[Senate Hearing 119-337]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-337
PENDING LEGISLATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
WATER AND POWER
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
on
S. 1034 S. 3635 S. 3737
S. 1242 S. 3684 S. 3738
S. 2437/H.R. 3857 S. 3693 S. 3743
S. 2753 S. 3723 S. 3792
S. 3409 S. 3725 S. 4040
S. 3500 S. 3732 S. 4041
S. 3518 S. 3736
__________
MARCH 17, 2026
__________
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-135 WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MIKE LEE, Utah, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
STEVE DAINES, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TOM COTTON, Arkansas MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
DAVID McCORMICK, Pennsylvania ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine
JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi ALEX PADILLA, California
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
------
Subcommittee on Water and Power
JOHN HOEVEN, Chair
JAMES E. RISCH RON WYDEN
STEVE DAINES CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO
DAVID McCORMICK JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER
JAMES C. JUSTICE ALEX PADILLA
BILL CASSIDY RUBEN GALLEGO
Wendy Baig, Majority Staff Director
Chris Prandoni, Majority Deputy Staff Director and Chief Counsel
James Priest, Majority Counsel
Jasmine Hunt, Minority Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Minority Chief Counsel
Melanie Thornton, Minority Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Hoeven, Hon. John, Subcommittee Chair and a U.S. Senator from
North Dakota................................................... 1
Wyden, Hon. Ron, Subcommittee Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator
from Oregon.................................................... 2
Daines, Hon. Steve, a U.S. Senator from Montana.................. 27
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, a U.S. Senator from Alaska................. 78
WITNESSES
Palumbo, David, Deputy Commissioner of Operations, U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation.................................................... 4
Turpin, Terry, Director, Office of Energy Projects, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission................................... 18
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
Albertson, Larry and Jill:
Letter for the Record........................................ 53
American Public Power Association and National Rural Electric
Cooperative Association:
Letter for the Record........................................ 98
American Whitewater:
Statement for the Record..................................... 101
Arkansas Electric Cooperative Association:
Letter for the Record........................................ 108
Assiniboine and Sioux Rural Water System:
Letter for the Record........................................ 96
Association of California Water Agencies:
Letter for the Record in support of S. 2437.................. 110
Letter for the Record in support of S. 3693.................. 112
Belle Fourche, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 200
Bitter Root Irrigation District:
Letter for the Record........................................ 35
Bloesser, Trey:
Letter for the Record........................................ 49
Boise Project Board of Control:
Statement for the Record..................................... 114
Box Elder, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 202
Brower, James:
Statement for the Record..................................... 68
Candee, Garey:
Letter for the Record........................................ 58
Cayko, Terry:
Letter for the Record........................................ 54
Colonial Pine Hills Sanitary District:
Letter for the Record........................................ 191
Custer, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 193
Daines, Hon. Steve:
Opening Statement............................................ 27
Danielson, Dale:
Letter for the Record........................................ 51
Danielson, Doug and Bev:
Letter for the Record........................................ 59
Degn, Sarah:
Letter for the Record........................................ 60
Denver Water:
Letter for the Record........................................ 119
Dry Prairie Rural Water Authority:
Letter for the Record........................................ 97
Edgemont, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 194
Family Farm Alliance:
Statement for the Record..................................... 120
(The) Freshwater Trust:
Statement for the Record..................................... 130
Garland, David H.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 30
Gianforte, Hon. Greg:
Letter for the Record........................................ 66
Greenfields Irrigation District:
Letter for the Record........................................ 32
Hillesland, Chris:
Letter for the Record........................................ 46
Hintz, Jeff:
Letter for the Record........................................ 64
Hoeven, Hon. John:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
Hot Springs, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 197
Intake Irrigation District:
Letter for the Record........................................ 44
Iversen, Neil:
Letter for the Record........................................ 31
Johnsrud, Erica:
Letter for the Record........................................ 36
Jorgensen, Jon and Dee:
Letter for the Record........................................ 57
KandLight Ranch:
Letter for the Record........................................ 61
Kansas Electric Cooperatives, Inc.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 138
Kelley, Brandon et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 140
Ler, David:
Letter for the Record........................................ 48
Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts:
Letter for the Record........................................ 142
Lower Yellowstone Irrigation District #1:
Letter for the Record........................................ 41
Lower Yellowstone Irrigation District #2:
Letter for the Record........................................ 42
Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project Board of Control:
Letter for the Record........................................ 40
Milk River Joint Board of Control:
Letter for the Record........................................ 34
Missouri Electric Cooperatives:
Letter for the Record........................................ 144
Missouri Public Utility Alliance:
Letter for the Record........................................ 146
Montana Farm Bureau Federation:
Letter for the Record........................................ 29
Montana Natural Resource Coalition of Counties:
Letter for the Record........................................ 38
Montana Water Resources Association:
Letter for the Record........................................ 39
Morrison, Greg:
Statement for the Record..................................... 150
Murkowski, Hon. Lisa:
Opening Statement............................................ 78
Murphy, Michael E.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 62
Musser, Douglas:
Letter for the Record........................................ 198
National Hydropower Association:
Letter for the Record in support of S. 3500.................. 75
Letter for the Record in support of S. 3684.................. 148
Letter for the Record in support of S. 3518.................. 149
National Hydropower Association et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 76
Oklahoma Association of Electric Cooperatives:
Letter for the Record........................................ 153
Ollerman, Aarin:
Letter for the Record........................................ 45
Oregon Water Resources Congress:
Statement for the Record..................................... 155
Palumbo, David:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
Written Testimony............................................ 7
Questions for the Record..................................... 89
Quincy-Columbia Basin Irrigation District:
Letter for the Record........................................ 158
Quinnell Electric:
Letter for the Record........................................ 47
Rhoden, Hon. Larry:
Letter for the Record in support of S. 3723.................. 159
Letter for the Record in support of S. 3725.................. 161
Letter for the Record in support of S. 3736.................. 163
Richland County Commissioners:
Letter for the Record........................................ 37
Risch, Hon. James E.:
Statement for the Record..................................... 95
Savage Irrigation District:
Letter for the Record........................................ 43
Sondeno, Matt:
Letter for the Record........................................ 55
South Dakota Cattlemen's Association:
Letter for the Record........................................ 203
South Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources:
Letter for the Record........................................ 190
Southern Black Hills Water System:
Letter for the Record........................................ 201
Southwestern Power Resources Association:
Letter for the Record........................................ 165
Steinbeisser, Don:
Letter for the Record........................................ 52
Steinbeisser, Joseph G.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 63
Sturgis, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 199
Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership:
Statement for the Record..................................... 168
Tri-County Implement:
Letter for the Record........................................ 56
Turpin, Terry:
Opening Statement............................................ 18
Written Testimony............................................ 20
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 93
U.S. Department of Defense:
DoD Instruction 4715.28, ``Military Installation Resilience''
dated December 17, 2024.................................... 205
U.S. Department of Energy:
Statement for the Record..................................... 171
U.S. Geological Survey:
Scientific Investigations Report 2025-5067 (Abstract and Map) 219
Wall, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 195
West Dakota Water Development District:
Letter for the Record........................................ 192
Western Dakota Regional Water System:
Statement for the Record..................................... 173
Western Urban Water Coalition:
Letter for the Record........................................ 222
Whitewood, SD (City of):
Letter for the Record........................................ 196
WWC Engineering:
Letter for the Record........................................ 65
Wyden, Hon. Ron:
Opening Statement............................................ 2
----------
The text for each of the bills addressed in this hearing can be found
on the Committee's website at: https://www.energy.senate.gov/hearings/
2026/3/water-and-power-subcommittee-to-receive-testimony-on-pending-
legislation
PENDING LEGISLATION
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 17, 2026
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Water and Power,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Hoeven,
Chair of the Subcommittee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
Senator Hoeven. The Subcommittee will come to order.
