[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 14432-14435]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                              DEVILS LAKE

  Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, I come to the floor today to speak about 
Devils Lake in North Dakota. Most people don't know about Devils Lake. 
It is one of only two lakes at the bottom of a closed basin in the 
entire country. One is the Great Salt Lake, the other is Devils Lake. 
Devils Lake has a basin about the size of the State of Massachusetts 
tucked inside the borders of North Dakota.
  To set the stage, North Dakota is ten times the size of 
Massachusetts. Devils Lake has been subject to chronic emergency 
flooding now for many years. That flooding in Devils Lake over recent 
years has caused absolute chaos for the folks who live in that region 
of northeastern North Dakota.
  This is a lake that has risen about 25 feet in 7 years. In the past 
60 years, it has risen nearly 50 feet. If you were a family living in 
Minnewaukan, ND, it wasn't too long ago that you lived 7 miles away 
from a lake. But recently I was standing in Minnewaukan, and the lake 
is right up to the back yards of that community. In 7 short years, 
people who lived 7 miles away from the lake now find the lake flooding 
their property.
  The cost of this flooding, in human terms, is massive. The lake 
continues to rise in a manner that is uncontrolled, and the question 
for the Corps of Engineers and the Federal Government is: What do we do 
to respond to the threatening rise of the lake that has occurred in 
recent years and threatens a fairly large city in North Dakota? It 
threatens to cut off one region of our state from emergency services 
and the normal commerce of daily life. It inundates roads, railways and 
utilities.
  In response, over $300 million has been spent in that region raising 
roads and relocating people and building dikes--doing all the things 
necessary to combat the flooding. This is a different kind of flood, 
unlike a river flood, where we see a picture on television of a swollen 
river moving very rapidly and causing chaos with houses floating down 
the river. The lake flooding here has come, and it has stayed, slowly 
destroying homes and businesses. It is causing major problems.
  One of the plans with respect to this Devils Lake flooding has been 
to build an outlet. We are building dikes to protect cities and protect 
roads. We are raising roads, using roads as dikes. We are doing all of 
these things over recent years.
  One of the pending proposals is to build an outlet to take a small 
amount of pressure off the lake. The challenge is that there is no 
problem-free place to put the water. You could put some of it in the 
Sheyenne River, which goes down to the Red River and up into Canada. An 
outlet to the Sheyenne River can provide relief but must be well-
managed to avoid causing problems for others. We don't want to solve a 
problem by creating a problem for others. The question of building an 
outlet has been a very difficult and sensitive one.
  By the same token, most everyone believes it is an emergency and we 
must use a comprehensive strategy to try to take some pressure off this 
lake, including upland storage in the upper part of the basin and 
building an outlet to take some pressure off the lake. However, all of 
the plans and work to build an outlet have been for naught at this 
point, because the Corps of Engineers is at odds with itself on the 
question of whether an outlet should be built.
  I came to the Senate floor to put in the Record two things. One is a 
``Draft Summary Document for the Report to Congress on the Emergency 
Outlet from Devils Lake, North Dakota, to the Sheyenne River, North 
Dakota.'' This was prepared by the St. Paul District Office of the Army 
Corps of Engineers. I requested this be made available to me by the 
Department of the Army's Corps of Engineers Division Office in 
Vicksburg, MS.
  Incidentally, Vicksburg, MS, has jurisdiction over North Dakota. Now, 
Lord only knows how that can happen. Tell me how it makes sense for a 
general sitting down in Vicksburg, MS, to tell us about lake flooding 
in North Dakota. But that is the way it is and the way the Corps is 
organized.
  The St. Paul district, which has spent a great deal of time on this 
issue, prepared this document. I want to read just a bit from the 
document. The St. Paul district says pointedly that we face emergency 
conditions. This is the Corps of Engineers, St. Paul office:

       Clearly we face emergency situations and we need to 
     proceed.

