[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT
APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2026
_______________________________________________________________________
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT, AND
RELATED AGENCIES
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISHMANN, Tennessee, Chairman
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
KEN CALVERT, California
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas,
Vice Chair
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
CELESTE MALOY, Utah
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio,
Ranking Member
JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina
DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
MIKE LEVIN, California
FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
SUSIE LEE, Nevada
NOTE: Under committee rules, Mr. Cole, as chairman of the full
committee, and Ms. DeLauro, as ranking minority member of the full
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.
Laura Cylke, Perry Yates, Richie O'Connell,
Raynor Buckley and Sykes Connell
Subcommittee Staff
PART 2
__________
Page
Members' Day................................................ 1
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
61-939 WASHINGTON : 2026
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
----------
TOM COLE, Oklahoma, Chairman
HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky,
Chairman Emeritus
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
KEN CALVERT, California
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
CHARLES J. ``CHUCK'' FLEISCHMANN,
Tennessee
DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
DAVID G. VALADAO, California
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
BEN CLINE, Virginia
GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa
TONY GONZALES, Texas
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
RYAN K. ZINKE, Montana
ANDREW S. CLYDE, Georgia
STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
SCOTT FRANKLIN, Florida
JAKE ELLZEY, Texas
JUAN CISCOMANI, Arizona
CHUCK EDWARDS, North Carolina
MARK ALFORD, Missouri
NICK LaLOTA, New York
DALE W. STRONG, Alabama
CELESTE MALOY, Utah
RILEY M. MOORE, West Virginia
ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut,
Ranking Member
STENY H. HOYER, Maryland
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
JAMES E. CLYBURN, South Carolina
SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
GRACE MENG, New York
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
PETE AGUILAR, California
LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
NORMA J. TORRES, California
ED CASE, Hawaii
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
JOSH HARDER, California
LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois
SUSIE LEE, Nevada
JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York
MIKE LEVIN, California
MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
FRANK J. MRVAN, Indiana
MARIE GLUESENKAMP PEREZ,
Washington
GLENN IVEY, Maryland
Susan Ross, Chief Clerk and Staff Director
(II)
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR
2026
Tuesday, April 8, 2025.
MEMBERS' DAY
Mr. Fleischmann. The hearing will come to order. Good
morning. I would like to welcome everyone to today's Energy and
Water Member Day hearing.
Today, our fellow members will have the opportunity to
testify on issues under the jurisdiction of this subcommittee
that are important to them. Each witness will have 5 minutes to
present their testimony. Members of the subcommittee will then
have the opportunity to ask questions if they would like to do
so.
I know everyone has busy schedules today, so I will forego
any extended remarks. I look forward to learning more from our
colleagues on their priorities for the fiscal 2026 energy and
water bill.
At this time, I would like to recognize my friend, Ms.
Kaptur, for any opening remarks she would like to make. Ms.
Kaptur.
Ms. Kaptur. Thank you, Chairman Fleischmann, and thank you
to our colleagues who come before us today. We appreciate very
much the time you have taken to be here and advocate for your
communities. And I look forward to hearing your priorities,
learning more about your part of the country, including Federal
programs of importance to you and your district.
I yield back.
Mr. Fleischmann. I would like to thank the ranking member.
We will now turn to our witnesses. First up, I would like
to welcome Congressman Randy Weber from the State of Texas. Mr.
Weber, you are recognized for 5 minutes, sir.
----------
Tuesday, April 8, 2025.
WITNESS
HON. RANDY K. WEBER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
TEXAS
Mr. Weber. Thank you. Are we on? We are on. Okay. Well,
good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Kaptur, and the
Ranking Member DeLauro and Cole, Chairman Cole, who I don't
see, but I am Randy Weber. I have the great honor of
representing Texas 14th District, which is the Gulf Coast of
Texas, starting at the Louisiana line and going down the curve
of Texas.
Let me tell you, my district is not just a dot on the map,
nor is it just a curve. It is the beating heart of American
energy, trade, and security. Why do I say that? Texas 14 is
home to some of the largest refineries in the Nation. We export
American produced LNG through three major terminals. We operate
the most strategic military port in the country. We move more
military personnel and equipment out of the country than any
other port in the United States. On every day, our seven ports
operate pipelines and ship channels. We keep the American
economy running and keep our military supplied and keep our
military moving, quite frankly.
But here is the hard truth. If we don't invest in the
deepening and strengthening of these waterways, if we let them
degrade, they silt in, as most of y'all will know. Then what is
the point of all this energy production? Because we can't move
it out. What good is having oil and gas if we can't move it out
safely and efficiently? What good is an American energy
dominance if the infrastructure support is crumbling? We will
fall woefully behind.
