[Senate Hearing 118-746]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-746
PERSPECTIVES ON NEW AND EXISTING
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
AUTHORITIES TO RESPOND TO WATER
MANAGEMENT ISSUES INCLUDING
DROUGHT AND WATER CONSERVATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
of the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 16, 2023
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62-278 WASHINGTON : 2025
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Ranking Member
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
MARK KELLY, Arizona DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
ALEX PADILLA, California LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania
Courtney Taylor, Democratic Staff Director
Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
----------
Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure
MARK KELLY, Arizona, Chairman
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota, Ranking Member
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
ALEX PADILLA, California LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware (ex Virginia (ex officio)
officio)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
MAY 16, 2023
OPENING STATEMENTS
Kelly, Hon. Mark, U.S. Senator from the State of Arizona......... 1
Cramer, Hon. Kevin, U.S. Senator from the State of North Dakota.. 3
WITNESSES
Plumer, Christy, Chief Conservation Officer, Theodore Roosevelt
Conservation Partnership....................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 9
Meyers, Leslie A., P.E., Chief Water Executive and Associate
General Manager of Water Resources, Salt River Project......... 15
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Lewis, Hon. Stephen Roe, Governor, Gila River Indian Community... 24
Prepared statement........................................... 26
Travnicek, Andrea, Director, North Dakota Department of Water
Resources...................................................... 72
Prepared statement........................................... 74
Verleger, Jennifer, Chair, Western States Water Council.......... 89
Prepared statement........................................... 91
PERSPECTIVES ON NEW AND EXISTING
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
AUTHORITIES TO RESPOND TO WATER
MANAGEMENT ISSUES INCLUDING
DROUGHT AND WATER CONSERVATION
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 16, 2023
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room
406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mark Kelly (chairman
of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Senators Kelly, Padilla, Cramer, Ricketts.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARK KELLY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Senator Kelly. The subcommittee will come to order.
I want to welcome everyone to the first hearing of the
Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee for the 118th
Congress. This is my first hearing chairing this committee.
I want to thank my colleague, who will be with us shortly,
Senator Cramer, for his partnership and assistance leading up
to this hearing. I look forward to our future work together.
I also want to thank Senator Cramer's staff, I think they
are here, and the EPW Committee staff, for their assistance in
making today's hearing a reality.
I had the opportunity to say this to each of them right
before the hearing gaveled in but I also want to again say
thank you to all of our witnesses for joining us today and
taking part in this important discussion.
The topic of today's hearing is an important one,
understanding how the Army Corps of Engineers has been
successful at responding to emerging water management
challenges like drought risks in the western United States or
increased flooding in the midwest, and how the Corps can be a
better partner in responding to these challenges.
For Arizona, the most prominent challenge that we face
today, and one I talk about on this committee all the time, is
drought. Arizona and the entire western United States is in the
midst of a two decade-long drought. This has put incredible
strain on watersheds throughout the West.
In Arizona, this strain is seen most prominently along the
Colorado River, but it is by no means the only impacted
watershed. We had an unseasonably wet winter this year. We got
great snow pack in the Rockies. This means we have better than
usual runoff. All that is good news. It really is. We know from
experience that wet winters are often followed by dry winters
the next year.
We need to continue to prepare for this. Congress has
already acted to take emergency actions to respond to the
drought in the west. I secured $4 billion in the Inflation
Reduction Act for the Bureau of Reclamation to respond to
drought conditions along the Colorado River. Already the Bureau
of Reclamation has used that funding to conserve nearly 500,000
acre-feet of water on the Colorado River through some short-
term water reduction agreements.
I will also note that the Gila River Indian Community and
Governor Lewis stepped up here and made one of the most
significant contributions in this process, agreeing to leave
125,000 acre-feet of water in Lake Mead. This helps us stop the
bleeding.
We know more is needed. The name of the game in the western
United States is long-term system conservation and
efficiencies. Those efficiencies will limit water loss and
promote better conservation.
The Bureau of Reclamation is making some investments to
support these projects but this must be a whole-of-government
effort. That includes the Army Corps of Engineers. That is why
I worked hard in last year's WRDA to secure key provisions to
help address these water supply challenges.
This included a number of things like providing new
authorities to the Army Corps to respond to drought risk, to
reauthorizing the tribal partnership program for 10 years. It
also included requiring the Corps to study ways to better
support and manage aquifer recharge efforts, and examining how
installing natural features at Federal reservoirs can improve
storage capacity.
I want to give Senator Cramer some credit for his work to
establish a Western Water Cooperative Committee in WRDA which
is going to foster more collaboration between States when
addressing supply challenges in the western United States.
I look forward to hearing more from our witnesses today
about how these programs and provisions are being implemented.
I also hope we can explore what more needs to be done. For
example, do the flood control curves established by the Army
Corps, which govern how much water can be retained in all
Federal reservoirs for drinking water or flood control, does it
make sense, given the changing hydrology in the western United
States, do those curves still make sense or should we modify
them?
At a time when we do not have time or water, we do not have
either to waste, is the Corps able to move quickly enough to
support needed infrastructure investments in the western United
States? What more can and should the Corps be doing to address
invasive plant species in these rivers and in these watersheds?
I look forward to discussing all of these questions and
more with our witnesses today. I am going to start with some
introductions. Depending on the timing, we will see where we go
next because I would like to hear from Senator Cramer for his
opening remarks and some further introductions.
Let me first start with Governor Stephen Lewis. He is
currently serving his third term as Governor of the Gila River
Indian Community and previously served as the Community's
Lieutenant Governor.
Governor Lewis was born in Sacaton on the Gila River Indian
Community. He graduated from Arizona State University like my
younger daughter, Claire, and pursued graduate studies at the
JFK School of Government at Harvard University.
During his tenure leading the Community, Governor Lewis has
developed a track record for bringing innovative solutions to
water challenges on the Community. He spearheaded the
development of the Community's Managed Aquifer Recharge Sites,
which I have visited on multiple occasions. He restored the
Community's riparian area. He has also been a key collaborative
partner in the ongoing negotiations around Colorado River
Conservation issues.
Governor Lewis has also spearheaded education initiatives,
collaborations with the Community's veteran population and
advocated for protection of the Indian Child Welfare Act, both
at home and nationally.
Governor Lewis serves as Secretary for the National
Congress of American Indians; he is the President of ASU's
American Indian Policy Institute; he is on the Executive Board
of the National Indian Gaming Association; and is on the Board
of Trustees for the Heard Museum in Phoenix.
Leslie Meyers is the Associate General Manager and Chief
Water Resources Executive for the Salt River Project. Ms.
Meyers joined SRP in 2022 and has more than 30 years of
experience with water resources management in Arizona and the
southwest.
Prior to joining SRP, Ms. Meyers served as the Area Manager
for the Phoenix Area Office with the Bureau of Reclamation. Ms.
Meyers received her BS in Civil Engineering from Texas A&M
University, and is a registered professional engineer.
Christy Plumer is the Chief Conservation Officer for the
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, or TRCP. Ms.
Plumer joined TRCP in 2016 before which she worked with Solar
City, the Nature Conservancy, and the Conservation Fund on
issues related to Federal land and renewable energy policy.
For 7 years she worked on Capitol Hill working for former
Senators John Chafee and Bob Smith, and was staff director for
Senator Lincoln Chafee when was Chair of the Fisheries,
Wildlife and Water Subcommittee of this committee.
Ms. Plumer has a BA in Biology and Environmental Studies
from the University of Pennsylvania and an MA in Environmental
Studies from Brown University.
With that, let me turn it over to it over to Senator
Cramer. I said all these great things about you but you weren't
here. I will turn it over to him for his opening statement and
also to introduce our remaining two witnesses.
Senator Cramer.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KEVIN CRAMER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Cramer.
[Presiding.] Thank you, Chairman Kelly, for that and for
the kind words you said earlier. I will verify them later.
