water resources engineering challenges.
    Projects are primarily funded based on their economic, environmental
    and safety returns. The selection process includes giving priority to
    investments, on a risk-informed basis, in dam safety assurance, seepage
    control, and static instability correction work at dams that the Corps
    owns and operates, and work to address significant risk to human
    safety, as well as constructing dredged material disposal facilities
    for high and moderate use segments of commercial deep-draft, shallow-
    draft, and inland waterways projects. We also give priority to work
    that will help disadvantaged communities address their flood risks,
    including climate change.
        The Budget includes $2.037 billion for the Construction program.
    This funding will ensure continued momentum on water resources
    infrastructure improvements across the Nation. The Budget funds
    construction on 20 projects comprised of three Commercial Navigation
    projects, nine Flood and Storm Damage Reduction projects, and eight
    Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration projects.
        The three Commercial Navigation projects are: $264 million for the
    Soo Lock Replacement Project in Sault Ste Marie, Michigan; $25 million
    for the Port of Nome Modification Project in Alaska, and $18 million
    for the Dredged Material Disposal Facility for the Calcasieu River and
    Pass Project in Louisiana.
        For Flood and Storm Damage Reduction, the top-four funded
    Construction projects are: $280 million for the Rough River Lake Dam
    Safety Project in Kentucky; $49 million for the Lower Mississippi River
    Main Stem Project, which reduces flood risks in seven states; $43.5
    million for the West Sacramento Project in California; and $38.5
    million for the Pajaro River at Watsonville in California.
        For Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, the top three funded
    Construction projects are: $500 million for construction of a fish
    passage facility at Howard A. Hanson Dam in Washington state; $444
    million for the South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Program to restore
    the Everglades; and $75.2 million for the Columbia River Fish
    Mitigation program. The Budget also includes $13 million in the
    Continuing Authorities Program (CAP 206) for small-scale aquatic
    ecosystem projects to help protect wetlands that may be negatively
    impacted by the Supreme Court's Sackett v. Environmental Protection
    Agency decision.
        The two Construction projects budgeted for completion in 2025 are
    flood risk management projects: the Iao Stream Flood Control Project in
    Maui, Hawaii, and the Pipestem Lake Project in North Dakota.
                        operation and maintenance (o&m)
        The O&M program supports completed works owned or operated by the
    Corps, including operation and maintenance of locks and dams along the
    inland waterways; maintenance dredging of inland and coastal Federal
    channels; operation and maintenance of multi- purpose dams and
    reservoirs for flood risk reduction and related purposes such as
    hydropower; monitoring of completed navigation and flood damage
    reduction projects; and management of Corps facilities and associated
    lands, including serving as a responsible steward of the natural
    resources on Corps lands.
        The Budget provides a total of $4.344 billion for the Operation and
    Maintenance program. Of that amount, the Budget provides $935 million
    for specific projects to maintain and improve navigation on our inland
    waterways and gives priority to those waterways with the most
    commercial traffic. The Budget includes over $1 billion to operate and
    maintain the top 50 U.S. coastal ports across the nation, which handle
    around 90 percent of the waterborne cargo that is shipped to or from
    the United States in foreign commerce. The Budget also includes $60
    million, financed through the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, for donor
    and energy transfer ports.
        The Budget provides $33 million for operation and maintenance
    investments to improve climate resilience and/or sustainability at
    existing Corps-owned projects, $50 million to mitigate for adverse
    impacts from existing Corps-owned projects, and $28 million to install
    the necessary refueling infrastructure to support zero-emission
    vehicles at existing Corps-owned projects. The Budget also includes the
    completion of 11 project master plans and 12 water control manuals.
                            research and development
        As the Corps is working to address current challenges across the
    Civil Works missions, the Budget advances investments to tackle
    problems of the future and advance technological development. This
    Budget builds on the prior year's historic President's Budget request
    for R&D with an FY25 request of $79 million investment in research and
    development activities, and an additional $11 million in data
    collection and technology transition R&D support activities. This
    investment will allow the Corps' laboratories, along with partners in
    academia and industry, to continue addressing the critical knowledge
    gaps and technology needs such as: $3 million to explore durability of
    novel composite materials in future civil works infrastructure; $2.4M
    for Engineering With Nature activities to quantify engineering
    properties of Nature-Based Solutions; and $10 M to advance Forecast-
    Informed Reservoir Operations, furthering our understanding of
    atmospheric river impacts on flood risk management and water supply and
    evaluate potential application to USACE reservoirs in other
    geographical locations.
                               regulatory program
        The Regulatory Program is committed to protecting the Nation's
    aquatic resources and navigation capacity, while allowing reasonable
    development through fair and balanced decisions. The Corps evaluates
    permit applications for construction activities that occur in or affect
    the Nation's waters, including wetlands. The Corps continues to
    streamline the permit processes to eliminate duplicative reviews and
    expedite permit decisions for infrastructure projects while continuing
    to protect the environment. The Budget provides $221 million for this
    program, which is the necessary level of funding to enable the Corps to
    protect and preserve these water resources.
                formerly utilized sites remedial action program
        The FY25 Budget provides $200 million for the Formerly Utilized
    Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). This funding would continue
    ongoing investigation and cleanup in eight states at 20 sites
    contaminated as a result of the nation's early atomic weapons
    development program. FUSRAP focuses on protecting human health, public
    safety and the environment at these sites, contaminated with low-level
    radioactive materials, throughout the investigation and cleanup phases.
                              emergency management
        The Nation continues to face extreme weather events including
    hurricanes, fires, drought, and flooding. Some of these have
    significantly impacted communities and the economy. Over the past year,
    as part of the Federal response team working with Federal Emergency
    Management Agency, the Corps provided disaster assistance in a number
    of states and U.S. Territories. The Budget provides $45 million for
    preparedness and training of Corps staff to enable them to assist
    communities during a flood, hurricane, or other natural disasters. This
    is $5 million more than last year's Budget level. The Corps will use
    these funds to hire additional emergency management professional staff,
    provide more training for its planning and response teams and subject
    matter experts, properly maintain and upgrade its ENGLINK automated
    information system, and ensure that the Public Law 84-99 program has
    sufficient advanced contracting capabilities.
                      water infrastructure finance program
        The Corps Water Infrastructure Financing Program (CWIFP) enables
    investment in infrastructure projects that enhance community resilience
    to flooding. Through CWIFP, the Corps will accelerate non-Federal
    investments in water resources infrastructure by providing long-term
    loans to creditworthy borrowers. The Budget provides $7 million,
    including $5 million for administrative expenses and $2 million for
    credit subsidy costs related to non-Federal dam safety projects.
                                   conclusion
        The FY 2025 President's Budget for the Army Civil Works Program
    represents a continuing, fiscally prudent investment in the Nation's
    water resources infrastructure and restoration of aquatic ecosystems.
    The Army is committed to a performance-based Civil Works program, based
    on innovative, resilient, and sustainable risk-informed solutions.
        The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a world-class organization
    offering one of the most diverse mission sets in the Federal
    government--delivering vital engineering solutions to address water
    resources challenges. We are committed to a performance-based Civil
    Works program, based on innovative, resilient, and sustainable risk-
    informed solutions.
        Thank you, Chairman Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and members of
    subcommittee. This concludes my statement. I look forward to answering
    any questions you and other members of the subcommittee may have.

        Chair Murray. Thank you very much.
        Finally, Commissioner Touton.

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                             Bureau of Reclamation

    STATEMENT OF HON. CAMILLE CALIMLIM TOUTON, COMMISSIONER
        Ms. Touton. Good morning. My name is Camille Calimlim
    Touton, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation.
        Thank you, Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and
    Members of the Subcommittee, for the opportunity to discuss the
    President's budget request for the Bureau of Reclamation. We
    are grateful for your bipartisan support and for our working
    relationship with the subcommittee.
        The Bureau of Reclamation is the largest deliverer and
    manager of water in the Nation and is the second-largest
    producer of hydropower. We have 189 projects across the
    American West and help to feed the Nation and the world through
    10 million acres of irrigated agriculture, provide water to
    millions of Americans, and meet our trust responsibility to
    sovereign nations while sustaining ecosystems across the
    western landscape.
        The need to secure, maintain, and modernize our Nation's
    infrastructure is an administration priority, and we have a
    once-in-a-generation opportunity to utilize our fiscal year
    2025 $1.6 billion budget request, with the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act.
        The cyclical nature of Western hydrology, as we have seen
    from the last 3 years, highlights the need for immediate
    actions as well as thoughtful planning and on-the-ground work
    to make both our infrastructure and operational decisions more
    resilient to withstand future water resource scarcity and
    variability.
        Our 2025 budget priorities reflect a commitment to drought
    planning and response activities to promote water security.
    This approach is illustrated by the signing of a Record of
    Decision last week to protect the near-term stability and
    sustainability of the Colorado River System, with historic
    conservation of 3 million acre-feet in collaboration with our
    partners, made possible by the President's Investing in America
    agenda, we staved off the immediate threat and stabilized the
    system to protect water deliveries in the ecosystem, and power
    production.
        Our focus is now on the future. For the entire West, we are
    guided by the best available science and engineering to make
    informed decisions together. The stability of our
    infrastructure and our commitment to transparency remains our
    highest priorities. Reclamation's dams and reservoirs, water
    conveyance systems, and hydropower facilities serve as the
    water and power infrastructure backbone of the American West.
        As with all infrastructure, these features are aging and in
    need of critical maintenance to prepare for the future. Our
    fiscal year 2025 budget includes $74.8 million for
    extraordinary maintenance, with an announcement for our fiscal
    year 2025 funding--2024 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding,
    imminently. This includes $2.5 million for the Milk River
    Project in Montana, and over $2 million for the installation of
    a surge tank at the Mill Creek Plant in Oregon as part of the
    Dallas project.
        For New Mexico, our request also includes over $6 million
    for irrigation infrastructure and rehabilitation for the Rio
    Grande Pueblos. Reclamation's WaterSMART Program also provided
    nearly $10 million in bill funding to the North Unit Irrigation
    District for fish screen replacement at Bend Headworks on the
    main stem of the Deschutes River.
        We must also address our infrastructure needs while
    considering the needs of rural and underserved communities,
    Reclamation is establishing and rebuilding water infrastructure
    for underserved populations by ensuring that clean drinking
    water is provided to communities. Our request includes $58.5
    million for rural water projects, including almost $25 million
    for North Dakota's Garrison Diversion Unit.
        It leverages $1 billion in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
    funding to accelerate the completion of these long-needed
    projects, and it has enabled us to complete the Fort Peck-Dry
    Prairie Project in Montana later this year.
        The Department remains committed to upholding our trust
    responsibilities to Tribal Nations. Over the past 3 years,
    Interior has allocated $2.43 billion available through the bill
    to address Indian Water Rights settlements. And in addition to
    these investments, the request for Reclamation in fiscal year
    2025 includes $181 million to support the White Mountain Apache
    Tribe's Water Settlement Agreement.
        The administration also proposes legislation to expand the
    Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion Fund, a proposal that
    would provide $2.8 billion in mandatory funding over 10 years
    to help ensure communitycommitments are honored, as well as
    funding for operation and maintenance costs.
        We are committed to working with you, and the subcommittee,
    and our partners across the American West in carrying out our
    mission. And our fiscal year 2025 budget supports these
    actions.
        Again, I thank the subcommittee. I am happy to answer your
    questions.
        [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Camille Calimlim Touton
        Thank you, Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and members of the
    Subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss with you the President's
    Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Budget for the Bureau of Reclamation. I am
    Camille Calimlim Touton, Commissioner for the Bureau of Reclamation.
        Reclamation manages water for agriculture, municipal and industrial
    use, the environment, power production, and provides flood control and
    recreation for millions of people. We are also the second largest
    producer of hydropower in the United States and operate 53
    hydroelectric powerplants that annually produced, on average, 40
    billion kilowatt-hours for the last 10 years. Reclamation's project and
    programs serve as the water and power infrastructure backbone of the
    American West, constituting an important driver of economic growth in
    hundreds of basins throughout the Western States. Reclamation's
    activities support economic activity valued at $34.1 billion, and
    support approximately 450,700 jobs.\1\ Reclamation delivers 10 trillion
    gallons of water to millions of people each year and provides water for
    irrigation of 10 million farmland acres, which yields approximately 25
    percent of the Nation's fruit and nut crops, and 60 percent of the
    vegetable harvest.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ U.S. Department of the Interior Economic Contributions Report--
    Fiscal Year 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Reclamation's fundamental work to modernize and maintain
    infrastructure, conserve natural resources, use science and research to
    inform decisionmaking, serve rural, Tribal, and underserved
    populations, and stay as nimble as possible in response to the
    requirements of drought and aridification--position us to meet the
    Biden-Harris Administration's core tenets. The Bureau of Reclamation's
    2025 budget provides the foundation to meet our mission and remains
    committed to working with a wide range of partners, including water and
    power customers, Tribes, State and local officials, and non-
    governmental organizations.
        Reclamation is requesting a net total of $1,543,321,000 in Federal
    discretionary appropriations, which is anticipated to be augmented by
    almost $2.5 billion in other Federal and non-Federal funds for FY 2025.
    Of the total, $1,443,527,000 is for the Water and Related Resources
    account, which is Reclamation's largest account, $66,794,000 is for the
    Policy and Administration account, and $33,000,000 is for the
    California Bay Delta account. A total of $55,656,000 is budgeted for
    the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
        Reclamation is committed to efficient and effective implementation
    of the Infrastructure Investments and Jobs Act, also known as the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), which was enacted as Public Law
    117-58 on November 15, 2021. Title IX of the BIL, Western Water
    Infrastructure, authorized $8.3 billion to be appropriated to Water and
    Related Resources in $1.66 billion annual installments from FY 2022--FY
    2026, making a once-in-a-generation investment in the Nation's
    infrastructure and economic competitiveness. This landmark investment
    will rebuild America's critical infrastructure, tackle the climate
    crisis, advance environmental justice, and drive the creation of good-
    paying union jobs. By addressing long overdue improvements and
    strengthening our resilience to the changing climate, this investment
    in our communities across the country will grow the economy sustainably
    and equitably for decades to come.
        Reclamation has been putting these resources to work in communities
    with focus on areas where the greatest impact can be realized. Since
    President Biden signed the BIL, Reclamation has selected 420 distinct
    projects for funding, totaling more than $2.9 billion. The Spend Plan
    that sets out FY 2025 allocations of this funding was submitted to
    Congress at the same time as this FY 2025 request as required and is
    available at https://www.usbr.gov/bil/2022-spendplan.html. The Spend
    Plan allocates funding at the program level, and subsequent addenda to
    the Plan allocate programmatic funds to the project level for certain
    programs.
        Reclamation is also committed to efficient and effective
    implementation of The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Public Law 117-
    169, which was enacted on Aug. 16, 2022. Title V, Subtitle B, Part 3 of
    the law, entitled ``Drought Response and Preparedness,'' makes
    available $4.587 billion to mitigate drought in Reclamation States; to
    plan, design and construct domestic water supply projects for
    disadvantaged communities or households that do not have reliable
    access to domestic water supplies; to design and implement projects to
    cover water conveyance facilities with solar panels; and to provide
    emergency drought relief for Tribes. The programs and projects funded
    under the IRA will help increase water conservation, improve water
    efficiency across western basins experiencing long-term drought, and
    prevent the Colorado River System's reservoirs from falling to
    critically low elevations. Reclamation is actively engaged implementing
    the law and has already directed funds to Colorado River water delivery
    contract or entitlement holders for activities that mitigate drought in
    the short term. A total of 23 Lower Basin agreements have been executed
    in Arizona and California, serving to conserve up to 1,567,668 acre-
    feet of water through 2026. An additional 104,427 acre-feet of system
    conservation in the Upper Basin have been executed using IRA funding.
    Information on plans, developments and funding will be available at
    https://www.usbr.gov/inflation-reduction-act.
        Modernizing and Maintaining Infrastructure: Reclamation's water and
    power projects throughout the western United States provide water
    supplies for agricultural, municipal, and industrial purposes.
    Reclamation's projects also provide energy produced by hydropower
    facilities and maintain ecosystems that support fish and wildlife,
    hunting, fishing, and other recreation, as well as rural economies.
        Activities to Support Underserved Communities, Tribal Programs &
    Tribal Water Rights Settlements: Reclamation tackles the challenges of
    underserved communities through investments in Tribal water rights
    settlements, continuation of the Native American Affairs technical
    assistance program, rural water projects, and investments in specific
    projects for underserved communities through programs such as
    WaterSMART. The BIL and IRA appropriations invest substantial portions
    of its funding to underserved populations, rural, and Tribal
    communities. Reclamation is committed to investing public dollars
    equitably, including through the Justice40 Initiative, a government-
    wide effort toward a goal that 40 percent of the overall benefits from
    Federal investments in climate and clean energy flow to disadvantaged
    communities.
        Section 70101 of the BIL established the Indian Water Rights
    Settlement Completion Fund (Completion Fund), making $2.5 billion
    available to the Secretary of the Interior to satisfy Tribal settlement
    obligations as authorized by Congress prior to enactment of the BIL. In
    FY 2022 through FY 2024, the Secretary of Interior allocated $2.434
    billion of those funds, $815.4 million of which supported Reclamation's
    Tribal settlement implementation actions. The Department expects to
    allocate the remaining $65.9 million in funding from the Completion
    Fund in FY 2025; more detail can be found in the Permanents chapter of
    the FY 2025 Reclamation budget request. In addition to the Completion
    Fund, FY 2025 represents the sixth year of Reclamation Water
    Settlements Fund (RWSF) allocations, which provides $120 million in
    annual mandatory authority for Reclamation Indian water rights
    settlements. The RWSF is authorized as an interest-bearing account; and
    making use of the accrued interest, Reclamation anticipates $142
    million being available in FY 2025. Funding made available by previous
    mandatory authorities, such as that authorized in the Claims Resolution
    Act, remain available for settlement implementation, while the ongoing
    operations and maintenance requirements of the Arizona Water Settlement
    Act are expected to continue to be supported within the Lower Colorado
    River Basin Development Fund.
        The 2025 President's Budget request continues previous proposals to
    provide mandatory funding for Indian Water Rights Settlements. The 2024
    President's Budget proposed legislation to provide mandatory funding
    for Indian Water Rights Settlements to cover the costs of existing and
    future water rights settlements and to address the ongoing Operation,
    Maintenance, and Repair requirements associated with four enacted
    Indian Water Rights Settlements managed by Reclamation. The proposal
    would provide $2.8 billion: $250.0 million annually over 10 years for
    existing and future water rights settlements and $34.0 million a year
    over 10 years for requirements associated with the Ak Chin Indian Water
    Rights Settlement Project, the Animas-La Plata Project (Colorado Ute
    Settlement), the Columbia and Snake River Salmon Recovery Project (Nez
    Perce Settlement), and the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project. Funds
    would be deposited into the Indian Water Rights Settlement Completion
    Fund established by the BIL and be available to Reclamation for
    implementation.
        In addition to supporting the mandatory funding proposals, the FY
    2025 discretionary request includes $181 million for the White Mountain
    Apache Tribe (WMAT) Water Rights Quantification Act of 2010. Public Law
    117-342, enacted January 5, 2023, which amended the White Mountain
    legislation, increasing the authorization of the WMAT Cost Overrun
    Subaccount from $11 million to $541 million and extending
    enforceability from April 2023 to December 2027. Funding will support
    the design, construction, and eventual operations and maintenance of a
    rural water system to provide clean, potable water.
        The FY 2025 discretionary request also includes $29.5 million for
    the Native American Affairs program to improve capacity to work with
    and support Tribes in the resolution of their water rights claims and
    to develop sustainable water sharing agreements and management
    activities; $9 million of this amount will support Tribal drought
    assistance efforts in FY 2025, while $500,000 will support Departmental
    and Reclamation efforts for Tribal Co-Stewardship activities. This
    funding will also strengthen Department-wide capabilities to achieve an
    integrated and systematic approach to Indian water rights negotiations
    to consider the full range of economic, legal, and technical attributes
    of proposed settlements. Reclamation is committed to increasing
    opportunities for Tribes to develop, manage, and protect their water
    and related resources. The Native American Affairs Program is a
    collaborative, coordinated, integrated function in Reclamation, which
    performs activities that support the opportunities.
        Reclamation's Rural Water program, under which many activities
    support Tribal needs, addresses important needs in rural communities
    for clean, reliable, safe drinking water; the FY 2025 request includes
    $58.5 million to support investments made through BIL to ensure
    construction, operations, and maintenance of the existing authorized
    projects can proceed as efficiently as possible. Funding also supports
    Reclamation efforts for Tribal Nations by supporting many activities
    across the Bureau, including the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement
    Project, the Klamath Project, and the Lahontan Basin project, among
    others.
        Finally, the WaterSMART Program prioritizes funding under its
    competitive grant programs for disadvantaged and underserved
    communities. The WaterSMART Program aims to address water supply issues
    and improve water management through partnerships with communities,
    States, Tribes, municipalities, and agricultural stakeholders.
        Conservation and Climate Resilience: The climate crisis is
    challenging Reclamation's ability to both produce energy and sustain
    reliable water delivery. The Nation faces undeniable realities that
    water supplies for agriculture, fisheries, ecosystems, industry,
    cities, and energy are confronting stability challenges due to climate
    change. Reclamation's projects address the Administration's
    conservation and climate resilience priorities through funding requests
    for the WaterSMART program, funding to secure water supply to wildlife
    refuges, and proactive efforts through providing sound climate science,
    research and development, and clean energy. To address these
    challenges, Reclamation has implemented its Climate Change Adaptation
    Strategy, which affirms Reclamation will use leading science and
    engineering to adapt climate-based situations across the West.
        The WaterSMART Program serves as a contributor to Reclamation's/
    Interior's Water Conservation Priority Goal. Since 2010, projects
    funded under contributing programs, including WaterSMART Grants, Title
    XVI (Water Recycling and Reuse Program), California Bay-Delta Program,
    Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, and Desalination
    construction projects have achieved a total of 1,745,157 acre-feet
    water savings.
        Through WaterSMART, Reclamation works cooperatively with States,
    Tribes, and local entities as they plan for and implement actions to
    address current and future water shortages due to a number of factors
    including drought, degraded water quality, increased demands for water
    and energy from growing populations, environmental water requirements,
    and the potential for decreased water supply availability due to
    climate change. This includes cost-shared grants for planning, design,
    and construction of water management improvement projects; water
    reclamation and reuse projects; watershed resilience projects; the
    Basin Study Program; and drought planning and implementation actions to
    proactively address water shortages.
        Reclamation's FY 2025 budget for WaterSMART also includes $500,000
    for the Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program. Through this program,
    Reclamation provides funding for fish passage improvements and aquatic
    habitat enhancement, including removal of dams or other aging
    infrastructure if such projects are supported by a broad multi-
    stakeholder group, and if the project maintains water security for all
    involved. This program aligns with the Administration's priorities for
    climate change and climate resiliency. Reclamation was also
    appropriated $250 million for aquatic ecosystem restoration and
    protection projects in the BIL. The FY 2025 request includes $65.6
    million for the WaterSMART Program.
        Climate Science: Reclamation's FY 2025 budget for Research and
    Development (R&D) programs includes $22.6 million for the Science and
    Technology Program, and $7.0 million for Desalination and Water
    Purification Research--both of which focus on Reclamation's mission of
    water and power deliveries. Climate change adaptation is a focus of
    Reclamation's R&D programs, which invests in the production of climate
    change science, information and tools that benefit adaptation, and by
    yielding climate-resilient solutions to benefit management of water
    infrastructure, hydropower, environmental compliance, and water
    management.
        The Desalination and Water Purification Research program addresses
    drought and water scarcity impacts caused by climate change by
    investing in desalination and water treatment technology development
    and demonstrations for the purpose of more effectively converting
    unusable waters to useable water supplies. The Science and Technology
    program invests in innovation to address the full range of technical
    issues confronting Reclamation water and hydropower managers and
    includes the Snow Water Supply Forecasting Program that aims to improve
    water supply forecasts through enhanced snow monitoring and water
    management to address the impacts of drought and a changing climate.
        Dam Safety: At the time of publication, Reclamation manages 490
    dams throughout the 17 Western States. Reclamation's Dam Safety Program
    has identified 364 high and significant hazard dams at 242 facilities,
    which form the core of the program. Through constant monitoring and
    assessment, Reclamation strives to achieve the best use of its limited
    resources to ensure dam safety and maintain our ability to store and
    divert water and to generate hydropower.
        The Dam Safety Program helps ensure the safety and reliability of
    Reclamation dams to protect the downstream public. Approximately 50
    percent of Reclamation's dams were built between 1900 and 1950, and the
    majority of the dams were built before adoption of currently used,
    state-of-the-art design and construction practices. Reclamation
    continuously evaluates dams and monitors performance to ensure that
    risks do not exceed the Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety Risk
    Management and the Public Protection Guidelines. The Dam Safety Program
    represents a major funding need over the next 10 years, driven largely
    by necessary repairs at B.F. Sisk Dam in California. The B.F. Sisk Dam
    is a key component of the Central Valley Project, providing 2 million
    acre-feet of water storage south of the California Sacramento-San
    Joaquin River Delta. Reclamation is modifying the dam to reduce the
    risk of potential failure resulting from potential overtopping in
    response to a seismic event, using the most current science and
    technology to develop an adaptive and resilient infrastructure. In
    addition to B.F. Sisk, Reclamation has identified 12 projects with
    anticipated modification needs through 2030, as well as 5 additional
    projects that will be assessed for potential risk reduction efforts
    starting in 2024. The FY 2025 request includes $182.6 million to
    support corrective actions at dams, $118 million of which is
    anticipated to support modifications at B.F. Sisk.
        The proposed budget also requests $74.8 million for specific
    Extraordinary Maintenance (XM) activities across Reclamation in FY
    2025. This request is central to mission objectives of operating and
    maintaining projects to ensure delivery of water and power benefits.
        Reclamation's XM request relies on condition assessments,
    condition/performance metrics, technological research and deployment,
    and strategic collaboration to better inform and improve the management
    of its assets and deal with its infrastructure maintenance challenges.
    Reclamation was also appropriated $3.2 billion in the BIL to repair
    aging infrastructure.
        Renewable energy: Reclamation owns 78 hydroelectric power plants.
    Reclamation operates 53 of those plants to generate approximately 14
    percent of the hydroelectric power produced in the United States. Each
    year on average, Reclamation generates approximately 40 million
    megawatt hours of electricity and collects over $1.0 billion in gross
    power revenues for the Federal Government.
        Reclamation's FY 2025 budget request includes $4.5 million to
    increase Reclamation hydropower capabilities and value, contributing to
    Administration clean energy and climate change initiatives and
    enhancing water conservation and climate resilience within the power
    program. Reclamation's Power Resources Office oversees power operations
    and maintenance, electric reliability compliance, and strategic energy
    initiatives.
        Environmental Responsibilities: Reclamation remains committed to
    meeting our environmental responsibilities through a variety of project
    examples throughout the West, such as the Central Valley Project and
    the Middle Rio Grande Collaborative Program. The FY 2025 budget also
    funds Reclamation's Endangered Species Act recovery programs and other
    programs that contribute towards these efforts, such as the Columbia/
    Snake River Salmon Recovery Program, the San Juan River Recovery
    Implementation Program, the Upper Colorado Recovery Implementation
    Program, and the Multi-Species Conservation Program within the Lower
    Colorado River Operations Program, among others.
        The investments described in Reclamation's FY 2025 budget, in
    combination with BIL and IRA implementation efforts will ensure that
    Reclamation can continue to provide reliable water and power to the
    American West. Water management, improving and modernizing
    infrastructure, using sound science to support critical decisionmaking,
    finding opportunities to expand capacity, reducing conflict, and
    meeting environmental responsibilities are all addressed in this FY
    2025 budget request. Reclamation continues to look at ways to plan more
    efficiently for future challenges faced in water resources management
    and to improve the way it does business.
                  central utah project completion act (cupca)
        The Department's 2025 CUPCA budget of $17.0 million continues
    progress of prior appropriations, supporting construction of the Utah
    Lake Drainage Basin Water Delivery System along with associated fish
    and wildlife conservation measures. As authorized, the completion of
    the Utah Lake System pipelines will deliver 60,000 acre-feet of
    municipal and industrial water to Salt Lake and Utah Counties. The
    completed project will provide increased water security, helping
    communities adapt to and increase their resiliency under changing
    climate conditions.
        The request provides funding for the construction of the Spanish
    Fork--Santaquin Pipeline component of the Utah Lake System; the
    recovery of threatened and endangered species; the implementation of
    mitigation efforts for impacts to fish, wildlife, and recreation; and
    the implementation of water conservation projects. One of the goals of
    the project is the recovery of the June sucker fish, a critical element
    of listed species recovery efforts.
        The 2025 budget includes $5.2 million for the Central Utah Water
    Conservancy District to administer planning and project construction
    activities; $1.5 million for water conservation; $4.4 million for fish
    and wildlife conservation activities funded through the CUPCA program
    office; and $1.9 million for program administration. In addition, the
    budget includes $4.0 million for mitigation and conservation activities
    funded through the Utah Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation
    Commission.
        Thank you for the opportunity to summarize the President's FY 2025
    Budget Request for the Bureau of Reclamation.