Today, we are holding our first hearing of the Subcommittee
on Water and Power. I want to thank the Ranking Member, Senator
Wyden, for joining me and for the members who are here now and
will be joining us. I want to begin by saying that Senator
Wyden and I have worked together on a number of things related
to energy, so he might even comment on that. I had him out in
North Dakota, but I'll let him mention that.
Today, obviously, we're talking about water and power.
Water access is fundamental to quality of life. For families,
it means safe drinking water when they turn on the tap. For
farmers and ranchers, it means the ability to grow crops and
raise livestock. For communities, it means the opportunity to
attract businesses and grow. Western states face unique
challenges in reliable access and delivery of water. I'm going
to be intrigued here to see if my staff put in what we all
know, and that is that whiskey is for drinking and water is for
fighting. We'll see if they got it in there. Just in case, I
wanted to reference it. It's an old saying, but it does have
real meaning. And that is, water is so important to everyone
across the country, so incredibly important, and a challenging
issue. And these challenges include all regions of the country
and rural population centers, areas that are very wet, areas
that have drought, it affects all of us.
In North Dakota, we understand these challenges very well.
Our state has long worked to manage both floods and drought,
sometimes in the same year, which requires a close relationship
with our federal partners, including the Bureau of Reclamation
and critical water supply projects in our state. Today, we'll
be hearing testimony from the Bureau of Reclamation and the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on a number of bills,
including a priority from my home state to reauthorize the
Dakota Water Resources Act, which I want to thank Senator
Padilla for joining me on. I appreciate it very much. This bill
provides much-needed authorizations to provide more reliable
drought-resilient water supplies for North Dakota and the five
tribal nations located in our state. Also, it will support
completion of two key regional water supply projects--the
Northwest Area Water Supply Project (NAWS), serving Minot and
surrounding communities and the Eastern North Dakota Alternate
Water Supply Project (ENDAWS), helping to serve communities in
the Red River Valley of the North.
North Dakota has yet to fully realize the promise of over a
million acres of irrigation as compensation for the loss of
approximately 550,000 acres of prime farmland permanently
flooded by federal water projects under the Pick-Sloan Flood
Control Act of 1944. Access to clean, reliable, and affordable
water supplies is a quality-of-life issue, and our legislation
is consistent with the historical federal promise to the state
and tribes on construction of the Garrison Dam and Lake Oahe.
Senator Wyden did get to the Williston Basin, but he did not
get to Lake Sakakawea, which is a 100-mile-long man-made lake
which competes with some of the other reservoirs to hold the
most water of any reservoir in the United States, and of course
is incredibly important, not just to our state, but to the
states downstream, all the way down to the end of the Missouri
River, which of course joins the Mississippi in St. Louis, or
just south of there.
So, with that, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses
this morning, and I would like to turn the microphone over to
Senator Wyden for his opening comments.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and it is
good to be back working with you. We have worked together on a
host of things--transportation issues and energy issues--and I
recall being invited to North Dakota. I was glad to be able to
come when I was Chairman of this Committee. It's a wonderful
Committee. And I believe I was introduced to the Walleye
Caucus, or something close to that.
Senator Hoeven. That's it.
Senator Wyden. Because I was told that as I navigated all
these great lakes and whatnot, I would have some terrific
walleye, and that was, in fact, correct. So, if I could wangle
an invitation to come back, I will do it. It was a good trip.
What the Chairman is doing is particularly important to the
West right now. And if I were to sum it up, western states are
facing a devastating 1-2 punch--historic drought and record-low
snowpack. And I have town hall meetings in every one of my
counties, have had more than 1,100 of them, and I'm heading out
to the rural part of the state here shortly. And I know that
the dominant question will be those two topics, and what the
Chairman has smartly agreed to look into, which is the question
of how are we going to get strong federal leadership and smart
policy when it comes to water management and western drought.
And the Federal Government seems to have taken a back seat on
these issues, and communities in the West are suffering. For
example, one of the areas that we feel very strongly about is
the Klamath River Basin in southern Oregon. It's an example of
why strong leadership and good policy are so critical. The
Federal Government has a responsibility to safeguard water
infrastructure, meet tribal obligations, and protect water
access. In the Klamath, decades of conflict have shown what
happens when that leadership falls short. The communities, the
tribes, and ranchers have paid a big price.
The Colorado River is another example of why strong federal
leadership is so critical. Sustainable solutions require strong
federal engagement and consistent funding. I was proud that
last Congress, this Committee passed a law that I wrote that's
already delivering real results to communities along the
Klamath. It's important that we step up and do more. For
western communities, the combination of farmers and ranchers
and tribes and families means that you have to provide
certainty to a whole host of important community concerns.
Those are individuals who need the reassurance of knowing that
the people representing them are doing everything they can to
protect this critical water resource. They simply can't go from
year to year lurching about trying to figure out where
reservoir levels are going to be, and if they are going to
collapse, or our agreements are going to unravel.
So, I just want to briefly mention two pieces of
legislation, Mr. Chairman.
First, I have a bill that brings the private sector to
measuring watershed results. It's called the Watershed Results
Act, and it takes the current outdated approach to this
question of really getting value for scarce dollars on its
head. It's a pilot approach that pays for performance that
projects are going to benefit from. If you're making the real
results on water supply reliability and watershed health, you
in effect go to the head of the program. Taxpayers deserve to
know that the money is producing real on-the-ground results.