I like this committee a lot. I like this subcommittee a
lot. I enjoyed my work on it previously. As the Ranking Member
with Senator Cardin, we accomplished some big things. I look
forward to even bigger things with Chairman Kelly who is going
to do what I just did and that is to vote on the floor.
Thank all of you witnesses for being here as well. As I
said, this is a good committee. The whole committee is a good
committee. This subcommittee especially, I think we have worked
on some really important things together. I look forward to
many more of those. I think today's hearing is a good place to
start with that.
We are focused today on gathering feedback and information
from stakeholders regarding new and existing authorities that
enable the Corps of Engineers to respond to challenges related
to drought, floods and water supply. It is amazing all those
things have happened at the same time in our great big Country
for some years.
Additionally, the hearing will provide an opportunity to
discuss the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 and help
inform future WRDA legislative action concerning water
management issues.
Before we turn to that, I want make a few comments about
the doctrine of cooperative federalism and the States' well-
established rights regarding water management. I happen to
think that the States' rights have been overlooked in lots of
areas, not just water management, but it is probably as good a
display of some of the imbalance that we should not see in
cooperative federalism.
Regarding the western States, Congress and the courts have
given clear and consistent deference to States for water
allocation through the 1944 Flood Control Act and the Water
Supply Act of 1958. The history matters.
Despite this, the Corps has pursued various regulatory
actions over the years and decades, namely their proposed Water
Supply Rule in 2016 threatening to erode western States'
authority to manage water resources within their boundaries,
the States' boundaries.
Cognizant of this continued State and Federal conflict over
water management, Congress established the Western Water
Cooperative Committee through the Water Resources Development
Act of 2022. It was harder to do than I thought it would be but
the committee, through this, will provide a platform of dialog
for western States to work out water appropriation and other
issues with the Corps. I am hopeful this committee will help
bring about a more cohesive State-Federal partnership relating
to water management.
This committee can serve as a first step toward improving
the existing partnership to better account for States' rights
and better resemble the model of cooperative federalism
envisioned by Congress.
One of the things about this committee that we are forming
is it recognizes two important facts. One is that water belongs
to each of us when it is in our State but it belongs to all of
us collectively. It also recognizes while not every State is
the same, the halves of our Country are very different. The
west is different than the East. West Mississippi and West
Missouri is different than east.
I am anxious to see how well the committee works and if it
is going to work as well as the members of it apply themselves.
In addition, I want to also take a moment to briefly touch
on the Snake Creek Embankment issue in my State. In 2007, the
Corps realized they were experiencing some foundational
problems with the embankment. The relief wells they put in
place were not properly maintained over the years. Instead of
physically fixing the problem to prevent embankment failure,
the Corps decided to implement a water control plan that would
limit the pool differential between Lake Sakakawea and Lake
Audubon. Only people from North Dakota would know what I am
saying when I do this. The State and others objected to this
change as it would inhibit water supply to what is called the
McClusky Canal, among other concerns.
I worked hard to secure a provision in WRDA 2020 requiring
the Corps to reevaluate structural and operational alternatives
to reduce risk of an embankment failure and to properly account
for the economic benefits provided by the embankment. Boy,
aren't there economic benefits or economic consequences if
there is adequate water or not adequate water. Water is pretty
critical to economic opportunity.
The Corps has since conducted a dam modification study and
completed the associated draft environmental assessment earlier
this year. The State and the Garrison Diversion Conservancy
District have raised concerns with the Corps' recommended plan
primarily as it fails to fully account for the economic impacts
associated with the entire embankment. I look forward to
getting into that a little bit today.
I have since communicated with General Spellman and urged
the Corps to take an all-encompassing perspective on the
importance of the embankment, fully recognizing its integral
role in ensuring water supply to roughly 50 percent of North
Dakota's population and the billions of dollars' worth of
development that are on the line due to the need for consistent
water supply. This issue is simply too important for the future
of the State to get it wrong.
I look forward to speaking more with our witnesses and
getting valuable feedback on a variety of water management
issues. Thank you to all our witnesses for being here today. I
know you all bring tremendous expertise and certainly a lot of
local and regional understanding of the importance of this
issue.
Now I get to introduce my witnesses. I call them my
witnesses. You are all of our witnesses and you are all
wonderful.
It is an important hearing and it is my honor to introduce
as witnesses Andrea Travnicek, Director of the North Dakota
Department of Water Resources and Jennifer Verleger, Chair,
Western States Water Council. Thank you both for being here.
Dr. Travnicek, we call her ``Trav.'' You all will
eventually. It is easier to pronounce and spell. It is Dr.
Andrea Travnicek.
She was appointed by Governor Burgum in 2021 to serve in
this role as the Director of the North Dakota Department of
Water Resources. She has had lots of very important roles. She
oversees the management of water resources for the State
through water development, regulatory responsibilities,
planning, education and safety.
Previously, Dr. Travnicek was the Director of the North
Dakota Parks and Recreation Department and also worked in
various roles at the United States Department of the Interior,
including serving in the Water and Science Hallway. She is
intimately familiar with western water issues and the impacts
Federal policy has on States.
Further, Dr. Travnicek has a Ph.D. in Natural Resource
Management Communication from North Dakota State University and
was recently given the 2023 Horizon Award which honors NDSU
graduates doing outstanding work and community service.
Congratulations on that.
She certainly keeps herself busy. She testified earlier
this morning at the House Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee. We are grateful to have you here today.
Jennifer Verleger is testifying before this committee today
as Chair of the Western States Water Council. However, she is
also North Dakota's Assistant Attorney General and provides
general counsel and litigation services to the North Dakota
Department of Water Resources and State Water Commission, a lot
of work.
Ms. Verleger has represented the State on water issues in
the U.S. Supreme Court, Federal appellate courts, the North
Dakota Supreme Court, State and Federal district courts and
Office of Administrative Hearings in several areas including
interState rivers, federalism, water rights, water
appropriation, drainage, and sovereign lands. It is hard to
imagine a more important legal job than that one.
Ms. Verleger sits on the National Water Supply Alliance
Board and is a member of the Conference of Western Attorneys
General. She has been an excellent resource to me and my staff.
They talk about you a lot, Jennifer, as we have worked through
water supply and water law conflicts with the court.
Thank you both, Andrea and Jennifer, for being here today.
I value this opportunity to gather input from all of you and
your insights. I look forward to a meaningful discussion on
water management in our western States and other issues
pertaining to the Corps.
Senator Cramer. I should have read slower. Maybe the
Chairman could have gotten here. We will proceed without him
and he will catch up.
We are going to start with witness statements. You will
each have 5 minutes. You can see the lights in front of you. It
is just like driving. You know what red, yellow and green mean.
We will start with Ms. Plumer. Thank you for being here.
STATEMENT OF CHRISTY PLUMER, CHIEF CONSERVATION OFFICER,
THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP
Ms. Plumer. Thank you, Senator Cramer. Thank you to
Chairman Kelly and other members of the subcommittee for the
opportunity to testify today.
I am Christy Plumer, Chief Conservation Officer of the
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, a coalition of 63
hunting, fishing, outdoor recreation, landowner, and scientific
associations that was founded in 2002. At the TRCP, we are
dedicated to ensuring the places Americans love to hunt and
fish are conserved and the species upon which we depend as
hunters and anglers are managed at sustainable levels.
Water conservation and Federal and State authorities
related to water quantity and quality are therefore core to our
mission and we work closely with Federal, State, tribal and
regional partners to accelerate the pace and scale of aquatic
restoration.
As a part of this effort, we host working groups through
the TRCP Policy Council that bring together our organizational
partners to develop, respond to, and advance water and natural
infrastructure policy, and we engage with Congress on the
biennial Water Resources Development Act and with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers to implement aquatic restoration programs
and authorities.
Today, I will touch on the growing water management
challenges, particularly in the west, and the opportunity for
the Corps and this committee to advance nature-based solutions.