  The St. Paul division further says:

       Further study and analysis are not reasonable responses to 
     what is truly an emergency situation. What is required is a 
     proactive, multifaceted emergency flood damage reduction plan 
     to protect not only Devils Lake but the region. The lake is 
     within a single Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) event of 
     overtopping the levees protecting the City of Devils Lake, 
     and for the first time in recorded history, the lake is 
     within single PMF event of spilling into the Sheyenne River . 
     . . . Any project that would prevent the natural overflow 
     would be justified by economics and from a human health and 
     safety perspective.

  Accordingly, the St. Paul District recommends immediate action 
leading to the construction of an emergency outlet.
  The Mississippi division, which has charge of the St. Paul division, 
is 1,500 miles away. The general at the Mississippi division and his 
staff have come up with a completely different perspective. They are 
farther away, spend far less time on this issue, and know much less 
about the issue. The Mississippi commander wrote a letter to the North 
Dakota congressional delegation questioning the summary recommendations 
of the St. Paul office, which has done all of the work on this issue 
and whose experts judged there to be an emergency--one that justifies 
an outlet.
  The Vicksburg office in Mississippi says that is not the case at all. 
They say they don't need an outlet. They say, first of all, they are 
not certain there is an emergency at all. They say an outlet is not 
necessary or appropriate. ``Of the outlet plans reviewed, none of the 
outlet plans show benefits exceeding costs.''
  Incidentally, this computation by the Division ``experts'' wouldn't 
meet third grade math standards. They arbitrarily establish costs and 
benefits, but then leave out some of the real and major benefits. These 
benefits include, for example, not having to increase roads in order to 
keep roads open in this basin. Tens and tens and tens of millions of 
dollars are required to do that. But maybe if you have an outlet you 
don't have to do that.
  The Corps of Engineers Division Office says: That is not the problem 
or the complication because we have ``principles and guidelines'' to 
use for the computations. So we leave out large categories of costs 
avoided. Then they say the cost-benefit calculation does not work. The 
Mississippi division

[[Page 14433]]