Under the current system, huge sums of money head out the door
without enough safeguards to ensure that it's being put to good
enough use. I don't want the record to show that David is
nodding his head in agreement, but I do want to tell,
seriously, that I do appreciate the fact we have two very
dedicated civil servants, and we look forward to working with
them on these issues. The concept for the legislation is
simple. If you want to improve your local waterways, great, but
demonstrate to us you have the best way of doing it before the
taxpayer dollars go out.
The other piece of legislation is a bill that I have with
Senator Murkowski. When I was the Chair of the Committee, she
was the Ranking Republican, a pleasure to work with, and we
have teamed up on DOE's Water Power Technologies Office. I'm
going to put into the record a longer description of it, but
this really measures what we did with the Clean Energy Tax
Credits that were really thought up in this Committee and
passed by the Senate Finance Committee. They basically bring a
technology-neutral approach to the energy field, and we sure
need that in terms of water power technology. So, let's reward
the private sector, again, building on the other piece of
legislation, because they are technologies that we ought to be
looking at. And I want to give a special thanks to the Oregon
State University PacWave project, which allows researchers to
test technologies that generate electricity from ocean waves.
I'll close with this: just as we did with the Clean Energy
Tax Credits, Mr. Chairman, we said nobody really knows what the
best producers are going to be 30 years from now. So, why not
create an opportunity for technological innovation. The
Murkowski-Wyden bill allows that, and I look forward to working
with my colleague in pursuing the bills that you're talking
about, and I know Senator Padilla is interested in, because
that's the way we work--hands-on, all the time. Using my
basketball analogy--come in to play every single day, and I
look forward to it.
Senator Hoeven. So, is it the Ducks or the Beavers that
have the green and yellow that I wore in honor of your state
today?
Senator Wyden. Well, I've already been thinking about my
response, because the Chairman is wearing green and yellow.
What we do in our areas, we wear green and yellow one day, and
black and orange the other. So, we cover our bases. And I'm
pleased to see the Chairman is connecting Saint Patrick's Day
with the Ducks, where I went to school, and I look forward,
seriously, to working with you.
Senator Hoeven. The Ducks are awesome. This is actually for
the North Dakota State Bison, but the Ducks are awesome.
Senator Padilla, did you have some opening comments?
Okay, then we'll go to our witnesses, and first we will
hear from David Palumbo, who is the Deputy Commissioner of
Operations for the Bureau of Reclamation within the Department
of the Interior. Mr. Palumbo, thanks for being here, and the
floor is yours.
OPENING STATEMENT OF DAVID PALUMBO, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
OPERATIONS, U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you, Chair Hoeven, Ranking Member Wyden,
and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity
to testify today on behalf of the Department of the Interior. I
am David Palumbo, Deputy Commissioner for Operations for the
Bureau of Reclamation. Reclamation appreciates your work, and
we stand ready to work with the Subcommittee on these important
bills.
Of the Reclamation-focused bills before the Subcommittee
today, a number focus on expanding existing or creating new
grant programs. Senator Wyden's Watershed Results Act and
Senator Hickenlooper's Water Project Navigators Act seek to
improve Reclamation's WaterSMART program, which provides
funding and technical assistance to states, tribes, and local
entities for water conservation, drought planning, and
infrastructure improvements. The bills seek to expand
Reclamation's authorities in the form of a new pilot program
and new federally funded positions to help entities access
federal funding. Senator Padilla's GROW SMART Act amends
existing Reclamation authority to fund demonstration projects
that promote agricultural water efficiency projects.
Reclamation would suggest that each of these new programs could
be amended into existing programs to better meet the goals of
the legislation. We would like to work with the bill sponsors
to that end.
Senator Hickenlooper's Snow Water Supply Forecasting
Program Reauthorization Act extends and expands Reclamation's
work developing multiple snow monitoring technologies to
improve forecasting for the benefit of water management.
Senator Cortez Masto's Large-Scale Water Recycling
Reauthorization Act and Senator Daines's Fort Peck Water System
Reauthorization Act extend authorities without the need for
additional funding. Senator Padilla's MORE WATER Act
reauthorizes the Large-Scale Water Recycling Program as well as
other recycling and environmental restoration programs. The
MORE WATER Act also creates a broad new conveyance program for
federal and non-federal projects that expands Reclamation's
authorities beyond what are presently funded by Congress. We
share the goals of the legislation to increase water supply and
conveyance and would like to work further with the bill
sponsor.
Another bill that establishes a new program is Senator
Gallego's Water Security and Drought Resilience Act. The bill
reauthorizes and expands the Small Storage Program for five
years, and creates a new program for natural water retention
and release projects. In addition, the bill authorizes the
Verde Reservoirs Sediment Mitigation Project in Arizona.
Reclamation recognizes the importance of this project to
promote water supply and resilience in the Colorado River
Basin, and would like to work with the bill sponsor to promote
such opportunities.
Senator Daines's Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish
Conservation Act and Senator Risch's Urban Canal Modernization
Act would both transfer financial responsibility of addressing
infrastructure challenges from local water users to the Federal
Government. In the case of the Lower Yellowstone Bypass
legislation, the administration wants to work with Senator
Daines to address financial concerns from irrigation districts
while also ensuring local control by project beneficiaries. On
urban canals, the bill seeks to make 35 percent of funding non-
reimbursable. Reclamation recognizes the high cost faced by
operating partners, and would like to work with the bill
sponsor to address concerns with increasing federal costs on
state and local projects.
Senator Hoeven's Dakota Water Resources Act authorizes over
a billion dollars for rural and tribal water projects across
North Dakota. Senator Thune and Senator Rounds have introduced
three bills to conduct feasibility studies on water projects in
South Dakota. These bills provide Reclamation with the
authority to conduct detailed analysis on the economic,
environmental, technical, and legal viability of these projects
that impact South Dakota and surrounding states so that
Congress can determine how best to move forward in the coming
years.
Finally, Chairman Lee's bill is related to a feasibility
study on various temperature control options at Glen Canyon Dam
that will optimize hydropower and prevent entrainment of fish
species. We appreciate the Chairman's commitment to critical
water delivery and hydropower generation at Glen Canyon Dam and
Reclamation's facilities across the West. As we approach the
70th anniversary of the Colorado River Storage Project Act,
which authorized dams such as Glen Canyon and Flaming Gorge,
Reclamation remains committed to the Colorado River Basin and
the system of dams and reservoirs that support millions of
people.
In closing, the Bureau of Reclamation remains committed to
managing water in a responsible manner for the American people.
Thank you for supporting Reclamation's important work. I would
be pleased to answer your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Palumbo follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Palumbo. Again, we
appreciate you being here and your comments, and of course,
your responsiveness to the questions from the panel.
Next, I'd like to call on Mr. Terry Turpin, Director of the
Office of Energy Projects for the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) within the Department of Energy. Mr. Turpin,
thank you for being here.