The Sabine-Neches Waterway is the longest waterway in the
Gulf Coast, second only to the Mississippi River. Okay? It is
the most critical waterway, one of the most critical waterway
systems in our country. The impact of the Sabine-Neches
Waterway is undeniable. The waterway moves over, check this
out, 194 million tons of cargo every single year. And it is the
largest crude oil and LNG exporter in the Nation.
The waterway has not undergone any improvements in over 50,
5-0, years. And improving this waterway by deepening the
channel from 40 feet to 48 feet will allow larger ships to come
up into the channel and get the cargo a lot more quicker and a
lot more efficiently, unleashing the power of American energy
by enabling future growth and increases in shipping volumes,
which helps with trade, by the way.
The Port of Galveston, one of my other reports, operating
since 1825, believe it or not, it was formed by the Mexican
government before Texas won its independence in 1836, is a
vital commercial hub in my district, handling both cargo, not
only cargo, but energy, but cruise traffic, cruise terminals.
We have a lot of cruises out of Galveston. Each year Galveston
port moves over 4 million tons of cargo and welcomes over 1
million cruise passengers every year.
To stay competitive and accommodate modern fleets, channel
dredging and harbor improvements are absolutely essential. Not
to mention, we also have what is called Coastal Texas
Protection and Restoration Project, which is necessary for the
Gulf Coast because we have so many hurricanes. We are prone to
so many hurricanes. That project is to reduce the risk for
storm surge for the millions of folks and the energy businesses
who live on the coast and work our very critical industries
that keep the U.S. up and running.
The Texas Legislature, y'all, understands that investing in
our future--in that infrastructure is investing in our future.
That is why the State of Texas has stepped up with funding for
the Brazos River floodgates, which are critical structures on
the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway that has been in place since the
1940s. 1940s. And they are long overdue for modernization. Now
it is time for the Federal Government to do its part by
allowing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to accept the funds
that Texas has already committed.
And finally, we must stay ahead in small modular nuclear
technology. Southeast Texas is ready to lead, but we need
continued support to ensure the U.S. remains at the forefront,
not playing catch up to China or Russia.
So to recap let me say this. We must fully fund the Sabine-
Neches Waterway Channel Improvement Project. We must deepen the
Galveston ship channel. We must advance the Coastal Texas
Barrier Protection and Restoration Project. And we must upgrade
the Brazos River floodgates. And yes, we must continue to
support nuclear demonstration projects as part of the all of
the above strategy to meet rising global demand.
So to my esteemed colleagues, thank you for having me here
today. Let's not talk about energy dominance and then fail to
fund the very arteries that make it possible. Let me reiterate.
If we are going to talk about we need to be energy dominant and
the leader in the world, let's not fail to fund the very
arteries that make it possible. Let's back up our principles
with action. Y'all have the capability and the power to do
that. I respectfully ask for your full and fair consideration
of these vital projects.
And with that, I will yield back or welcome any questions.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Fleischmann. I thank the gentleman, my friend from
Texas, for an excellent presentation. I have no questions at
this time.
Ms. Kaptur.
Ms. Kaptur. Yes, Mr. Chairman. I am going to take the time
because I am interested in this. I never been to Galveston or
your part of Texas, Congressman Weber. But they provided us
with a little map here, and I wish it were larger, but tell us
a little bit more about your district. And obviously, the
energy economy is the leading----
Mr. Weber. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Kaptur Economic activity----
Mr. Weber. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Kaptur [continuing]. Of your district.
Mr. Weber. And NASA, just for information. Actually, the
Johnson Space Center was in Dr. Brian Babin's district, half a
mile north of mine. Seventy-five hundred people who either work
for NASA and/or its subcontractors live in my district. So not
only is energy very, very, very huge, so is space.
It is an extremely, what should I say, long district,
Congresswoman Kaptur. I don't know how long yours is, but mine
is 160 miles from the Louisiana border down to the southwest
end. So the gasoline--the oil companies love me because we
traverse that on every weekend.
Ms. Kaptur. All right. Well, that is a long district. And I
wanted to just shift over a little bit if I could. LNG, I look
at your region, and I think about all the storms that have
occurred in Texas. Has your district been a victim of the
hurricanes and the changing climate at all?
Mr. Weber. I have been here. I have the gray hair to prove
it. I was 8 years old in 1961 when Hurricane Carla hit the
Texas Gulf Coast and I have been through every single hurricane
since that time. And believe it or not, not only do we have
hurricanes, but we also have Galveston Island for the first
time in my life, I am 71 years old. I have lived in a 20-mile
radius, had 16 degrees on the island last winter. Winter Storm
Uri, if you remember, from February of 2021, we had 18 degrees.