        Chair Murray. Thank you very much to all of you. We will
    now begin a round of 5-minute questions. So I ask all of our
    colleagues to keep track of your clock and stay within those 5
    minutes.
        Assistant Secretary Connor and General Spellmon, I know you
    have both mentioned in your opening remarks, and have been to
    see the Key Bridge cleanup efforts, and I really want to thank
    you for the Corps' immediate and sustained response to the
    collapse of the Key Bridge.
        As we have previously discussed, it is important that the
    Corps has the funding needed to clean up the Key Bridge and to
    reopen the Port of Baltimore. I know that the Corps is working
    to finalize a cost estimate, and is using excess funds for
    immediate needs, but there seems to be difficulty in
    identifying the old funds that are available. So can you tell
    me how much funding is needed for the Key Bridge cleanup, how
    much you are able to reprogram, and your plan to cover the
    remaining need? Secretary Connor.
        Mr. Connor. Thank you, Senator Murray. And I will turn to
    General Spellmon real quick for some elaboration. First, this
    is, I don't have a firm fixed cost estimate at this point in
    time. This is unprecedented, complex, unique work that we are
    doing, so we are monitoring the spend rate right now.
        Currently, we have obligated around $36 to $37 million in
    the recovery efforts. By the end of this week, I think we are
    issuing another contract installment this week, so we will be
    at $48 million that we have obligated by the end of this week,
    and we are about 50 percent complete with the work that is
    being done. So that provides some parameters.
        We have also been using the Baltimore Harbor O&M Funding
    account, of which we had about $53 million coming into this
    year plus the 2024 Work Plan. So that is the source of the
    funds right now. We have almost exhausted that based on the
    numbers I have just given you, and we have identified funds
    that we can do an emergency reprogramming on. We have
    identified funds, unallocated Bipartisan Infrastructure O&M
    money that we had access to that we hadn't yet distributed, and
    we have identified, as a fallback, in fact, we have got some
    other reprogramming that we can do. And then finally, as we----
        Chair Murray. Do you know how much you are able to
    reprogram, do you have--
        Mr. Connor. We have done about $20 million right now, and I
    think we are looking at about another $20 million as a
    potential source for reprogramming. And then, as a fallback, if
    we need, to ensure that we have got the resources necessary, we
    identified in the fiscal year 2024 Work Plan, the Baltimore
    Harbor Donor and Energy Transfer Ports' money, so we want to,
    you know, make use of that for its intended purpose. It is a
    fallback in case we need it.
        So, we think with those resources and that contingency,
    that we will be well-positioned to carry out this mission. And
    just the last point I would make is we are taking from other
    accounts and needs. We will account for that. We will make sure
    you all understand that, so those funds can be replenished.
        General Spellmon.
        General Spellmon. Senator Murray, I would just say, that is
    correct. We are halfway done with the work in the channel. The
    big cost drivers up front were the mobilization, 11 large
    cranes that we brought to the Port of Baltimore, all the way
    from New York, New Jersey, from tools all the way from
    Galveston, Texas. The cost uncertainty that we have, moving
    forward, really is: How deep do we have to go to get the
    remaining wreckage out of the channel.
        In the one-half of the channel, the north side of the
    channel that is open today, in some cases, we had to go down 60
    feet to get all the pavement and steel out. So we have a little
    bit of uncertainty on the south side of the channel.
        The vessel is still in the way. Hopefully, that will be
    moved this week, and we will be able to bring down the
    uncertainty even more. I would just also add, we are looking
    for savings at every opportunity. One example is we have a lot
    of mixed material coming up, mud mixed with concrete, mixed
    with steel. For us to process that in the State of Maryland,
    that was an estimate to the tune of about $40 million. We are
    going to transport that to New Jersey, where we have an
    existing facility that can deal with it at less than half the
    price, for about $16 million. So we will keep you and every
    member of the committee informed, ma'am, and work to bring
    this--open this channel, at the lowest cost possible.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. Let me ask one other question
    before my time is out. The State Department and actually
    numerous government agencies are negotiating a modernized
    treaty for the Columbia River. I have been watching this
    process very closely. I know everyone is working really hard,
    but Commissioner Touton and Assistant Secretary Connor, we are
    all hopeful for an agreement that provides stability. But the
    fact is, we are not there yet.
        If there is no agreement by September, the Corps and
    Reclamation Bureau will have to change how they operate
    facilities in the Basin. Are you engaging with the tribes, and
    BPA (Bonneville Power Administration), and public utilities
    about potential changes to operations as we get closer to
    fiscal year 2025?
        Mr. Connor. Yes. Sorry. I am going to jump in,
    Commissioner. Yes, we are engaging with all stakeholders. And
    yes, you are correct, we are not there yet with the agreement,
    we are working around the clock to try and change those
    circumstances. But without changed circumstances, without an
    agreement, operations will need to change when the Treaty Flood
    Control Provisions expire in September of this year. So we did
    a preliminary round of outreach to tribes, stakeholders, and
    members of the Congressional delegations last fall. Based on
    that, we took back that input. We are finishing some technical
    work, modeling so we can do another round coming into June, of
    briefings, and then public outreach because we have got to plan
    for that inevitability now.
        Commissioner.
        Ms. Touton. The answer for us also, Madam Chair, is yes, we
    are engaged with the irrigators, with the power users, and with
    the sovereign nations, care, and support.
        Chair Murray. I appreciate it. It is really important that
    all the stakeholders in the region are included in these
    discussions about the potential changes that are coming. So, I
    appreciate that, and I want to stay informed.
        Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        General, as you know, the pumps in our new storm protection
    system in New Orleans are corroding, and I know the Corps is
    working on it. Thank you for that. Who did we buy the pumps
    from?
        General Spellmon. It was a joint venture, a contractor.
        Senator Kennedy. Who was it?
        General Spellmon. Oh, sir, I will get you the specific
    names of the joint venture.
        Senator Kennedy. Well, are they going to stand behind their
    product?
        General Spellmon. Sir, we reached a settlement agreement
    with the joint venture, and we will begin that work after
    hurricane season. The interim fixes on the remaining four pumps
    in the system will be complete by the 1st of June, so we will
    have every pump available for this hurricane season. Then we
    will go to work on the long-term repairs.
        Senator Kennedy. You said you reached a settlement with
    your joint venture partner. I assume that is the pump
    manufacturer.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. How much money are they putting up?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I can get you--I don't have those
    details here.
        Senator Kennedy. Would you? I mean, they need to stand
    behind their project. This project is brand new, and the pumps
    are corroding. And I really would like to not -- see more about
    the settlement that you worked out with them.
        General Spellmon. Okay. Yes, sir. We are going to deliver
    on a 35-year design life. That is our commitment to you.
        Senator Kennedy. Yes, sir. I want to ask you about another
    project, General; I know you are familiar with it. That is the
    Elevator--Grain Elevator project in Wallace, Louisiana, by
    Greenfield, Louisiana. It is a $225 million project. It is not
    a petrochemical plant. It is a grain elevator project. It will
    export grain. It is going to create about 100 new jobs, good
    jobs, about $75,000 a piece.
        The community wants it. The Planning and Zoning Commission
    in the community just approved the rezoning, but we have
    reached a point in this country where it takes longer to go to
    medical school--or it takes longer to get a permit for a
    project than it does to go to medical school.
        When are we going to make a decision? The project needs a
    permit from the Corps. I am not telling you what decision to
    make. This company has already spent $25 million, and they are
    going on, what, a couple of years. It is fish or cut bait time.
    Can you tell me when we are going to have a decision from the
    Corps?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So soon, this is a
    controversial permit. There are parties for and against this
    particular project.
        Senator Kennedy. I know.
        General Spellmon. So the current friction that we are
    working through, sir, is adherence to the National Historic
    Preservation Act, specifically Section 106, on six historic
    properties that are in the region. So we have got the
    information we needed from all of our consulting parties.
    Colonel Jones is going through that now. He will make the
    decision, likely very soon, on whether or not that needs to be
    elevated to the Keeper of the Registry of--the National
    Register for a decision. We expect to have that decision very
    soon.
        Senator Kennedy. Can I ask your question, General? This is
    the Corps' call, is it not? I mean, if the Historic
    Preservation folks, they are entitled to input, but they don't
    have veto power, do they?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I don't know, whether or not it gets
    elevated, I believe is Colonel Jones' call.
        Senator Kennedy. Yes. It is the Corps' call. And I know
    there are some people who don't want it. I understand that, and
    they are entitled to their opinion. But at some point, the
    Corps has got to make a decision, and you are not going to make
    everybody happy here. But time is money, and that is all I am
    asking is that you go ahead and make a decision.
        Give me a quick update. Do I have any time left?
        Thank you, Senator Hoeven. I love Hoeven.
        Can you give me a quick update on the Morganza to the Gulf
    of Mexico project?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. Yesterday, we completed the
    initial NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) work, we
    signed the finding of No Significant Impact, and we completed
    the plans and specs for what we call Reach A, so that is the 5-
    mile gap on the southwest side of this 98-mile system. We will
    get that contract out for solicitation next and intend to award
    a construction contract in July.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. Now, I have got 35 seconds, Senator
    Hoeven tells me. A quick update on the St. Tammany Parish,
    Louisiana, Feasibility Study.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. I will take that Chief's report
    briefing from the New Orleans District on the 28 of May. We
    will sign that, and we will get that to Congress for their
    consideration in WRDA (Water Resources Development Act) 2024.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. Thank you all very much.
        Chair Murray. You have (unmic'ed).
        Senator Kennedy. I know. But I am--Senator Hoeven can have
    my time.
        Chair Murray. Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Commissioner Touton, the El Vado Dam rehabilitation project
    in New Mexico is now 3 years behind schedule. Reclamation
    actually announced a stop-work notice in March, last year the
    loss of water storage in El Vado was the primary reason that
    the Rio Grande actually ran dry in the Albuquerque stretch for
    the first time in nearly 40 years. What is Reclamation doing to
    get the repairs at El Vado Dam moving?
        Ms. Touton. Good morning, Senator. As you know, El Vado Dam
    was constructed in the 1930s. It is one of the few structures
    that is a steel faceplate dam on an earthen infrastructure. So,
    as we are looking to upgrade that to this century's criteria,
    we have run into some challenges with that project.
        And so, what we are doing now is looking at what we can
    have as a safe reservoir restriction to be able to store as
    much water as possible. We are working very closely with the
    districts, but we are also working with our sister agency,
    specifically with how we can store water, pump our water in
    Abiquiu Reservoir.
        Senator Heinrich. And what is the status of being able to
    store that water in Abiquiu Reservoir?
        Ms. Touton. We will be able to know more, and I can follow
    up in the record for you on that.
        Senator Heinrich. What is the timeline for actually getting
    El Vado finished?
        Ms. Touton. Unfortunately, Senator, it is a little longer
    than we anticipated, given the challenges that we are seeing.
        Senator Heinrich. And what does that look like?
        Ms. Touton. I can provide a more detailed timeline for you
    for the record, but it probably is a year or so.
        Senator Heinrich. Are we talking months or years?
        Ms. Touton. Closer to a year.
        Senator Heinrich. A year?
        Ms. Touton. I will follow up for the record, Senator.
        Senator Heinrich. Okay. So on another issue that I am not
    particularly happy to raise today, you know that my commitment
    to deliver for the Eastern New Mexico Rural Water Project has
    never wavered, and we made major progress, thanks to the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. But Reclamation's budget line
    item for this is $60,000, which suggests to me that your
    commitment is wavering.
        I have to ask you: Will Reclamation honor its promise to
    provide the remaining funding for the Eastern New Mexico Rural
    Water Project so that it can actually be completed on time?
        Ms. Touton. We are committed to this project, Senator. In
    the last 3 years, we have provided $302 million to this
    project, including $231 million from the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law. I was just there last fall, around the
    Clovis Air Force Base area, and look forward to continuing to
    meet the commitment to deliver water to those communities.
        Senator Heinrich. The progress has been great in recent
    years. I am just trying to make sense of a budget line item
    that seems to be missing a zero. We look to leverage additional
    funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, to be able to
    make our commitments to that Rural Water Project, and others.
        Senator Heinrich. I look forward to that.
        Ms. Touton. Thank you.
        Senator Heinrich. Between Reclamation and the Corps, 20 of
    the 24 dams that are operated in New Mexico right now are
    classified as high-hazard potential.
        Maybe I will start with Secretary Connor. What are your
    timelines for assessing and completing the repairs that are
    necessary on these structures to just maintain public safety?
    Your mic, Mr. Secretary.
        Mr. Connor. Apologies, Senator. If I could, on the
    operational side, refer it to General Spellmon on the status of
    this network?
        Senator Heinrich. General.
        General Spellmon. Senator Heinrich, thank you for the
    question. I am responsible for 745 dams in the country. Nine of
    them are in New Mexico. Our data is different. I don't have any
    in New Mexico that are high or very high risk. I have got one
    that meets all dam safety guidelines, two at low risk, and two
    at moderate.
        Senator Heinrich. Okay. We will share our data with you
    just to be sure.
        And with regard to Reclamation?
        Ms. Touton. We are tracking the same, we have nine
    Reclamation dams. We talked about El Vado already, but it would
    be good to compare notes on the facilities, and we will provide
    timelines appropriately, Senator.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. I look forward to that. Since I
    have 27 seconds left, Secretary Connor, talk to me about the
    Army Corps' plans for removing Jetty Jacks in the Rio Grande,
    especially in the Middle Rio Grande stretch where we know that
    there are severe issues with respect to public safety. Every
    time we have a Bosque fire, or General, if you want to jump in
    on this; it is a real challenge for our firefighters to deal
    with those Jetty Jacks, which are all connected with wires as
    well. So they represent a very severe impediment to our
    firefighters being able to operate in those areas.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir, wildfire response and important
    for environmental restoration. I would argue, sir, we have done
    this work before in the State. Our authority and our funding
    limited us to the Albuquerque area. We are absolutely capable
    of expanding this effort, and we can work with you on the
    additional authority and funding needed to take this more to
    the Middle Rio Grande.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. And I look forward to working with
    you on that. It is a fairly severe problem for boaters as well
    because they are now stretched in the actual channel of the
    river, and then a very severe problem for our firefighters.
        Chair Murray. Senator Hoeven.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
        Secretary Connor, to quote a very wise and esteemed
    gentleman, ``It takes longer to get an EIS (Environmental
    Impact Statement) done these days than it does to go through
    medical school'', and that seems to be the case because we have
    the Dakota Access Pipeline Project that has now been operating,
    without a problem, without incident, for 6 years, moving more
    than half a million barrels of the lightest, sweetest crude we
    produce in this Nation from the State of North Dakota,
    including from the three affiliated Tribes, Mandan, Hidatsa,
    and Arikara Nation, much coming from that source, to markets,
    you know, out in the eastern part of the country and so forth.
        Oil that we don't have to get from OPEC (Organization of
    the Petroleum Exporting Countries), or Russia, or Venezuela, or
    anyone else because we produce it right here at home. And this
    is a pipeline with the latest, greatest technologies and
    safeguards, probably exceeding any in the country. And so we
    have been waiting for a final EIS now for 6 years while it is
    operated safely. And thank goodness, General Spellmon, it has
    been able to operate because the country very much needs that
    energy. When can we expect a resolution, and final approval, of
    the project through this EIS project--process, excuse me?
        Mr. Connor. Senator Hoeven, thank you for the question. And
    quite frankly, the process has taken quite a long time. I am
    responsible for some of that. In the aftermath of coming into
    this position, I requested the Corps to go back and do more
    work with respect to spill--risk assessment, as well as spill
    response, to look at the Tribal Treaty Rights closer, and then
    finally to look at how we are evaluating greenhouse gas
    emissions.
        So we have moved forward with that. We got the draft
    Environmental Impact Statement out on the street. As you know,
    last year, and we have got, still, a very significant volume of
    comments, and very substantive comments. I have been
    representing to you and others in the delegation, and the
    Governor that we would complete this work by the end of this
    calendar year, and unfortunately, I think it is going to take a
    little bit longer at this point in time, to ensure that we do
    this work thoroughly, respond to the comments, and build a
    record to make this a defensible piece of work, and we don't
    have to do it over again.
        As you know, there has been a lot of litigation, and that
    we need to complete that work. So I am looking at--we have
    moved probably into 2025, I am working with the team to assess
    what specifically needs to be done, and to come up with a
    firmer time line. And I will get that information back to you,
    Senator.
        Senator Hoeven. You will commit to keep our office fully
    informed as you go through the process, as well as the State of
    North Dakota and the three Affiliated Tribes?
        Mr. Connor. Absolutely, sir.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you. General Spellmon, did you have
    anything to add to that process, sir?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I don't have anything else to add.
        Senator Hoeven. Okay. Secretary, also, are you working to
    expand the WIFIA (Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation
    Act) loan process to non-Federal levees? As you know, we have
    worked very hard to give you that capability along with our
    Ranking Member. It is an incredible tool. EPA (Environmental
    Protection Agency) has used it very successfully. The Corps
    started to use it. One of the first projects was the Red River
    Valley Water Supply Project, at north of a $3 billion project,
    incredible tool. Are you going to use it for non-Federal
    levees, which would be of huge benefit, I think, for the Corps?
        Mr. Connor. Senator Hoeven, you and I are in complete sync
    on this. You have used this very effectively in Fargo-Moorhead,
    quite frankly, to add to the public-private partnership there.
    So thank you for that. I am working diligently to get our--we
    are calling it now the CWIFP, Corps Water Infrastructure
    Financing Program, CWIFP program, up and going. We have got the
    rule in place. We solicited proposals. We have those proposals,
    and now we want to take the next step of providing full
    applications.
        I am trying to get that done as quickly as possible, within
    the next month, because this is non-Federal investments in key
    infrastructure across the country. So now, with the 2024 Work
    Plan and the expansion to levees, non-Federal levees, we wanted
    to do the same. I think we are going to have to go through
    amending our rule to include that, because right now it is just
    non-Federal dams rehabilitation.
        Senator Hoeven. Right.
        Mr. Connor. We want to include the levees, make use of the
    resources provided. This is a good program, and we will work on
    it expeditiously.
        Senator Hoeven. I would think both for our Chair and
    Ranking Member in their States, there would be a lot of
    utility, just across the country as well. I mean, this is an
    incredible tool for you all.
        General Spellmon, did you want to add on that? And then
    also, as you know, we need comprehensive protection on the SRS
    (Savannah River Site), and we have to fix those dead loops. You
    can't have stinking dead loops in the middle of a town, it
    isn't--they stink, and they look terrible. And you all need to
    help us fix it.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So on the Oxbow Lakes in Minot,
    sir, we have got the request from the City, we are putting a
    workshop together with our St. Paul District, and we are going
    to bring some of our best research scientists up from our labs
    in Vicksburg. We are going to have that workshop in August, and
    I will report out to you at the end of that, sir, on our way
    ahead.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, sir. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Thank you all very much for
    being here. I am a big fan of the Army Corps. You have been
    very helpful to us in New Hampshire. We have several small
    harbors, and you have been very responsive as we have tried to
    deal with dredging in those small harbors, where shoaling has
    been a consistent problem. And one of the reasons that you have
    been able to do that is because of the funding for small remote
    subsistence harbors.
        Can you speak--Assistant Secretary Connor, maybe you could
    speak to the impact of funding for these small harbors on local
    communities where so much of the economy, in those communities,
    is tied to the harbor?
        Mr. Connor. Yes, Senator. I can't think of something I hear
    more about when I am out making visits than the importance of
    these harbors, whether it be on the East Coast, whether it be
    in Alaska, Chesapeake Bay. So I know the reliance that
    communities have on the work that we can do to ensure that
    these harbors can continue operations.
        And so from that standpoint, with the WRDA 2020 provision
    that targeted 15 percent of our Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund
    funds going for small harbors and then the follow-up provisions
    in WRDA 2022. The good news is, while there is still a very
    high demand out there, is that we have increased our budget
    requests consistent with the targets of the 15 percent. And we
    have exceeded in some cases, barely met it in others, but the
    trajectory has been in the right direction. So we recognize the
    importance, appreciate the leadership from Congress directing
    us in this area.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you, and I agree the
    trajectory is going in the right direction, but it is going
    very slowly in the right direction. And Congress has
    consistently noted that the administration's criteria for
    navigation maintenance projects, disadvantages small, remote,
    or subsistence harbors and waterways, and so how does the Army
    Corps account for needs at these small harbors, given that?
        And I know we have a huge backlog for ports and harbors,
    small ports and harbors across the country. So how are we going
    to get to that backlog and actually address the challenges that
    communities are facing; either one of you?
        General Spellmon. Yes, Senator. First, thank you. So I am
    responsible for 577 of these navigation channels, and 440 of
    them meet the criteria for small, low-use harbors. And we
    greatly appreciate the language that has allowed increased
    draws on the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, and the targets
    that Congress has set out for us for the increased investment.
        As Mr. Connor said, we are exceeding. Like this year, we
    will exceed those targets. But you are right, there is 440 of
    them, and the demand is greater than the need, and we just have
    to keep pressing on--stay on this important work. We realize
    how important these are to localities and the regions where
    they are located.
        Senator Shaheen. And so would it be helpful to you to have
    Congress direct that a higher percentage of the funding goes to
    those small harbors?
        General Spellmon. Senator, we will certainly follow the
    direction of Congress.
        Senator Shaheen. That was a very diplomatic response. One
    of the things that we are struggling with across the country is
    the impacts of climate change. What is the Corps doing to think
    long-term about the investments that we need to make to address
    existing waterways, and how we respond to climate change?
        Mr. Connor. I think this is a question that both of us
    would like to tackle.
        General Spellmon. (Nods)
        Mr. Connor. But I will start first. I think a lot of things
    in recognition, so you know, we have--Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Law ramped up investments, prioritized resilient-type
    investments, so we got to initiate projects and continue
    projects that we think were critical from a safety standpoint,
    and a risk standpoint, integrating climate change, so
    investments right now is part of that equation. The Corps has
    been doing----
        Senator Shaheen. Give me some examples.
        Mr. Connor. Examples, you know, North Slope of Alaska,
    where, you know, the accelerated wave action, the lack of sea
    ice accelerates, you know, the impact on the coast. And so that
    is actually disaster supplemental money that we have got now,
    but then we followed that up with investments to do coastal
    protection work there in Alaska, that is a perfect example
    where climate change has really been focused; Norfolk, one of
    the most at-risk communities from sea level rise, very
    significant investment to get that coastal storm risk
    management project up and going. So I could go on. There
    riverine examples in the Arid West, in Little Colorado, in
    Arizona, where we have made similar investments.
        But also, we are building the tools, and this is, you know,
    kind of below the radar screen, but you know, the Corps is
    looking at different tools to measure hydrology changes, flow
    and stages on our riverine systems, as well as the constant
    updating of our sea level models, ensuring that we integrate
    that into our planning processes as we develop new projects,
    quite frankly.
        And then, you know, where we can, because of the costs
    involved, integrate engineering with nature, so that we can
    work with nature as opposed to fighting nature in a lot of
    these examples.
        If you could, General Spellmon, that is----
        General Spellmon. Yes, Senator, I would just say, to add to
    everything Mr. Connor just said, I want to thank this committee
    for the increased investment that you are making in our
    research and development programs. Back in the early-'80s, we
    invested about 2.5 percent of our Civil Works budget into R&D.
    Three years ago, we weren't at 2.5 percent, we were like at 0.2
    percent.
        So these last two budgets, you have increased our R&D
    budget five-fold, and that is going to very important work on
    coastal projects, it is going to important work on our inland
    projects. Examples like forecast-informed reservoir operations,
    or aquifer storage and recovery wells in Florida, or water
    quality R&D testing that we are doing in a number of locations
    around the country. I think that it gets--in response to your
    question: What can we do long-term? And it is in the
    laboratory.
        Senator Shaheen. Right. Thank you. Thank you both.
        Chair Murray. Senator Hyde-Smith.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Chair Murray and Ranking
    Member Kennedy, and thank you to our witnesses for being here
    today.
        We have a short period of time to ask questions, but
    Secretary Connor and General Spellmon, I want to cover three
    topics, if I can, during this questioning time, or the next
    round: The Arkabutla Dam, and the Yazoo Backwater Area Project,
    which I really appreciate everybody's work on that, and then,
    if we could get to some more Mississippi River tributaries
    questions.
        But Arkabutla Dam, for Secretary Connor and General
    Spellmon. As you know, Arkabutla Lake is an authorized
    Mississippi River and Tributaries Flood Control Project in
    Northwest Mississippi, Tate and DeSoto Counties; that was
    completed in 1943. The lake encompasses about 57,000 acres and
    provides flood protection for more than 19,000 Mississippians.
    A depression was found near the base of the dam last year,
    igniting major concerns if left untreated. A Corps risk
    assessment summary stated that if Arkabutla Dam breached or
    failed, flood waters would be deep and swift enough to damage
    and destroy homes, buildings, roads, bridges, and power, and
    water supplies, and in their words, even cause loss of life.
        I understand the Corps is taking a deep look at the
    problem, but also that the lake would need to be lowered enough
    for the engineers to make an assessment, which means releasing
    more water into the Coldwater River, potentially more than ever
    before, and flooding tens of thousands of acres of farmland.
    This could be a multi-year, multi-million dollar endeavor.
        My questions for you are, will you prioritize addressing
    this problem as quickly as possible? Farmers alone have already
    invested hundreds of millions of dollars putting crops in the
    ground this year, which would be wiped away with a bad turn of
    events. Should the White House submit any type of emergency
    supplemental appropriations request to Congress in the near
    future, before the Arkabutla Dam issue is resolved, would you
    commit to ensuring this project is part of the conversation? If
    you ask folks who live in that area, they would certainly tell
    you this is a high-risk emergency scenario.
         Mr. Connor: Senator, I would tell you public safety is our
    number one priority. So the Vicksburg District, they are
    currently implementing what we call interim risk reduction
    measures. You have described some of them, to take the pressure
    off of the dam. Yes, lowering the lake level. We are also
    installing additional relief wells. We are increasing
    surveillance, both with tools and with human eyes, and we will
    continue our active communications with the community.
        Simultaneously, with these risk reduction measures, we are
    also in design looking at--we call it a Dam Safety Modification
    Study--what is the long-term fix. So I will know more on cost,
    and to inform a supplemental discussion as we advance in the
    Dam Safety Modification Study.
        General Spellmon. Senator Hyde-Smith, I would just add that
    with respect, I know there is other discussions going on about
    disaster supplemental, emergency supplemental. We will be very
    prepared to participate in those discussions based on needs,
    risk, and ongoing expenditures that we have to deal with
    emergencies.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, because it is critical for
    my State, and certainly in that area right now. And question
    two is about the Yazoo Backwater Area Project that we have
    spent many, many, many hours on, and the status of the
    environmental review. And again, I am so grateful to everyone
    at the Corps who has been involved in addressing the flooding
    affecting the Yazoo Backwater Area. A solution to this problem
    is long overdue.
        I mean, we are talking decades here. But I understand the
    following, and please correct me if I am wrong. The Corps last
    year signed a Memorandum of Collaboration with EPA and other
    supporting Federal agencies to address the flood risk in this
    area. A new preferred alternative has been proposed, agreed
    upon by all Federal partners, supported by local interests, and
    a draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Study is expected in
    the near future, and the goal for a final EIS to be published
    this fall, and God willing, a Record of Decision to be signed.
        My questions for you are: Are we still on track? And do you
    agree that the people trying to live, raise families, put food
    on the table, and do business in the Yazoo Backwater Area have
    the right to this federally-authorized flood protection? And
    would you agree that pumping stations are not a new concept?
        Mr. Connor. Senator, as you know, I have been out there
    with you, and I have been out there a total of four or five
    times, I believe, working on this issue. So with respect to the
    information you provided, yes, I think it was 2022 when we
    signed our Memorandum of Collaboration at EPA, included Fish
    and Wildlife Service. So Federal agencies are working in
    alignment on this, which hasn't always been the case too. We
    have a new water management proposal, including pumps, how we
    operate those pumps, adaptive management, and nonstructural
    measures that we are putting together as part of the
    Environmental Impact Statement process.
        So we are on track to move forward with the draft EIS,
    hopefully release that in the next 30 to 45 days, get that on
    the street and take comment. We expect there will be a lot of
    interest in that, but the goal is to, by late fall, end of the
    calendar year, have this process concluded.
        So I would agree, you know, I have listened to the stories,
    we can't replicate the 2019 situation that occurred there. It
    is very important that we continue to work on this project, and
    that we have backwater pumps in other parts of the Mississippi
    River where we have completed that work.
        Senator Hyde-Smith. Great. Thank you for your answer. I am
    good with that.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. Senator Britt.
        Senator Britt. Thank you, Madame Chairwoman. First, I want
    to appreciate--tell each of you that I appreciate you being
    here, and being in front of this committee today. I also see
    several Alabamians in the--here in hearing, and I want to say,
    welcome. Glad you are here, and thank you for all that you do
    for our great State.
        Mr. Connor, and Lieutenant General Spellmon, I would first
    like to follow up on what we discussed at last year's hearing.
    We discussed different ways that the port, like the Port of
    Mobile, should be able to use their port energy funds. I was
    going through the work plan that you released earlier this
    week, and read the section identifying the expanded uses and
    activities for these port and their energy funds.
        I would like to thank you both for following through on
    your commitment to reexamining the capabilities for ports to
    use these funds for channel, berth and other dredged material,
    management activities. I would also like to take this time to
    thank Brigadier General Hibner's team with the South Atlantic
    Division. And specifically, Colonel Chapman's team at the
    Mobile District for their actions to gather the necessary
    funding to rapidly begin and soon complete the repairs to the
    Lock in Demopolis, Alabama. I have really been blown away by
    everyone's willingness to work together to achieve that goal
    and get the Lock back open.
        Colonel Chapman's team has been very responsive both to
    myself and my team over the last few months, following the
    Lock's failure, and it is exactly the way that this should
    operate.
        Mr. Connor or Lieutenant General Spellmon, I understand
    that traffic is set to return to the Demopolis Lock within the
    next 2 weeks. Do you all foresee any impediments to that? And
    with the Lock reopening, I want to see if you feel like it will
    be on time?
        General Spellmon. Great question, Senator. We are on track
    to complete all of our work by the 30 of May, 30 of this month.
        Senator Britt. Excellent. That is wonderful news. It is
    great when we can do things on time. I think it saves money,
    saves energy, and it is certainly vitally important to the
    economics of that entire region and beyond. So thank you so
    much. It is great news to hear.
        I also want to speak about another project, the Mobile
    Harbor Deepening Project, which I understand is on schedule for
    completion March 30 of 2025, so just under a year.
        Last year, I think, Mr. Connor, I think you visited the
    Port of Mobile immediately prior to this hearing. You told me
    you believe the project was going to be completed on time.
    Question for both of you here: Do you still expect that project
    to be completed on time?
        General Spellmon. Senator, the last contract will be
    awarded next month, and we are on track to complete this work
    in March of 2025.
        Senator Britt. That is wonderful. I have noticed,
    obviously, a theme and have discussed this with Colonel
    Chapman, but fully funding major projects at the beginning
    results in projects being completed on time and raises the
    likelihood that projects remain on budget or potentially, in
    some cases, under budget. As of today, the Mobile Harbor Ship
    Channel, widening and deepening project, which was fully funded
    at the start by the Federal Government, which obviously some in
    the media irresponsibly and falsely reported otherwise, but it
    is both on time and on budget.
        On this, in 2023, for the first time in years, Chair Murray
    and Vice Chair Collins led the Senate Appropriations Committee
    in public markups, and advanced all 12 bills by July 27. I am
    grateful for both of their leadership in making this a
    priority.
        Unfortunately, it took 174 days, though, after the fiscal
    year to get all 12 appropriations bills signed into law. And it
    was actually 236 days since this appropriations committee
    actually did their work.
        Mr. Connor, and Lieutenant General Spellmon, do endless
    continuing resolutions raise the cost--and some people know
    them as CRs (Continuing Resolutions)--but do they raise the
    cost and length of the timeline for major projects? And would a
    return to more regular order, this body doing its job on time
    for the American people, allow the Corps to be more responsible
    stewards of taxpayer dollars?
        Mr. Connor. Senator Britt, thank you for the question. Yes,
    the continuing resolutions process makes it very hard to
    complete the work that we are trying to accomplish. As a
    threshold matter, I would just acknowledge, but full funding is
    obviously most optimum. Very significant funding for blocks of