OPENING STATEMENT OF TERRY TURPIN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ENERGY
PROJECTS, FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Mr. Turpin. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Hoeven,
Ranking Member Wyden, and members of the Subcommittee. My name
is Terry Turpin. I am Director of the Office of Energy Projects
at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The office is
responsible for taking a lead role in the Commission's siting
of infrastructure projects, including non-federal hydropower
projects, interstate natural gas pipelines and storage
facilities, and liquefied natural gas terminals. Thanks for the
opportunity to appear before you today to discuss current
legislative efforts regarding hydropower permitting and the
Commission's role in oversight of this infrastructure. As a
member of the Commission staff, the views I express in this
testimony are my own and not necessarily those of the
Commission or of any individual Commissioner.
Under the Federal Power Act, or FPA, non-federal hydropower
projects must be licensed by the Commission if they are located
on a navigable waterway, occupy federal land, use surplus water
from a federal dam, or are located on certain waters subject to
the Commerce Clause. In accordance with the FPA, the Commission
currently regulates over 1,600 non-federal hydropower projects,
including over 2,500 dams, representing about 57,000 megawatts
of authorized capacity, which is more than half of all the
developed hydropower in the United States. The Commission
serves as the lead agency in all FPA proceedings and prepares
the documentation required for each project under the National
Environmental Policy Act. Currently, the Commission is
processing about 187 pending applications, of which
approximately 90 percent are for re-licenses of existing
hydropower projects, and about 10 percent are for original
licenses or new power generation. Based on the license terms of
existing projects, the number of projects that will begin the
relicensing process will continue to be high well into the
2030s. Over the next 10 years, more than 410 projects,
representing about 41 percent of the Commission's licensed
projects, and about 15 percent of the licensed power production
capacity, will begin the pre-filing consultation stages of the
relicensing process.
Once the Commission has issued a license, its role is to
provide regulatory oversight of projects during their license
term. This post-licensing workload involves ensuring compliance
with license requirements, processing requests for extensions
of time to comply with those requirements, and processing
applications to amend licenses by modifying project facilities
or their operations. The Commission's post-licensing workload
also entails processing requests for license transfers between
parties, as well as applications to surrender a project
license. During Fiscal Year 2025, the Commission processed 172
extension-of-time requests, 73 amendments to project facilities
and operations, 612 complaints or allegations of non-
compliance, and 27 license transfers or applications for the
surrender of the project license. Under the FPA, the Commission
is responsible for ensuring that the water-retaining features
of hydropower projects are designed, constructed, operated, and
maintained using current engineering standards, and that they
continue to meet federal guidelines for dam safety.
Through regularly scheduled inspections during construction
and operation, Commission engineers verify that dams meet
stipulated design criteria and identify any necessary remedial
modifications or required maintenance. In Fiscal Year 2025,
Commission staff, to this end, conducted 2,085 inspections
related to incident response, construction, and operation of
dams, and completed review of more than 11,000 dam safety
related filings. As the lead agency for FPA hyperpower
proceedings, the Commission has developed processes that take
into account and take into consideration the views,
recommendations, and conditions provided by federal and state
agencies and other stakeholders, while also meeting our own
statutory obligations to license projects that are best adapted
for improving or developing a waterway.
The Commission staff remains committed to working with all
agency stakeholders and Congress to ensure the most effective
processing of energy infrastructure matters, and will be happy
to provide any technical assistance you need as you move
forward. Thanks again for inviting me today, and I would be
happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Turpin follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Turpin.
I see that Senator Daines has joined us, and I would ask,
Senator Daines, if you had an opening statement that you would
like to make before we go to Q and A?
Senator Wyden. And I would also note, just very briefly,
that it is very fitting that Senator Daines gets to make an
opening statement because I noticed that he's retiring, and I
have enjoyed serving with you greatly. Speech on you.
Senator Daines. Well, you're both very kind, thank you.
Senator Hoeven. Ranking Member, look how young he looks.
Doesn't he look young? He looks so young to me.
Senator Wyden. Whatever he's done, it was right.
[Laughter.]
Senator Hoeven. So young.
Anyway, go ahead, if you'd like to make an opening
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE DAINES,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Daines. All right, thank you, you're both very,
very kind. Chairman Hoeven and Ranking Member Wyden, it has
been an amazing 14 years here on Capitol Hill, and I'm
energized, encouraged, and grateful for being partners on so
many important issues here in Washington.
But on today's agenda, there are four of my bills--the
Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act, the Fort
Peck Water System Reauthorization Act, the Cooperative
Watershed Management Program Reauthorization Act, as well as
the Hydropower Licensing Transparency Act with my colleague
Senator Cortez Masto. All of these bills have critical impacts
on clean water and energy availability in Montana.
The Fort Peck Water System Reorganization Act extends
authority to December 2028 for the Bureau of Reclamation to
finalize construction of essential water infrastructure. This
project is designed to provide municipal, rural, and industrial
water from two interconnected water systems within the Fort
Peck Reservation and within Roosevelt, Sheridan, Daniels, and
Valley Counties. I think it's helpful to remember the semi-arid
climate that we have in Montana. D.C. and Seattle receive about
the same amount of rain, about 41 inches a year. In Montana, we
get anywhere from 13 to 16 inches of measurable precipitation
in a year. And so, it's a semi-arid climate. And that's why
these water projects are so important in a really arid part of
the country. The infrastructure is so important. I'm pleased
that this bill will help ensure timely completion of the
project.
My other bill, Senate bill 3409, the Lower Yellowstone
River Native Fish Conservation Act, reaffirms that BOR retains
exclusive ownership, operational control, and financial
responsibility for the Lower Yellowstone Fish Bypass Channel.
This is where we can be very responsible as it relates to
stewardship of our fish populations with these important
bypasses, and at the same time, being good stewards of our
water to allow our farmers and ranchers to continue to support
the most significant economic driver in my state, which is
agriculture. The lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project, located
about 70 miles upstream from the Yellowstone-Missouri River
confluence in eastern Montana, includes an intake diversion
dam, a screened headworks structure, 71 miles of main canal,
and 225 miles of lateral canals. The project was authorized by
the Department of the Interior in 1904 to provide irrigation
water to approximately 58,000 acres in eastern Montana and
western North Dakota. This is where Senator Hoeven's ears perk
up because I mentioned North Dakota. It is used to irrigate
crops such as sugar beets, alfalfa, wheat, barley, and rye, and
enables aquifer recharge for well replenishment. In 2007,
construction of a 2.1-mile-long bypass channel for fish was
authorized to allow the endangered pallid sturgeon access to
upstream spawning grounds. However, irrigators in the region
are being expected to take on operation and maintenance
responsibility of this extraordinarily expensive bypass
channel. I received dozens of letters from irrigation
districts, county commissions, and rural electric co-ops, as
well as individual Ag producers and the Governor of Montana,
Greg Gianforte. I'd like to ask unanimous consent that these be
added to the hearing record.