So we have had a lot of weather patterns change and it is a
huge district and we see a lot of weather.
Ms. Kaptur. And do you see those changing weather patterns
having an impact on access or egress from your ports?
Mr. Weber. Well, yes, they do, of course, when things are
cold. For example, and I know y'all live up north, I am not
sure about Tennessee, I think that y'all's, you can tell I am
from Texas, y'all, I think y'all's buildings are built to
withstand very cold temperatures. Ours are built more to
withstand high, you know, warm temperatures and hurricanes,
too. But a lot of things happen. Traffic gets snarled, the
roads get icy, pipes break. So when you have really cold
winters, it will affect the people in our district.
And when you have a hurricane approaching and the news is
saying y'all need to evacuate, unfortunately, and this is true
in just about every district I see on TV, I say people, y'all
need to evacuate, people are quite slow to evacuate, and so the
roads get clogged very easily. So weather definitely affects
us.
Ms. Kaptur. And what about coastal erosion in your region?
Mr. Weber. Coastal erosion is something that we deal with.
But USACE, United States Army Corps of Engineers, and the
Galveston Flood Control District, we have an agreement with
what they do is they renourish the beach sands. So when they do
projects and when they do dredge, and, quite frankly, that is a
great question, because when they do dredge out these long 40-
something-mile channels, then they can actually renourish the
beach with that sand that they took from dredging.
Ms. Kaptur. And some of our coasts, we have had real, real
challenges with coastal erosion----
Mr. Weber. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Kaptur [continuing]. Of a major proportion. So I was
just curious about your region.
Final question. I am one of the members that cares about
nuclear waste. I know our chairman does, too. And having
thought about nuclear power, do you have suggestions? I think I
read, I believe, that Texas has disallowed storage of nuclear
waste. Have you ever heard anybody in Texas who is interested
in this challenge?
Mr. Weber. Well, yes, I have. Some of you probably won't
know, but I spent 4 years in the Texas legislature before I got
demoted to Congress. And we actually had waste control
specialties out in Andrews County, far West Texas, which they
wanted that facility. The community wanted it. The chamber of
commerce wanted it. The city fathers wanted it. At some point
in time, they changed their mind. They said they didn't want it
anymore. So there is been that.
I have actually been there and visited with my own eyes in
2010, I think it was. Very futuristic, huge concrete barriers,
huge rooms, and stuff like that, so they can--come on in, Mr.
Acosta. And so we have had that discussion.
And Chairman Fleischmann knows this, that we have a nuclear
event every month we are in session, about one a month over at
the Capitol Hill Club, bipartisan, where we have Republicans
and Democrats come talk to members--come talk to businesses. We
have had people from the EPA, we have had people from the
State--retired people from State Department, we have had people
from industries that come. It is nonattributable. We don't let
all this stuff out. There is no sales going on. Nobody is
trying to sell us into a product or something like that.
We are talking about all the pathways and all the things
that are growing. In other words, we are learning that there is
more and more. For example, how France reproduces their nuclear
waste. We could do the same thing. We had that discussion every
month. I would invite all of you, and I know Chuck knows this.
He is one that really got me involved. He is good at it, too,
by the way.
Ms. Kaptur. Yes, he is.
Mr. Weber. But I would invite you all to come because it is
really fascinating when you listen to it. And I forgot to say
this. When I was in the Texas legislature for 4 years, I had a
nuclear project in my district, South Texas Nuclear Project
down in Matagorda County. I have been there in 2010 and watched
them change out spent fuel rods with my own eyes. It is
fascinating. They can do it cleanly, they can do it safely.
Ms. Kaptur. Well, that I got to make it over to the Capitol
Hill Club, Mr. Chairman. You got to help us.
Mr. Fleischmann. You are always welcome. And many of your
colleagues, Madam Ranking Member, come over. And Mr. Weber is
absolutely right. They are not only very convivial discussions,
very substantive, and help us do our work, and you are always
welcome. I know Mr. Simpson has joined some of those, but Mr.
Weber is there just about every month. In fact, there is one, I
think, tomorrow night.
Mr. Weber. Yep. And so Bill Foster, he comes quite
regularly and he always reminds us he is the only physicist----
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes.
Mr. Weber [continuing]. In the House.
Mr. Fleischmann. And Mr. Levin from this committee----
Mr. Weber. Yes, absolutely.
Mr. Fleischmann [continuing]. From California is a
mainstay. But thank you.
And at this time I think my distinguished colleague,
chairman of the Interior Subcommittee of Appropriations and
former chair of this subcommittee, Mr. Simpson, would like to
ask a question.