    work like Howard Hanson Dam, which we need to do, obviously
    creates significant efficiencies and allows us to move through
    the most complex aspects of our work.
        And CRs are the worst part of that spectrum of how we fund
    things. We have those projects that aren't fully funded, which
    are typically base plus option type contracts, and then we
    start chasing options as to whether we can pick them up or not,
    if we are in continuing resolutions. If we don't pick them up,
    they get rebid. Chances are that costs will be significantly
    higher and that labor will go elsewhere.
        Senator Britt. Madam Chairman, would you allow me just one
    more minute?
        I am so grateful for you saying that. I mean, these women
    have led this committee in a remarkable way, and it is
    ultimately the hardworking Americans that pay the price when
    the body does not do its work, when Congress does not pass
    these bills on time. So I appreciate you speaking directly to
    that, because when you rebid something, everybody knows that
    the price does not go down; it goes up. So not only do you not
    have the predictability you need, it ultimately costs the
    taxpayer more. Two things I just wanted to make sure that I
    mention before I conclude: First, is the Wilson Lock in
    Florence, Alabama. It lost buoyancy and sank to the bottom of
    the reservoir. I understand that TVA (Tennessee Valley
    Authority) is pursuing internal solutions, but I think it is
    extremely important that we work together and examine all
    possible routes for a permanent repair to the guide wall.
        And then second, the Selma Flood Risk Mitigation Project,
    it would construct a wall along the bank of the Alabama River.
    We all know that Selma is not just a crown jewel of Alabama; it
    is a crown jewel with historic nature for our entire country,
    and so making sure that we prevent the river from further
    eroding the bank and causing historic buildings to fall into
    the water.
        This project is very important to me. It is also very
    important to Congresswoman Sewell. And the floods threaten a
    nationally registered historic district. And we look forward to
    working with you all on making sure that we get this right.
    Thank you.
        And thank you, Madam Chair Murray.
        Chair Murray. Thank you, Senator Britt. We will now do a
    second round for anyone who wishes to ask additional questions.
        And I will start; Assistant Secretary Connor, with you.
    This subcommittee requires quarterly execution reports from
    each agency. Both your office and the Corps indicated there is
    no system that can provide that information, yet we have other
    agencies, like the Department of Energy, that are able to
    provide that information to us. These reports are really
    critical to this subcommittee. They really ensure that the
    Corps is executing funding in accordance with the law, and that
    we are putting limited funding to the best uses. Can you
    explain how you are working to update the Corps' budget and
    execution software to address this issue?
        Mr. Connor. I will start, Senator Murray. We don't have
    any, right now moving forward, system in place to provide all
    the relevant information. I think you know, with respect to the
    budget and execution reports that you expect and that you need
    to do your work, we have now got into a rhythm, and we have had
    internal discussions about how we can get the information to
    you on time.
        It would certainly be facilitated better if we had the
    system that delivered that information out immediately. It
    still requires some analysis, and it is complex in the sense
    that our 902 limits continue to change year to year with
    inflation figures, and some of the information will be hard to
    just put in a system itself. So we need to do a deeper dive. I
    know the Corps has done a lot of work on their information
    systems, mostly related to project execution, and see if we
    can't somehow in the future meld the needs with the information
    system we have got, because we are not doing any significant
    changes at this point in time, even while getting you the
    information.
        General Spellmon. You know, Senator Murray, I would be
    happy to visit with the Department of Energy and see what
    system they are using so we can get you timely reports. To be
    frank, today I could not invest in that IT system, and the
    reason is, if you go back 15 years, the Corps had a $30 billion
    construction program, and we were funded for oversight for
    about 1,460 people.
        Today, the workload is three times that. We are a $92
    billion program, and I have fewer--I am funded for fewer people
    to provide that oversight. So finding dollars to invest into an
    IT system, it would be challenging for us at the moment. But
    again, I will follow up with the Department of Energy and see
    how they are doing----
        Chair Murray. Would you just be willing to work with our
    subcommittee to make sure we get those systems in place?
        General Spellmon. Yes, and absolutely.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. Commissioner Touton, the Yakima
    Basin is experiencing the second year of drought conditions and
    reduced water allocations. Thankfully, the Yakima Basin,
    Integrated Plan Partners have proposed drought mitigation and
    resiliency projects critical to conserving and managing the
    Yakima River Basin's natural resources, their water supply, and
    economic, and environmental well-being.
        Those projects can help mitigate drought effects this year
    and in the future. And I understand the Inflation Reduction Act
    provided funding that can quickly get those projects underway.
    How is Reclamation executing the remaining IRA (Inflation
    Reduction Act) funds? And are those funds available for basins
    that are currently experiencing drought, like the Yakima Basin?
        Ms. Touton. Thank you, Senator. The Yakima Basin Project is
    the model across the West for how you deal with climate change
    and aridification while dealing with agricultural sovereign
    nations and the ecosystem. Our budget includes $35.5 million
    for the Water Enhancement Project.
        And as regarding your question on the Inflation Reduction
    Act, we made our first announcement for other basins: $60
    million in the Rio Grande, New Mexico. And we look forward to
    working with you to help the Yakima Basin get through this
    year, and for the future.
        Chair Murray. I appreciate that. Finally, General Spellmon,
    Congress has consistently, almost annually, since 2018,
    provided supplemental funding to address natural disasters. In
    2018, Congress provided $15 billion in a supplemental for the
    Corps to construct critical flood projects. However, we
    understand there is now more than $10 billion in additional
    need to complete what was started. It is important we finish
    what we start, and that is impossible when total project costs
    continue to increase drastically, which is why fiscal year
    2024, this committee provided dedicated funds to start
    addressing some of the critical failure points such as
    underdeveloped project design, and a failure to do periodic
    cost updates.
        In addition to this Committee's actions, what is the Corps
    doing right now to address cost overruns and incorporate
    lessons learned to correct those issues?
        General Spellmon. Senator, a number of things. First, I
    will share with you, we are not alone. The Federal--the people
    that build for the Federal Government are dealing with this.
    People that are building for States and private industry,
    everyone is dealing with cost increases, primarily in labor,
    the labor market, that is the number one cost driver on our
    projects.
        We are doing a number of things. First, we are hiring more
    cost engineers. A year ago, I had 350 of them on our staff.
    Today, I have 463, and we are working to hire the remaining 27.
    For the size program I have a need for about 500. We are almost
    there. We are changing the way that we report costs and our
    estimates to the administration and to Congress. We are going
    to tell you what design maturity it is. Is it a 10 percent
    design, a 20 percent design, what assumptions went into that,
    and what the range of costs could be looking at the potential
    construction timeline for the project.
        We are meeting routinely with industry, specifically the
    Associated General Contractors of America, who represents all
    of the construction trades. We are meeting with the economist
    so we understand more specifically the regional impacts of
    materials and labor. And the last one, we are working hard to
    get industry involved more early and contractor involvement
    type acquisition strategies in our project so we get more
    industry feedback in all that we are doing. We are committed to
    this, and we are committed to greater transparency with you.
        Chair Murray. Okay. I appreciate that. And if you can share
    with our committee any steps that we can take in fiscal year
    2025 to help address those issues, particularly related to
    increased design maturity, I would appreciate it. Thank you.
        Senator Kennedy.
        Senator Kennedy. I defer to Senator Durbin.
        Chair Murray. Senator Durbin.
        Senator Durbin. Thank you, Senator Kennedy. I appreciate
    that very much.
        Assistant Secretary Connor, it is good to see you again,
    and your colleagues. The Great Lakes contain 21 percent of the
    world's fresh water. One out of every ten Americans rely on the
    Great Lakes for drinking water, from an economic standpoint,
    the Great Lakes support 311,000 jobs across a variety of
    industries, $8.8 billion in wages.
        For years, we have worked to move the Brandon Road
    Interbasin Project at the Brandon Road Lock and Dam near
    Joliet. This project is critical to preventing an invasive
    species of carp from reaching the Great Lakes. For over 10
    years, I have dedicated a large part of my public service to
    that ``damn fish''. We all know the importance of keeping this
    fish out of the Great Lakes. They already have shifted the
    ecological balance of the Mississippi River significantly.
        I have helped secure more than $272 million for this
    project, but as I understand it, the funding will not become
    available until an agreement is reached between the Army Corps
    of Engineers and my State of Illinois.
        This is a regional issue, not just our State, concerned
    about it. The State of Michigan has shown a remarkable
    commitment to solving this problem with us, and I want to thank
    them. I commend you for the role that you played in moving
    toward construction, but before we can get to this step, there
    needs to be a project partnership agreement between the local
    sponsor, the State of Illinois, and the Army Corps. What will
    happen on June 30 if a project partnership agreement between
    the Army Corps of Engineers and the State of Illinois is not
    signed?
        Mr. Connor. Senator, thank you for the question. The
    prospect for increased costs associated with the project if we
    don't get the PPA (Power Purchase Agreement) in place by the
    end of June of this year, and that is primarily because we need
    to coordinate some of the work that we need to do on Brandon
    Road with the closure on the Illinois Waterway for maintenance
    work that we do. So we get efficiencies out of that if we
    combine that construction activity.
        So that is why we have articulated the end of June is
    incredibly important. Thank you very much for all you have done
    to help work through the issues, and I am happy to elaborate
    more on where we are trying to get to PPA if you would like.
        Senator Durbin. I understand you received a letter from the
    Governor of Illinois asking questions about the project. Have
    you responded to that letter?
        Mr. Connor. I have responded by talking to the Governor
    directly. The Governor requested that we sign an incremental
    PPA for a phase of this project. We don't think that this
    project can be broken down into phases that are usable
    increments. We need to complete the whole project. So I wanted
    to talk to the Governor about that directly before sending him
    a letter. We talked through some of the State's concerns with
    respect to ensuring cost certainty, long-term O&R. We had a
    good conversation.
        I still need to respond to him for the record, I don't
    believe we can sign an incremental PPA. We can work on items
    associated with that cost certainty and OM&R, and I also think
    it is important that we bring Michigan into the discussions,
    which I know is happening at the local level, but I think that
    is important for us to be able to try and hit that PPA June 30.
        Senator Durbin. And once again, thank Michigan, the
    Governor, and both Senators, my colleagues, have really gone
    overboard trying to help us, and I want to thank them for this.
    Do you think the ball is in the Corps' court at this point? Or
    is Illinois waiting on a response from you?
        Mr. Connor. I think the Governor is waiting for a response
    from me. We have been in contact with his team. After he and I
    talked, I would like to get that response out to lay the
    foundation for the next set of steps we need to take to get to
    a final PPA.
        Senator Durbin. With June 30 deadline looming. Can you give
    me your assurance that you will look into this matter as soon
    as perhaps today?
        Mr. Connor. Yes; absolutely, sir.
        Senator Durbin. Thank you very much. I also want to thank
    the Corps for their efforts on the Quincy Bay. That means a lot
    to me and to the people in that community, so thank you for
    moving forward on that.
        I see my time is just about up, but I want to ask the last
    question about the infamous Bubbly Creek in Chicago. Will you
    commit to expediting interagency discussions with the EPA to
    ensure there is no further delay in the restoration of this
    area?
        Mr. Connor. Yes, sir. We would like to get this project up
    and going as quickly as we can. And I know this issue,
    particularly as it relates to hazardous, toxic, and radioactive
    waste, the HTRW issue, is one that we have got to work through
    with all the agencies, so we are committed to that.
        Senator Durbin. Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam
    Chair.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. Senator Kennedy.
        Senator Kennedy. General, in my opening comments, I talked
    about how, in my judgment, the Corps of Engineers and its
    projects actually save us money. Do you think I am right about
    that?
        General Spellmon. Sir, you are absolutely correct.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. I am a big fan, by the way, of the
    Corps, like Senator Shaheen, like all of us. I just worry about
    how we fund you. The President's budget, I know it is not your
    budget, you have got to claim it. But I get it, you wouldn't do
    it the same way it was thrust upon you, but let us take the
    Inland Waterways Trust Fund. How do we fund that?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So this is a tax on
    transporters, on our inland waterway system, and those funds
    are collected into the specific fund.
        Senator Kennedy. But we don't spend all the money, we
    collect the tax from people, but we don't--and we say it is for
    inland waterways, but we don't spend all the money on inland
    waterways, do we?
        General Spellmon. We don't.
        Senator Kennedy. We spend it elsewhere in the budget,
    right?
        Mr. Connor. Can I jump in on that?
        Senator Kennedy. Sure.
        Mr. Connor. With respect to, I looked a lot at this issue
    as we were finalizing the work plan, Senator. We have a $300
    million account right now within the Inland Waterway Trust
    Fund, and we generally get about $100- to $120 million worth of
    revenue. We had the opportunity to make a choice based on the
    work plan of whether or not we went into the trust fund this
    year. I chose not to do that. We had the opportunity to use
    repurposed Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, so--and the reason I
    wanted to do----
        Senator Kennedy. Yes, sir. But before we get too far down
    in the weeds, we do this with the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund
    as well. We tax people who are using these waterways, and then
    we don't spend the money on the waterways. Isn't that an
    accurate description?
        Mr. Connor. We have not used all the funds provided, that
    is correct, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. General, tell me when we can expect
    a Corps decision on the Greenfield Project we talked about
    earlier.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. I just spoke to Colonel Jones
    just this morning on that. I expect we will have that decision
    within the next few days.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay, and that will be a final decision?
        General Spellmon. That would be a decision on whether or
    not we need to elevate to the Keeper of the National Register
    the issue associated with the six historic properties. The
    final decision, sir, will come later in the----
        Senator Kennedy. But suppose you elevate it to the Historic
    Preservation community, if you will, call them, you still have
    the final decision, right?
        General Spellmon. That is correct.
        Senator Kennedy. The Historic Preservation folks give you
    their advice, but their advice is not dispositive; is that
    right?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I am sorry, I may have misunderstood
    your earlier question. I don't know the answer to that. I only
    have one repetition where we had to elevate to the Keeper. I
    will take that, sir, and follow up with you.
        Senator Kennedy. Yes. But here is what I am trying to
    understand. Whose decision is it? Is it you--is it the Corps?
    Or is it the Historic Preservation people?
        General Spellmon. Yes, that is the part I don't--the final
    decision on the permit, the overall permit is with the Corps.
    The specific issue with the National Historic Preservation Act,
    I would have to follow up. I don't know.
        Senator Kennedy. Well, it is your decision. I mean, that is
    my understanding of the law. Historic Preservation folks offer
    their input to the Corps, but the Corps either issues the
    permit or it doesn't. And you have the authority to say, I
    agree with the Historic Preservation people or I don't. And
    what I am asking is when do you think we will get a final
    decision? I mean, what if the Historic Preservation folks say,
    this is going to take us 3 or 4 years? Now we have not only
    finished medical school, we finished an internship, and a
    residency, and the subspecialty.
        So how long are you going to give the Historic Preservation
    folks to make a decision? It is not like they haven't been part
    of this. They have been part of this from day one.
        General Spellmon. Right.
        Senator Kennedy. And then I want this project moving.
        General Spellmon. So Senator, I have only had one
    repetition where we had to elevate to the Keeper of the
    National Register, and it didn't----
        Senator Kennedy. I am trying to understand the time.
        General Spellmon [continuing]. Take 6 years. It took a few
    weeks.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. So you think that the Historic
    Preservation folks, you are going to elevate it to them, and
    then they are going to have to give you an answer in a few
    weeks?
        General Spellmon. So the decision to elevate has not been
    made yet, that is the----
        Senator Kennedy. Yesh. But you are going to elevate. That
    is my prediction. You know, let me put on--put my, you know, I
    just see an elevation in my future. You know, after you
    elevate, how long are they going to take?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I don't know how long they are going
    to take.
        Senator Kennedy. How long are you going to give them?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I don't know those answers.
        Senator Kennedy. We have to make a decision. We have not
    only finished med school here, we finished law school and going
    after a Ph.D. These permits just shouldn't take that long,
    General. This controversy is not going away. And I am not
    telling you how to make the call, but you got to make a call
    here. Just like on Senator Hoeven's pipeline; 6 years, you
    know, that is not acceptable. I am----
        Thanks, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. Thank you, Senator Hoeven.
        Senator Hoeven. I want to thank the Ranking Member for his
    comments, and he always expresses it very well, but it is
    important. We have got to move these projects. They are just
    critically important for the country, critically important
    infrastructure for all our States and for the country.
        Commissioner Touton, speaking of that, you have been
    actually remarkably helpful in getting--advancing ENDAW, and
    the Eastern North Dakota Alternate Water Supply Project which
    actually will provide water supply, not only to Eastern North
    Dakota but Western Minnesota as well. A lot of folks over there
    in the Red River Valley of the north, and you have done a--
    provided a timely process for the Record of Decision. We thank
    you for that, but now we have to, you know, get to the actual
    funding piece.
        And so my first question is, are you committed to helping
    us get that funded? And then second, your recommendations on
    how we advance this project in a timely way?
        Ms. Touton. It is nice to see you, Senator Hoeven. The
    first time we visited North Dakota was to see the water source,
    and we were together again last year to be able to see the
    communities we would serve. So, we are committed to this. We
    are at a point of hitting a ceiling within the project. I know
    we are working with you and with other projects that may face
    similar situations, and look forward to continuing that
    conversation.
        Senator Hoeven. Your work on this has been critical. You
    have been out to our State twice. Will you commit to work
    closely with our staff, now to continue to advance this so that
    we can get it done on time?
        Ms. Touton. Absolutely, Senator.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Commissioner.
        General Spellmon, I wanted to follow up with you on a
    couple things that I didn't get a chance to earlier. One is
    that you are doing Missouri River test flows and you are doing
    these pulses for, I think, pallid sturgeon, and various
    species. But you also have a lot of folks in Eastern Montana,
    and obviously Northwestern North Dakota that are affected by
    this, in essence, flooding that you do. And so I want to know
    if you are making sure that our folks up there in Northwest
    North Dakota are fully informed, and that you are taking any
    steps to mitigate flooding that you actually may be causing
    for, you know, fish, and so forth, at the expense of people.
        General Spellmon. No, sir. We are meeting our requirements
    under the Endangered Species Act. We are not interested in
    inducing flooding on anyone. We have physical monitors out in
    the field, and if we get any reports that there is induced
    flooding we will off ramp the test. So that off ramp is already
    built in. No, you are correct. In fact, the test this year is
    simply replicating the flow that we had from plain snowpack
    last year, just this year, we have additional instrumentation
    and monitors in the field.
        Senator Hoeven. Okay. And then shifting gears a little bit,
    Lake Sakakawea, as well as the other Mainstem reservoirs are
    huge, and they are multi-purpose, one of which is recreation.
    What steps can we take to develop partnerships between the
    Corps and local stakeholders who are willing to step up to
    ensure that recreational facilities are well-maintained and
    enhanced?
        General Spellmon. Sir, we are open to any ideas that would
    increase investment in recreation facilities across the
    country. I just think that private--public-private partnerships
    is another avenue, and it is a great idea.
        Senator Hoeven. And you will emphasize that to your folks
    on the ground that they should be looking for those
    opportunities, and working with our local stakeholders?
        General Spellmon. Yes. Yes, sir.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, General. And then the last is
    the Dam Safety Modification Project for Garrison Dam which is a
    huge project, fiscal year 2025 there is $32 million for design
    on it. You know, schedule and scope. I know some of your folks
    have talked about coming out this summer and actually going out
    to the dam with us, and describing for the public what it is
    you are going to do. But I know it is a massive undertaking. So
    could you, please, describe exactly how?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir, it is. But those dollars are
    design and construction so $27 of that $32 will actually go to
    advancing the design. There is $4 million we want to put
    immediately to construction, it is the right abutment drain.
        Senator Hoeven. Yes.
        General Spellmon. It is work we can get after right away.
        Senator Hoeven. There was some erosion I think on it.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. And then also we are doing some
    work in the laboratory on this as well. There is three modeling
    efforts going on, there is some anchor testing that we need to
    do, and there is also some material tests in the lab that we
    want to conduct. We want to build this right the first time,
    but a very important project for us.
        Senator Hoeven. Okay. So Secretary Connor; and I want to
    thank both of you for your leadership on these really important
    projects. You know, we need your help on them to complete them.
    Thank you.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. Senator Sinema.
        Senator Sinema. Thank you Chairwoman Murray, and Ranking
    Member Kennedy; and thank you to our witnesses for being here
    today.
        As you all know, there is nothing more important to my home
    State of Arizona than our water resources. My constituents and
    I take our responsibility as water managers extremely
    seriously, and I appreciate the support of your agencies in
    achieving this mission over the years.
        As Arizona, the Colorado River Basin, and the West face an
    unprecedented drought crisis. Now is the time to put aside
    partisan and geographic divisions to act with determination and
    creativity to address this crisis. Public relations campaigns
    that are focused on finger-pointing and zero-sum outcomes leave
    everyone worse off. With a booming economy driving the energy
    transition, Arizona cannot bear the full weight of future
    reductions as we look forward to post-2026 operations of the
    Colorado River.
        As you all know, I have worked hard to provide funding and
    policy solutions in multiple pieces of historic legislation,
    and I look forward to discussing this critical issue with you
    all today as we go forward.
        First, Commissioner Touton, as I alluded to in my
    statement, I continue to be concerned about the trajectory of
    post-2026 negotiations for the Colorado River. Can you provide
    an update on the Basin-wide negotiations?
        Ms. Touton. Thank you, Senator. We are currently in the
    alternative development stage. We have received several
    proposals from the Upper Basin States, the Lower Basin States,
    as well as the NGOs (Non-Governmental Organization), and some
    tribal elements, skills alternatives. We are currently in
    conversations with all of our partners in being able to model
    those alternatives to show the impacts.
        Senator Sinema. As you know, we are almost halfway through
    the year, and nearly 2 years since the Inflation Reduction Act,
    and the Historic Drought Funding I secured has become law. As
    we have discussed in the past, the purpose of this funding is
    to address crisis needs and to help communities defer the
    impacts of potential drought-driven water delivery reductions.
    Can you provide a specific timeline for when bucket two funding
    decisions will be announced?
        Ms. Touton. Yes, Senator. I think you will be pleased that
    we will be making those announcements here in the coming weeks.
        Senator Sinema. What do you mean by weeks?
        Ms. Touton. I look forward to following up with you,
    Senator.
        Senator Sinema. I would like to get a follow-up on that.
        Ms. Touton. Absolutely.
        Senator Sinema. As you know, it could be 2 or it could be
    20. I am hoping for the 2.
        Ms. Touton. It will be this summer, Senator.
        Senator Sinema. Wonderful, thank you. The drought in the
    Colorado River Basin is now extending beyond its 20 year. The
    Lower Colorado River Basin was in a Tier 2A shortage for 2023.
    As you know, the States in the Lower Basin had to reduce their
    Colorado over-supplies by 617,000 acre-feet per year. As we
    know, Arizona took the majority of these cuts. Over the last
    several decades, however, there remain additional deliveries to
    Mexico over and above the quantity of water required by the
    Treaty of 1944.
        And while I appreciate that the Bureau has worked to
    address some of these flows of Colorado River water to Mexico,
    my understanding is that there was over 170,000 acre-feet of
    water delivered to Mexico above our treaty obligations, due to
    the high salinity infrastructure needs, and other issues. What
    is Reclamation doing to address these over-deliveries?
        Ms. Touton. 2023 was a good hydrologic year for us. It also
    showed us that we need more flexibility downstream of Hoover on
    how we can capture some flows. So, we are actually in the
    process of looking at infrastructure below Hoover Dam to see
    how we can work through our operational flexibilities to be
    able to capture some of this water during these types of years.
        Senator Sinema. The Federal Government's trust
    responsibilities to deliver water to our tribal communities, of
    course, is one of our most important duties, and I was proud to
    pass into law, at the end of last Congress, amendments to the
    White Mountain Apache Tribe's and Water Rights Quantification
    Act that extended the enforcement date and expanded the
    authorized funding available to deliver clean water to this
    community.
        The President's budget requests $181 million for the
    settlement in fiscal year 2025; can you explain how this
    funding will be used to implement the settlement?
        Ms. Touton. Absolutely. The $181 million within the
    President's budget request is for the planning, design, and
    construction of Minor Flat Dam as part of that settlement. And
    we look to be able to meet that enforceability date through
    these three next fiscal years to be able to hit the 2027 date
    that you provided us, Senator.
        Senator Sinema. Thank you. I am also concerned about the
    long-term viability of the river outlet works at the Glen
    Canyon Dam. How does the Bureau's budget request seek to
    address damage that has been sustained to the river outlet
    works?
        Ms. Touton. The Glen Canyon Dam remains operable, and there
    are no short-term risks to deliveries within the system. What
    we saw was evidence of cavitation, we are already working
    through fixing the lining within that canal within the next
    year. But we are also looking at long-term solutions, including
    what this looks like in operations for post-2026.
        Senator Sinema. Thank you. I see that my time is nearly
    expired. Commissioner, I would like to follow up on the issue
    around the water overflow to Mexico.
        Ms. Touton. Absolutely.
        Senator Sinema. As you know, every time we send too much
    water to Mexico, that is less that Arizona has, and of course,
    that creates more stress within the Seven States for our post-
    2026 Agreement.
        Ms. Touton. I look forward to following up, and thanks to
    your constituents' leadership, we have been able to conserve
    1.7 of the 3 million acre-feet as part of the Inflation
    Reduction Act. Lake Mead is higher today than it was in May
    2021.
        Senator Sinema. Thank you, Commissioner. As you know,
    Arizona is very proud of the work it has done. Not only have we
    borne the brunt of the cuts so far, but we have also
    demonstrated leadership, and an understanding that all Seven
    States must work together to solve this crisis.
        Madam Chair, if I may, I just would like to close my
    questioning by reminding Fellow States that our region will
    either survive or fail together; and so I call on the other Six
    States to join Arizona in this leadership to find a long-term
    solution that benefits the entire region, not putting one State
    against each other. Thank you.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you
    all for being here this morning.
        We have had an opportunity over the past year to engage on
    a couple of different issues in my State, certainly Homer, the
    Barrow coastal erosion, and I want to thank you for a pretty
    pragmatic approach to working with me and my team, and your
    focus on the Alaska projects and partnership going forward. I
    think the more we can be open and communicating well with one
    another, the better off we are going to be.
        I am pleased to see funding for the Port of Nome
    construction, and the Homer GI both included in the 2024 Work
    Plan, as well as the fiscal year 2025 budget request. As you
    know, these are very high priorities, particularly the Port of
    Nome, due to its national security significance.
        But that being said, there has been a lot of advocacy to
    ensure that both of these projects stay on track. So I am a
    little bit concerned going into the 2025 process and beyond
    that we are going to appropriately prioritize these in the
    budget process. Concerning Nome, particularly, this kind of
    seems to be a case study in rhetoric versus reality with our
    Nation's challenge to match the projects of national security
    and economic significance with the processes that we have at
    our disposal, and how to fund them.
        We know that the Port of Nome is a Civil Works project,
    Senator Sullivan and I have been talking to a lot of our
    national security officials and flag officers, both directly,
    and in person, and off the record, as we underscore the
    strategic and national security imperative into the Arctic
    region. A lot of dual-use benefits for both commercial and
    naval security interest in the Arctic, where we have seen
    investment really lacking. And I think both of you would agree
    with that.
        And yet, while we have got some unanimity on the value of
    the project, we can't seem to get the same level of enthusiasm
    or gusto when it comes to funding it. This year's budget
    request of $25 million is the first regular order construction
    request for the project, notwithstanding, Nome's previous award
    of $250 million for construction, which was due, of course, to
    hydro.
        So at $25 million, it is absolutely essential. I think we
    all know it is far from the cost to complete. So we are looking
    at a project that is going to be in the range of $500 million.
    And so I look at the $25 million request and don't see this as
    adequate to meet the project's requirement. Maybe it is because
    the project is not a great fit for the National Economic
    Development funding formula under which it was authorized.
        So I am using my time here to suggest that it is time that
    the Corps work with Congress to figure out some creative ways
    to adequately fund this project, and perhaps some others that
    recognizes the national security benefits as well as the
    economic benefits. So I am hoping that we are going to see
    future budget requests that will make very meaningful progress
    on fully funding the project's construction costs.
        So I am hoping that maybe you can give me a little more
    optimism here with a budget request number in fiscal year 2026
    that reflects the cost to complete the project. But also, I
    would like to have your assurance that for future budget
    requests, you will treat the projects authorized under this
    authority, like Nome, consistent with the provision in Title
    33, Section 2242(c), of the U.S. Code.
        So in other words, making sure that it is given equivalent
    budget consideration and priority as projects recommended
    solely by national economic development benefits.
        A long statement there, but you know where I am going with
    this. We have got to figure out what the funding plan is going
    to be for a port like Nome given the national security
    imperative, because if we are going to do $25 million every
    funding cycle, the Arctic is never going to be addressed. We
    need a Deepwater Arctic Port.
        General Spellmon. Yes, Senator. So I think I will try to
    give you some insurance here. This is more sequencing than in
    terms of a budget issue. So with the $250 million that came to
    us in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and the $25 million in
    this budget, that is going to allow us to award what we are
    calling the phase one, the West Breakwater Extension. We need
    to get that in place before we can start the work on the actual
    harbor deepening. We can express that capability as early as
    2025 that is about a $95 million job. And then the final phase
    of this is the new East Causeway, we estimate about $151
    million.
        But we have what we need to get this first work done. Then
    we are going to work on the budget for the deepening, and then
    the remaining work to complete the project.
        Senator Murkowski. Secretary Connor.
        Mr. Connor. Yes. If I could just add on the bigger picture
    question that you raised in your comment, I would agree, this
    is not a great NED (National Economic Development) fit in our
    traditional analyses. But yet we did get it in the budget,
    which I think represents progress. And it is for a lot of the
    reasons that you have just identified.
        And we are working on, you know, expanding the range of
    what we view the benefits of our projects are. My predecessor
    put in place something called Comprehensive Benefits, asked the
    Corps to look at comprehensive benefits as we are planning
    projects and to integrate that, and assess that as part of our
    Chiefs' reports that we are putting together.
        We are trying to take that to the next step now, and to
    look at institutionalizing that approach through our principal
    requirements and guidelines that maximize our look at benefits.
    This is net public benefits. It doesn't specifically address
    national security, but we are moving in this direction to
    recognize that we can't, you know, purely just look at NED
    benefit-cost and assessing the value of these projects. So we
    want to continue. I think there is appetite for that from all
    quarters of people invested in the Corps' projects, and we will
    continue to work in the way that you suggested here.
        Senator Murkowski. Well, let us keep--again, we have got to
    have open lines of communication here, and we can't have
    everybody holding their breath waiting for the next funding
    cycle, hoping that we are going to get enough for that next
    phase. So I would really like to keep close on this project as
    well as some of the others we are working on. Thank you.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. That will end our hearing today.
    And I want to thank our witnesses, and all of my colleagues for
    participating in today's hearing. I look forward to working
    together on this year's appropriations bill to make sure we are
    providing the Army Corps and the Bureau the resources they
    need.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        I will keep the hearing record open for 1 week. Committee
    Members who would like to submit written questions for the
    record should do so by 5 p.m., Wednesday, May 22. We appreciate
    the Army Corps and Bureau responding to them in a reasonable
    amount of time.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
                 Questions Submitted to Hon. Michael L. Connor
                  Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Baldwin
        Question. The Army Corps' budget request includes $264.13 million
    to continue construction of a new navigation lock at the Corps' Soo
    Lock facility in Michigan's upper peninsula. Is the requested amount,
    and the remaining prior year appropriations, adequate to exercise all
    of that project's contract options that are scheduled to expire by the
    end of FY25? If not, how much funding would be required in FY25 to pay
    for all of those contract options?
        Answer. The Corps awarded Option 3 of Phase 3 of this project in
    September 2024. Three options are scheduled to expire in FY 2025--
    Options 4, 5, and 6 of Phase 3. The Corps expects to be able to
    exercise all three of these options within the funding level requested
    in the Budget.
                                     ______