Senator Hoeven. Without objection.
[Letters of support for S. 3409 follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Daines. Federal agencies, not the irrigators,
should be responsible for ensuring the long-term success of the
bypass channel in order to protect the pallid sturgeon, and
this bill will do just that.
By the way, if I could brag for a moment on what we do in
Montana managing the fish populations: once upon a time, when I
was a little kid growing up, we used to stock our rivers in
Montana. We would grow the fish in the hatchery and dump them
in the rivers. Fish biologists started to challenge that idea,
and said native fish would actually be more resistant to
disease, and we would actually see a higher fish population if
we stopped stocking the rivers. It seems counterintuitive. They
studied that in the Madison River, which is not far from where
I grew up. I was fly fishing in the Madison River before Brad
Pitt discovered fly fishing with Robert Redford. And they took
a section of river and they stopped stocking it. And they
studied it and they found out the fish populations went up, not
down. And they found out that the native fish were more
resistant to disease and they weren't as aggressive in feeding
on the eggs and so forth during spawning periods.
And so, Montana no longer stocks its rivers, and our fish
populations, on a per-mile basis, are at the highest levels.
We're in really good shape. Our fisheries are very robust. So,
I share that because we're very thoughtful and intentional to
think of managing our fish species, and like the pallid
sturgeon here, and we want to have the bypass channel there.
We've got to make sure our irrigators aren't bearing the burden
of the cost of doing that, and we share that to make sure our
farmers and ranchers and our fish populations can all thrive.
Before I close, I want to also recognize Senator Cortez
Masto. We have a bill on the agenda, Senate bill 3500, which
will increase transparency in the licensing process for
hydropower projects. I have a few letters of support for our
bill. I ask unanimous consent to add them to the record as
well. Mr. Chairman, I need a ``without objection'' from you.
Senator Hoeven. Without objection.
Senator Daines. Thank you.
[Letters of support for S. 3500 follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Daines. The companion bill, H.R. 3657--see, we
didn't beat North Dakota State this year, but somebody else
did. He's much more compliant now, the Chairman, ever since.
That's a good-looking tie, though, you have there.
Senator Wyden. It's the Duck colors.
Senator Daines. The companion bill--it's the Duck colors--
bipartisanship is breaking out here on the Hill. H.R. 3657 has
already passed the House floor by voice vote. I encourage the
Committee and the Senate to likewise pass the bill by unanimous
consent and get it to the President's desk. Mr. Chairman, I'm
well past my time. Thanks for the extra minute.
Senator Hoeven. That's absolutely fine.
I see that Senator Murkowski, another person who would be
an expert, I'm sure, on fish stocking--or not. I mean, we're
not stocking, and we are talking about s-t-o-c-k-i-n-g, not s-
t-a-l-k-i-n-g.
Senator Murkowski. True, true.
Senator Hoeven. Which Daines does with animals on a regular
basis, and his wife Cindy does too, I've seen.
Senator Murkowski. Pretty effective.
Senator Hoeven. Very effective, yes. But if you'd like to
make an opening statement, Senator Murkowski.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I will. And I
appreciate what you have shared with the Committee, Senator
Daines, because, as you know, in Alaska, we're pretty proud of
our wild species that roam our rivers, and we see the same
thing. It is the native species that are hardier, are more
resistant. Management is kind of an important thing. We
recognize that. But interesting to hear your comparison.
Mr. Chairman, I love the fact that we are before the Water
and Power Subcommittee here this morning. Senator Daines has
reminded us that in his home state it's often relatively arid,
and as you mentioned, your 16 inches, I just hearken back to my
birthplace, Ketchikan, Alaska, where I checked the average
rainfall for 2025, and it was 160 inches. So, just add a zero
to your 16, sir.
Senator Daines. Senator Murkowski, now you're bragging on
me, right?
Senator Murkowski. I don't know. You know, sometimes we say
what's the problem with these states that don't have ample
water because we can't really relate to that. But that's the
reason for the two measures that I have before the Subcommittee
here this morning, and I appreciate both you and the Ranking
Member including S. 3518, which is the Fair Licensing for
Operators of Water Structures Act, as well as S. 3684, the
Water Power Research and Development Reauthorization. Senator
Wyden is very familiar with that one.
But as I mentioned, we've got a lot of water in Alaska.
We've got great water resources with the lakes, the rivers. We
have some of the strongest tides in the world along the
thousands of miles of coastline. Our tides in Cook Inlet are
right up there with the Bay of Fundy. So, we've got a lot of
strength in our tides, and yet so many of our coastal
communities, our river communities still rely on diesel. If
you're watching the news right now, diesel is through the roof,
but it was already through the roof. You've got communities
that are paying over $10 a gallon for their diesel. And so, it
makes a difference in terms of the impact to our families and
our communities.
So, the FLOWS Act, S. 3518, makes some commonsense
improvements by hydropower permitting. Right now, in the state,
where you have a small operator, the operator is required to
file former license amendments with FERC for routine
maintenance or simple equipment replacements. So, keep in mind,
these are projects that are--the plans are already approved,
the work is relatively minor, the safety oversight is fully
intact, but you have operators that are still waiting months
and months for approvals, and that translates into costs for
our small utilities and our communities. So, what we do in the
FLOWS Act is, clarify that routine maintenance, in-kind
replacements, and temporary operational adjustments that do not
substantially change a project do not require a full licensing
amendment. So, FERC still retains full authority over dam
safety. They can require when changes are needed, but we
eliminate some of the red tape that slows the projects down.
And I'll tell you, I had an opportunity to go out to a dam
project near the community of Sitka, and to understand that
what they were trying to do was provide for a painting, if you
will, not for anything other than to just reinforce the dam
structure that was already there. That was required to go
through this lengthy process just to repaint. So, we look at
things like that and say, look, there's got to be a better way.
We also address a gap affecting marine energy technologies. So,
we establish a modernized licensing pathway for micro-
hydrokinetic projects. These are the small systems that can
harness energy from tides, from waves, and river currents that
don't have any dams.
If you want to go fishing somewhere, there's a great little
amazing community in Southwestern called Igiugig. It's up on
the Nushagak River. It's a small population, 68 people, but
they have been in partnership with Ocean Renewable Power
Company and they have been testing an in-river turbine that
generates electricity directly from the current. And every year
that that device operates, the community is saving nearly
23,000 gallons of diesel fuel because this is how they get
their power if they don't have their in-river--they have a
couple solar panels there, but the turbines have allowed the
village to shut off its diesel generators for roughly 275 days
a year. That's a huge savings for a small community.