The Corps plays an important but often-overlooked in the
West providing water to meet the needs of around 101 million
people and supporting agricultural irrigation from 24 projects.
Corps-owned facilities also provide abundant hunting, fishing
and outdoor recreation opportunities in the west and across the
country. Drought and wildfire, aging infrastructure and
increasing levels of water demand, along with climate change,
are growing challenges for the Corps.
Addressing these challenges, we believe, will require rapid
deployment of nature-based solutions and natural infrastructure
such as restoring wetlands and improving watershed health. The
Corps has several existing tools and authorities at their
disposal to scale natural infrastructure investments. One
example is the Sustainable Rivers Program, a partnership with
the Nature Conservancy that funds local efforts to integrate
environmental flow and natural infrastructure objectives into
existing Corps operations.
In southern Arizona, this program supports a partnership to
design releases from the Alamo Dam on the Bill Williams River
to enhance riparian areas and reduce flood risk. Another
example is the Continuing Authorities Program, specifically the
Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Authority, which
provides a streamlined process for the Corps to design and
implement natural infrastructure projects.
The Water Resources Development Act of 2022 includes new
authorities and direction for the Corps to address drought with
provisions on managed aquifer recharge, updating water control
manuals in response to drought, and facilitating dialog on
western water management.
We specifically appreciate Section 8208 of WRDA 2022 which
directs the Corps to assess opportunities to use natural
infrastructure to reduce drought and wildfire risk to Corps
infrastructure in the southwest United States. This study will
provide information on how natural infrastructure may be
integrated into existing agency risk management and operational
guidance. We encourage Congress to fully fund the study.
Looking ahead, this Congress has numerous opportunities to
continue to build on existing programs and authorities to
tackle drought. First, Congress should invest in the existing
Drought Resilience Program to meet the outsized demand in the
west, including the Sustainable Rivers Program, the Continuing
Authorities Program authorities and WRDA 2022 drought-focused
provisions.
Second, Congress should strengthen technical assistance.
The Silver Jackets Program is one successful model for flood
risk management and should be expanded to address drought.
Third, Congress should encourage the Corps to enhance
cross-boundary partnerships with Federal land management
agencies and non-Federal partners.
Fourth, Congress should consider directing the Corps to
update their benefit cost analysis process to account for the
multiple benefits of natural and nature-based infrastructure.
Finally, on the topic of hunting and fishing access,
Congress should enable the Corps to invest in recreational
infrastructure through the bipartisan LAKES Act, spearheaded by
Senator Cramer, thank you, and Senators Heinrich and Padilla.
In closing, we stand ready to work with this subcommittee
and the full committee, Congress and the Corps to advance these
fish and wildlife-focused solutions. Once again, thank you,
Chairman Kelly and Ranking Member Cramer, for holding this
important hearing today. I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Plumer follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Kelly.
[Presiding.] Thank you, Ms. Plumer.
Ms. Meyers.
STATEMENT OF LESLIE A. MEYERS, P.E., CHIEF WATER EXECUTIVE, AND
ASSOCIATE GENERAL MANAGER OF WATER RESOURCES, SALT RIVER
PROJECT
Ms. Meyers. Thank you, Chairman Kelly. Good afternoon
Ranking Member Cramer.
I am Leslie Meyers, Associate General Manager for Water
Resources at the Salt River Project. Thank you for inviting me
today to provide testimony on how we can improve our ability to
respond to water management challenges using existing and
potential new authorities. It is a privilege to share my
insight and observations with you.
SRP has been serving Arizona since 1903, almost 10 years
before Arizona became the 48th State. We are the third largest
not-for-profit community-based public power entity in the
country providing sustainable, reliable and affordable
electricity to nearly 3 million people.
SRP is also the largest supplier of raw water in the
Phoenix Metropolitan area, delivering about 800,000-acre-feet
annually from the Salt and Verde Rivers to municipal,
industrial and agricultural customers.
SRP manages and operates seven dams and reservoirs that can
store approximately 2.3 million-acre-feet of water as well as
1,300 miles of canals, lateral stitches, and pipelines.
Roosevelt Dam was authorized as one of the first projects
in the 1902 Reclamation Act. In 1905, Reclamation began
construction on Roosevelt Dam 40 miles northeast of Phoenix,
which it completed in 1911. SRP has operated and managed the
dam for over 100 years.
The U.S. constructed Roosevelt Dam as a water storage and
power generation facility and it remains a critical source of
stored water and hydroelectric power generation today.
Reclamation undertook several significant modifications to the
dam in the 1990's raising it 77 feet in elevation, adding
550,000 acre-feet of dedicated flood control space, 1.2 million
acre-feet of safety of dam surcharge capacity, and increasing
water conservation storage capacity by about 280,000 acre-feet.
The flood control space is under the jurisdiction of the
Corps of Engineers under Section 7 of the Flood Control Act of
1944. The Corps of Engineers, Reclamation and SRP developed a
flood control plan in 1997 that requires that SRP evacuate
water within 20 days of it first entering the flood control
space.
While the Flood Control Manual ensures that SRP can operate
the dam safely under the most extreme flood events, it also
requires SRP to evacuate water during small and moderate flood
events, something we are working with the Corps of Engineers
and Reclamation to revise.
The 2006 and 2020 Water Resources Development Acts included
provisions authorizing the Corps of Engineers to accept funds
from non-Federal entities to review flood operating plans at
Reclamation facilities with dedicated flood control space like
Roosevelt Dam. Since Congress enacted these provisions, SRP,
along with 14 tribal, agricultural, industrial, and municipal
partners, were funding a coordinated effort with the Corps and
Reclamation to review the flood control plan. This review
resulted in our proposal to temporarily extend the release
period in the bottom 20 percent of the flood control space from
20 to 120 days in certain years. Engineers from both the Corps
of Engineers and Reclamation concluded that the proposal was
safe or risk neutral.
This type of cross-sectional public-private partnership is
a great example of what it will take to maintain resilient
water supplies in the future. The Federal and non-Federal
partners work together to improve water management while
maintaining the safety and integrity of our critical dam
infrastructure.
If approved, this proposal could make up to 109,000-acre
feet of flood water annually available for use in three of the
next 5 years. Put in perspective, this amount of water can
support the annual needs of roughly 330,000 households in the
Phoenix metropolitan area.
The Salt and Verde Rivers are highly variable river systems
and we anticipate that the changing climate will produce
increasingly variable annual flows. Projections predict a
hotter, drier climate that has higher variability in river
flows, including wetter wet periods and sharper, deeper drought
periods.
The Salt and Verde River systems experienced significant
runoff this season and water rose 6 feet into the flood control
space. If the proposed changes to the flood control plan were
in place, SRP would have been able to reduce the flood releases
by 109,000 acre-feet.
Thank you, Chairman Kelly and Ranking Member Cramer for
this opportunity to testify today. I look forward to answering
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Meyers follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Ms. Meyers.
Governor Lewis.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN ROE LEWIS, GOVERNOR, GILA RIVER INDIAN
COMMUNITY
Governor Lewis. Chairman Kelly and Ranking Member Cramer,
thank you for the opportunity to testify today on behalf of the
Gila River Indian Community.
The subcommittee's focus on the role of the Corps of
Engineers highlights the need for an efficient, all-of-
government approach to the drought crisis on the Colorado
River. The Corps is a key partner in addressing water
management, conservation and infrastructure related to drought
and is already engaged in new infrastructure investments,
operational improvements at existing facilities, ecosystem
resilience and planning assistance.
The Corps has also taken positive steps to ensure that
tribal governments, especially those tribes with significant
water supplies, are at the table as strategic governmental
partners.
I do want to acknowledge that the relationship between the
Corps and tribal Nations has not always been a positive one.
Historically, decisions around flood control, pipelines and
other projects have, at times, pitted the Corps against tribal
governments.