agrees with St. Paul that dikes should be built but only supports 
building an outlet subject to a favorable analysis.
  In fact, the division doesn't believe that on outlet is appropriate.
  The St. Paul Corps of Engineers said: Yes to an outlet. They are the 
ones who know this region. They study it, and are in charge of it. 
Vicksburg, 1,500 miles away, says no.
  When the Corps decided to move its office to Vicksburg, MS, I had a 
fit. I should have tried to put a wrench in the crankcase then, and I 
did not do everything I should have done--I admit. It didn't make any 
sense at all to decide that the Corps of Engineers' headquarters for a 
region similar to that ought to be in Mississippi, 1,500 miles away.
  Here is the evidence. The evidence is that you have the Corps arguing 
with the Corps. The St. Paul office, which knows the subject best, 
says: Here is what ought to be done. It is an emergency. We support an 
outlet for the following reasons. Here is what we ought to do. The 
folks in Mississippi say: Gee. We don't believe that at all.
  The only reason I am putting two documents in the Record today by 
consent--I would like to include in the Record the summary document 
prepared by the St. Paul office of the Corps of Engineers and the 
letter sent to the congressional delegation by General Anderson, who 
runs the Vicksburg office of the Corps of Engineers--is that they 
directly contradict each other. Again, it is the same agency.
  Let me use a couple of charts because I think it is useful to see.
  This is the level of Devils Lake. You can see what is happening with 
this lake. This shows 1445.5 feet. It is actually now again up to 1447. 
So this chart is actually out of date in just a month or two. That 
chart shows what is happening to this lake.
  Actually, the most appropriate chart to show for Devils Lake is a 
chart that I want to put up. This chart is actually a picture taken of 
a woman in 1993. If you look carefully, you can see she is standing at 
the bottom of the telephone pole in the Devils Lake area.
  I want to show you where the lake is right now. It is not here. This 
is also out of date. This is 1445.5. The lake is now 1447 feet. It is 
above this chart. Here is where this woman would be in the lake at the 
moment with the lake somewhere around 25 or 30 feet above her head. 
This picture was taken in 1993.
  That will describe to you what has happened here.
  I mentioned to you that people who used to live 7 miles away from the 
lake 7 years ago now have a lake behind their homes threatening their 
houses. This doesn't happen anywhere else in the country. It happens in 
the Great Salt Lake and in Devils Lake. They are the only two closed 
basins in America in which you have this kind of flooding. The Great 
Salt Lake threatened a flood in a very dramatic way and receded. But 
Devils Lake continues to increase.
  I want to show you what is happening. Every single year the Corps of 
Engineers says: Well, we were at 1437 feet, then the height of that 
lake. There is less than a 3-percent chance that it will increase. It 
increased up to 1443. Then they said there was a less than a 1-percent 
chance it would increase once more. Again, it increased up to 1444.7. 
They said that there was less than a 1-percent chance again, and it may 
well increase to 1447.5 by the middle part of this summer.
  Every single year we are in a wet cycle, and this basin continues to 
flood and cause chaos for the people of that region.
  Here is the cost. Here is what is happening to us and what happens 
with respect to this flooding.
  At some point, this flows naturally across the divide out of the 
basin with the worst possible quality of water, with dissolved solids 
that create a terrible quality of water that everyone is afraid of. And 
it flows naturally across the divide at 1460, down into the Sheyenne 
River, up the Red River into Canada, causing very significant problem 
for major population centers.
  That is why all of us have to be concerned about this.
  Here is what the damages are when you have that kind of flooding. 
Again, it is not river flooding where a gushing river grabs a house and 
throws it downstream and you have dramatic pictures. It is a lake that 
gobbles up a region, people, property, and hope inch by inch.
  What is happening is the cumulative damages, as this lake goes up, 
are massive--about $300 million to date, and the prospect is much more.
  I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the document 
that I asked the Vicksburg office to provide me which reflects the 
recommendations by the Corps of Engineers at the St. Paul office, and 
also the document that is offered by the general who is in charge of 
the Vicksburg office.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

  Draft Summary Document for the Report to Congress on the Emergency 
           Outlet from Devils Lake, ND to the Sheyenne River,

    (Prepared by the St. Paul District Office of the Army Corps of 
                               Engineers)