And again, I mentioned this is in an area where there is
prolific fishery. What we have been able to demonstrate through
the years of monitoring is more than 100 million sockeye salmon
smolts and 10 million adult salmon passing the turbine without
observed injury or mortality. I've been out there on site. I've
seen this turbine when it's been sitting up waiting to go in
the river. I've seen it in the river. This is an area where, if
there is no fish, there is no purpose for the people to be
there. So, they would be the first ones to object if this
interfered. And it's an astonishing project. Others are looking
to its potential.
But despite this, the project is regulated under the same
framework that's designed for a large conventional dam. So,
think about this. This is a small turbine that sits not on the
bottom of the river, but just a little bit above, so that you
have flow underneath and flow above. And it's in the river, and
yet it's being regulated as a larger conventional dam, which
doesn't make any sense. So, the FLOWS Act creates a licensing
process better suited for these small innovative technologies
that establishes clear timelines, so developers and communities
know when to expect decisions.
The other bill is the one that I'm working on with Ranking
Member Wyden. I appreciate your good work on this. This builds
on what we have done before in our water power research and
development authorization. We reauthorized DOE's Water Power
Technologies Office. This has been instrumental in advancing
hydropower and marine energy research, including several
projects in Alaska. We update the program to reflect where the
industry is going. It supports integration with microgrids. It
promotes workforce development and domestic manufacturing, as
well as encouraging research into Arctic operating conditions,
ensuring that technologies are designed to work in cold-water
and ice-prone environments. We also promote collaboration with
tribal entities and local stakeholders--really important in my
area where many of our energy projects are developed in
partnership with our Alaska Native communities.
So, two good bills. I think we take a practical approach.
We modernize outdated regulations, we support innovation, and
we make sure that the federal programs reflect the realities
that are facing our communities. So, this helps us in Alaska,
but I think this kind of pioneering, this kind of technology,
we can prove it out in Alaska. We can make it work in Oregon,
in North Dakota, in California, and Colorado. So, I appreciate
the Subcommittee's good work on these important issues and look
forward to partnering with you on them. Thank you.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. Interesting
stuff.
Now we'll turn to the questions for our panel members here.
Mr. Palumbo, thank you again for appearing today. We appreciate
the Interior Department and Bureau of Rec's support for the
Dakota Water Resources Amendment of 2026. As you know, we work
carefully to craft legislation that aligns support with
Reclamation, the state of North Dakota, and the five tribal
nations in our state. The bill received bipartisan approval out
of this Committee in the last Congress. Again, I want to thank
Senator Padilla for co-sponsoring the legislation, and I
appreciate his willingness to work together on bipartisan water
priorities for both California and North Dakota.
As I mentioned in my opening remarks, our legislation is
key to completing critical water supply projects for our state,
including the Eastern North Dakota Alternate Water Supply
(ENDAWS). ENDAWS is a win-win partnership for both the Federal
Government and North Dakota. It ensures that half of North
Dakota has access to a reliable, drought-resilient water
supply. This project also enables Reclamation to generate
revenue from underutilized Garrison Diversion facilities like
the McClusky Canal. Communities in eastern North Dakota and
potentially western Minnesota would benefit from lower
construction and operations costs as a result.
So, my question is, will you continue to work with me, our
state, and the tribes to help pass this legislation so we can
work on the funding side and bring these projects to
completion?
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you, Senator Hoeven. Yes, absolutely,
both the ENDAWS and the NAWS projects are instrumental for the
State of North Dakota, of course, for tribes and non-tribal
members. You have our commitment to work with you on those
projects. You mentioned drought resiliency. They're both
incredibly important drought resilience projects, and our
commitment remains solid to work with you on that legislation.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Palumbo, and the Bureau has
been a good partner, and we truly appreciate it. Again, thanks
for being here today.
Mr. Turpin, you note in your testimony the complexities in
the licensing process for hydropower projects, which relates a
little bit to what Senator Murkowski was talking about,
including compliance with other statutes requiring coordination
with numerous federal and state agencies, often on different
timelines and deadlines. So, my question is, will you expand on
FERC's efforts to streamline the licensing process to better
leverage hydropower resources?
Mr. Turpin. Absolutely, Chairman. I mean, the Commissioners
are very invested in that singular issue and have been
expressing a lot of interest in a lot of different ways to
tackle the plethora of all the permitting decisions that have
to get lined up just to get one project approved.
Senator Hoeven. Do you have any specific recommendations as
to how Congress can help you in that process?
Mr. Turpin. I think the biggest recommendation I'd have is
simply just recognition that all the statutes that are out
there that govern these facilities, they all aren't lining up
in the same fashion. I mean, they all have slightly different
intents as to what the outcome is supposed to be. And what that
does is present a lot of agencies with slightly different
missions. And so, at the Commission, our focus is on that best
adaptive plan for the entire waterway, which includes power
production and all the water uses that you have mentioned, but
that may not be true for other agencies that are looking at a
much smaller slice. So, I think the thing that's needed is
really that congressional direction about what is in the
national interest, what is this thing that Congress wants
focused on for these licensing processes so that we can all
kind of get into the same vein and process these as efficiently
as we can.
Senator Hoeven. Well, then, I think it's important that you
provide those recommendations as part of our efforts on
permitting reform, which is something that the Committee is
working on, so it's very important.
Again, thanks to both of you for being here, and I'll turn
to the Ranking Member.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My colleagues have
been very gracious. We're going to go with Senator Padilla next
and then I'll follow him, and Senator Hickenlooper has been
very helpful, too.
Senator Padilla.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Senator
Wyden for the accommodation, I appreciate it.
Deputy Commissioner Palumbo, first of all, I want to thank
you for your decades and decades of honorable civil service and
leadership in the West. It's notable and very, very much
appreciated. On the subject at hand, we know that there are
many barriers to meeting our water infrastructure needs in the
West. And one of the key barriers has actually been time. Even
when we know what projects we need, from water recycling
facilities to conveyance improvements, safe drinking water,
upgrades, et cetera, the process to authorize and fund these
projects can take years, sometimes a decade or more.
The MORE WATER Act, which I have put forward, would
streamline that process by reauthorizing and expanding
programmatic approvals for the Bureau of Reclamation's water
supply projects instead of requiring project-by-project
authorization by Congress. Projects would be able to directly
seek funding once they're found to be feasible. I'd like to
think that faster development of water recycling projects and
faster development of conveyance projects in the West would be
welcome news. So, Deputy Commissioner, do you agree that the
programmatic authorizations in my MORE WATER Act, subject to
the programmatic authorizations in legislation by Senator
Cortez Masto, Senator Gallego, and Senator Curtis, would help
us address our water infrastructure needs?