                 Questions Submitted by Senator Kyrsten Sinema
        Question. The Army Corps plays a vital role in many parts of the
    nation to help develop water resources for public use, provide flood
    control, and other critical functions. However, this has not
    historically been the case in Arizona and much of the West. As the
    Corps looks forward in the 2025 budget and beyond, what additional
    authorities and resources would be most helpful in addressing the
    unique needs of drought-prone areas of the West? Specifically, how can
    the Congress better align the missions of the Corps and the Bureau of
    Reclamation to address the drought risks facing tens of millions of
    citizens in fast growing areas like Arizona?
        Answer. As I stated in a July 28, 2022 memorandum on drought
    resilience, the Corps is helping states and local communities to adapt
    to the significant changes in hydrology brought on by climate change.
    We have many efforts underway to assist drought-prone areas. For
    example, the Corps has funded drought resiliency and water augmentation
    efforts in Arizona under the Arizona environmental infrastructure
    program. It is working with the Gila River Indian Community in Arizona
    on a renewable energy and water conservation project through the Corps
    Tribal Partnership Program. The Corps also works with the Bureau of
    Reclamation (Reclamation) to address drought conditions, for example,
    through changes to the operation of the Corps reservoirs that store
    water that Reclamation supplies to its authorized projects.
        The Corps does not require additional drought-related authorities
    at this time. Our recent authorities in this area include Section 1116
    of WRDA 2016, as amended, and Section 1118 of WRDA 2016, as amended (43
    U.S.C. 390b-2). Section 1116 provides for the evaluation of water
    conservation measures in areas affected by drought, such as in the
    State of Arizona. Section 1118 authorizes the Corps to receive non-
    Federal funds to evaluate the operation of flood control storage at
    Reclamation reservoirs to ascertain whether such flood control storage
    may be adjusted to accommodate water conservation without harming flood
    control benefits. Section 8106(b) of WRDA 2022 authorizes the Corps to
    add water supply or water conservation as an objective in any
    feasibility study, where requested by the non-Federal sponsor. Section
    8108 of WRDA 2022 authorizes the Corps to pursue managed aquifer
    recharge to address drought, water resiliency, and aquifer depletion at
    its authorized water resources development projects and through its
    feasibility studies.
        The Corps also works with Reclamation and other Federal agencies on
    the Forecast Informed Reservoir Operations program, which is developing
    techniques to use data from watershed monitoring and modern weather and
    water forecasting methods to inform decisions by water managers on when
    to retain or release water from reservoirs, which should improve their
    ability to manage water, both in wet years and under drought
    conditions. A pilot effort at Prado Dam in California, for example,
    showed that the use of these techniques could conserve more storm water
    in a time of drought, making it available for later use.
        Question. Please provide an update on the Rio de Flag and Winslow
    Levee projects, and assurance that the Corps will see the projects
    through to completion?
        Answer. The Rio de Flag, Arizona project is under construction. The
    Corps plans to award the next construction contract for work on the
    lower Rio de Flag--Stage 1 segment. Before the Corps can advertise that
    work, the non-Federal sponsor (NFS) must secure all related real estate
    interests, including certain rights-of-way from the Burlington Northern
    Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF). Due to delays in reaching agreement with
    BNSF, the Corps anticipates that the project schedule will slip. The
    Corps is also working to develop a revised total project cost estimate,
    and expects that the estimated total project cost will increase.
        The Little Colorado River at Winslow, Arizona project is in the
    pre-construction engineering and design phase. The initial surveys,
    which are scheduled to be complete by September 2024, will help the
    Corps to update the topographic maps for the project. The Corps also
    expects to award a Geotech Investigation Drilling Contract in August
    2024. This work will assist in establishing current site conditions and
    soil characteristics, which will enable the Corps to design the project
    levees.