                            Summary Document


                           executive summary

       Conditions in the Devils Lake basin have changed 
     dramatically. The continued rise of Devils Lake has 
     exacerbated the flooding concern around the lake. The higher 
     lake level has created a situation where a single 
     catastrophic event would overtop the levees protecting the 
     City of Devils Lake and overflow to the Sheyenne River. This 
     has serious international, regional, and environmental 
     implications. The strategies employed to date cannot be 
     expected to provide a timely solution. Further study and 
     analysis are not reasonable responses to what is truly an 
     emergency situation. What is required is a proactive, 
     multifaceted emergency flood damage reduction plan to protect 
     not only Devils Lake but the region.
     Current lake level situation
       Devils Lake is now at the highest level (elevation 1445.5) 
     in recorded times. Although the lake is a terminal lake, it 
     has naturally spilled to the Sheyenne River several times in 
     geologic history. The last spill was likely 800 to 1200 years 
     ago. The 1999 forecast is for the lake to rise another 2 feet 
     to elevation 1447.5 by August. The 1999 inflow is forecast to 
     be the second largest on record even though the basin had a 
     reasonably mild winter and near normal preciptation this 
     spring. The lake level is extremely sensitive to small 
     climatic shifts, which might be the case given the persistent 
     wet cycle over the last 7 years. The continuing lake rise is 
     necessitating additional emergency flood control measures to 
     protect urban areas and transportation routes.
     Current efforts
       Solving the rising lake problem is not easy, and the 
     pursuit of a single solution offers little hope. Currently, 
     three separate flood damage reduction activities are being 
     pursued--upper basin management, infrastructure protection, 
     and a managed outlet. Numerous entities are pursuing water 
     management measures to reduce runoff and store water in the 
     upper basin. Infrastructure protection is being implemented 
     by local counties and cities, the Federal Highway 
     Administration, the North Dakota Department of 
     Transportation, the Federal Emergency Management Agency 
     (FEMA), the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), the Corps of 
     Engineers, and private citizens. To date, infrastructure 
     protection--raising roads and levees and evacuating 
     structures--has been provided in incremental steps that 
     usually just stay ahead of the steadily rising lake, although 
     in some cases the lake has risen faster than the level of 
     protection.
       This year, the Corps of Engineers is completing the final 
     authorized raise of the levees protecting the City of Devils 
     Lake to elevation 1450 with top of levee at 1457. FEMA issued 
     a ``Continuous Lake Flooding Waiver'' in 1996, 1997, and 
     1998, which changed their policies to allow for buyouts of 
     properties expected to be affected by the forecasted lake 
     rise. A waiver for 1999 is being sought. Highways 19, 20, 57, 
     and 281 have been or are being raised by the North Dakota 
     Department of Transportation. Emergency actions are being 
     pursued for other communities by the State, counties, and 
     Corps of Engineers. Agencies have worked with the Spirit Lake 
     Tribe to try to protect infrastructure on tribal properties 
     and keep transportation routes to and from the Spirit Lake 
     Reservation open.
       In response to the Energy and Water Development 
     Appropriations Acts of 1998/99, the Corps of Engineers is 
     also investigating the possibility of developing an emergency 
     outlet from Devils Lake to the Sheyenne River. That 
     authorization is contingent upon there being an emergency 
     declaration and that the project is technically sound, 
     economically justified, environmentally acceptable, and in 
     compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 
     There also need to be assurances that the discharges from

[[Page 14434]]