There is an important role for the Corps to play in drought
mitigation. We have been encouraged by the more recent focus of
the Corps, through its current leadership and tribal
partnership program, to look for innovative ways to partner
with tribes and support those innovative projects that bring
long-term solutions to the ongoing drought crisis that we find
ourselves in.
In November 2022, the Corps issued new interim tribal
partnership guidelines and guidance to expand the types of
partnerships through which the Corps can engage with tribal
governments. A critical component of the revised guidance is
the stated commitment to tribal sovereignty and an
acknowledgment of tribal capacity that, in many cases, either
meets or exceeds the capacity of the Corps to carry out
projects on trial lands.
Following this guidance, the Community sought to partner
with the Corps on a project that was already well underway when
the guidance was issued, a pilot project to install solar
panels over a stretch of one of the Community's irrigation
canals. The Community's concept is that solar over canals would
generate renewable energy for operating our system and reduce
water evaporation. This concept has been considered but never
tested in the United States.
Using the Community's own resources, we commissioned a
study that showed that our design would indeed increase system
efficiency, conserve water, and generate energy. Although Phase
1 of the pilot project will only cover about 1,000 feet of
canal, our study shows real potential for this concept.
To give you an idea of how significant this technology
might be, there are approximately 150 miles of canals through
the reservation that would be suitable for this installation.
If fully developed, we could generate over 750 megawatts of
power and conserve over 6,000 acre-feet of water from
evaporation loss each year.
This project will have long-lasting water conservation
impacts and will serve as a model that can be used by other
tribes and local governments. This is the type of project
innovation that Congress intended when you included $25 million
for similar pilot projects for solar over canal in the
Inflation Reduction Act.
When you are the first to bring a new concept to a large,
bureaucratic agency, such as the Corps, the process can be
cumbersome. Unfortunately, current Corps policy required that
the Corps do its own validation study, which essentially
duplicated the work we have already done to study the project
and its potential and slowed the project down.
The Corps timeline for construction is also much slower
than ours. Their project budget exceeds what the cost would
have been if the Corps could contract directly from the
community to complete the work under the Indian Self----
Determination and Education Assistance Act. Although the
project could already be well underway and heading toward
completion, the Corps' inability to contract directly with
tribes has slowed the process, exactly what you do not need
when you are responding to the drought crisis we are all
facing.
While there have been some issues and delay, I want to
State that I do think the Corps is moving in the right
direction under Assistant Secretary Connor's leadership. In the
past few days, we have had major movement from the Corps on our
project. The Corps' validation study was approved late last
week and the conclusions matched those of the Community's
validation study. Both the Community and the Corps are
confident that we will be signing an historic partnership
agreement for construction of the Solar Over Canal Project
within the next 3 weeks.
Based on the Community's experience, my one recommendation
for the committee along with the need for continued and
expanded funding for the Corps' Tribal Partnership Program,
would be to consider statutory language to allow for tribal
self-determination programs to be implemented at the Corps
because the drought crisis and other complex infrastructure
issues can not be solved without tribal governments being at
the table as true partners, Senators.
Thank you, Senator Kelly, for inviting the Gila Indian
Community to participate in this hearing and for your
leadership within the State and the basin on drought issues.
[The prepared statement of Governor Lewis follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Governor Lewis.
Ms. Travnicek.
STATEMENT OF ANDREA TRAVNICEK, DIRECTOR, NORTH DAKOTA
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
Ms. Travnicek. Good afternoon, Chairman Kelly, Ranking
Member Cramer, and members of the Committee. Thank you for your
invitation to testify today on the importance of jointly
managed water infrastructure in the State of North Dakota.
My name is Andrea Travnicek and I am the Director of the
North Dakota Department of Water Resources.
The Department of Water Resources has trust
responsibilities for managing and developing North Dakota's
waters. We strive to sustainably manage and develop North
Dakota's water resources for the health, safety and prosperity
of its people, businesses, agriculture, energy, industry,
recreation, and natural resources. We know that sound
infrastructure must be maintained and modernized to meet
multiple objectives.
The Garrison Dam, completed in 1956, forms Lake Sakakawea
and was authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1935 and
the Flood Control Act of 1944. The dam is part of a project
planning effort known as the Garrison Diversion Unit authorized
by Congress in 1965. The Garrison Diversion Unit, associated
with the Bureau of Reclamation, diverts water from Lake
Sakakawea to provide water for irrigation and water supply.
As part of the Pick-Sloan Plan, irrigation of over 1
million acres and other water development opportunities in
central and eastern North Dakota were authorized by the Federal
Government. The Snake Creek Embankment impounds Lake Audubon, a
sub-impoundment of Lake Sakakawea. Lake Audubon's elevation is
cooperatively managed by Reclamation, the North Dakota Game and
Fish Department, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by
pumping water from Lake Sakakawea across the Embankment to Lake
Audubon, where it is then diverted eastward for its federally
authorized uses through the McClusky Canal.
The Embankment is authorized to provide relocation routes
for a highway, railroad, and utilities inundated by the
creation of Lake Sakakawea and to serve as a sub-impoundment
dam for the diversion of Missouri River water to eastern North
Dakota as part of the Garrison Diversion Unit.
The diverted water is then used to support the State's
largest industry, agriculture, by providing water to the
McClusky Canal. The diverted water also supports municipal,
rural, and industrial water supplies; fish and wildlife;
recreation; and other project purposes in accordance with
Federal reclamation laws.
The Embankment's original design included relief walls
specifically designed to maintain structural integrity during a
high-water differential, ensuring obligations for water and
recreational users on Lake Audubon are met even during drought.
In 2007, a post-drought seepage analysis determined there
is a potential for adverse under-seepage that could lead to
Embankment failure when pool differentials exceed 43 feet
between Lake Sakakawea and Lake Audubon and further identified
performance issues due to a lack of relief well maintenance.
In 2019, the Embankment Interim Risk Reduction Measures
Project identified a selected alternative to modify the Water
Control Manual to incorporate an operating restriction that
limits the pool differential between Lakes Sakakawea and
Audubon to 43 feet during times of extreme drought. This means
a partial drawdown of Lake Audubon could occur, which could
impact regional water supply projects and irrigation,
especially during times of drought when supply is most needed.
In response to concerns, Senator Cramer included a
provision in the 2020 Water Resource Development Act directing
the Corps to reevaluate structural and operational alternatives
to reduce the risk of an Embankment failure; coordinate on the
alternatives with State and local entities whose water
obligations would be impacted by a drawdown; and to properly
account for the economic benefits provided by the Embankment.
In 2021, the Corps initiated a Dam Safety Modification
Report for the Embankment to identify and recommend a Risk
Management Plan. The recommended plan is an operational
alternative to remodify the 2019 Water Control Manual to
include risk-informed language, update the dam monitoring and
surveillance plan, and remove the formal reference to the 43-
foot differential constraint.
While removing the differential is progress, the Corps is
not addressing the overall concern of the project in not
meeting all authorized purposes that are associated with the
Snake Creek Embankment Lake Audubon Project. The draft report
and recommended plan are only based on the perspective of
potential dam failure that could result in a low-potential loss
of life, rather than the breadth of economic and ecosystem
impacts associated with the entire Garrison Diversion Unit and
Snake Creek Embankment Lake Audubon Project.
The other authorized purposes associated with the project
are not fully credited in this study and are therefore
minimized when determining the recommended plan and the final
benefit-cost ratio. The lack of consideration of the other
authorized purposes and the low benefit-cost ratio developed as
a result of diminishing the value of these services have led to
a decision by the Corps to have an operational fix versus a
sound structural fix. This decision leaves current and future
projects in jeopardy.
Sound, reliable, infrastructure is a top priority for the
State and local project sponsors. As of May 2023, Federal,
State, and local partners have already committed over $500
million to projects dependent on the Embankment's stability to
put Missouri River system water to beneficial use. It is
imperative that the Corps look at water management from a
holistic approach, especially as it relates to all project
purposes and directives that have been authorized by Congress.