                              SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

        Chair Murray. Thank you very much to our witnesses today.
        We stand adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., Wednesday, May 15, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of
    the Chair.]

        ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2025

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2024

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Patty Murray (chair) presiding.
        Present: Senators Murray, Shaheen, Coons, Heinrich,
    Kennedy, Murkowski, and Hoeven.

                              DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                            Office of the Secretary

    STATEMENT OF THE HON. JENNIFER GRANHOLM, SECRETARY
    ACCOMPANIED BY THE HON. JILL HRUBY, UNDER SECRETARY, NATIONAL NUCLEAR
                SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

                    OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIR PATTY MURRAY

        Chair Murray. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate
    Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development
    will please come to order.
        We are here today to discuss President Biden's fiscal year
    2025 budget request for the Department of Energy, including the
    National Nuclear Security Administration. DOE's (Department of
    Energy) work has a direct bearing on our national security, our
    international competitiveness, and our ability to tackle the
    climate crisis. The investments we make at DOE protect our
    energy grid, drive down our dependence on foreign energy, drive
    down energy prices and drive forward innovation and clean
    energy, and so much more. At the Pacific Northwest Lab in
    Washington State, we are always seeing how these investments
    fuel cutting-edge research, but this is a constant race against
    the clock that is the climate crisis and against our
    competitors. We cannot cut investments without ceding ground.
    We have to make sure breakthroughs in AI, (Artificial
    Intelligence) quantum computing, clean energy, and so much else
    are happening here in America. And while we are at it, we have
    to make sure the jobs that follow are staying in America, too.
        But it is not just our economy that is at stake in the
    Department's work. It is our national security as well. For one
    thing, the climate crisis is more than a rolling series of
    devastating weather disasters. It is also an economic threat
    and a national security threat, as our generals have warned us.
    Then, of course, DOE's management of our nuclear activities has
    enormous stakes for our national security. And for the sake of
    our families, we have to take a balanced approach where we are
    investing not just in weapons, but in non-proliferation work
    and environmental cleanup efforts. So while I appreciate the
    targeted increases in the President's budget for nondefense
    programs, like improving our grid and existing energy
    infrastructure, developing and deploying new energy
    technologies, lowering emissions, and tackling the climate
    crisis, and funding our scientific research enterprise, I have
    to say I want to see a better balance than increasing nuclear
    weapon activities by 4 percent to nearly $20 billion, while
    decreasing nuclear nonproliferation and cleanup by 4-and-a-half
    percent and over 2 percent, respectively.
        Now, we proved last year that when we set partisanship
    aside, we are capable of working through these issues in a
    productive way. We wrote solid bipartisan bills for fiscal year
    2024 under some really tough top lines, and I even made sure we
    included historic funding for the Hanford nuclear cleanup in
    Washington State. That was huge progress, and I am pleased to
    see that this budget request includes funding to meet the
    obligations in the holistic agreement between the Department of
    Energy, EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), and the
    Washington State Department of Ecology, because we do have a
    moral and legal responsibility to do right by our Hanford
    workers and the Tri-Cities communities, and I will not rest
    until we have lived up to that. I hope we can once again make
    good bipartisan progress on that issue and many others, and I
    will remind my colleagues, the only way we are going to make
    that happen is by working together in good faith. And
    unfortunately, House Republicans are already once again
    planning to ignore the bipartisan deal they cut last year on
    top lines, and now push through drastic spending cuts to non-
    defense that are going nowhere. But just like last year, we can
    choose a different path here in the Senate, a bipartisan one.
        I know there are members on both sides who are concerned
    about how these tight caps will undermine our Nation's
    strength. And as I have said from the start, I share those
    concerns and have made clear that any additional resources must
    be provided equally between the defense and nondefense sides of
    the ledger because as we will talk a lot about today, both play
    a vital role in securing our Nation's future. Our measure of
    success should be what does it take to stay ahead of
    competitors like China and lead the industries of the future.
    What does it take to keep our economy strong, create jobs, and
    lower prices, and what does it take to keep our Nation safe? In
    other words, what does it take to actually meet the challenges
    we have before us. And hearings like this are a crucial
    opportunity to help answer those questions, so I look forward
    to discussing these issues today with our witnesses and working
    with Ranking Member Kennedy and our colleagues to deliver the
    resources DOE needs to keep us on the forefront of innovation
    and progress and to keep America safe.
        With that, I will turn it over to my Ranking Member
    Kennedy.

                       STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOHN KENNEDY

        Senator Kennedy. Thank you Madam Chair, and thank you,
    Madam Secretary and Madam Secretary, for being here. I want to
    apologize in advance. I have got a couple of other committees
    going, so I am going to be in and out. I would like to hear you
    talk today about a couple of things.
        First, Madam Secretary, I am very disappointed in the
    administration's decision to place a moratorium on LNG
    (Liquefied natural gas) permits. I do not see how that is going
    to further the goal of climate change. I do see how that is
    going to hurt America's energy independence, but, equally
    important, it is going to hurt our friends in Europe. It is
    going to help our enemies, like Qatar. It looks political to
    me, and I am hoping you will be able to address that. I would
    also like to talk today about whether the administration would
    consider--so far, it has not--it has considered it, but it has
    not done it--advancing plutonium pit production. We have done
    better, but it is still not enough. I am disappointed that the
    administration has not emphasized nuclear energy funding. I do
    not understand how we are going to achieve carbon neutrality
    without advanced small modular nuclear reactors, and the
    administration does not seem to want to talk too much about the
    benefits--of course there costs as well--but the benefits of
    nuclear energy. It seems to have worked out well in countries
    like France, which sees its energy future including a big role
    for nuclear energy. So those are the kinds of things that we--I
    am hoping we can talk about today.
        But I want to end my remarks, Secretary Granholm, with a
    more general thought. I consider you to be one of the most
    intelligent and accomplished appointees by President Biden.
    That does not mean I agree with all the positions that you have
    taken. I do not know to what extent you have taken those
    positions because you believe them or because you have been
    directed to take them by the White House, but I also feel like
    in our debate over energy transition, we are missing a major
    piece of the puzzle. And that is an explanation to the American
    people about what we are doing, why we are doing it, the costs
    of doing it, and the benefits and the tradeoffs, and I think
    you and your Department should take on that responsibility. Let
    me try to get to be more specific.
        There is a gentleman by the name of Dr. Bjorn Lomborg. I am
    not saying that he has all the answers, but he is a visiting
    professor at Stanford. He is head of a think tank in Europe
    called the Copenhagen Consensus. He is basically a climate
    change economist, and in peer review studies, he predicts, for
    example, that in order for us to be carbon neutral in not just
    the United States, in the world by 2050 and to maintain it
    through 2100, it will cost about 1 percent of the world's--not
    America's, but the world's GDP (Gross Domestic Product). Now,
    that does not sound like much until you reduce it to raw
    dollars. That is $27 trillion a year. That is the cost. He
    raises the question of whether we should spend that $27
    trillion or take a portion of it and instead use it to combat
    the effects of climate change, which he estimates we could do
    successfully worldwide for a trillion dollars a year. Now, you
    may not agree with his numbers or his analysis, but a cost-
    benefit analysis is worth pursuing instead of just throwing a
    bunch of money at the problem.
        For example, he raises the question--he believes that in
    order for China to become a carbon neutral by 2050 and maintain
    its carbon neutrality by--through 2100, it will cost China a
    trillion dollars a year. China is not spending a trillion
    dollars a year. China, in fact, has increased its carbon
    emissions 300 percent by 1990. He raises the question--it is a
    fair question--what happens if China does not cooperate? What
    is the impact on world carbon neutrality? If it does not
    cooperate, is America wasting all its money? He raises the
    question about Russia. He thinks that it would--Russia needs to
    start spending today $400 to $500 billion a year and spend that
    amount every year between now and 2100 to achieve carbon
    neutrality. That is about 3 times what Russia spends on its
    military. Does anyone in this room honestly believe that
    President Putin tomorrow is going to stand up and say, well, I
    am going to stop spending money on my military and start
    spending it on CO2 emissions? And Professor Lomborg
    raises the question of, well, what happens if they do not? What
    happens if India does not cooperate? Developing countries, they
    want the same things as us, they want to be able to eat and
    live indoors and their children to have better lives. Are we
    going to have to pay developing countries to--for their energy
    transition, particularly when it is cheaper for them to advance
    their societies using fossil fuels?
        These are the kind of questions that need to be hit head
    on, and we are not doing it, and this administration, with all
    due respect, has not done it. All we are doing is throwing
    money at a problem. And I asked, I think it was your deputy
    secretary, Madam Secretary, about a year or so ago. I said, if
    the United States Government achieves carbon neutrality by 2050
    and we spend the money to do it, how much will that lower world
    temperatures or how much will that decrease the increase in
    world temperatures. He said, I cannot guarantee you that it
    will lower temperatures at all because it depends on other
    countries. And I think that needs to be addressed head on, and
    I think you are the person to do it. I do not know if the White
    House will let you, but the world is yearning for this.
        I am going on too long, I am sorry, Madam Chair, but people
    are starting to figure out that they are going to have to pay
    for this. We see it in Germany right now. I mean, Germany said,
    well, we are just going to require everybody to convert to heat
    pumps. Now all of a sudden, people say, well, you mean I have
    got to go buy a $15,000 heat pump, and so they are pushing
    back. And in order to have people buy into an energy
    transition, they have got to understand that there is an
    overarching plan. I am sorry for going on so long, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. No worries. Thank you. Thank you, Ranking
    Member Kennedy. I will now briefly introduce our panel. We have
    Jennifer Granholm, Secretary of the Department of Energy, and
    Jill Hruby, undersecretary for nuclear security and
    administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration.
    We will now proceed with your--witness testimony from Secretary
    Granholm. You have 5 minutes for your testimony.