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you, Senator Padilla. Absolutely,
programmatic authorities help the Bureau of Reclamation be more
nimble to react more swiftly to address drought in the West, in
particular. We do benefit from project-specific authorizations
as well, but having a programmatic ability to implement efforts
on the ground is also often expedited by having such authority.
We have an aging infrastructure authority where we can deploy
resources, again, very nimbly, without having individual
project authorizations, as long as those underlying projects
are going to be authorized in some fashion.
Senator Padilla. It's all about balance, right? We can't do
all project-by-project. We can't do all programmatic. We have
to have the right balance. I don't think we've struck that
right balance in recent years.
Now, on a second topic--I know our time is going by fast--
recent research suggests that agricultural water use efficiency
measures are dramatically less expensive, or can be
dramatically less expensive than the construction of new water
supplies and its required infrastructure. They often cost
hundreds of dollars per acre-foot of water, and savings could
be as much as 90 percent less than the thousands of dollars per
acre-foot that new water supplies could cost. And we have huge
water needs in the Colorado River Basin and elsewhere in the
West, so yes, cost is a focus and a concern.
This speaks to the other measure that I have introduced for
us today, the GROW SMART Act, which would authorize federal
funding to support demonstration projects of innovative
agricultural water efficiency projects that benefit farmers.
These are not mandates. These are voluntary. They are
demonstrations. They are farmer-led. They are locally driven
efforts to test new irrigation strategies. Again, is this a
tool? Would you agree that voluntary demonstrations of
innovative agricultural water use efficiency projects can be a
valuable tool in addressing the supply and cost challenges that
we have to meet the needs of our growing population and our
growing economy?
Mr. Palumbo. Yes, Senator Padilla. We have----
Senator Padilla. Great answer. Feel free to expand.
Mr. Palumbo. We have an acute supply and demand imbalance
problem in the West, as you're very well aware of, and we have
gotten very good at doing more with the same amount of water.
And what I see your bill doing is trying to do the same with a
lesser amount of water. And that's where we really need to
pivot to manage water in the West. We know the supplies are
reducing. So, if we can figure out smart ways to do the same
with less water, the Bureau of Reclamation absolutely supports
initiatives such as that.
Senator Padilla. Thank you. We're trying to lean in, think
innovatively. California alone is the fourth largest economy in
the world. If you bundle the whole western region of the United
States, it's obviously much bigger than that. California alone
is the largest agricultural producing state of any state in the
nation. If you combine the agriculture of all the western
states, it's even larger. So, the needs are acute in the West.
We're leaning into it and we appreciate your partnership. Thank
you.
Senator Hoeven. Ranking Member Wyden.
Senator Wyden. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Palumbo and
Mr. Turpin, both of you have been, for decades, on the front
lines thinking about this. And I will just tell you, I feel a
little bit like I'm having an out-of-body experience, because
I'm a Senate Democrat and I'm advocating using the private
sector more, and the administration, made up of Republicans,
has been using mostly a program kind of standard. And my sense
is there's an opportunity here to do something that's overdue,
which is to be bipartisan. Tell me your thoughts about how we
might figure out how to start gradually using results and the
private sector to play a bigger role. And we're certainly not
advocating throwing everything out altogether, but it just
seems to me that results and the private sector have an
opportunity now to make a huge difference in terms of water
when we need it. And there's a chance to kind of at least look
at it in terms of a pilot sort of way, as we're doing in our
legislation.
Your thoughts?
Mr. Palumbo. You know, thank you, Senator Wyden.
The Reclamation really prides itself on professional
excellence. And one way in which to achieve professional
excellence is to measure our results, and using the private
sector, or the public sector, for that matter, holding
ourselves accountable, measuring ourselves with the best
available technology, with gold-standard science, verifying
that what we're paying for is actually achieved, is very
important to Reclamation. Our programs--in our WaterSMART
program, for example--establish an application review committee
where we review applications that come in to ensure that
they're using the best available science, that they're using
demonstrated projects, and then, ultimately, we verify that
what we anticipated to be installed was installed. However,
what your bill is proposing is ratcheting up that a bit to
verify those results with the private sector. We would like to
work with your office to figure out how our existing WaterSMART
program could incorporate some of the ideas that you put
forward in your bill to smartly assess whether the American
taxpayer is in fact getting what he or she has paid for.
Senator Wyden. I probably ought to quit while I'm ahead
because I appreciate the fact that you'll work with us. Can we
do that? And so, over the next couple of weeks, can we nail
down something that really uses the private sector, because I
think we're now headed toward the home stretch of this session,
and there's lots of interest in this area because, as I talked
about earlier, I'm heading out to town hall meetings where this
is the issue--the question of droughts and water and snowpack.
We have just been hit by a wrecking ball in terms of, you know,
the opportunity to deal with these issues. Can we try to nail
this down in terms of using the private sector over the next
couple weeks?
Mr. Palumbo. Yes, absolutely. We'll sit down with your
staff, with our WaterSMART program, and look at all the
objectives and see how they can be incorporated into what we're
doing today.
Senator Wyden. Great. That's very much in line with what I
understand your career has always been about, which is not
particularly looking at water as a blue issue or a red issue
and everybody saying this is my approach because it's partisan
and all the rest, but just trying to get out the best and
smartest ideas, and I think we've got a chance to do some good
work. Thank you.
Mr. Turpin, let me just ask a question of you. I mentioned
at Oregon State, you know, really testing technologies. One of
the things that I was struck by in the debate that we had over
the last few years is that neither side really looks adequately
at technology. And so, what I did is, I came up with something
that we called technological neutrality. And the Chairman
remembers, for example, Senator Manchin, you know, who always
said he's for all of the above, and I said, so, it's
technological neutrality. It can go even further because you
basically can test just about anything as science gives you the
opportunities. Isn't that what we're trying to really do is
look at the technologies? That's what Senator Murkowski was
talking about. I think that's what you have talked about in the
past. And it's something that could bring all sides together. I
know that I filed my bill that passed, that became law, because
I want whoever is in charge around here in the years ahead to
say technological neutrality encourages good science, and
innovation, and the private sector.
I'd be interested in your thoughts.
Mr. Turpin. Well, I completely agree. The Commission has a
long standard of--I mean, if you look at it not just from the
technical neutrality, but from sort of energy production
neutrality, its all-energy provision is on the table, and it's
really about the best way to get that to the American people's
use. So, I couldn't agree more.
And in terms of technology on the waterways, as you
mentioned PacWave, I mean, there's a number of efforts that
have been underway to, you know, to incubate testbeds to try to
get different ways to test things so that companies have a
chance. It's an enormous risk to take on undertaking a full
project and a full license on a new technology, and so things
like PacWave present really good approaches to allow them.