Furthermore, State and local investments and dependence on
reliable water sources that may be impacted by a compromised
Embankment must be fully considered for the citizens of our
State who are looking to the Federal Government to keep the
promises that have been made.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Travnicek follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Ms. Travnicek.
Ms. Verleger.
STATEMENT OF JENNIFER VERLEGER, CHAIR, WESTERN STATES WATER
COUNCIL
Ms. Verleger. Chairman Kelly, Ranking Member Cramer, and
members of the committee, thank you for holding this hearing
and your efforts to achieve a balance between Federal policies
and programs and the role of the States in our Federalist
system.
My name is Jennifer Verleger. I am here today as the Chair
of the Western States Water Council. I am also an Assistant
Attorney General for the State of North Dakota, where I
represent the State Water Commission and the Department of
Water Resources. In that capacity, I am also a delegate to the
Conference of Western Attorneys General. Additionally, I sit on
the board of the National Water Supply Alliance which focuses
on Corps water supply issues.
Over the decades, western States and the Corps of Engineers
have butted heads when State water law has conflicted with
Federal programs and priorities, particularly when it comes to
water supply. The problem can be illustrated with an analogy.
Think of a typical kitchen sink. There are usually two sides to
the sink, with a divider in the center and a faucet that swings
between each side.
On one side, the drain is plugged. This is the Corps'
storage reservoir. On the other side, there is no plug, which
is the flowing river. The running faucet is the upstream river
and surface runoff, which is controlled by Mother Nature.
The Corps controls which side of the sink the faucet is
running into by opening and closing the outflow of its
reservoirs. Once the plugged side of the sink is full, the
Corps must drain some of the water, or move the faucet to the
uncontrolled, free-flowing side.
The Corps takes the position that all of the water in the
sink is in storage and subject to their control and the fees
they charge. The States take the position that the sink is in
their own house, and that even though the Corps gets to control
which side of the sink is filling, it only gets to enter a
water supply agreement or charge users when they take water
from the plugged side of the sink. Water that is coming out of
the faucet, before it gets to the sink, for example when you
fill a glass, and water that flows into the open portion of the
sink is the States' to appropriate.
After several years of the States' unsuccessful attempts to
resolve their differences with the Corps over this issue, a
provision was included in WRDA 2014 prohibiting the Corps from
charging surplus water fees in the Upper Missouri River Basin
for 10 years.
However, undeterred, in 2016, the Corps published its
Proposed Water Supply Rule. The States had several issues with
the proposed rule. Despite the Corps' insistence that it sells
``storage,'' the rule never defined that term. As a result, the
Corps continues to assert that all the water in the reservoir
is its to manage. In other words, the entire kitchen sink.
In the rule, the Corps specifically stated that it was
aware of North Dakota and other States' position that ``users
should not be required to pay for benefits they do not
receive,'' but stated that the law ``does not require the Corps
to undertake such an analysis.''
Not only did the proposed rule require States to pay for
benefits they do not receive, it usurped the States' rights and
authority to control and allocate their own water resources. It
ignored multiple declarations from Congress that States have
the primary responsibility for water supply and water
management.
Congress and the courts have unequivocally established and
repeatedly affirmed the doctrine of cooperative federalism
regarding water management issues. There was bipartisan
opposition to the proposed rule from the Western States Water
Council, Conference of Western Attorneys General, and Western
Governors Association. There was bipartisan opposition to the
rule from 19 Senators, including Senators Cramer and Merkley.
Ultimately, the Proposed Water Supply Rule was withdrawn in
2020. Most recently, Senator Cramer successfully incorporated
into WRDA 2022 a permanent ban on the Corps from charging
surplus water fees from the Upper Missouri River Basin. While
this resolves the issue for some States regarding fees, it
still leaves the fee issue open for other States as well as
leaving unresolved, for all States, the issue regarding control
over the water allocation.
As such, WRDA 2022 established the Western States
Cooperative Committee, which requires the Corps to annually
meet with delegates from the Western States to develop and make
recommendations to avoid or minimize conflicts between Corps
projects and water rights and water laws of the western States.
The committee must provide a report to Congress.
The Western States Water Council and the Conference of
Western Attorneys General are working diligently with their
memberships to make their committee appointments. In fact, I
believe we have sent a letter that went out yesterday making
some of those appointments.
While there is no expectation the committee will be the
end-all solution to States' conflicts with the Corps, there is
hope that with this additional congressional oversight, the
Corps will take the cooperative portion of its cooperative
federalism responsibilities more seriously.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify and I stand for
any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Verleger follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Ms. Verleger.
I am going to recognize myself for 5 minutes. Then we will
go to Senator Cramer. With the four of us here, if it remains
that, I think we will get a couple opportunities.
I want to start with Governor Lewis. Thank you for your
opening statement. That is exactly what I want to talk about,
which is aligning of these canals. Some of the stuff you went
through pretty quickly so I want to kind of drill down. First,
let me say thank you for everything the Gila River Indian
Community is doing in trying to mitigate for this horrific
drought we have been experiencing for 20 years. It really is
going to take all of us. The Community stepping up the way you
have is much appreciated by the State of Arizona, myself, and
my office.
The advantage we get from this is we are going to save some
water and also generate some electricity. You went through some
of this already but I want to make sure we get this correct for
the record. My understanding is initially it is going to be
1,000 feet, lineal feet, of solar panels covering these canals.
For that 1,000 feet, what is the anticipated water savings per
year in acre-feet?
Governor Lewis. Thank you, Chairman. The Community expects
that the project will conserve water, of course, that is lost
to evaporation and thermo-electric energy usage. It is expected
to conserve roughly 8 acre-feet of water annually. That is
combined to 5.4 from evaporation and 2.58 acre-feet from
thermo-electric energy usage.
Senator Kelly. How many total megawatts would that lining
of the 1,000 lineal feet of canal generate?
Governor Lewis. It would equate to 1,000 feet would produce
1 megawatt of energy.
Senator Kelly. One megawatt of energy. What is the total
cost of the project? What is the Federal versus non-Federal?
Can you go into a bit more detail, I think in your opening
statement you said if the Army Corps was to do this on their
own, it would take longer and cost more? Could you give us an
estimate of how much more it would cost?
Governor Lewis. The traditional cost share percentage is a
65 percent to 35 percent breakdown. That is for agricultural
water supply. In accordance with 33 USC, Subsection 22.13(c),
this would include credits for LERRDs, which stands for lands,
easements, rights-of-way, relocations and disposal.
However, associated implementation guidance modifies the
cost sharing agreement for tribes by applying a waiver of
$665,000 to the non-Federal share. This will reduce the
Community's cost share to 25 percent of the regular 35 percent
share. This reduction results in an estimated non-Federal cost
share of roughly 6 percent of the estimated total project cost
of $423,850. The adjusted Federal costs are around $6,320,000.
Senator Kelly. What are the opportunities? How many miles
of canals did you say there were?
Governor Lewis. That is suitable for this project, 150
miles.
Senator Kelly. One hundred and fifty miles. Six thousand
feet or so in a mile, so you could expand this by well over a
couple orders of magnitude, potentially. Obviously, the cost
would be in proportion. My point is I think there is an
opportunity to save significant amounts of water and generate
significant electricity.
Governor Lewis. Yes, Chairman. This is a goal that as a
tribal leader I set for our Community to be one of the first
net-zero communities especially in Arizona to potentially be a
significant energy producer as well through this project. We
might be in competition with my good friend to the right of me
from the Salt River Project.
Senator Kelly. You said there was a recommendation of a
change to statutory language. I am going to go over here by
about 30 seconds. Could you go over that again and be a bit
more specific?
Governor Lewis. We are realizing that the Corps lacks,
Chairman, that essential statutory authority to treat tribes as
respective sovereign partners. We are respectfully looking for
Congress to potentially significantly enhance the Corps'
ability to execute the TTP, Chairman, by granting the agency
the ability to enter into those self-governance contracts with
tribes thereby respecting tribes' inherent sovereign nature.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Governor Lewis.