     the outlet will not violate the 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty 
     with Canada. A report to Congress is required on the findings 
     of the outlet investigations, which is the purpose of this 
     document.
     Preliminary report to Congress findings
       The concept of an outlet from Devils Lake has been the 
     subject of several studies. To meet water quality standards 
     in the Sheyenne River and Red River of the North, the only 
     viable plan appeared to be an outlet from the fresher, west 
     end of this saline lake. However, the effectiveness of even a 
     west end outlet is limited because the salinity constrains 
     the rate of releases in order to meet the downstream water 
     quality standards.
       A plan developed by the Corps of Engineers in December 1998 
     indicated that, to be effective in lowering or controlling 
     the rising lake levels while meeting downstream water quality 
     standards, the outlet would have to remove fresh water from 
     the basin before it mixed with Devils Lake water. Studies 
     since December have concentrated on freshwater alternatives 
     that would allow a higher discharge that stays within the 
     water quality and channel capacity constraints on the 
     Sheyenne and Red Rivers.
       The constantly changing lake level, flood protection 
     measures, and other circumstances combined with current Corps 
     policies and principles and guidelines have made it 
     challenging and virtually impossible for the hydrologic, 
     economic, and water quality modeling and analysis to keep 
     ahead of events. Consequently, an economically justified 
     solution concentrating on the damages prevented within the 
     basin has been elusive.
       Findings from these recent studies indicate that an 
     economically feasible solution cannot be developed using the 
     current economic and hydrologic models. Benefit-cost ratios 
     vary from 0.12 to 0.72 depending on what assumptions for a 
     without-project condition are used. Also, a outlet of 300 
     cubic feet per second (cfs) has limited effectiveness in 
     terms of reducing peak lake levels, although the maximum 
     drawdown in the lake could be as much as 8 feet. These 
     results, however, do not take into account downstream 
     benefits from an outlet's reduction in the probability, 
     severity, and duration of natural spills to the Sheyenne 
     River.
       Of the five separate criteria set forth by Congress for 
     outlet authorization, all but two could be met, assuming 
     satisfactory consultation with the State Department and 
     satisfactory completion of the NEPA process. The current 
     analysis shows that economic feasibility is lacking, and due 
     to the extremely controversial nature of the emergency outlet 
     and many outspoken opponents, a consensus on environmental 
     acceptability would be extremely difficult to achieve.
     Reframed problem
       With the release of the April 1999 forecast by the National 
     Weather Service (NWS), the flooding problem has changed from 
     protecting the properties around the lake to also protecting 
     the region from a natural overflow from Devils Lake to the 
     Sheyenne River. The lake is within a single Probable Maximum 
     Flood (PMF) event of overtopping the levees protecting the 
     City of Devils Lake and, for the first time in recorded 
     history, the lake is within a single PMF event of spilling to 
     the Sheyenne River.
       A natural overflow to the Sheyenne River could cause 
     catastrophic flooding and water quality effects for residents 
     along the Sheyenne and Red Rivers. Ecosystem impacts of a 
     prolonged spill would be devastating. Computer simultations 
     show that an overflow could exceed the Sheyenne River's 
     channel capacity by a factor of more than two and the river's 
     sulfate standard by a factor of more than seven. In addition, 
     should the water flow out naturally, erosion would cut into 
     the divide and increase the discharge and downstream effects 
     even further.
       Although, the downstream damages have not been quantified, 
     it is expected that any project that would prevent the 
     natural overflow would be justified by economics and from a 
     human health and safety perspective. The problem now becomes 
     one of dealing with the emergency in time to allow for final 
     design and implementation of a plan before it is too late. To 
     determine the urgency of taking action, the Corps of 
     Engineers analyzed when action would be needed to prevent a 
     natural overflow to the Sheyenne River assuming a 
     continuation of the average net inflow to the lake over the 
     last 7 years and assuming a 2-year construction period. Using 
     this approach, construction should have begun at lake 
     elevation 1441.8 to prevent a PMF from overflowing naturally 
     and at 1451.3 to prevent a natural spill from a Standard 
     Project Flood (SPF). To prevent overtopping of the City of 
     Devils Lake levee system by an SPF, construction would need 
     to begin at lake elevation 1448.0, 0.5 foot above the 1999 
     forecast lake level. This incidates that plans and 
     specifications for both an outlet and a 3-foot raise of the 
     city's levee should begin immediately to allow for a 
     construction start early in 2000.
       To demonstrate how quickly the situation is deteriorating, 
     in February 1999, the Corps of Engineers was working on a 
     plan to divert water from Devils Lake to the Stump Lakes. 
     This plan made sense on the basis of the NWS's initial 
     forecast of a 1446.0 peak lake level. Using the Stump Lakes' 
     storage could limit Devils Lake's near-term rise and buy time 
     to deal with the emergency outlet situation. However, at the 
     NWS's 9 April 1999 revised forecast for a peak lake level of 