Mr. Simpson. Thank you. Randy, I fully agree with you on
the future of energy and SMRs and advanced design reactors that
we are working on and stuff, not only for this country, but,
frankly, for around the world. This committee is obviously very
aware of that and been funding those projects as we can.
Let me ask you about dredging, though. You have, I think
every year you have come in and told us how important this is.
What is the status of it now? Is the Army--because in the
committee, we generally fund the Army Corps of Engineer
dredging. We also do some specific projects if people request
an earmark. Are you going to request an earmark for dredging in
that area this year or--excuse me, it is community----
Mr. Weber. Project funding. Not that I keep up with that.
Mr. Simpson. Project funding. It is one of those things
that I scratch all that earmark stuff out.
Mr. Weber. Well, I am, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for that
question.
And here is the thing. Remember I said in my comments, 40
years that channel has not been dredged out and the USACE,
United States Army Corps of Engineers, helps, but there is a
lot of red tape and bureaucratic hoops that they have to jump
through. The Sabine-Neches Navigation District is the district
that controls that. And they had an abnorm tax income. In other
words, they are a taxing entity.
The people of Jefferson County, we call it Southeast Texas,
their jurisdiction, literally have contributed hundreds of
millions of dollars. They have, and you know this, these
projects, they require a local sponsor. Usually it is 25
percent. Sabine-Neches Navigation District, and we were with
Russ Vought yesterday over in the House, the President's Office
of Management and Budgets at OMB, and the Sabine-Neches
Waterway Navigation District was there with us. They literally
stepped up to the plate and said, we will not contribute 25
percent. We will contribute 40 percent. And we are talking
hundreds of millions of dollars. It is a 1.1- or $2 billion
project. And they have already started the work. They have
already started the engineering.
And so now what we need is the United States Congress to
step up and say, look, for the number one energy export, not
only energy, but don't forget I said military, too, number one,
energy and military exporting port in the country, we really
need to do this.
There is a process, and this is more than y'all bargained
for, so forgive me, there is a process where ships, when you
have VLCC, very large crude containers, that are coming into
the, into the Gulf there, the draft they take is they are not
allowed to come up into that channel because it needs to be
dredged to 48 feet. So they sit offshore and they have these
smaller vessels come up one at a time and offload some of the
crude, for example, and then work their way up the channel,
which is extremely busy. And they dock up and they drop their
load, if you will, offload their cargo. Then they got to go
back out the channel, which is 48 miles to the port of
Beaumont, by the way, from the Gulf Coast. They got to go back
to the VLCC, load up again. You see what is happening.
If the channel was dredged, we could bring more product in
and out a lot quicker. And God forbid that we have a problem
where we need our military to get in high gear very quickly. It
would enable them to do so more efficiently.
Mr. Simpson. Yeah, that doesn't seem like a very efficient
way to do it the way we are doing it now. And it has got to be
costly to offload out in the Gulf and then----
Mr. Weber. Well, absolutely. And I will tell you, Mr.
Chairman, one of the things that we did, was it 2 or 3 years
ago, we had to change the visa program because a lot of these
ships bring sailors from other countries. And they can go
ashore, and I think I forget exactly what the figures were,
they had a 20-day visa or whatever it was, and they weren't
in--I mean, the ship might be out there 3 or 4 weeks. And y'all
will never know this unless you come to Galveston. But when you
come across the causeway from Houston across the bay, Galveston
Bay, you can see the Galveston Island. You can see out in the
Gulf. And if it is at night, you can see probably 30 or 40
ships because of their lights----
Mr. Simpson. Yeah.
Mr. Weber [continuing]. Lined up, all waiting to get in.
So, you say, well, gosh, 20 days. You would think they would
get in and out. They would if it was, you know, two or three
ships a day. But it is like 30 or 40, I bet, a day, if not
more.
Mr. Simpson. Yeah. Well, I appreciate that. I, like Marcy,
I have never been to Galveston, but I just read a book on the
big hurricane that wiped out----
Mr. Weber. The storm of 1900.
Mr. Simpson. Yeah, it was 1900.
Mr. Weber. It was almost, depends on whose figures you use,
6,000 people or 8,000 people, and they raised the entire island
of Galveston 9 feet.
Mr. Simpson. Yeah.
Mr. Weber. They brought in some of those dredge boats,
Ranking Member Kaptur was talking about, and they raised that
whole island nine feet.
Mr. Simpson. Yep. But it was good for Houston because
Houston and Galveston were in competition to be the main port
and stuff.
Mr. Weber. Well, I am still trying--you have to come up
through the Galveston Bay to get up the channel and into
Houston. I am trying to figure out how I can get some toll arms
there where we can participate in their freight, too.