Senator Cramer?
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
For all of you, I am quite sure there is going to be plenty
of demand for both. There is going to be more demand than there
is electricity. Keep them all going as long as you can.
I will start with you, Ms. Verleger. All of you are great.
At least for nerds like us, it was fascinating to listen to all
your stories and anecdotes.
Ms. Verleger, your insight has been really helpful to my
team, as I mentioned earlier. I thank you for that, and I see
why you are so valuable to them.
You provided some very instructive background. I loved the
illustration of the sink and the two sides. With regard to that
water supply rule, from a legal standpoint, again, you talked
about Congress, but could you dig down just a little more for
me on the legal objections to the supply rule in the first
place? I think history is instructive. I am glad we had it
withdrawn and wanted to ultimately make it permanent for
everyone. Maybe give a legal analysis of why it was so
objectionable.
Ms. Verleger. Thank you for the question.
Basically, by the Corps trying to usurp control over all of
that water in the entire kitchen sink, that takes away the
States' ability to allocate the water in accordance with their
State laws. Every State allocates their water somewhat
differently. Arizona is a little bit different than North
Dakota. Generally we all use the prior appropriation system in
the west. There are already mechanisms already set up in place
to allocate water between users, especially in times of
shortage. When the Corps comes in and tries to take control of
the whole sink, that really takes away the States' ability to
do any sort of regulation. That is contrary to State law.
Senator Cramer. Maybe even the Constitution.
Ms. Verleger. And the Constitution.
Senator Cramer. I was going to ask you about the Western
Water Cooperative Committee, which again, the Corps wasn't
crazy about our doing. Their sense was we can with attorneys
general and Governors in individual States.
Tell me how you see the new committee working and why it
might work better in getting better cooperation with the Corps.
Ms. Verleger. I see it working as, the committee appoints,
there is one person appointed by the Governor and one appointed
by the attorney general from each of the States. Those are
supposed to be people who actually have technical expertise.
These are not meant to be political appointments but people who
are actually going to be able to dig down into the weeds with
the Corps of Engineers' staffers, discuss the problems, and try
to find solutions.
Also, they are required to report to Congress every year
after we have the meeting about whatever it is that the
committee talks about. I expect it to be focused a lot on water
supply issues, but there is no language in the bill that says
it has to focus on water supply issues. I think we can maybe
broaden out from that and see where there is conflict.
Senator Cramer. I appreciate that. I am looking forward to
being in the middle of that quite honestly, so thank you for
your work on that.
Dr. Travnicek, thank you for your work on the Snake Creek
Embankment and for understanding my illustration. Dig down a
bit more for me on what an EA should include in terms of
information. Unfortunately, General Spellmon lifted the time,
provided more time for comment. It is kind of fun, this is how
it works in North Dakota. I text the Governor, the Governor
calls Andrea, and pretty soon we are getting more information.
Fortunately, what they ignored first go round, they are now
asking for in the second go round.
Tell us a little bit about that additional information.
That is, by the way, it is their charter, right?
Ms. Travnicek. Right. Senator Cramer, thank you for that
question.
Yes, as we are looking at the Snake Creek Embankment and
the economic analysis that goes with it, right now the Corps is
looking at the economic analysis just from the dam safety
perspective, so the loss of life.
I mentioned in the testimony that there are multiple
purposes associated with this embankment. Looking at it from
that water supply, recreation, fish and wildlife perspectives,
that is why we have the concerns. That is why we reached out to
you and the Governor's office looking for that extension.
We had requested seeing the data that was associated with
the economic analysis and what that looked like. We did have to
sign an NDA associated with the extra information. My team was
able to dive in, working with Garrison Diversion Conservancy
District as well, on what those numbers are.
We feel that if there was an opportunity to make sure we
are looking at this from a multiple purpose perspective versus
just the dam safety, loss of life perspective, we would be
above that 1.0 that is needed for the benefit cost ratio to
move forward with a structural fix versus an operational fix.
Senator Cramer. Thanks for that. I think in the next round
I may come back to that and drill down a little more on things
like loss of economic opportunity if you do not have the water.
Thank you.
Senator Kelly. Thank you.
Senator Padilla.
Senator Padilla. Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this
hearing. As you and I together, the Senators representing
California and Arizona during this 1,200 year mega-drought, we
know all too well the Federal response to drought and water
management requires a whole-of-government approach based on
science and data.
Governor Lewis, I particularly want to thank you for being
here today. Thank you for your work on behalf of the Gila River
Indian Community to elevate tribal voices within the Colorado
River discussion and for being so proactive in finding
solutions to the crisis. I look forward to working together to
ensure the sustainability of the Colorado River for many
generations to come.
In California, the Army Corps works closely with State and
local agencies to improve, among other things, the forecasting
of atmospheric rivers which are often described as rivers in
the sky, rivers that can carry as much water as 15 Mississippi
Rivers. They produce most of the rain and snow that the West
depends upon each and every year.
The research conducted through the Forecast Informed
Reservoir Operations program by the Corps, in partnership with
State and local agencies, has enabled water managers to retain
water that otherwise would be needlessly released, resulting in
not just cost savings, but more importantly, a more reliable
water supply while also preventing and enhancing flood control
capabilities.
My first question is for Ms. Verleger. As you stated in
your testimony, western States experience great variability in
precipitation which has serious impacts and consequences for
the management of water projects. How critical is FIRO for
effectively managing drought and flood operations across the
West?
Ms. Verleger. Thank you for the question. I would say it is
very critical for States in the West. I understand that NOAA
has submitted a report to Congress recommending a pilot project
for improving the western S2S, which is subseasonal to seasonal
forecasting, to support water management.
The Council would recommend that the Corps should enter an
agreement with NOAA to partner on that project and tailor it to
ensure it supports the FIRO, Forecast Informed Reservoir
Operations.
Senator Padilla. Thank you for that. I am looking forward
to following up with you on those items.
In addition, there is a strong and growing interest across
not just California, but beyond, in understanding the broad
benefits of flood-managed aquifer recharge or flood-more
projects. Flood-more projects use flood water from rainfall or
snowmelt for managed aquifer recharge on agricultural lands and
working landscapes, including refuges and floodplains. Flood-
more projects demonstrate how natural infrastructure can make
flood impacts, maximize water retention and provide habitat
benefits for fish and wildlife.
This question is for you, Ms. Plumer. Can you speak to how
water conservation and drought provisions included in the 2022
WRDA will help stakeholders across the west implement
watershed-scale, multi-benefit projects to mitigate climate
impacts?
Ms. Plumer. Thank you, Senator Padilla, for that question.
Exactly in line with the testimony we provided, tremendous
built-up authorities over multiple WRDAs in support of these
levels of projects. We are strongly supportive of the vast
range of authorities across the Continuing Authorities Program
such as Section 206 that I mentioned in my testimony, aquatic
ecosystem restoration, to provide the tools for non-Federal
partners to do things like wet meadow restoration, flood plain
restoration and really look at these abilities for natural
features that exist in the landscapes today to be restored and
do more long term water storage, water conservation that takes
some of these fluctuations out of the water that we are seeing
right now, of the vast changes happening between atmospheric
conditions, such as facing California and these mass flooding
events that are happening.
Really holding, storing, and slowing the water over long
periods of time and really tapping into the large expanse of
authorities that the Corps, this committee and other efforts
that Congress that has pushed the Corps on to think again about
these natural features and nature-based solutions to these
types of conservation objectives for our systems in the west.
Senator Padilla. Thank you. With the few seconds I have
left, I am going to squeeze in one more question. I will not
stick around for a second round.
To followup, Ms. Plumer, as we speak, the Corps is managing
the flows of four reservoirs to minimize flood risk by low-
lying Central Valley communities in California facing
potentially catastrophic spring snowmelt.