                  SUMMARY STATEMENT OF HON. JENNIFER GRANHOLM

        Secretary Granholm. Great. Thank you so much. I look
    forward to having this conversation with all of you. So nice to
    be here. Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and all the
    members of the subcommittee, honored to be here to discuss the
    President's budget request for 2025. Honored to be here
    alongside Jill Hruby, who has been leading our NNSA (National
    Nuclear Security Administration) in an extraordinary way.
        Three years ago, I joined this administration believing
    that if America could come together around a national energy
    strategy, we could restore manufacturing, we could create jobs,
    we could address the climate crisis, and we could become energy
    independent and secure, and today, we are doing just that.
    America is back. Thanks to Congress' efforts and the
    President's vision, we are executing a focused, deliberate
    strategy that positions our businesses to dominate, our workers
    to compete, and our communities to thrive, and it is working.
        Since the passage of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, for
    example, companies have announced more than 600 new or expanded
    just the clean energy manufacturing plants on American soil;
    nearly $200 billion in planned investment for batteries for
    electric vehicles, solar, wind, nuclear, and more; tens of
    thousands of jobs being created from Anchorage to Albuquerque,
    from Baton Rouge to Baltimore, from Washington to Wisconsin,
    and everywhere in between, thanks to the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act. Sustaining
    such growth, though, requires us to complement that historic
    funding with durable, long-term investments, so we are grateful
    for a fiscal year 2024 bill that appropriated more than $50
    billion for the Department, and the President's request for
    fiscal year 2025 will empower us to make even greater progress.
        Our commercialization tools are giving American businesses
    the confidence to capitalize on this moment while deepening our
    energy security, but deepening our energy security is an
    ongoing project, and we need to fund it year over year. I know
    the subcommittee shares this imperative. Thank you for the $2.7
    billion, for example, to build a domestic uranium strategy,
    industry as well as Congress' efforts to ban Russian uranium
    imports, which the President recently signed into law, and now
    we can get to work on building the domestic supply chain for
    civil nuclear fuel. The President's budget calls for
    significant appropriations for our demonstration and deployment
    programs, including our Office of Manufacturing and Energy
    Supply Chains, and our Grid Deployment Office so we can make
    the same progress along the energy economy.
        So DOE is making sure that every community can benefit from
    reliable, affordable, clean energy and efficiency technologies.
    We are leveraging dedicated funding from the infrastructure law
    for our Interagency Working Group on Coal and Power Plant
    Communities. I have seen firsthand how this program gives
    communities the gift of rebirth. It instills pride for the
    workers who defined America's energy past and will help to
    power its future. We are also planning for the future by
    doubling down on R&D (Research & Development). With an $8.6
    billion request for basic science research and $3 billion for
    applied R&D, we will make sure that each new generation of
    energy technologies is more innovative than the last from
    industrial decarbonization solutions to geothermal to fusion.
        We are also requesting $2 billion for critical and emerging
    technologies, like AI (Artificial Intelligence) and quantum.
    Both are key to economic competitiveness and defense, and DOE
    is uniquely positioned to drive them forward. And, of course,
    the budget also includes an historic $25 billion for NNSA. The
    growing cooperation between Russia and China and Iran and North
    Korea has created a more dynamic, less predictable
    international environment. Increased saber rattling and
    aggression against our allies and cyberattacks reinforce the
    imperative to maintain a safe, secure, and effective nuclear
    deterrent. The President's request would give the NNSA the
    means to deliver and adapt in the face of these evolving
    threats, and it would advance NNSA's wider priorities around
    arms control and nonproliferation and counterterrorism and the
    safe use of civil nuclear power, as well as naval nuclear
    propulsion.
        Thanks to the bipartisan assistance we have received from
    Congress, America is back. We are the envy of the world. We
    cannot afford to lose our momentum. It depends on your
    continued support. So thank you for the opportunity to address
    you today, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The statement follows:]
                   Prepared Statement of Jennifer M. Granholm
        Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members of the Committee,
    it is an honor to appear before you today to discuss the President's
    Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 Budget request for the Department of Energy
    (``the Department'' or ``DOE'').
        I want to begin by thanking you all for your work to negotiate and
    pass an FY 2024 bill that provides critically important appropriations
    to the Department of Energy. Thanks in no small part to the leaders on
    this Committee, we have proved to the American people that we can
    deliver results in an era of fiscal restraint. I am grateful to this
    Committee and your colleagues throughout Congress for supporting an
    agency that accomplishes so much for this country.
        It is the honor of a lifetime to serve the American people as the
    16th Secretary of Energy. The DOE workforce, from headquarters staff to
    scientists and engineers at the National Labs, is made up of dedicated
    and driven individuals that are working hard to advance the energy,
    economic, and national security of the United States. Through
    transformative science and technological solutions, we are making
    significant progress to address some of our Nation's most pressing
    challenges.
        The Department is committed to advancing this Administration's
    energy, climate, and nuclear security and nonproliferation goals. I
    want to thank Congress for the ongoing, bipartisan support for the
    Department of Energy and I look forward to working closely with the
    Committee as you consider the FY 2025 budget for DOE.
                                 budget topline
        DOE proposes $51 billion in budget authority for FY 2025. This
    Budget makes historic investments that will help the country lay the
    foundation to build a clean energy economy, invest in the American
    people, and ensure the U.S. reaches net-zero emissions by 2050.
        This Budget delivers results for the American people by creating
    jobs and investing in innovation for the energy economy; expanding
    cutting-edge research at National Laboratories; investing in critical
    and emerging technologies; advancing critical climate goals including
    industrial decarbonization; building the clean innovation pipeline;
    building, maintaining, and modernizing critical national security
    infrastructure; preventing adversaries from acquiring nuclear weapons;
    reducing health and environmental hazards for at-risk communities; and
    bolstering the cybersecurity and resilience of the energy sector. In
    addition, we have worked hard to focus our budget request on strategic
    investments, while maintaining our commitment to fiscal responsibility.
    Making the United States the leading nation for investing in clean
            energy.
        We are working to create a workforce for the future with the
    creation of high-quality, good- paying jobs. As we continue to power
    through this evolutionary period in our history, the Department is
    focusing on onshoring and reshoring supply chains and turning America
    back into a manufacturing powerhouse.
        The Budget invests $1.6 billion to support clean energy workforce
    and infrastructure projects across the Nation, including: $385 million
    to weatherize and retrofit homes of low-income Americans; $95 million
    to electrify Tribal homes, provide technical assistance to advance
    Tribal energy projects, and transition Tribal colleges and universities
    to renewable energy; $113 million for the Office of Manufacturing and
    Energy Supply Chains to strengthen domestic clean energy supply chains,
    and $102 million to support utilities and State and local governments
    in building a grid that is more secure, reliable, resilient, and able
    to integrate electricity from clean energy sources. These investments,
    which complement and bolster the historic funding in the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law (BIL), the CHIPS and Science Act, and the Inflation
    Reduction Act (IRA), create good-paying jobs while driving progress
    toward the Administration's climate goals, including a 100% carbon
    pollution-free electricity sector by 2035. Sustaining our early success
    requires long-term investments in annual appropriations that complement
    and bolster the historic funding in BIL and IRA.
        The Budget provides dedicated funding for the Interagency Working
    Group on Coal and Power Plant Communities and Economic Revitalization
    to facilitate a whole-of-government approach to workforce training,
    community engagement, and identification of Federal resources to spur
    economic revitalization in the hard-hit energy communities that have
    powered the Nation for generations.
        The Budget includes $24.1 million for the Office of Technology
    Transitions to focus on expanding the commercial impact of the
    Department of Energy's research investments and $3 million for the
    Foundation for Energy Security and Innovation that OTT is helping
    steward.
    Ensuring investments provide economic and clean energy benefits in the
            communities that have been left behind.
        We are ensuring that our economy does not neglect historically
    disadvantaged communities and instead works with them to guarantee an
    equitable transition. The Office of State and Community Energy Programs
    includes $385 million for the Weatherization Assistance Program to
    weatherize low-income homes. Weatherization programs work with local
    contractors and trades to improve home performance, which boosts local
    employment and creates new job opportunities, while uplifting America's
    most vulnerable families by reducing their annual energy costs by
    approximately $372 per household. Among the many benefits associated
    with weatherization, low-income households experience improved health,
    safety, and comfort, save money on their monthly energy bills, and
    reduce their overall impact on the environment by using fewer natural
    resources.
        Similarly, the State Energy Program is requesting $70 million in FY
    2025 for technical assistance to states, territories, and the District
    of Columbia to enhance energy security, advance state-led energy
    initiatives, and increase the affordability of energy. This request
    would provide funding for the Weatherization Assistance Program to
    support approximately 40,000 residential energy retrofits for low-
    income households.
        The Budget includes $8.2 billion for the Environmental Management
    program, reflecting this Administration's strong commitment to clean up
    and protect communities that supported defense production programs and
    government-sponsored nuclear energy research, including $3.1 billion to
    continue cleanup progress at the Hanford site in Washington. As the
    largest environmental cleanup program in the world, Environmental
    Management plays a key role in cleaning the environment, contributing
    to national security priorities, investing in the future and aiding
    community efforts to build strong economies, growing jobs, and
    preparing for a clean energy future. This investment will enable the
    Department of Energy to treat radioactive tank waste, take down
    contaminated buildings, ship and dispose legacy waste and clean soil
    and groundwater.
        The Budget also includes $205 million for the Office of Legacy
    Management to protect human health and the environment by providing
    long-term management solutions at over 100 World War II and Cold War
    era sites where the Federal government operated, researched, produced,
    and tested nuclear weapons and/or conducted scientific and engineering
    research. The Administration will ensure the investments for the
    cleanup of legacy pollution and long-term stewardship of these sites
    align with the Justice40 Initiative to benefit disadvantaged
    communities.
    With cutting-edge R&D, supporting industry so that each future
            generation of clean energy technology will be more innovative
            than the last.
        The Budget provides an investment of $8.6 billion for the Office of
    Science, advancing toward the authorized level in the CHIPS and Science
    Act to support cutting-edge research at DOE's 17 National Laboratories
    and partner universities to build and operate world-class scientific
    user facilities. These investments support identifying and accelerating
    novel technologies for clean energy solutions, improving predictability
    of climate trends and extremes using high performance computing,
    providing new computing insight through quantum information, expanding
    innovation in microelectronics, and positioning the United States to
    meet the demand for isotopes. Within funding for Science, the Budget
    provides over $800 million to advance the basic research needed to
    solve fundamental science and technology gaps towards the development
    of fusion power as a clean energy source in the U.S using diverse set
    of tools and strategic approaches.
        The Budget provides a historic investment of $1.9 billion in
    advancing critical and emerging technologies, including biotechnology
    and biomanufacturing, quantum information sciences, and artificial
    intelligence (AI) and machine learning. This investment strengthens
    U.S. leadership in science, technology, and innovation and plays a
    central role in the Department's national security mission. Included in
    this investment is $455 million for supporting the advancement of AI
    technologies and the development of foundational models to support new
    applications in science, energy, and national security. DOE's AI-
    related activities include fundamental research and development of AI
    and use of AI tools to explore machine learning, while assuring the
    safety, security and robustness of AI systems. DOE will also apply AI
    technologies to the stockpile stewardship mission and to early
    detection of foreign nuclear proliferation activities.
        The Budget provides $5 million to fund the recently established
    Office of Critical and Emerging Technologies (CET) that will coordinate
    efforts, support AI governance, and provide oversight across the
    Department. CET will develop a strategic outlook for these
    technologies, working with and through other DOE offices, enabling DOE
    leadership, as well as interagency, congressional, and external
    partners, to maximize the impact of DOE capabilities and investments in
    these key areas of national importance.
                        advances critical climate goals
        The Budget includes $10.6 billion in DOE climate and clean energy
    research, development, demonstration, and deployment programs,
    including over $1 billion to improve technologies to cut pollution from
    industrial facilities, nearly $900 million to commercialize
    technologies like sustainable aviation fuel and zero-emission trucks to
    cut emissions from the transportation sector, and over $2.4 billion--a
    majority of which is included in the Energy Efficiency and Renewable
    Energy (EERE) Program--to improve carbon-free electricity generation,
    transmission, distribution, and storage technologies for reliability,
    resilience, and decarbonization. Specifically, within the EERE Program,
    the budget includes $502 million for Vehicle Technologies Office, $280
    million for Bioenergy Technologies Office, $318 million for Solar
    Energy Technologies Office, $199 million for Wind Energy Technologies
    Office, $179 million for Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office,
    and over $500 million for Advanced Materials/Manufacturing and
    Industrial Efficiency and Decarbonation Offices. In addition, the
    Budget invests in advancing climate modeling within the Biological and
    Environmental Research Program in the Office of Science. Overall, this
    funding advances efforts crucial for achieving the goal of a 50- to 52-
    percent reduction from 2005 levels of economy wide net greenhouse gas
    pollution in 2030 and economy wide net-zero emissions no later than
    2050, while also reducing energy bills for American families.
                     accelerates industrial decarbonization
        Addressing the climate crisis requires rapid decarbonization across
    energy use sectors. The industrial sector contributes about a quarter
    of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and is a major opportunity for
    significant reductions. By investing more than $965.8 million in
    discretionary DOE industrial decarbonization activities, the Budget
    reflects the importance of supporting U.S. industrial decarbonization
    through innovation, targeted investment, and technical assistance. The
    Budget supports funding for Industrial Emissions and Technology
    coordination to drive adoption of industrial decarbonization solutions
    and expanded research and development efforts across DOE.
        makes historical investments to strengthen the nation's nuclear
       security and protect the nation from weapons of mass destruction
                                   terrorism
        The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) is doing
    extraordinary work to meet the challenges of today's ever-changing
    geopolitical landscape. NNSA helps to provide the cornerstone of our
    national defense by maintaining a safe, secure, reliable, and effective
    deterrent, while simultaneously working with key allies and partners on
    our shared nonproliferation goals. From powering the nuclear Navy to
    investing in infrastructure revitalization and modernization efforts,
    such as the Uranium Processing Facility at Y-12 and plutonium
    modernization efforts at Savannah River and Los Alamos, NNSA
    successfully meets a difficult and varied mission space. NNSA's efforts
    to reduce nuclear risks in Ukraine following Russia's further invasion
    over 2 years ago provide just one example of the essential mission NNSA
    is responsible for and executes with the utmost expertise and
    capability.
        The Budget provides a historic investment of $25 billion in the
    Nation's nuclear security enterprise to implement the President's
    National Defense Strategy and the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR),
    including $19.9 billion for Weapons Activities, which represents more
    than an $800 million increase over FY 2024 enacted levels. This funding
    will modernize the Nation's nuclear deterrent and keep the American
    people safe. The Budget supports a safe, secure, reliable, and
    effective nuclear stockpile and makes necessary investments to reduce
    global nuclear threats, provide safe and effective integrated nuclear
    propulsion systems for the U.S. Navy, and modernize the Department of
    Energy's Nuclear Security Enterprise, including recapitalizing
    essential scientific and production facilities.
        The Budget provides robust support for key modernization
    priorities, including Plutonium Modernization efforts that will
    strengthen NNSA's ability to produce no fewer than 80 plutonium pits
    per year at Los Alamos and Savannah River as close to 2030 as possible.
        The Budget enhances DOE capabilities to prevent and respond to
    Weapons of Mass Destruction terrorist attacks by non-state actors at
    home and abroad. It also supports DOE's long-standing effort to advance
    nuclear and radioactive material security, enhancing U.S. security,
    health, and economic interests. In addition, the Budget continues
    investments to develop the next generation of arms control
    technologies, including space-based monitoring and verification, and
    experts to help mitigate against emerging and evolving national
    security risks.
                Stockpile Management
        The Budget proposes $5.1 billion in FY 2025 for Stockpile
    Management to maintain a safe, secure, reliable, and effective nuclear
    weapons stockpile through stockpile modernization, stockpile
    sustainment, weapons dismantlement and disposition, production
    operations, and nuclear enterprise assurance. The Budget includes $2.8
    billion for six major modernization projects that extend the lifetime
    of the nation's nuclear stockpile while addressing required updates,
    replacing aging/obsolete components to ensure continued service life,
    and enhancing security and safety features.
                Production Modernization
        The Budget includes $5.9 billion for Production Modernization to
    support production capabilities for nuclear weapons components critical
    to weapon performance, including primaries, secondaries, radiation
    cases, and non-nuclear components. Included within this budget total is
    $2.9 billion for plutonium modernization to fund the equipment,
    facilities, and personnel required to reestablish the Nation's
    capability to produce 80 plutonium pits per year.
                Stockpile Research, Technology, and Engineering
        The Budget incorporates $3.2 billion for Stockpile Research,
    Technology, and Engineering to provide the scientific foundation for
    stockpile decisions and actions; develop the personnel required to
    support the current and future stockpile; and provide the capabilities,
    tools, and components needed to support all missions. The funding
    includes $683 million for the Inertial Confinement Fusion program to
    support facilities such as the National Ignition Facility and the Z
    facility in High-Energy-Density and ignition science experimental
    activities. The Budget also provides $880 million for Advanced
    Simulation and Computing, which is supporting NNSA's exascale high-
    performance computing capability.
                Infrastructure and Operations
        The Budget proposes $3.3 billion for Infrastructure and Operations
    to maintain, operate, and modernize the NNSA infrastructure in a safe
    and secure manner that supports program execution while maximizes
    return on investment and reduces enterprise risk. The FY 2025 Request
    provides funding for activities to enable plutonium pit production,
    expand capacity at the Kansas City National Security Campus (KCNSC),
    and address infrastructure modernization throughout the complex. The
    budget also includes $881 million in Maintenance and Repair for
    predictive, preventive, and corrective maintenance activities to
    maintain facilities, property, assets, systems, roads, and vital safety
    systems.
       restores american leadership in arms control and nonproliferation
        The Budget includes $2.5 billion for Defense Nuclear
    Nonproliferation to enhance the Nation's ability to prevent adversaries
    from acquiring nuclear weapons or weapons-usable materials, technology,
    and expertise; counter efforts to acquire such weapons or materials;
    and respond to nuclear or radiological incidents and accidents
    domestically and abroad. By limiting the number of nuclear-capable
    states and preventing terrorist access to materials and technology that
    can threaten the U.S. and allies, NNSA plays a critical role in
    enhancing global stability and constrains the range of potential
    threats facing the nation, our allies, and partners.
                            powers the nuclear navy
        The Budget includes $2.1 billion for DOE's Naval Nuclear Propulsion
    Program to ensure safe and reliable operation of reactor plants in
    nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers. The Budget
    prioritizes infrastructure modernization and investments to develop,
    refine, and deliver new technologies to the Navy and maintain America's
    advantage over its adversaries. The Budget continues to support the
    Columbia-Class Reactor System Development and recapitalizing spent fuel
    handling and examination capabilities at the aging Expended Core
    Facility in Idaho.
                                   conclusion
        I have been humbled and encouraged by our progress so far; this
    budget will help us accelerate developing a workforce for the future
    with the creation of high-quality, good-paying jobs. We are ensuring
    that our economy does not neglect historically disadvantaged
    communities and instead work with them to guarantee an equitable
    transition. As we continue to power through this evolutionary period in
    our history, the Department is focusing on onshoring and reshoring
    supply chains and turning America back into a manufacturing powerhouse.
    I want to again thank the Committee for its ongoing and bipartisan
    support for the DOE mission.
        Thank you for the opportunity to be here today. I am happy to
    answer your questions.