Mr. Simpson. Well, thank you.
Mr. Weber. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Simpson. I appreciate it.
Mr. Fleischmann. And again, I thank Mr. Weber for his
testimony today before us, sir.
At this time, I would like to welcome Congressman Jim Costa
from the State of California. Mr. Costa, you are recognized for
5 minutes, sir.
----------
Tuesday, April 8, 2025.
WITNESS
HON. JIM COSTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA
Mr. Costa. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
Member Kaptur and my neighbor Mr. Simpson, for allowing me to
testify before the subcommittee. We have important work that we
share. I look forward to working with the subcommittee on goals
of deploying technologies for better reservoir management,
advancing western water storage projects, and upgrading our
aging infrastructure that we are challenged with.
Let me begin with the Water Operations Technical Support
Program that the subcommittee has supported in the past.
Clearly, with, you know, the changes that we have in weather
patterns, atmospheric rivers constitute more and more a source
of water for our regions in the West and certainly in
California. The Operations Technical Support Program and the
Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations Program cannot be
overstated.
For an example, in California we get most of our moisture
between end of November and the end of March. The first 3
months of this year were below average. And we measure our
rainfall in California, but elsewhere, in 10-year averages
because sometimes you have an average, you have above average,
you have below average. So the 10-year averages we have noticed
in the last two decades have changed dramatically. And our
reservoirs were built over a period of the last 60 to 80 years
with flood management manuals that reflected what they thought
were the 10-year averages back when these reservoirs were
built. Across the West, 40 to 60 percent of our precipitation
is now brought to us by these extreme atmospheric rivers
events, meaning that an entire water may hinge on two major
storms.
We saw an example of that here in the last month. We were
way below averages in the middle of February. And then we got
two large atmospheric river events back in late February and
early March. And now in Northern California we are above
average and in the center of the state, where I represent, we
are slightly below average. Nonetheless, the Army Corps of
Engineers needs to incorporate this latest data to try to
determine how they can balance their flood control manual so
that we can try to reserve as much space possible for these
atmospheric rivers when they come.
The seasonal forecasting observations now become a critical
tool for reservoir operations. These tools empower western
reservoirs to track and to respond to major precipitation
events while retaining water that otherwise might be released.
So this gives us a more reliability factor. I requested this
subcommittee in previous years, and I do once again this year,
to provide $15 million for fiscal year 2026 and $15 million for
the Fire Row program. These two areas are very helpful in
better managing the reservoirs that we have in the West.
Separately, the WIIN Act storage program related to this
recent winter storms in March helped increase the levels of the
snowpack in the Northern Sierra Mountains. And although climate
change continues to be a challenge, it oftentimes causes
prolonged periods of droughts. The funds are necessary for
increasing water storage across Western reclamation states to
better manage our reservoirs. Such investments are necessary to
capture water during the wet years so we can withstand the dry
years.
So I urge the committee for the full funding of the $134
million Water Infrastructure Investment for the Nation.
Congressman Kevin McCarthy and I worked on this a few years
back and continue to want to maintain this good investment.
Also before the subcommittee, report language for the
repair of the Bureau of Reclamation canals. As we know in the
West, water is the lifeblood of the West. And where we say
water flows, food grows. We have two major aqueduct systems,
the Friant-Kern Canal and the Delta Mendota Canal, and the
California Aqueduct that have all been impaired by age and land
subsidence, seriously depleting their ability to move water.
These defects seriously jeopardize the Bureau of Reclamation's
ability to meet its obligations in the San Joaquin Valley to
feed our Nation, where we have one of the largest agricultural
valleys in the entire world.
So we need to provide additional support to restore the
capability of these canals. We urge the committee to advance
the important projects by supporting report language of up to
$30 million to repair the reclamation canals in fiscal year
2026.
Protecting the San Joaquin River Restoration Program that
we passed in 2008 to resolve a settlement of a court agreement.
The San Joaquin River Restoration Program aims to restore and
maintain not only fish populations in San Joaquin River, but to
reduce the adverse water supply impacts to the farmers in the
Friant Division. They wholeheartedly support this effort. The
program is not as far along as we'd like and it is very
critical that we continue to provide support. The farmers are
providing their support, as are the water districts, to ensure
that we don't throw the management of the San Joaquin River
into chaos and uncertainty. So I would urge the committee to
avoid any efforts to eliminate this program which was enacted,
as I said, back in 2008, to complete the final two projects
here on this.
Because our river systems in California are connected
between the Federal projects and the state water projects, we
have two anadromous fish screens on the Sacramento River. I
request that the committee provide $7.8 million in funding to
finish these projects and to meet the higher quality standards
and to protect our ability to move water between the
Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the San Joaquin River Basin,
moving water further south to the San Joaquin Valley into Los
Angeles.
