[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]