        Chair Murray. Thank you very much. We will now begin a
    round of 5-minute questions for our panel. I ask my colleagues
    to keep track of your clock and try and stay within those 5
    minutes.
        Secretary Granholm, I fought really hard to make sure the
    fiscal year 2024 bill provided record funding for the Hanford
    site in Washington State, so I want to reiterate how pleased I
    am that the DOE, Washington State Department of Ecology, and
    EPA have reached this holistic agreement now for the management
    of Hanford's tank waste. I understand the fiscal year 2025
    budget request has incorporated now that holistic agreement. We
    know the future holds some pretty steep increases to maintain
    compliance. How do you plan to meet the obligations that they
    just agreed to in that holistic agreement, particularly for the
    high-level waste facility?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. Thank you for that. I mean, the
    good news is that the agreement incorporates with timelines the
    movement forward on the high-level waste treatment via direct
    feed. The agreement also makes sure we have got a strong path
    for out-of-state grout disposal, for example, the construction
    of additional million dollar capacity for tank waste storage as
    well. We are excited to see this agreement, and we are excited
    to help fund it this year, obviously, to make that request.
    Thank you so much for your leadership in that. We also
    recognize we are going to need additional funding in years
    ahead if we are really to live up to the agreement and the path
    that is set forward, so we look forward to working with you on
    that for next year's budget.
        Chair Murray. Well, it will be work, and I appreciate your
    consistency.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Chair Murray. I have heard concerns from the Tri-Cities
    community about DOE's Cleanup to Clean Energy Initiative, which
    will use underutilized Hanford land for clean energy projects.
    What is your Department doing to incorporate feedback from the
    community into that initiative?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. We have a number of Cleanup to
    Clean Energy sites because, of course, the legacy waste
    management issues that we have--or responsibilities that we
    have. We have met with the Tri-Cities, and we are going to
    continue to meet with the Tri-Cities. We know and we are in
    constant contact with them about what they would like to see
    happen with the land. We know that there is an opportunity to
    have a partnership between what they would like to see on
    economic development and on powering that economic development
    with clean energy. The land has such potential for obviously
    solar, and we are excited about that.
        You know, we have been meeting with the Tribes as well as
    the community on this. We think it is really important in all
    of these sites that the communities are hand-in-glove with us
    on it, and we will continue, obviously, to meet with the Tri-
    Cities area. Tomorrow, for example, we are meeting in Savannah
    River at that site with the community. We have informational
    meetings. We have direct meetings with the communities that are
    adjacent--and the Tribes that are adjacent to make sure we have
    their input. So we will continue working with the community at
    Hanford----
        Chair Murray. Okay.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. And the other site.
        Chair Murray. Really important to do as we----
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Chair Murray [continuing]. Make decisions on that, so thank
    you. Secretary Granholm, your budget request increases funding
    for the Office of Science to over $8.58 billion, coming on the
    heels of our fiscal year 2024 bill that provided $8.24 billion.
    This funding is important for our competitiveness, providing
    support to our world-class national labs, and boosting
    scientific research, including at the Pacific Northwest
    National Lab. That research really drives domestic innovation
    across a lot of different fields--biologic and environmental
    research, AI, machine learning, quantum computing, clean energy
    technology--and I really believe that that kind of funding is
    really critical for our future. How does your budget request
    support innovation across critical emerging technologies like
    clean energy and AI?
        Secretary Granholm. So yes, on the basic research and
    development side, on the earlier part of the spectrum, we think
    that quantum, AI, fusion, all of these advanced technologies
    have to be funded because we are facing global competition. We
    are number one. We are not going to lose that spot, and that is
    why the support from Congress to be able to fund that basic
    research is so important. The 17 national labs are our jewels,
    as you know. You have got one in your state. The tools that are
    in those labs are essential for us to continue to move forward.
    The exascale computers, for example----
        Chair Murray. Mm-hmm.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. We continue to be number
    one. We have the top two exascale computers in the world, and
    we want to continue to have that, and those are obviously
    important for AI as well.
        So on the earlier side of the spectrum, super important.
    You move across the spectrum from demonstration to deployment,
    those are also important for us to be in the lead. We are not
    in the lead on deployment, but we can be, and that is why
    continuing to move across the spectrum is important. As you are
    aware, we have these joint strategy teams inside of the
    Department to make sure that both the research and development
    as well as the demonstration and deployment are all speaking to
    one another so that we are deploying with an eye to the future.
    And all of that is part of the strategy of how we reorganized
    the Department of Energy under--after the BIL (Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law)--and after BIL and IRA (Inflation Reduction
    Act) were passed.
        Chair Murray. Okay. Thank you. We know that China is
    investing heavily in scientific infrastructure. It is really
    critical that we keep pace.
        Secretary Granholm. Really critical.
        Chair Murray. Senator Kennedy.
        Senator Kennedy. I decided to stay. Okay. All right. Thank
    you, Madam Chair. Secretary Granholm, do you believe that the
    world can achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 without nuclear
    energy playing a substantial, substantial role?
        Secretary Granholm. I do not.
        Senator Kennedy. Okay. I agree with you. I want to go back
    to the--my thesis that I hope I articulated it reasonably well
    about we do not have an overarching plan or analysis for
    achieving CO2. In my opinion, we are just throwing money at it.
    Let's suppose Professor Lomborg is right: $27 trillion a year--
    that is worldwide--to achieve carbon neutrality and maintain it
    through 2100. Let's assume America's share, we produce 15
    percent CO2 emissions. That makes our share about $4 trillion a
    year. That is, I do not know, 8 to 10 percent of our GDP. It
    does not sound like much when you talk about it that way, but
    it is still $4 trillion a year every year. That is money we
    cannot spend on healthcare or feeding people, housing. What
    happens if we start spending $4 trillion a year each year for
    every year through just 2050, and China does not do its part,
    or Russia does not do its part, or India does not do its part,
    or Vietnam or Thailand? How much is our money going to reduce
    world temperatures or the increase in world temperatures?
        Secretary Granholm. Mm-hmm.
        Senator Kennedy. The answer is zero, is it not?
        Secretary Granholm. No, I do not think it is zero, but I do
    know that this is why we have global----
        Senator Kennedy. How much is it? But how much is it?
        Secretary Granholm. This is why we have all 190 countries
    signed on to get to net zero by 2050----
        Senator Kennedy. I know they have signed on, and excuse me
    for interrupting.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. And countries are moving
    in that direction, sir.
        Senator Kennedy. But they are not doing--I am asking you,
    and I hope they do it, okay, if it turns out that the
    scientists are right. I am not saying they are or they are not.
    It is just that the whole topic has become so politicized, but
    we do not have--we never talk about what happens if they do not
    and what is the likelihood that they will. Let me ask you
    again. If we spend $4 trillion a year every year until 2050 to
    achieve carbon neutrality in the United States, and President
    Putin and President Xi and Prime Minister Modi say, mmm, I do
    not think so. I think I am going to spend that on my--on
    domestic needs in my countries, how much are we going to reduce
    world temperatures?
        Secretary Granholm. With respect, I am not going to buy
    into the hypothetical because they have said--I do not know
    about Putin, but the President of China and Prime Minister Modi
    have all made commitments----
        Senator Kennedy. Uh-huh.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. To move in this direction
    and are spending money to move in this direction. But the
    better question is or a parallel question would be, what
    happens if we do not? If we don't----
        Senator Kennedy. Well, I am interested in my question,
    though.
        Secretary Granholm. Well----
        Senator Kennedy. You are good, and I--but I do not want you
    to change the subject.
        Secretary Granholm. It is the same subject.
        Senator Kennedy. Have you ever known President Xi to lie?
        Secretary Granholm. Well, I am not--I am telling you what
    it is in the plan----
        Senator Kennedy. He lies on occasion, does he not?
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. And what we have seen in
    terms of their spending. They have spent about $400 billion a
    year so far--that was, I think in 2023--on renewable energies.
    They are spending.
        Senator Kennedy. What about Russia?
        Secretary Granholm. They are spending.
        Senator Kennedy. What about Russia?
        Secretary Granholm. They are spending. Russia, I----
        Senator Kennedy. You honestly believe that----
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. Do not have the
    information on Russia.
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. President Putin----
        Secretary Granholm. They are not very transparent.
        Senator Kennedy. But do----
        Secretary Granholm. But all of these countries have signed
    onto the goal, and my point is, if we do not, sir, if we do
    not, we will be spending globally $38 trillion a year to clean
    up after the extreme weather events that are happening because
    of climate change.
        Senator Kennedy. Yes, but you use that figure, but I have
    seen no basis for it.
        Secretary Granholm. It is----
        Senator Kennedy. Professor----
        Secretary Granholm. I can send you that.
        Senator Kennedy. Professor Lomborg says it is--it is much
    less than that, but here's my point. Do we just start spending
    the $4 trillion a year and spend it blindly every year like
    clockwork, or it is--at what point, if China is not pulling its
    load, or Russia or Vietnam or Sub-Sahara Africa, at what point
    do we say--what model do we have in place to say, whoa, wait a
    minute, we are wasting our money because they are not spending
    theirs?
        Secretary Granholm. I believe that the United States and
    its leadership in this world, as well as our allies, are not
    going to throw in the towel, that this is too important in
    terms of our world, in terms of climate change going into the
    future, and the devastating impact it is having right now, much
    less----
        Senator Kennedy. I am out of time, but do you trust--look
    me in the eye--do you trust Vladimir Putin----
        Secretary Granholm. No, I do not trust him.
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. Or President Xi Jinping to do
    anything other than what is in their best political interest--
    --
        Secretary Granholm. Of course.
        Senator Kennedy [continuing]. And the power that they
    achieve in the world? Do you really believe that?
        Secretary Granholm. And in China's interest, it is in their
    interest to move down this path because they are experiencing
    extreme heatwaves and death as a result of climate change, and
    this is why they are spending what they are. And this is why
    they want to dominate these clean energy technologies because
    they see an economic advantage for them to be leading in this.
    So no, I do not trust what they say, but we will verify.
        Senator Kennedy. But you are willing--well, I have gone
    over. I am sorry, Madam Chair. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
    Thank you, Madam Secretary. I will try to come back or not.
        Chair Murray. All right. Thank you. Senator Shaheen.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you both for being here. I can
    reassure Senator Kennedy a little bit on Vietnam because I was
    just there, and I can tell you that we met with the second top-
    ranking official in Vietnam, and everybody we met with was very
    clear they were getting to, clean energy by 2050, and that is
    their goal. So, they talked about their concerns, significant
    concerns, both they and in the Philippines, about climate
    change and the impact that it is having there. So thank you for
    the work that you are doing.
        One of the best ways to address our energy needs is through
    energy efficiency, and energy saving performance contracting
    has been very effective. I used it when I was governor
    extensively. It saved taxpayers money, and it also saved
    thousands of pounds of pollution. Under the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law, we have made it possible--more possible for
    the Federal Government to use performance contracting. Can you
    talk about how you view that, how much that is going to be part
    of your recommendations, and also what DOE is thinking about in
    terms of trying to help States and municipalities use
    performance contracting?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. Performance contracting is just
    such a no-brainer. It is something that we are using. Our FEMP
    unit is pushing this across the Federal Government and
    certainly inside. The funding that was given, we just--FEMP
    just did a competitive grant which it is with the AFFECT
    funding that, thank you very much, Congress supplied. Eighty-
    five percent of the awardees from that grant went to
    performance contracting, so we believe in it. It is a win-win,
    and we would like to see more of it.
        Senator Shaheen. And do you have any estimates on how much
    money we are going to be able to save the Federal Government by
    using performance contracting? And then also, if you could
    speak to what can be done through DOE to help States and
    municipalities?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. Well, I will say the State energy
    offices we work with all the time in providing technical
    assistance as well as grant funding. In terms of the actual
    percentage of what has been saved, I am going to get back to
    you on that----
        Senator Shaheen. That would be great.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. Or the percentage or the
    actual numbers----
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. Because I do not have that
    in my notes here.
        Senator Shaheen. Great.
        Under Secretary Hruby, Russia is no longer participating in
    the New Start Treaty and have been rattling sabers about their
    nuclear weapons during the war in Ukraine and also the concern
    about weaponizing space with nuclear weapons. So can you talk
    about how we are talking to our allies and partners about our
    own nuclear deterrent and how we are reassuring them that what
    we are doing is safe?
        Ms. Hruby. Yes. Thank you for this question. It is--you
    know, the approach that we have taken in the Department of
    Energy and NNSA over the--this administration is since we are
    not talking to our adversaries, let's double down on talking to
    our allies and partners, and have done that. We have spent a
    lot of time in NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) and
    Asia, with our partners around the world, and there is an
    increased knowledge and an increased interest in everything
    that we are doing, and our weapons program and our nuclear
    deterrence program writ large, including our non-pro.
        And they are--you know, the world is making huge--I mean,
    we are making huge contributions to Ukraine. So is the rest of
    the world. Some of that we are doing in complete cooperation--
    much of it we are doing in complete cooperation to make sure we
    are covering the nuclear threat. And I would just say that, you
    know, we have continued--this is not--this environment is
    creating a great deal of cooperation, and we will have a lot to
    do to continue to reassure. But at this point, I think we have
    really increased our communication, and there is much better
    understanding of nuclear deterrence. I say the nuclear IQ is
    higher than it has been in a long time in both NATO and with
    our allies in Asia.
        Senator Shaheen. Well, one of those partnerships is around
    AUKUS with Australia and the United Kingdom. How is NNSA
    involved in the nuclear technology that is going to be critical
    to AUKUS?
        Ms. Hruby. Yes, in two different ways. So in the NNSA, we
    do have an element of Naval Reactors. The Naval Reactors has a
    DOD part and a DOE part. We in the NNSA operate laboratories
    that design fuels for reactors. And the way the AUKUS agreement
    will work is those submarines that will be provided to
    Australia will have a completely sealed nuclear reactor. The
    materials will not be able to be removed. It will be, you know,
    the same--have the performance like our reactors, completely
    sealed, very good reactors, very good for nonproliferation. We
    also have a significant effort in our nonproliferation element
    where we are working with Australia and the IAEA (International
    Atomic Energy Agency) to make sure that all of the systems are
    in place to assure the world that there is no diversion of
    nuclear material as a result of AUKUS.
        Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Thank you both.
        Chair Murray. Senator Murkowski.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Secretaries,
    thank you for being here, your leadership.
        Secretary Granholm, it is kind of fortuitous that we are
    having this hearing today because in Energy and Natural
    Resources Committee yesterday, we had a hearing on the rising
    energy demand and what it means as we see greater needs across
    all sectors for increased energy, and the fact that it just
    takes too darn long to complete energy projects in this
    country, how we bring them online and kind of this mismatch. It
    is something that I look at and if we are not more cognizant of
    the vulnerabilities that we have right now. We are talking a
    lot about bringing on intermittent sources of power, but base
    load is where it counts. Base load is where it counts, and this
    is why I have been pressing you and the folks on your team on
    the geothermal space. I think we have just got so much more
    room to run there.
        Hydro, we have got so many of our hydro facilities that are
    up for relicensing in this next handful of years, and the
    relicensing process takes 10 years and millions and millions of
    dollars. So I am looking at this gap coming at us, and we want
    to build chips facilities. We want to have data servers
    everywhere. One project--one training facility on our military
    base in Anchorage at JBER (Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson),
    one training facility is going to increase their energy
    consumption on JBER by 50 percent, and it is the number one
    unfunded priority that that we have right now within PACAF
    (Pacific Air Forces). So we are going to do it, but where are
    we going to get the resources from? And as I have shared with
    you, we have got a decline in our natural gas reserves in Cook
    Inlet. So I will be damned if we are really going to import LNG
    from Canada, but that is where things are trending right now.
        So I am looking at the timing of all of this, and I want to
    push you, and I need your team to be working with us. You know,
    you have got this great commercialization liftoff for
    geothermal. We want to know where the barriers are, what we
    need to be doing to move forward on some of these pilot
    projects, the research. Everything that we can do to work with
    you to advance that, know that we are in that with you.
        I want to use my time on two questions. One is critical
    minerals, and the other one, very quickly, is on fuel tanks.
    Fuel tanks. On the critical minerals, I do thank you for going
    back and looking at the authorities for your support for
    mineral projects through the Loan Program Office. You went
    back, you took a look at it, reevaluated the Department's
    position, and I think it is going to be important. I am hoping
    that you will be able to provide the committee or some of us
    with the process on financial assistance for critical minerals
    and mine projects. Do the parties need to reach out to DOE? Is
    there a point of contact that we can direct people to? Are
    there certain minerals that you are looking to prioritize, kind
    of help us through this in terms of what some of the conditions
    of the loan may be. So I would like some information on that.
        And then just as a point of curiosity, I read last week
    that DOD had funded two Canadian mineral projects. One is $6-
    and-a-half million. The other is about $8-and-a-half million.
    The Canadian Government provided $9.2 million, we are right in
    there with them. But in an interview, the Canadian Energy
    Minister stated that the funding from the DOD grants are ``no
    strings attached.'' Do you have within DOE any grants to
    mineral companies in the U.S. that have no strings attached
    because if that is the case, we got a lot of people in line for
    that?
        Secretary Granholm. I am not sure--I have not read that,
    and I am not familiar with the DOD process. There are usually
    strings attached, as you know----
        Senator Murkowski. To most everything.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. Certainly the regulatory
    environment that we have to be cognizant of, et cetera, so I am
    not sure if he was just being colloquial or if there is----
        Senator Murkowski. Let's follow up with this----
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Murkowski [continuing]. If we can. I am doing a lot
    of talking and not giving you a chance to answer, but I want to
    leave you with this. In so many of our small, rural
    communities, their power is diesel generation. We want to get
    them off it. They are doing everything that they can to move
    towards their own little microgrid, whether it is a little bit
    of a wind, a little bit of solar, whether it is a run of
    ribbon--run of river. They are working hard to get off that,
    but every one of these is going to need their backup generator,
    and so we are never going to be able to get rid of the need for
    that fuel. Our problem right now is they store the fuel in
    these fuel storage tanks, these bulk facilities. There is about
    a $1.5 billion in deferred maintenance issue for over 200 bulk
    fuel farms throughout rural Alaska, and when I say ``farms,'' I
    mean, I am talking like a couple tanks.
        We are not talking big things, but we have been working
    through the Denali Commission. We have got a couple million a
    year to allocate to this--these projects, but we have reached
    out to you at DOE. We are told that you are not aware of any
    grant programs that are available to Tribes in rural areas to
    address this. But it seems to me that this should be something
    where the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management or the
    Office of Indian Energy or the Arctic Energy Office should be
    able to address this. So I am using a little bit of my time to
    raise this as an issue with you. We are trying to work it. We
    need some help with your teams to identify how we can address a
    problem. And I think it is not just unique to us. I am looking
    at my friend from New Mexico there, and I think it is probably
    something that you face as well.
        Secretary Granholm. Well, I look forward to working with
    you all on it. If there is no direct authorities right now,
    perhaps there are some that we can create, and I will be
    following up with you on the other issues that we discussed
    because I have some answers.
        Senator Murkowski. Thank you.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. Senator Heinrich.
        Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair. Secretary
    Granholm, you actually joined me to see the very first wind
    towers coming off the line at Arcosa's Manufacturing Plant in
    Belin, New Mexico. And that is a great example of how the
    Inflation Reduction Act is literally bringing manufacturing
    back to the United States, and I believe that we now need to do
    the same for components of our power grid, things like
    transformers. Can you talk a little bit about how your budget
    request of $113 million for the Office of Manufacturing and
    Energy Supply Chains can help ensure that we have American-made
    grid components?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. I mean, we are doing a number of
    things on this. First, we--and thank you for your leadership on
    it because we know that we are going--we may need some
    additional support for it.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes.
        Secretary Granholm. Our Office of Manufacturing and Energy
    Supply chains, as an example, did this with heat pumps through
    the Defense Production Act----
        Senator Heinrich. Right.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. And was able to
    essentially seed domestic industry growth here, and we would
    like to do the same with grid components, particularly
    transformers. I will say, though, that 48(c) gave us an
    opportunity to fund six grid transformer manufacturers in this
    country. So there will be that expansion because that was a
    bottleneck as we try to get full supply chains back here. 48(c)
    has a wide scope, so we are excited about that. To the extent
    that we can work on other mechanisms to be able to enhance
    manufacturing in the U.S., we would be excited to do that and
    excited to work with you on it.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. Yes, I think transformers are a
    real, as you know, bottleneck right now and something we should
    be making here for our own security.
        Administrator Hruby, I understand that Los Alamos National
    Laboratory will need more power than its existing power lines
    can handle by as soon as potentially 2027, and to address that,
    NNSA decided that building a new transmission line was going to
    be necessary. Now, I know when NNSA first looked at this,
    energized reconductoring felt like a little bit of a stretch,
    but we have seen enormous progress since then. Is energized
    reconductoring something you would be willing to evaluate to
    meet LANL's (Los Alamos National Laboratory) power needs?
        Ms. Hruby. Yes. Thanks, Senator Heinrich. The answer is
    yes. We have to--of course, this is a big process of making
    sure that we are working with all the stakeholders and--in New
    Mexico. The first time we looked at reconductoring, it actually
    required larger areas to set it up that the Tribes were worried
    about, sensitive. So we just need to--there has been a lot of
    progress made in the 2 years since we last looked at that, and
    we will have another look to see if anything significant has
    changed. Meanwhile, we will, in parallel, move along because as
    you mentioned, 2027 is not that far, and we want to continue to
    do this. So we will keep the process moving that we have right
    now, the NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) process, but
    we will take another look at reconductoring. I think it makes
    sense.
        Senator Heinrich. I appreciate that, and I have heard
    concerns from the Tribes about the current proposal as well, so
    I just think we need to evaluate all our options here.
    Administrator Hruby, during my tenure in Congress, I have
    worked really hard to nearly double the budget at Los Alamos
    National Lab, but as you know, with that growth comes a lot of
    growing pains, and particularly in housing. What can we do to
    make sure that we are addressing the housing challenges that
    face Los Alamos, in particular?
        Ms. Hruby. Yes. Senator Heinrich, this is a good question.
    You know, for those of you who know Los Alamos, its land is
    limited on the Mesa, and housing is expensive and in high
    demand, so we have done a couple of things. We probably need to
    do more, but we have opened an office in Santa Fe so that
    people who are not working in the labs, that are working in
    offices will be--can be closer to other housing, Santa Fe, but
    also a broader region. We have also looked at options on the
    other side of the Lab to see if there are some things that we
    could do to open office spaces in northern--on the north side,
    and that is still being evaluated. We have offered housing
    assistance to temporary workers, construction workers in the
    area so that we can get them there to work on, in particular,
    the plutonium facility.
        So I think we have addressed this in a few ways. We cannot
    create more land on the Mesa, so we are looking--we are
    thinking--we are trying to be creative about the options that
    we can provide.
        Senator Heinrich. Great. Thank you.
        Chair Murray. Senator Coons.
        Senator Coons. Thank you, Chair Murray, and thank you both
    to our witnesses today for your leadership in America's energy
    security and for delivering on the promise of landmark
    legislation--the Chips and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction
    Act, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. You are really
    delivering a next-generation energy future for America. And
    since the last time we held this budget hearing, Delaware and
    the Mid-Atlantic region have been selected for one of the
    hydrogen hubs, which has potential to be transformational for
    my region and to give it an opportunity to really participate
    in the hydrogen economy of the future. We have several iconic
    Delaware companies that are at the leading edge of electrolyzer
    technology. We have three oil refineries at the head of the
    Delaware Bay in three States that are committed to a
    transformation towards hydrogen production and deployment, if
    we can get this right.
        Madam Secretary, how are you making sure that each of the
    hubs gets the support and the flexibility they need to achieve
    liftoff? I am concerned about flexible matching requirements,
    in particular, so that we can not just put out a big grant
    announcement, but actually strike the right balance between
    private sector partners, public sector investment, and getting
    hydrogen secured as a next-generation fuel.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. This is such an important issue.
    We want these hubs to succeed, and we know we have to carve
    this with a scalpel and not with an axe. The 45(v)
    requirements, I know, have been put out, and we have received
    20,000 or 30,000 comments from stakeholders on all sides.
    Treasury, with the assistance of DOE are--we are wading through
    the comments to make sure that we get it right. Suffice it to
    say the Biden Administration is deeply invested in making a
    hydrogen economy successful in this country. We are--I can tell
    you, in meeting with all of my counterparts across the world,
    we are really the envy of the world because we have such a
    diverse array of hydrogen--of inputs for these hydrogen hubs.
    So we are looking at it, we are evaluating, and we want to get
    it right.
        Senator Coons. Thank you. I just in our particular case, I
    worry about a cash flow crunch in terms of what is the timing
    of the matching requirements, and I want to make sure we get
    this right, and I very much look forward to working with you on
    that.
        CHIPS (Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce
    Semiconductors) and Science also helped authorize a new
    foundation for your Department--FESI--the Foundation for Energy
    Security and Innovation, which is a tool many other Federal
    agencies and entities have used to attract and deploy private
    sector funding. In fact, I was thrilled that, in part because
    of funding from this subcommittee, there was the announcement
    of the inaugural board of directors a few weeks ago. What are
    the key challenges facing the Department of Energy that you
    think would benefit from----
        Secretary Granholm. Interesting.
        Senator Coons [continuing]. Public-private partnership from
    philanthropic capital and coordination?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes, thank you so much. First of all,
    thank you for your leadership on this. I know this has been in
    the works for a long time.
        Senator Coons. For years.
        Secretary Granholm. A long time, and there was such a sense
    of joy when we finally announced the board members, and it was
    funded to be able to get it launched. I know the board is--it
    is a mixture of people with a variety of talents, and so they
    are interested in the spectrum of things that they might be
    helpful on. But I do know there is a wealth of opportunity in
    the space of taking ideas from labs to commercialization.
        Senator Coons. Mm-Hmm.
        Secretary Granholm. And so helping those and getting a
    sense of the spectrum from all of the various labs. I mean,
    there is just so--it is so rich in that environment. They are
    very interested in leaning in on that, so I think that is a
    very big way they can help. I would say there is one other way
    that is not so technically involved, which is, to help us think
    through and maybe help to supply technical assistance to, for
    example, Tribes----
        Senator Coons. Mm-Hmm.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. And other areas, rural
    areas where the region might not--just do not--does not have
    the--is not equipped to be able to navigate the bureaucracy of
    the Federal Government to apply for a grant or a loan. So those
    kinds of things, they are looking at the vast array of it, but
    thank you so much for giving us this assist at the Department.
    Even though it is totally independent and bipartisan, it will
    be a great assist to future--to the Department going well into
    the future.
        Senator Coons. My most bipartisan bill in this area is the
    PROVE IT Act with Senator Cramer that has 14 bipartisan co-
    sponsors, and it just advanced out of EPW (Energy and Public
    Works), I think, by a vote of 14 to 5 in January, and NETL
    (National Energy Technology Laboratory), the whole suite of
    National Labs will be critical to gathering data about
    emissions intensity. Any thoughts you want to share about what
    resources you might need as a Department? Obviously Commerce,
    USTR, State, EPA, there would be a whole range of participants,
    but it would really be DOE led. Any thoughts about what
    actually gathering emissions-intensity data to advance
    industrial decarbonization might look like for the Department?
        Secretary Granholm. Well, I hope the authorizers and the
    appropriators come together on providing some resources to make
    this happen, but the bottom line is I think it is an incredibly
    important bill for our competitive advantage. If we are
    manufacturing products, we need to know what that footprint
    looks like, and this is one way to be able to keep--to do that
    and to keep it updated, so thank you for your leadership on it.
    I can see why it is so overwhelmingly supported.
        Senator Coons. And I am simply going to reinforce what two
    of my colleagues said. The transformer--the domestic
    transformer manufacturing bottleneck is something I hear about
    constantly from the----
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Coons [continuing]. Delaware Electric Co-op, and
    Senator Shaheen has been a leader as long as I have been here
    on performance contracting and energy efficiency----
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Coons [continuing]. And in my previous role on
    FSGG, I tried to give some lift to performance contracting.
    Anything I could do be helpful, I would like to.
        Secretary Granholm. Thank you.
        Senator Coons. Thank you for your forbearance, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. Yes. Senator Heinrich, do you have additional
    questions?
        Senator Heinrich. Sure. Thank you. Secretary Granholm, New
    Mexico is well poised to be a top geothermal energy producer,
    something that is getting a lot more attention now, I think. I
    wish we had been sort of further along the trajectory of
    understanding just how close we are to advanced geothermal
    productivity in this country when we passed the Inflation
    Reduction Act.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. In New Mexico, we have got not only the
    resources, but the skilled workers from the oil and gas
    industry, very similar skillset. We have got Sandia's
    Geothermal Research Program backing this up, and your
    Department estimates that new geothermal technology could give
    us as much as 90 gigawatts of clean energy by 2050. So one of
    the things I am doing is pushing for a $125 million carveout to
    start funding demonstration projects for advanced geothermal
    technology. Can you talk a little bit about how this investment
    could help DOE reach its goals for advanced geothermal and just
    the state of the technology right now, because I do not think
    people understand, like, we are on the verge of something
    really, really big here.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes, it is amazing, and thank you for
    looking at that. I agree that if we had, you know, been more
    expansive in the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law, we might have been able to address this,
    but thank you for considering plussing up our efforts in
    geothermal. If we do that, we will be able to prove out that
    you can have geothermal in a variety of geologies in a variety
    of locations, even where the resource is deeper into the
    surface, because of the advances made in hydraulic fracturing
    technology from the oil and gas industry. This is why, speaking
    of bipartisanship, this is such a bipartisan--I think, the
    notion of geothermal is a very bipartisan issue, and I am
    hopeful that we can do that.
        So we have done this enhanced geothermal liftoff report, as
    you noted. It has identified specific barriers that we are
    break--we are breaking down, but honestly, so many of those
    barriers now end up being market barriers, et cetera, because
    the technology barriers, through efforts like Fervo and others
    they, they are breaking down. And the tech world is reaching
    out to these companies that are doing this enhanced because
    they would like to see data centers paired with geothermal to
    get that firm baseload power, which we are very encouraging of,
    so we are excited about the potential breakthroughs. I just
    want to see the funding commensurate with the potential, and so
    thank you for your leadership on it.
        Senator Heinrich. Absolutely, because I think we have known
    for a long time, or for a substantial amount of time, how to
    decarbonize the first 80 percent of the power sector. It is
    that last 20 percent that has been so elusive, and now we have
    technology that works.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Heinrich. And we just need to bring it down the
    cost curve.
        Secretary Granholm. Right.
        Senator Heinrich. And there is no doubt in my mind that
    this is another distributed technology that can be brought down
    the cost curve.
        Department of Energy recently announced a major proposal to
    perform groundbreaking work at the intersection of artificial
    intelligence, science, energy, national security. Can you talk
    a little bit about how the national labs--Los Alamos, Sandia,
    and others--will be incorporated into that project?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes, and I feel free to toss Director--
    Administrator Hruby as well. But the President's executive
    order on AI has unleashed a whole swath of activity across
    agencies. Obviously because of the national labs, we are the
    places where we do have those exascale computers and where the
    tools for leading in AI exist. The President's executive order
    set forth deadlines, shot clocks, et cetera, and we have been
    meeting all of them. One of the important ones is to be able to
    train up 500 AI researchers and scientists, and that is going
    to be critical for not just the Federal Government, but across
    the span of things.
        We are concerned on the plus side of AI of having enough
    power, and--but we think that AI can help to solve some of that
    because AI can teach us how to be more efficient as well. And,
    in fact, I think Nvidia just announced that they have halved
    the energy use of their chips, which is great, but there is
    still more that needs to be done on that.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes.
        Secretary Granholm. And we are also concerned about the
    negative uses of AI as well. Let me just toss it over to
    Administrator Hruby.
        Senator Heinrich. Administrator.
        Ms. Hruby. I love when it gets negative. So just to pick up
    on that, we are--another role that the Department has and NNSA,
    in particular, has is red teaming AI models and looking for
    issues that our adversaries might use. And we are really,
    like--we need the computers, we need the models, and we need to
    do good things with them, and we need to make sure nobody else
    is taking advantage of them or finding information. So we are
    really well along in that in NNSA, and we will--you know, that
    is an important role that we will play.
        Senator Heinrich. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. Senator Coons, did you have any additional
    questions?
        Senator Coons. No, thank you.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. I will turn it to Senator Hoeven
    in just a second, but while he is getting settled, I just
    wanted to follow up on what Senator Coons talked about on the
    hydrogen hubs. Pacific Northwest was selected for a billion-
    dollar award, along with the six other sites. The Treasury
    Department's proposed 45(v) rulemaking has thrown up some
    really big roadblocks, and all seven of the hydrogen hubs have
    now made it clear that those rules need revisions for them to
    work. Major companies in this space have already announced that
    they are going to pull back hydrogen investments unless there
    are changes. You are not in charge of Treasury, but their final
    rule will affect the success of these hydrogen hubs, and I
    wanted to ask you, are you working with the administration to
    make sure that the final 45(v) rule helps rather than hinders
    in this process?
        Secretary Granholm. Yes, we are.
        [Laughter.]
        Chair Murray. Okay.
        Secretary Granholm. It is very important. I mean, your
    point is super important, and that is why those 20,000 comments
    that we received, they are painstakingly being reviewed, and we
    just got to make sure these work.
        Chair Murray. Yes, we do.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Chair Murray. Okay. Thank you. Senator Hoeven.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Madam Chair. Secretary, good to
    see you. Thanks for being here.
        Secretary Granholm. Good to see you.
        Senator Hoeven. I want to ask you about both the Clean
    Power Plan 2.0 and also MATS, and MATS, particularly, has an
    impact on lignite coal more so than other types of coal. I
    think you are aware of that. We have had you out to North
    Dakota, so I know you know quite a bit about our industry. But
    the independent grid operators, including PJM, Southwest Power
    Pool, which, of course, is--we have both MISO and Southwest
    Power Pool, and we supplied power to about 9 States out of
    North Dakota, coal-fire and electric power. But PJM, SPP and
    ERCOT all have indicated that they think that these two rules
    are going to be a huge problem in terms of keeping enough
    baseload for grid reliability, and I have full letters from all
    three of them. Madam Chairman, I would ask they be made part of
    the record----
        Chair Murray. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]
       [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Senator Hoeven [continuing]. Expressing those concerns
    regarding these two EPA rules as promulgated by EPA, so, you
    know, we are going to need some help here. As you know, we are
    leading the way on this--these carbon capture, both for coal
    gasification, which is already in place, but also for carbon
    capture on coal-fired electric plants, both on the--our U.S.
    utility--the co-op side and on the private investor side. But
    with these rules, we are not going to get there, and you have
    got hundreds of millions invested with us in these projects.
        Secretary Granholm. I respectfully disagree that we are not
    going to get there. In fact, the--when the EPA put out its
    proposed rule, it took in feedback, listened to the concerns of
    the power authorities, and pushed back the date by which coal
    plants--existing coal plants would have to install carbon
    capture equipment. The question is, is it technologically
    feasible? You have proved out that it is technologically
    feasible, and we have financing mechanisms to help----
        Senator Hoeven. Yes.
        Secretary Granholm [continuing]. Fund the installation. So
    we think it is not just think. We have done this analysis with
    them. We have an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) with the
    EPA, and we think that--you know, I understand people being
    worried about it, but by, you know, in the 2030s, it will be--
    people will see that it is doable, and you guys have been the
    example of how that is possible.
        Senator Hoeven. We are doing it both for geologic storage
    now and EOR (Enhanced Oil Recovery), both, and these projects
    now are coming online. So we are--now, I have already talked to
    EPA administrator, Michael Regan, about coming out, and I am
    going to bring him out, as long as he agrees to come, to the
    EERC (Energy & Environmental Research Center) where you, where
    you have already visited.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Hoeven. And I know or I believe it was beneficial
    for you. I think it would be helpful to him, but he needs to
    talk to our experts about how we are going to address these
    rules, and we are going to need flexibility under these rules
    if we are going to be able to move forward. So I would ask for
    your assistance, for Deputy Secretary Turk's assistance, for
    EPA assistance on this.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. We have got the technology. We
    have got the ability. We can do this, and we would be happy to
    partner on it.
        Senator Hoeven. Let me also ask you about the cooperative
    agreements that relates to EERC. They have had cooperative
    agreements with the DOE since, I think, going back into the
    1980s. We need to renew that. As you know, they are not only
    doing all this work in the carbon capture area, but they are
    the leader on the Headwaters Hydrogen Hub, which covers
    Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, so I would like to ask
    that you would work with us to reauthorize it. It is up, I
    think, next year, but it needs to be reauthorized, and they
    have ongoing projects. So these--we do need to reauthorize our
    cooperative agreement. Now, the funding, of course, we do that
    separately, so that does not guarantee them funding, right? We
    work on that through appropriations, but they have to have the
    authorization to continue to work projects.
        Secretary Granholm. So, you know, we love EERC and they
    have been a partner with DOE for many, many years.
        Senator Hoeven. You can say that again if you want.
        [Laughter.]
        Secretary Granholm. The EERC, over the past few years, I
    think the past 5 years, they have won nine competitive awards
    because they are so capable.
        Senator Hoeven. Yes. They are doing a lot of work.
        Secretary Granholm. We are trying to move in the direction
    of more competitive relationships, though, and they compete.
        Senator Hoeven. I know. Hence, I expressed the difference
    between authorization and the appropriation.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Hoeven. And that is very important because we need
    to keep those--now, whether you end up giving them an award, we
    will work with you on that, but they have got to have the
    underlying authorization for continuity of projects, and then
    they compete with--on the awards, just like anyone else.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Hoeven. So that is why I would ask for your help,
    and if you would direct the deputy secretary--he has been very
    good working with us, but--or authorize or support, but that is
    where we need to get to.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Hoeven. So if you have questions about that
    relative to the competitive aspect you all are working on, I am
    happy to work on that, but I need your help to work on it.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes. We will continue to work with you,
    but as you know, even on this committee, there has been a push
    toward competition, and so we want to----
        Senator Hoeven. Yes.
        Secretary Granholm. We love all of our masters.
        [Laughter.]
        Senator Hoeven. Yes. No, I understand.
        Secretary Granholm. Yes.
        Senator Hoeven. Could I ask one more question, Madam Chair?
        Chair Murray. Of course.
        Senator Hoeven. And this is actually for Under Secretary
    Hruby, the warheads for the Sentinel Program, ICBM, right? As
    you know, that--the Sentinel is undergoing a Nunn-McCurdy
    review, and Air Force is working diligently on that. I have
    talked to them a lot about it, but I want to make sure--but it
    is not a technological issue. Mainly it is they got to pour so
    darn much concrete that it is just a, you know, a construction
    issue. You know, it is like building the interstate system
    again in some respects for a lot of that area. Are you staying
    on track and on top of what you have to do both for Sentinel
    and for the LRSO,the cruise missile warhead, the two different
    warheads?
        Ms. Hruby. Yes, thank you for that question. Yes, the
    Sentinel Warhead we call the W87-1, and we are just--as Nunn-
    McCurdy is proceeding, we are proceeding with the W87-1 warhead
    on the schedule that we currently have. We are part--we are
    asked to be an observer of the Nunn-McCurdy process, so we stay
    well aware of what is going on there, and when it is finished
    and there is a decision made, then we will make sure we sync up
    our timelines again. It is important for us that we have a
    flight test for our warhead development program.
        Senator Hoeven. Right.
        Ms. Hruby. So that will be where we have to--that is the
    particular point where we really want to make sure we stay
    synced up. On the 80-4, we are well aligned, and it is pretty
    far along in its development, and we will be making a lot of
    W80-4s to put on the standoff weapon before long.
        Senator Hoeven. Yes. Incredibly important at this time with
    what is going on in China and Russia.
        Ms. Hruby. It is, yes.
        Senator Hoeven. So thank you for that.
        Ms. Hruby. Thank you.
        Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Chair Murray. Thank you. That will end our hearing today,
    and I want to thank our witnesses and my colleagues for
    participating. I look forward to working together on this
    year's appropriation bill to make sure we are providing the
    Department of Energy with the resources they need.