Ninety-five percent of the water diverted from the
Sacramento River will pass through these fish screens. That is
most of the river. These projects help support a more
resilient, reliable water supply for agricultural communities
while enhancing the environment for local wildlife that are
considered threatened.
Finally, in closing, I want to thank the members of the
subcommittee again for the chance to testify and continue to
work for closer collaboration between the Army Corps of
Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, and California State
Water Project. This collaboration has been a history over the
last 30, 40 years. And with all the challenges we are facing,
it is absolutely essential.
There was a unfortunate release back in late January,
February on two Army Corps projects, like Success and Kaweah.
And we want to avoid those kinds of miscalculations of release
of water when there is no good place for it to go to.
And so I thank you for hearing my request. I will be
willing to answer any questions you might have. Keep up the
good work of this subcommittee. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Mr. Costa, for your testimony,
sir. At this time I have no questions, sir, but I would like to
yield to the distinguished ranking member, Ms. Kaptur, to see
if she has any questions.
Ms. Kaptur. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Congressman
Costa, thanks so much for testifying today. I believe you are a
farmer yourself.
Mr. Costa. Yes, third generation. And very proud of the
fact that my grandparents came to this country, like a lot of
immigrants, with a deep desire to have a better life. And what
they knew from where they came from in the Azore Islands was
dairy. And came to California and got involved in the dairy
business, like a lot of other folks, first as milking cows and
then later having our own dairy. And then that expanded to our
ability to farm a lot of other types of crops that, you know,
the San Joaquin Valley in California, as you know, is the
largest producer of agricultural production: 20 percent of all
the milk in the country comes from California, 80 percent of
the citrus production, 75 percent of the world's supply of
almonds, walnuts, and pistachios come from California. Very
diverse. And $59.2 billion last year at the farm gate.
So if I didn't have this job, I do have some redeemable
skills. I could get a job working in any dairy.
Ms. Kaptur. Well, I am put you on the hot spot here. About
three-quarters of a century ago, our favorite uncle and aunt
moved from our hometown just south of San Francisco. They went
out there to work with Dole and Libby and some of the big
processors of fruits and vegetables. And that was terrible for
me as a kid to, you know, to lose them in our own neighborhood.
But anyway, how has agriculture changed in the last century in
your region?
I know what happened in the area they lived in. All the
apricot trees were cut down for people. Lots of big
superhighways came through and it became much more expensive to
live in California. Their neighbors, actually three families
live there and they would each 8 hours of the day a different
family would go to work and the next one would come home from
work. And housing became very expensive.
What has happened to agriculture in your part of America in
this period of time?
Mr. Costa. Well, as a third generation farmer, I thank you
for asking the question. Change is constant. Change is constant
not only in California, but around the country. And I don't
farm the way my father and my uncle did. And they did not farm
the way their father did. And those that are able to stay
involved in agriculture have to address changes to maintain
generations in farming. And in some cases those changes are
very difficult.
For example, we have been overdrafting our groundwater
supply in California, but other parts of the country have had
that problem as well. Because we get our water from three
sources. We get it from the reservoirs that we have built in
our mountains where the snow is and it melts and it fills up
our reservoirs. We get it from groundwater and we get it from
reusing water. We use all the water tools in our water toolbox.
However, for decades we have been over relying on our
groundwater.
And I liken that to when I first went to Fresno State as a
younger guy and I had my first checking account. And my father
told me, kid, you can only write those checks as long as you
are making deposits. Well, that is our groundwater. And so we
have to figure out strategies to ensure that we don't overdraft
it. And we have been doing that in California since we passed a
challenging law in 2014 by the state legislature that set up
milestones in 2020, 2030, and 2040 to get our groundwater in
balance. And we are meeting those goals. But it is hard.
Ms. Kaptur. How far down do you have to drill now compared
to before?
Mr. Costa. Depends what region you are. In my area we have
a better supply for a combination of reasons. It is about 150
feet. But out on the west side they are drilling down as far as
1,500 feet, 2,000 feet at over a million and a half dollars per
well. And what happens is the clay layers below on the surface
when you remove that water out of there collapse and then it
limits your ability to restore that groundwater in the future
when you have good water years.
But we are using, we are learning to use, when we have
these atmospheric rivers in the wintertime to flood our fields
where we have permanent crops, whether they be trees or
vineyards. And we are having good success. We think in the last
18 months we have recharged between about 1.6 million acre feet
of water, which is a lot of water. We have seen certain places
where the water table has risen anywhere from 8 to 10 to 15
feet in the last 2 years. So it is a long-term effort, but we
are focused on it.