How can managed aquifer recharge near Corps facilities such
as those in California help mitigate flood risks for these
types of communities?
Ms. Plumer. Thank you again, Senator.
Again, I think it is very much about slowing the water
down, storing it, and utilizing the features we have on the
landscape to store that water for future use, so, thinking
about geologic storage, combined with things like wet meadow
storage.
Also, we are very focused on ensuring wildfire resilience
and that our forest systems are able to store the water and
snowmelt and that there is a slower pace in terms of hitting
the reservoirs. Sedimentation, for our interests, in terms of
recreation and how sedimentation impacts reservoirs and the
health of hunting and fishing on our systems is another area of
focus. Putting in these natural features blended with the
structural features is a win-win in terms of reservoir health
and storage.
Senator Padilla. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kelly. Senator Ricketts.
Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very
much for holding this, and Ranking Member Cramer, as well, for
this important talk about water resources. It is something that
is certainly very important to Nebraska.
Nebraska has a long history of managing our water in a
responsible way. In fact, the Daugherty Water for Food
Institute has looked at our farmers' crop water productivity
which is how much water our farmers are basically using to be
able to grow corn and soybeans. From 1990 to 2014, it has
increased by 75 percent which means we are being more
productive and growing more crops with less water.
Nebraska has had a system of water management in place
through 20 local natural resource districts for over 50 years
that has helped us manage our overall aquifer to keep it within
1 foot of where it was in the 1950's, where States like
Colorado have drained their aquifer down by nearly 14 feet.
We have worked with surrounding States like Wyoming and
Kansas to create compacts. In fact, we have a compact with
Colorado that goes back 100 years that entitles us to water on
the South Platte River which comes from the Rockies through
Colorado into Nebraska.
Actually, in years like the past couple years, we have had
drought. At one point on the South Platte River, I saw there
was no water coming across that, even though Colorado is
supposed to be giving us 120 cubic feet a second during the
summer. We can get even more in the non-irrigation season if we
have built a canal which we are undertaking to do.
In fact, the compact from 100 years ago gives us the
ability to build a canal in Colorado to Nebraska to a reservoir
system. We started funding for it when I was Governor. This
legislature has significantly increased backing for that
project so we can continue to make sure we get the water for
our State. That is going to impact drinking water all the way
to Lincoln and Omaha as well.
We are talking about water and Nebraska. I know it is all
about you, Senator Cramer, but North Dakota. I am going to get
there.
Ms. Travnicek, you talked about the Army Corps and I think
the Snake Creek Embankment and the uncertainty they were
creating by not appropriately looking at the types of ROI. What
can Congress do and this committee do to make sure that we are
properly enforcing the Water Resources Development Act? Are
there more things we could be doing to be proactive here in
this committee or in Congress?
Ms. Travnicek. Senator, thank you for the questions.
I think what would be beneficial is just making sure it is
fully clarified. Clearly with the last Water Resource
Development Act for 2022, there was discussion, I think Senator
Cramer included, related to the economic analysis. They decided
to take it at a smaller lens just looking at one authority
versus the multiple authorities.
I think trying to figure out the appropriate authorization
and can that be expanded to multiple purposes. I think that is
where that would be helpful, making really crystal clear, if
you have these projects that have multiple purposes, why are we
not looking at it as a whole.
Senator Ricketts. What has been your response in working
with the Army Corps of Engineers? What have they been saying?
Ms. Travnicek. Senator, the last discussion we had last
week in regard to the economic analysis, where they really did
just focus on the one element, the dam safety, loss of life for
the economic analysis. That is where we, as a State, continue
to impress on looking at all the other authorized purposes that
are associated with it, especially the water quantity side of
things.
Senator Ricketts. They have not acknowledged yet the other
purposes? They have still only acknowledged the one?
Ms. Travnicek. Senator, they talk about the multiple
purposes, but they do not include it in the economic analysis.
Senator Ricketts. What do we need to do in WRDA to be able
to make sure they are recognizing those other purposes?
Ms. Travnicek. Senator, I think making it crystal clear to
make sure they are looking at the multiple purposes.
Senator Ricketts. Write it into the language when we update
it. Got it.
Ms. Travnicek. Yes.
Senator Ricketts. Ms. Verleger, can you talk a bit about
what your experience with the Army Corps of Engineers has been
like when you have had your conversations with them?
Ms. Verleger. Thank you for the question. I think it
depends on who has been in charge and where we have been in the
process. The problems we have been having over water supply in
North Dakota have dated back at least to the time I have been
there, which is about 14 years. I know we have gone through
this same round of things back in the 1980's. I wasn't there,
but I have all the documents and history.
A lot of the problem seems to be, we talk to the staff
level. They tell us, well, that is not our decision; that is a
headquarters decision. Then we talk to headquarters and they
send us back. There is a lot of bouncing around back and forth
trying to even get to the right person who can help us.
That has been a problem. I am hopeful the Western
Cooperative Committee will help solve that problem, because
those are the people who are supposed to be in charge and
helping us.
Senator Ricketts. Do you agree with Dr. Travnicek's
assessment, though, that more clarification in WRDA will be
helpful to that?
Ms. Verleger. I do agree with that assessment, yes.
Senator Ricketts. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Kelly. Thank you.
Ms. Meyers, you discussed in your opening remarks work that
SRP has done with the Corps to update flood control manuals. I
want to get into that a bit more.
Across all your reservoirs at SRP, how much storage
capacity do you have to keep available for flood control
management? Then can you explain how the Army Corps Flood
Control Manuals impact the river operations?
Ms. Meyers. Thank you, Chairman Kelly.
Of our seven reservoirs we operate, only one has dedicated
flood control space. That is Theodore Roosevelt Dam. There are
550,000 acre-feet of flood control space in Theodore Roosevelt
Dam. That is operated pursuant to our Water Control Manual with
the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation.
Senator Kelly. Beyond the Army Corps telling you through
these flood control curves how much storage capacity you have
to have for flood control, is there anything more that affects
your operations or is just having that number based on the
existing curve?
Ms. Meyers. Today, we operate that, the Flood Control
Manual dictates that we evacuate the space in Roosevelt Dam,
which is the highest upstream dam on the Salt River, in 20
days. Our Flood Control Manual does allow for temporary
deviations, as do many other flood control manuals. We have
been working with the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of
Reclamation to solidify that proposal. Our proposal is to use
the bottom 20 percent of that space and extend that release
period from 20 days to 120 days. In Arizona, especially for our
spring runoff which is what we had this year, some really
intense spring storms, if we could extend the release period
for 120 days until the summer, we could meet some real critical
demand with that water supply.
Senator Kelly. How much water would that be?
Ms. Meyers. About 109,000 acre-feet annually.
Senator Kelly. You mentioned that in your opening remarks.
When was the last time the Army Corps did an update for one
of its manuals?
Ms. Meyers. I can only speak for our manual but I know that
it is not unusual for the Corps to go for many decades if there
is no substantive changes to the reservoir system and not
update their manuals. Our manual was established in 1997. This
is our first relook at that.
Senator Kelly. It has been over 25 years since that has
been updated. With that 550,000 acre-feet of available storage
for flood control, meaning if you could, if you need to, you
could flow that amount of water and it is not going to flood,
how often maybe have you exceeded that?
Ms. Meyers. This year actually the elevation rose to about
6 feet in the flood control space. The total is 24 feet. That
is the highest elevation we have been in the flood control
space in Roosevelt Dam.
Senator Kelly. That is 25 percent, essentially, if you are
just thinking about linear feet?
Ms. Meyers. Yes.
Senator Kelly. About 25 percent of what you have available
for flood control, you actually used going back how far?
Ms. Meyers. To the 1990's when it was modified.
Senator Kelly. Since the 1990's.
Ms. Meyers. The fifth largest city in the Country is just
downstream of this dam, so there are significant benefits from
the flood control space.
Senator Kelly. Do you now feel you can modify that to be
more favorable toward water storage as opposed to flood
control?