                         ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

        I will keep the hearing record open for 1 week. Committee
    members who want to submit written questions for the record
    should do so by 5 p.m., Wednesday, May 29. We appreciate the
    Department of Energy to responding to them in a reasonable
    period of time.
        The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
                 Questions Submitted to Hon. Jennifer Granholm
                 Question Submitted by Senator Martin Heinrich
        Question. Sandia National Labs' MESA Facility is crucial for
    creating secure semiconductors and studying future computer tech. But
    it's old and needs replacing. What can you do to keep MESA running for
    important research and production?
        Answer. DOE/NNSA is committed to sustaining the Microsystems
    Engineering, Science and Applications (MESA) complex at SNL via
    implementation of the MESA Extended Life Program, which was developed
    to identify investments required to sustain the existing capabilities
    of the MESA Complex. It provides a 20-year forecast of tools and
    equipment recapitalization, and facilities and infrastructure projects.
    This includes facilities and equipment upgrades to maintain and advance
    the research and production capabilities needed for all current and
    future weapons modernization programs.
        NNSA is exploring potential solutions to address the risks
    associated with maintaining the aging MESA infrastructure,
    collaborating with selected manufacturers to evaluate technologies that
    can sustain MESA's capabilities long into the future. This includes
    developing plans for equipment sourcing, providing additional
    manufacturing space for radiation-hardened microelectronics. Long term,
    it is anticipated that new capabilities will be required to replace the
    oldest of the MESA laboratories, the Silicon Fabrication Facility
    (SiFab). NNSA calls this the Microelectronics Components Capability
    (MC2) Project.
                                     ______

                  Questions Submitted by Senator John Kennedy
        Question. Some clean hydrogen projects both produce and use
    hydrogen in the same facility, but those projects are not included in
    the eight pathways identified in the proposed Section 45V tax credit
    guidance and, therefore, the emissions reduction value of that process
    is not captured in the new 45VH2 GREET model. This appears to be at
    odds with the congressional intent of the tax credit and the
    Administration's stated goals of supporting clean hydrogen production
    and use. How will DOE account for these projects in the alternative
    emissions value determination to be conducted by the DOE, and when will
    those process details be released?
        Answer. Question was answered during a briefing for Senator
    Kennedy's staff on July 18, 2024. Committee Staff confirmed that the
    question was addressed during the briefing and a written response was
    no longer required.
                                     ______

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
        Question. Developing and deploying the next generation nuclear
    reactor technology and the related supply chains and technologies in
    the United States is critically important. While your department agrees
    with this principle, your Fiscal Year 2025 budget does not seem to
    reflect this as a priority.
        In Fiscal Year 2024, Congress provided $100 million to support the
    design, licensing, supplier development, and site preparation of a
    grid-scale generation 3+ reactor design that can be deployed by 2030.
    By law, that money must be awarded by June 7, 2024.
        Can you tell me where we are in that process? Have you put out a
    request for a proposal? Have you received any proposals? Will your
    department be able to meet that June 7th deadline?
        Answer. In an effort to achieve the largest benefit for the Federal
    dollars available, the Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Nuclear
    Energy (NE) partnered with DOE's Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations
    (OCED) to develop a joint competitive solicitation to provide support
    for both the design, licensing, supplier development, and site
    preparation of a grid-scale Generation III+ (Gen III+) reactor design,
    as well as the up to two utility deployments of Gen III+ small modular
    reactor (SMR) designs, included in the Fiscal year (FY) 2024
    appropriation bill language.
        This approach provides the greatest potential, for the dollars
    available, to provide strategic support to the U.S. industry to achieve
    a first-of-its-kind deployment of a Gen III+ SMR technology, plus
    reduce the risk for additional movers to make investment decisions to
    build out the first orderbooks.
        DOE issued a Notice of Intent for the solicitation on June 17,
    2024, held an Industry Day on August 14-15, 2024, for potential
    applicants and team members to learn more about the upcoming
    solicitation and to facilitate team forming, and is preparing a
    competitive solicitation for public release in Fall 2024. Industry
    applications in response to the solicitation are anticipated in January
    2025, with award selections anticipated for Spring 2025.
        Question. In your opinion, will this money be better spent
    supporting design, helping with the licensing process, developing
    suppliers or beginning site preparation?
        Answer. With the approach identified in the response to question
    1a, DOE plans to focus the use of the $100 million to address three key
    risk areas, within the areas of design, licensing, supplier
    development, and site preparation, to reduce key risks for entities
    looking to deploy the first orderbook.
        These items include: (1) the independent evaluation of project cost
    estimates and integrated project schedules to identify if any key
    elements of the project have not been addressed and to increase
    customer confidence in a project's planned cost or schedule (aligns
    with design area); (2) the evaluation and preparation of potential
    sites currently under consideration for near-term deployments (e.g.
    early site permits through the Nuclear Regulatory Commission), to
    understand the advantages and disadvantages potential sites offer for
    the near-term deployment of Gen III+ SMRs (aligns with licensing and
    site preparation areas); and (3) support for key areas of the domestic
    supply chain to improve their capability, capacity, or competitiveness
    in supporting the domestic supply of products or services for the
    deployment of Gen III+ SMRs (aligns with supplier development area).
        Each of the above areas are critical for improving the customer's
    confidence in the anticipated cost and schedule for future deployment
    projects and reducing risks for the domestic deployment of Gen III+
    technologies. As each of these areas are important, DOE will consider
    the solicitation's evaluation criteria and policy factors to determine
    the best suite of projects that will advance the program's objectives
    to support industry achieving a committed orderbook for near-term
    deployments.
        Question. In Fiscal Year 2024, Congress also provided $800 million
    for two near-term utility commercial deployments of generation 3+ small
    modular reactor technology in the United States.
        Could you provide a status update on the $800 million allocated in
    Fiscal Year 2024 for two near-term utility commercial deployments of
    small modular reactor technology in the United States? How will you
    select these two utility commercial deployments? And in your view, what
    is the definition of ``near-term deployment'' in this context?
        Answer. The Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations (OCED) and the
    Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) released a notice of intent on June 17
    announcing their intent to release a funding opportunity for both the
    $800 million managed by OCED and the $100 million managed by NE later
    this year. The Department recently hosted an industry day on August 14
    and 15 for potential applicants and team members to learn more about
    the program and to facilitate networking and team formation. OCED and
    NE are still developing the final funding opportunity. The speed in
    which projects can be completed will depend on the quality and
    completeness of the submitted project applications.
        Question. The Department's Commercial Liftoff report explains that
    a generation 3-plus technology is one that uses water as a coolant and
    low-enriched uranium as fuel. This is my understanding as well. Do you
    expect the Department to change its view on what constitutes a gen 3-
    plus nuclear technology?
        Answer. The Department intends to remain consistent with the
    definition of a Gen III+ technology that was used in the Notice of
    Intent for the Gen III+ program, which states that a Gen III+ small
    modular reactor (SMR) is a nuclear fission reactor that uses light
    water as a coolant and low-enriched uranium (LEU) as a fuel, is
    included as part of a single or multiple unit plant that has a power
    output of approximately 50-700 mega-watts-electric (MWe) (with no
    single unit rated less than 50 MWe), maximizes factory fabrication
    approaches, and provides a number of other significant safety and
    efficiency improvements compared to existing reactors.
        Question. In your opinion, with the fiscal realities before this
    committee, what can that funding be most efficiently spent on: design,
    licensing, developing suppliers? Does that align with your
    understanding of what congress intended for the funding?
        Answer. The Department has released the Notice of Intent and
    recently hosted an Industry Day to better inform applicants of the
    details of the program and to inform industry applicants on how to
    develop strong proposals that will determine where Federal funds can be
    most effective in developing and deploying Gen III+ SMR technology.
    This approach aligns well with the legislation's intent of deploying
    utility scale projects that have potential to be deployed beyond the
    first of a kind.
        Question. How long will it take your department to distribute this
    funding? What mechanisms will your department use to dispense this
    funding--will it be a new competition, or will you utilize existing
    partnerships?
        Answer. The Department plans to offer a funding opportunity later
    this year in which teams will apply for funding.
        Question. The Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) is a key
    facility in our nation's nuclear security infrastructure, located in my
    home state of Tennessee. Since being founded decades ago, Y-12's role
    has evolved, and it now plays a critical part in maintaining the
    safety, security, and effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear weapons
    stockpile.
        In May 2022, the NNSA announced a five-year contract extension to
    Consolidated Nuclear Security, LLC, for the management and operation of
    the Y-12 National Security Complex.. Administrator Hruby, can you
    provide an update on the management and operations expected competition
    of the Y-12 contract?
        Answer. NNSA will begin pre-solicitation activities for the Y-12
    M&O contract competition in FY 2025 and final solicitation is expected
    to be released during the second quarter of FY 2026 to be prepared to
    transition to a new contract in FY 2027.
        Question. Congress has already appropriated over $6.3 billion for
    Y-12's Uranium Processing Facility project, which included considerable
    reprogramming and increases in Fiscal Year 2024. Administrator Hruby,
    can you provide an overview of the latest status of this project and
    the cost needed for completion?
        Answer. The UPF cost estimates have continued to increase as a
    result of lack of contractor performance, insufficient professional
    labor availability, and unplanned growth in procurement costs. However,
    the UPF project executed 45 days ahead of schedule and $7 million below
    cost from December 2023 through July 2024. This is the longest duration
    the project has executed per schedule and cost since construction began
    in 2018. We continue to closely measure the project's performance. We
    will perform necessary internal reviews and approvals to formalize the
    contractor's performance measurement baseline in the coming months.
        Question. It has become particularly apparent that NNSA projects
    are plagued with cost overruns and scheduling delays. This committee
    deserves assurance that the NNSA has the capability to function within
    the initial project outlines that your administration proposes.
        What concrete measures are being implemented at the NNSA to address
    the persistent issue of cost overruns and scheduling delays, ensuring
    that important projects are completed in a timely and cost-efficient
    manner?
        Answer. We recognize the importance of executing within project
    cost and schedule baselines, not only to maintain and grow stakeholder
    confidence, but also to avert significant budget modifications,
    especially near or during the year of execution. With that in mind,
    improvements our NNSA team implemented include:
      --Partnering with lab, plant and sites management and governing
            boards to understand execution challenges, establish and track
            mitigations, and set expectations.
      --Establishing initiatives centered on project lifecycle process
            improvements such as Build SMART and EMDI recommendation 10,
            which calls for streamlining execution of non-nuclear, non-
            complex, commercial type construction projects by
            institutionalizing the tailoring of substituting DOE Order
            413.3B requirements for project management processes more
            appropriate for low-risk commercial-like construction.
      --Modifying contractor performance plans to include specific goals to
            drive accountability and ensure a common understanding of the
            importance of executing safe, quality construction within
            baselined project cost and schedule parameters.
      --Establishing contract changes to enforce performance objectives,
            structural organization, and procedural changes for projects.
            Contracting for performance helps reduce costs and achieve
            value beyond the contract's original scope by shifting
            responsibility from NNSA to the M&O and specifying milestones,
            performance monitoring, and management processes. NNSA will
            make sure that metrics are defined at acceptable quality levels
            as part of the scope of work and establish a clear governance
            structure for reporting and monitoring continuous improvement.
            The distinct advantage of performance-based contracts is that
            operational efficiencies are guaranteed by the M&O. Such
            assurance comes from the inclusion of performance metrics,
            penalties, and monitoring, as well as performance incentives
            and gain-share mechanisms that are common in partnerships.
      --Working with our lab, plant, and sites management to develop better
            front-end planning and estimating based on maturing
            understanding of cost and schedule drivers.
        Question. Specifically, what actions are being carried out at the
    NNSA to ensure that Y-12's Lithium Processing Facility construction
    does not suffer the same challenges as the Uranium Processing Facility?
        Answer. In addition to the actions discussed above, NNSA chose to
    contract a construction manager at risk (CMAR) for the LPF project,
    which was not used for the UPF project. This project delivery method
    uses an experienced construction firm to provide cost estimating and
    constructability reviews during design. Throughout design development,
    the contractor confirms project feasibility and provides its own
    detailed cost estimate for comparison with that of the design agent.
    Because the CMAR is contracted to also perform as the construction
    agent once a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) is negotiated, this is
    expected to result in a more informed cost estimate from an experienced
    construction agent prepared to bear the risk of cost overruns should
    they breach the GMP, which, again, was not the case for the UPF
    project. Due to the complexity and uncertainties with aspects of the
    LPF project, it remains likely that elements of the project will still
    need to be executed outside the more fixed price negotiated GMP as cost
    reimbursable, where it is found neither prudent nor affordable for NNSA
    to transfer that risk to the CMAR. Once the design is complete and a
    GMP is negotiated with the CMAR, the LPF project execution will have
    greater cost certainty than the cost reimbursable contract used for the
    UPF project. However, given the construction environment in the United
    States, this ``fixed price'' approach may lead the CMAR to be more risk
    adverse in its estimates. . NNSA will continue to pursue contract
    mechanisms that maximize cost efficiency and limit uncertainty.
        Unlike UPF, the LPF project maximized build-to-print design and
    minimized build-to-specification designs in the facility. All major
    components of LPF are built-to-print designs, which give greater detail
    to support cost estimating efforts to mitigate risk exposures related
    to cost uncertainty and design changes during construction. Build-to-
    specification design, which was a common element of the UPF design,
    leaves detailed design to a subcontractor during the construction phase
    of the project, which can result in quantity, cost, and delay increases
    during construction as the subcontractor works through the process of
    building out designs that meet specification.
        Question. What is NNSA's plan to accelerate work on new
    manufacturing processes for depleted uranium at Y-12?
        Answer. Modernizing, recapitalizing, and reestablishing key
    production capabilities across the nuclear security enterprise are top
    NNSA priorities. NNSA is supporting new manufacturing technologies to
    modernize existing processes in the Depleted Uranium (DU) Modernization
    Program. Current processes can produce in-specification components, but
    they are material inefficient, leading to unnecessary waste and higher
    costs. The DU program is accelerating its technology readiness
    assessments for new manufacturing technologies. For example, Direct
    Casting is an alternative technology to legacy component manufacturing,
    which will reduce risks of equipment failure, improve process
    efficiency, and decrease material waste. The program is also maturing
    Electron Beam Cold Hearth Melting, a technology which will improve
    binary ingot production efficiency and provide process improvements for
    alloying, recycling, and material refinement capabilities.
        To resume full-rate production, the DU Modernization Program is
    executing high purity DU and alloy feedstock procurements before
    current inventory is exhausted in 2029. The program is also restarting
    and maintaining alloying and manufacturing capabilities, while
    simultaneously investing in key new technologies. NNSA is also
    leveraging innovative acquisition methods with industry and interagency
    partners to meet weapons requirements and increase component capacity
    with a mixture of modernized existing capabilities and new
    technologies. This complete strategy will improve the enterprise's
    reliability and reduce risk to future stockpile modernization programs.

                             CONCLUSION OF HEARINGS

        Chair Murray. We stand adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:09 a.m., Wednesday, May 22, the hearings
    were concluded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
    subject to the call of the Chair.]

          LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Baldwin, Senator Tammy, U.S. Senator From Wisconsin, Questions
      Submitted by...................................................    43

    Connor, Hon. Michael L., Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil
      Works), Department of Defense--Civil...........................     1
        Prepared Statement of........................................     5
        Questions Submitted to.......................................    43
        Summary Statement of.........................................     3

    Granholm, Hon. Jennifer, Secretary, Office of the Secretary,
      Department of Energy...........................................    47
        Prepared Statement of........................................    52
        Questions Submitted to.......................................    87
        Summary Statement of.........................................    51

    Hagerty, Senator Bill, U.S. Senator From Tennessee, Questions
      Submitted by...................................................    88
    Heinrich, Senator Martin, U.S. Senator From New Mexico, Question
      Submitted by...................................................    87
    Hruby, Hon. Jill, Under Secretary, National Nuclear Security
      Administration, Department of Energy...........................    47

    Kennedy, Senator John, U.S. Senator From Louisiana:
        Questions Submitted by.......................................    88
        Statements of

    Murray, Chair Patty, U.S. Senator From Washington, Opening
      Statements of

    Sinema, Senator Kyrsten, U.S. Senator From Arizona, Questions
      Submitted by...................................................    44
    Spellmon, Lieutenant General Scott A., Chief Engineers for the
      U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Department of Defense--Civil.....     8
        Prepared Statement of........................................     9

    Touton, Hon. Camille Calimlim, Commissioner, Bureau of
      Reclamation, Department of the Interior........................    13
        Prepared Statement of........................................    14

                                 SUBJECT INDEX

                                  ----------

                          DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

                             Department of the Army

                           Corps of Engineers--Civil

                                                                       Page

    Construction.....................................................    10
    Emergency Management.............................................    11
    Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program..................    11
    Investigations...................................................    10
    Operation and Maintenance (O&M)..................................    10
    Regulatory Program...............................................    11
    Research and Development.........................................    11
    Summary of Fiscal Year 2025 Budget...............................     9
    Water Infrastructure Finance Program.............................    11
                                   __________

                              DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

                            Office of the Secretary

    Accelerates Industrial Decarbonization...........................    54
    Additional Committee Questions...................................    87
    Advances Critical Climate Goals..................................    54
    Budget Topline...................................................    52
    Makes Historical Investments to Strengthen the Nation's Nuclear
      Security and Protect the Nation from Weapons of Mass
      Destruction Terrorism..........................................    55
    Powers the Nuclear Navy..........................................    56
    Restores American Leadership in Arms Control and Nonproliferation    56
                                   __________

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                             Bureau of Reclamation

    Additional Committee Questions...................................    43
    Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUPCA)......................    18

                                       [all]