But there is other things. The dairy industry, Costa
Brothers sold out a number of years ago, over 30 years ago, and
there were 16,000 dairies in California. Average size was
milking 250 cows, which is what about we were milking and had a
herd size of about 500 head. Today there is just around 1,000
dairies left in California out of 14,000, but they are much
larger. We are milking 2- to 3,000 cows average in a dairy;
5,000 cow dairies are not unusual. And so the change is, and
the change is hard, is you have had to get bigger in terms of
the scales of economy to stay in the dairy business. We are
still producing about 20 percent of all the milk products in
America with those 1,000-plus dairies, but they are much larger
in size and they take a lot more resources. They are
multimillion-dollar operations these days.
And those are among the changes. And our cropping patterns
have changed. We used to have about 1.4 million acres of cotton
up into the early 1990s. Now, last year, I think we had 150,000
acres of cotton, but it had been replaced with walnuts,
pistachios, and almonds. Permanent crops.
So these are among the changes. Our processing, our value
added has changed. Our mechanization has changed. Most of the
agriculture in California, like in other parts of the country
has become highly mechanized because of labor issues, in part.
But also, we are more efficient. And so these are among the
changes. Agriculture is more capital intensive.
And I will say this very clearly, and I have never been big
fan of tariffs, 44 percent of California's agriculture is
exported. And these issues of tariffs are, you know, very, very
challenging because if they last for any period of time,
foreign markets that we have been able to benefit from, whether
they be in Asia or Europe or elsewhere, they seek other sources
of supply. We saw that happen in the last tariff round when a
lot of our export to China on almonds became replaced with
China seeking those almonds from Australia. So we can't believe
that or risk that we get past this over 4 months, 6 months, a
year, that necessarily we regain these markets.
I had yesterday a citrus grower tell me that they ship a
lot of their citrus crop to China, that they had two loads that
were canceled here this week of what had been a usual ability
to export their navels and their Valencias. So, you know, when
you have as large of agricultural economy as we have in
California, these changes are real and they economically impact
entire communities. That means people that have businesses,
farmworkers, some of the hardest workers you will ever see in
your life, all the people that are on the food chain that have
value added on that supply, everybody, the ripple effect of the
economy is real.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you very much. I only have one final
question, Mr. Chairman, and that is with the recharging of your
water supply because of the atmospheric river, how many crop
cycles will that satisfy, 5 years, 3, 10?
Mr. Costa. Well, again, it is based on 10-year averages. We
are hoping that we can take advantage of these atmospheric
rivers as they continue to seem to be more of the norm and plan
accordingly, so that we can maintain that water behind our
reservoirs when they do come and can anticipate in terms of how
we manage these reservoirs. And that is why the funding here
for the Water Operations Technical Support is so important as
we manage our water supply more efficiently and effectively.
Ms. Kaptur. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Ranking Member Kaptur.
At this time I would like to recognize my friend, that
gentleman from Idaho, Mr. Simpson.
Mr. Simpson. Hi, Jim.
Mr. Costa. Hi.
Mr. Simpson. Thanks for coming today.
Mr. Costa. Number of our dairies have gone to Idaho.
Mr. Simpson. I was going to say, a lot of those dairies
that left California have come to Idaho and made us the third
largest dairy state. And we are going to overtake Wisconsin
before very long. We will never overtake California. You got
too much of the market and growing dairies in California.
But I just was at a plant, Chobani, the largest yogurt
plant in the world, is in my district, and they just did a
groundbreaking to expand that. They are going to go from using
4 million pounds of dairy of milk to 12.7. That means the dairy
cows in the area are going to have to go from about 60,000 that
produced the 4 million to about 171,000.
Mr. Costa. We have got Betancourt and a lot of folks from
California and they have got some good-sized dairies there as
well.
Mr. Simpson. Yeah. They are good friends.
Mr. Costa. Yeah. We have been impacted greatly by that high
path avian flu with our dairy and poultry industry. Has it come
up there significantly in Idaho?
Mr. Simpson. Yeah. Do you, just out of curiosity, do you in
California manage your groundwater and surface water
conjunctively?
Mr. Costa. Yes.
Mr. Simpson. I had two goals. I had a number of goals, but
two of them that I failed on when I was either chairman of this
committee or ranking member under Marcy. One of them, and we
talked about both of them today, one of them was to find a
permanent geological repository for our spent nuclear fuel.
That is Chuck's job now. And the other one that I could never
solve is California water issues. It was probably one of the
biggest challenges we had because we had Republicans wanting
one thing, Democrats wanting another thing. And finally I said,
you guys need to get together.