Senator Wyden. Thank you. Thank you very much for your
thoughts, and we're going to be interested in the other point
that you talked about, which is the incentive. In the bill that
was enacted, you know, we basically tied it to reducing carbon.
I think there are a variety of other opportunities in addition
to that. In other words, I filed that old bill so we can
continue to create incentives for reducing carbon, and that,
I'd say to the Chairman, really came from this Committee, when
Senator Risch and others were saying, hey, look, you know,
we're just interested in the bottom line. We want to have
something that really is going to be responsive to reducing
carbon. If you all, Mr. Turpin, have some ideas on that, it
would be useful here and it would be useful in the Finance
Committee. So, you would get a two-fer.
Big thanks to both of you, and for your dedication over so
many years.
Chairman, good hearing. Look forward to working closely
with you.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Ranking Member.
And we'll turn to Senator Hickenlooper.
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to
both of you for being here. This is obviously a very timely
meeting.
Let me start with Mr. Palumbo. And I thought you probably
don't know much about my background, but I have the, you could
somewhat say, regrettable history of having been an English
major as an undergraduate and trying to figure out a way to
have a career in writing but at the same time fell in love with
geology. And so, I couldn't help but notice you were an English
major as an undergraduate then got into the engineering side of
things, really more in graduate school. Anyway, I hope it
serves you as well as it has served me.
Obviously, the Colorado River Basin, and you having been in
the Lower Basin, the responsibility, we've missed key deadlines
on figuring out how we're going to negotiate this incredibly
intense drought that we're all dealing with, and Reclamation's
draft EIS makes it clear that none of the alternatives, if
examined fairly, will adequately protect the system without
additional agreements or some form of subsidies. Without
clarity on what Reclamation will rely on and what actions it
will take, let's say the absence of consensus, which we're
still working on, just to be plain, it's hard to--maybe
impossible for states and tribes and water users to plan ahead
or hash out these negotiations--negotiate solutions--because
again, we don't have clarity on what authorities Reclamation is
going to rely on. So, if the Basin can't reach an agreement,
what actions is Reclamation preparing to take to protect the
Colorado River system and manage, you know, after 2026, and
what activities are you looking at right now, in terms of
getting us closer to a deal?
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for
acknowledging our similar paths.
A couple things. Let me first say, as you indicated, we are
working to achieve consensus. That is our preferred outcome of
the seven Basin states discussion, is consensus, but as you
said, it is incumbent upon the Bureau of Reclamation to operate
the system responsibly within our existing authorities should
we not achieve consensus. And so, what would we do in that
particular case? I'll start at the top of the system and work
down. We have authorities under the 1956 Colorado River Basin
Project Act to operate the upper initial units. We would do so
meeting the multiple benefits purposes that are identified in
that Act and operate those upper initial units. Moving down to
Lake Powell, not only do we have the 1956 Act, but we also have
the 1968 Colorado River Basin Project Act, as well as the
subsequent--what we call the long-range operating criteria that
went through a rulemaking process in 1970 that establishes
releases from Lake Powell to Lake Mead.
Senator Hickenlooper. Right.
Mr. Palumbo. We would rely on that authority. Moving down
to the Lower Basin, we know there's a supply and demand
imbalance. There's a deficit of supply and we know that there
will need to be reductions in the Lower Basin. And we would
implement those reductions, you know, pursuant to the 1928
Boulder Canyon Project Act, the act that authorized Hoover Dam
and All-American Canal, as well as set forth the apportionments
to the Lower Basin states. We also have a Supreme Court decree,
Arizona v. California in 1964, ultimately consolidated in 2006,
and we would have reductions in the Lower Basin relying on that
authority.
I'll maybe also say the Secretary of the Interior, as the
water master, but beyond just the water master, has authorities
under Reclamation's founding act, the 1902 act, and the 1930
act. We would rely on those.
Senator Hickenlooper. Got you.
Mr. Palumbo. Again, we're hoping for consensus, but we'll
be prepared to operate the system.
Senator Hickenlooper. Great. And that's, I mean, that's
going to be the necessity if we can't get to a negotiated
settlement. I still am optimistic and hopeful that we can do
that. I think the--you know, Congress provided $4 billion in
the Inflation Reduction Act, specifically for drought
mitigation of the Colorado River, as part of that. Putting that
in there and making sure that it stayed in there, the idea was
to promote conservation and enhance environmental resilience,
basically to reduce risk to the entire system. Obviously, the
good news is Colorado and the Upper Basin states had several
Bucket 2 projects approved that would basically achieve all
those goals. The bad news is the funding; the actual allocation
of those appropriated dollars has been held up for over a year.
Do you have any idea when that funding is going to be
released, and if not soon, what's causing the delay?
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you, Senator. You raise an important
point. Of the $4 billion we received for drought, we've
obligated almost $3 billion. So, we have a billion left to go.
We have those Bucket 2 projects that you mentioned. We have
some other projects in the Lower Basin. We're going through a
process right now to ensure that we obligate that money before
the end of Fiscal Year 2026, putting it to the best use both in
the Upper Basin and in the Lower Basin. We need conservation.
We need contributions.
Senator Hickenlooper. Right.
Mr. Palumbo. We need pools to help offset impacts to tribes
and non-tribal communities. And our intention is to get that
money out the door, put it to work, and have it obligated
before the end of this fiscal year.
Senator Hickenlooper. I'm out of time, and I want to thank
you for all your work on this. I think if it was left to the
senators of those seven states, I think we would have this deal
done, and I think there's always a little bit of space between
governors and senators. And in this case, they're just at
loggerheads, but I think there's a strong will that the seven
states, there's no reason why they shouldn't be able to figure
out a compromise and take into--you know, hear the other side
of each negotiation, each point of contention, and then find
out what is a fair resolution to this so that we don't put you
in that position of having to make decisions that are difficult
and are just going to get you into more and more hot water.
So, anyway, thank you for all your work, and I will commit,
on the Colorado side, but I think I can speak for all seven
Republican and Democratic senators, who believe that we really
need to find a solution where all seven states have a
consensus. Thank you for all your work.
Mr. Palumbo. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Hickenlooper. I yield back to the Chair.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Senator Hickenlooper. And I knew
you were a man of science, now I understand you're a man of
letters as well. So, that's good.
And I don't envy you, or you, Mr. Palumbo, that is a
massive challenge in terms of the Colorado River and figuring
out how you handle the issue fairly between upstream and
downstream. So, just a massive challenge, but really important
to a lot of people. And again, the old adage, you know, that
whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting, because these
are real challenges, but I know you're hard at work. I
appreciate it.
I want to thank both of our witnesses for being here today,
as well as the members of the Water and Power Subcommittee for
being here. Questions for the record and statements for the
official record are due by 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 24th.
And with that, we are adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:02 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]