Ms. Meyers. We certainly feel that this bottom 20 percent,
the lowest 5 feet, is a good place to start. Our proposal is to
do a 5-year plan and we can enter into flood control space up
to three times during that. We will get some really good data
and information from that. If it is successful, we will move
forward with a long-term modification to the Water Control
Manual.
Senator Kelly. Was that enabled by what we did in the 2020
WRDA?
Ms. Meyers. Yes, sir, it was. That did allow us, the Salt
River Project, to work more closely with the Corps and the
Bureau of Reclamation on the reevaluation.
Senator Kelly. Do you feel like we are moving in the right
direction on this?
Ms. Meyers. Yes, I do.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Ms. Meyers.
Senator Cramer?
Senator Cramer. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Travnicek, I wanted to talk a little more about the
other factors that should be in the economic analysis. Your
discussion with Governor Ricketts reminded me there is nothing
more feared by the Corps of Engineers than a Governor who
becomes a Senator and gets on the EPW Committee.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cramer. Governors always have all this experience
and pent-up frustration they want to take out.
However, I thought the discussion was great because I think
both Jennifer and Andrea gave the answer, but the Corps still
didn't seem to be hearing our voice in the mandate, you know,
you have to consider these other things.
However, this is where hope lies, in my view. The Western
Water Cooperative Committee, where Governors and attorneys
general appoint these people, the reason the Corps leadership
did not want to do it is because they like talking to each
Governor one at a time, or staff level discussions one at a
time.
As a group, the West, together, strong bipartisan as we
notice in this room, while aren't identical, we have similar
concerns. That is why we created this committee that will
answer to both the Corps and then to Congress so we will be
able to be kept up to date on how they are responding so that
we hopefully can make crystal clear, Dr. Travnicek, what they
are either meeting or nor meeting.
Now, I am going to be hopeful because I am a hopeful
person. I agree with several of the witnesses that say right w
have right now pretty good leadership. I think we do at the
Corps. I have great respect for General Spellmon, I have great
respect for Secretary Mike Connor.
I am really hopeful. Secretary Connor having been involved
in other agencies, Interior and understanding the role of
States and the Federal Government, and natural resource
management, I am going to be hopeful, but will reserve the
tough ones for you, Governor.
Maybe, Dr. Travnicek, just expand a bit more. Having been
an economic development director, in the role of water,
obviously irrigation is critical. Obviously municipal use is a
really big deal. Both are big economic drivers that should be
considered as part of any analysis.
Beyond that, there is the whole role of industrial
development. It is hard to measure what would have been
possible had we had the water where we needed the water, for
example. I think of all the projects that probably have gone by
the wayside because we did not have adequate water.
Can that be a part of the analysis? I want to have
integrity. Can that be a part of it, if you could document
projects that are either in the docket or the queue or lost
opportunities if there was just a better supply? Ms. Travnicek.
Thanks for the question.
That would be our hope. We are hopeful as well. Some of the
discussions related to that, knowing that the water supply
projects that we have been working on, knowing we have had
authorization from 1965, in order to use the McCluskey Canal,
in order to get water out east to the Farber region, to the
Grand Forks region, so trying to get water out east is for 50
percent of the population of North Dakota. We have been trying
to move those projects forward.
It has been in the works a long time. We hope they would
take that into account for the economic analysis.
Senator Cramer. Is there anything you would add to that,
Jennifer? Are we hopeful about the leadership of the Corps
right now and maybe they are going to listen a little better?
Ms. Verleger. Yes, Senator, I am always hopeful that
leadership at the Corps will be helpful to us. I would echo
your comments about General Spellmon. He has been very good to
work with, and has been helpful in listening to the State's
prerogative.
Senator Cramer. My observation, and of course again, I look
to Governor Ricketts because he has so much experience with the
Omaha office. I think over the generations of leadership, we
can always get along with Omaha. It is when it gets to Oregon
or Washington that it gets more complicated.
That is enough for me. I am grateful to all of you. I think
your testimony has been great. I am ending on a note of
optimism.
Senator Kelly. I will recognize Governor Ricketts.
[Laughter.]
Senator Ricketts. Senator now, but I would agree with
Senator Cramer's statement about when you have a little bit of
knowledge, from personal experience, it certainly gives you a
background in it.
That is actually one of the areas I want to hit upon. I
will say that in the last few months, we have seen a big change
in the Corps in Nebraska with regard to more timely responses
to getting things done.
I do echo your point about some of the leadership there is
maybe a bit more responsive. I can tell you, for example, in
the past, we had a permit that took 6 years to issue that was
for just raising the levees around Offutt Air Force Base. The
Corps did not give that permit in a timely manner, we had
floods in 2019 that did $1 billion in damage. It cost the
taxpayers $1 billion because they were not timely with that.
One of the challenges I think we have, and Dr. Travnicek
you referenced the Flood Control Act of 1944, where it directs
the Corps to protect against flooding, protecting life and
property. Of course, one of the other functions of the Corps is
navigation.
There was also a court case in Minnesota that directed the
Corps to also take into account the Endangered Species Act. I
think this is an area where we, in Congress, have to be
thinking about how we may be hampering the Corps in its
mission. Congress has never dedicated which of those is a
priority, flood control, navigation, or endangered species. The
Corps has to juggle all those without direction from Congress.
That is an opportunity for perhaps this committee to think
about that.
In your experience in North Dakota, can you think of
projects that were delayed because of the Corps having to
juggle flood control, navigation, and endangered species?
Ms. Travnicek. Senator, as we look at those types of
projects, and we do have the authorized purposes associated
with the Main Stem Dam, Lake Sakakawea within North Dakota that
has all those different purposes, fish and wildlife,
navigation, and flood control. We have been able to, in working
with the Corps, they are the ones that operate that system. As
we look at other projects that could be delayed for permits,
for instance, for Northwest Area Water Supply, in regard to
getting a 408 permit in order to move forward with that
project, that has taken over 2 years to get the permit that is
needed.
It kind of depends on the situation and on the project,
definitely recognizing they do have a lot of authorized
purposes they have to be looking at, but also trying to make
sure we are not delaying things in the process.
Senator Ricketts. Ms. Verleger, do you have any experience
with regard to the Corps and having to juggle flood control,
navigation and endangered species and whether there are
projects you can think of that were delayed because of that?
Ms. Verleger. Thank you for the question.
I cannot think of a specific project but we have had in
North Dakota, we have had some issues with the Corps,
disagreement, I would say, over endangered species, the
Endangered Species Act. The Corps has a responsibility to meet
the Endangered Species Act and those provisions. We do, of
course, have threatened and endangered species on the Missouri
River.
There is some disagreement about how much control that
gives the Corps over certain activities they can do, projects,
how they operate things. I think there is some disagreement
there because I think the Endangered Species Act is somewhat
used to further whatever purpose it is that the Corps is trying
to further without looking at the holistic picture.
Senator Ricketts. Some of the experiences I had as Governor
of Nebraska were that without that clear direction from
Congress with regard to what is the priority, you are really
kind of left to the judgment of the Corps and they have
multiple masters to serve here. It is, in fairness, difficult
for them.
That also can drive projects, at least I have seen along
the Missouri River and along the Nebraska/Iowa border where it
is driving projects that lead to additional flooding. That is
one of the things I think, again, this committee and this
Congress can do, look at how we can prioritize that to
prioritize protecting people and property overall. I do not
know if you would have any further comment on that, either one
of you. All right, great. I will turn it back to you, Mr.
Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Senator.
Ms. Plumer, I am going to have some questions for you for
the record. We have to go to an all-Senators briefing.
I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here and
sharing your perspectives on what the Army Corps can be doing
with their water management approach.
Before we adjourn, we have some housekeeping for Senators
Ricketts and Cramer. We can submit written questions for the
record by 4 p.m. on Tuesday, May 30, which is 2 weeks from
today.
With that, this hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:52 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]