How together are Republicans and Democrats on California
water now?
Mr. Costa. I would describe we are making progress. I used
to chair the state Senate Ag and Water Committee in California
when I was in the legislature and having both agriculture and
water made it a very important committee under its
jurisdiction. And the things that I always tell people with
California water is that it is the three Cs: it is complex, it
is complicated, and it is controversial.
It is complex because we have the inner operations between
very large Federal water projects and very large state water
projects and we have got local water projects. And they all
were built at different times, financed differently, they have
different rules of operation, but yet we share, you know, a
general supply of water and we have to work together. And that
has gotten better.
So the complexity of trying to work together in Sacramento
and here in Washington is always part of the challenge getting
Democrats and Republicans to work together. But I think in
recent years, one of the things that we have learned, and it
gets back to the controversy, is that getting engaged in
endless litigation, endless litigation, doesn't bring one more
drop of water. And so what we have tried to do in recent years
in a bipartisan fashion is tried to look at interim and long-
term plans to create the one thing that water users in
California and in the West all seek, which is greater water
reliability. Water reliability based on 10-year averages,
realizing that some years are good, some years are not, and
trying to determine what our average.
I mean, California has been blessed. We have got the Sierra
Nevada, we have got that as a major source of supply, and we
have access to the Colorado River. But you know, the Colorado
River is beset with the upper basin and lower basin states as
well that were in endless litigation up until the 1960s and
they had the law of the river and they finally resolved it. But
they resolved it based upon evidence that is no longer real and
that is that the river on 10-year averages would yield 17
million acre feet of water. Lake Mead outside of Las Vegas has
not been filled since 2000, and it was almost a dead pool 2
years ago before you had these large atmospheric rivers that
ended up providing more supply.
And what we have come to the realization between the upper
basin states and the lower basin states, and some people have
rights to the river water that have never been able to exercise
it, like Utah, because they are not connected to the river. And
there are some Native Americans that have rights to the river
that they've never been able to access. But what we have come
to the realization in the last two decades with better
understanding of water supply and measurements is that the
yield of the river, of the Colorado, is about 10- to 12 million
acre feet. So this great agreement in the 1960s was reached by
everybody allocating 17 million acre feet on 10-year averages.
Well, if your allocation is really more like 10- to 11 million
acre feet on 10-year, then guess what. They are starting to
realize, well, how are we going to reallocate that smaller
supply of water?
And so the three Cs are applicable. You know, it is
complicated, it is complex, and it is always controversial. But
I think because we have been basically able to develop a plan
and, you know, it was interesting, I thought within the first
couple weeks of the Trump administration, Governor Newsom
specifically flew to Washington and had an hour meeting with
the President. And over, I am told, three-quarters of the
meeting was on water and what the state is trying to do to work
together with the Federal Government.
The President signed an executive order that by April 20,
which is coming up, that the Secretary of Interior and the
Secretary of Commerce would report to the President on water
supply. And so we want to work with the administration and we
obviously know that it is in California and Western states'
long-term interest to try to find solutions to a reliable water
supply. And that is what this is all about.
Mr. Simpson. It is always easy to allocate water, the more
you have got of it. And when you are assuming that they looked
at that and it was 5 years before they would had really wet
years, and they were told at the time when they made this
agreement and they said that there was 17\1/2\ million acre
feet of water that went down the Colorado every year, they were
told, you are only looking at the wet years, you are not
looking at the dry years.
Mr. Costa. Right.
Mr. Simpson. But it is always easier to allocate it. And
you are right, that is the problem. I don't think we will ever
see Lake Mead and Lake Powell filled again.
Mr. Costa. Yeah. I just flew over it yesterday and you can
see where the high mark was and where the lower is, and I agree
with you.
Mr. Simpson. Yeah. Anyway, thank you. I appreciate it.
And now that I am no longer chairman or ranking member of
this committee, I pass this on to someone who has the ability
and the intelligence to solve this nuclear waste issue and the
California water issue. And you and Laura can do a great job on
this, I am sure.
Mr. Fleischmann. Gleefully.
Mr. Costa. Let's work on all of it together.
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes. Gleefully, Mr. Chairman. And I thank
you for your questions.
And Mr. Costa, I thank you for your presentation and we are
solicitous of your thoughts, and I really appreciate the update
on California water and agriculture. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Costa. Well, appreciate all of your good work. And when
we work together, we get things done. Thank you.
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir. With that, the hearing is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:50 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
W I T N E S S E S
----------
Page
Costa, Hon. Jim.................................................. 14
Prepared statement........................................... 17
Weber, Hon. Randy K.............................................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 4
[all]