     1447.5, Devils Lake will begin a natural spill to the Stump 
     Lakes, and if Devils Lake continues to rise next year, 
     implementation of this plan may not be a prudent or practical 
     option. Having possibly missed the window of opportunity for 
     a diversion to Stump Lake emphasizes how important it is not 
     to miss the window of opportunity for an emergency outlet 
     that might prevent the lake from overtopping the city's levee 
     or spilling uncontrolled to the Sheyenne River.
     Report to Congress
       This summary report to Congress has been prepared to 
     present the most recent findings regarding the emergency 
     outlet to the Sheyenne River and to discuss the changing 
     conditions at Devils Lake that warrant a new fast-track 
     approach. Hope, incremental solutions, and constrained 
     measures are no longer an acceptable course of action. The 
     report proposes a solution and a timetable capable of dealing 
     with this evolving emergency situation; details are being 
     worked out. The plan would involve six actions:
       Building a west-end outlet with a discharge rate between 
     500 and 600 cfs to help prevent lake rises; however, this 
     outlet would not be capable of keeping up with inflow from an 
     extreme event.
       Raising the height of the City of Devils Lake levee.
       Developing a contingency plan for an emergency spillway 
     consisting of a controlled and armored outlet from the east 
     end of Devils Lake into the Sheyenne River to prevent a 
     natural overflow from eroding and causing a catastrophic 
     spill.
       Revising Public Law 84-99 Flood and Coastal Stream 
     Emergency Act policies to better deal with the flooding 
     problems on the Spirit Lake Reservation.
       Continuing emergency actions at Churchs Ferry, Minnewaukan, 
     and other communities within the Devils Lake basin on an as-
     needed basis.
       Mitigating downstream flooding caused by operation of the 
     outlet.
       By implementing the above actions, the risk of the 
     catastrophic damages to the Devils Lake region as well as the 
     risk of significant damages along the Sheyenne and Red Rivers 
     would be substantially reduced. If no action is taken, the 
     decision to accept the consequences is implicit. Further 
     study and analysis is not considered an appropriate response 
     to this emergency situation.
     Where do we go from here
       The resources of local interests are exhausted from 7 
     straight years of devastating floods in the Devils Lake 
     basin. The local interests are tired of worrying about the 
     rising lake, the loss of property, the evacuation of their 
     neighbors, and the uncertainty of getting a solution through 
     normal channels. They are proactively pushing for an answer, 
     and they recently passed a resolution supporting local 
     construction of an east-end spillway.
       The North Dakota Congressional Delegation and the Governor 
     consider Devils Lake to be one of the most important issues 
     in the State and are working hard to try to solve the Devils 
     Lake problem. The Corps of Engineers role has been to build 
     levees, to protect urban areas, and to study the problem and 
     a possible outlet. But the focus has been on solving the 
     internal flood problem to the Devils Lake basin. Now, with a 
     natural spill to the Sheyenne River being a statistical 
     reality, the focus must change to do what is necessary to 
     protect the region from a disaster by treating the situation 
     as a real emergency.
       We first need to use latitude that the Corps of Engineers 
     already has to develop plans and specifications for an 
     outlet, a levee raise, a contingency plan for an emergency 
     spillway, and protection measures for each community around 
     the lake. Second, we need to use the Corps of Engineers 
     emergency authorities under Public Law 84-99 to start 
     construction of the levee raise and community protection 
     measures as well as the west end emergency outlet using the 
     shortest possible implementation methods. We also need to 
     consult with the Council on Environmental Quality regarding 
     concurrent compliance with NEPA. In addition, coordination 
     between the State Department and the International Joint 
     Commission regarding compliance with the Boundary Waters 
     Treaty of 1909 should begin immediately.
                                  ____

         Department of the Army, Mississippi Valley Division, 
           Corps of Engineers,
                                     Vicksburg, MS, June 17, 1999.
     Hon. Byron L. Dorgan,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Dorgan: This is in response to your letter 
     dated June 10, 1999, concerning an outlet for Devils Lake. I 
     have sent this same response to Senator Conrad, 
     Representative Pomeroy, and Governor Schafer. The Corps 
     recognizes that emergency conditions exist within the Devils 
     Lake area. We will continue to respond, to the limit of our 
     authority, to minimize damages within the basin. While I 
     understand your concern and frustration in finding a timely 
     remedy for

[[Page 14435]]

     this rising lake, I have not reached a conclusion that an 
     outlet is a necessary or appropriate solution to the recent 
     rise of water in Devils Lake.
       Our analyses and my recommendations will be contained in an 
     Interim Report to Congress that will be completed by St. Paul 
     District and submitted in mid-July for Headquarters, U.S. 
     Army Corps of Engineers and the Assistant Secretary of the 
     Army for Civil Works' review and approval. For your 
     convenience, I have enclosed a copy of my recommendations. I 
     have recommended that we complete the Final Report to 
     Congress, which will include analyses of several 
     alternatives, including outlet plans. One of those plans will 
     have an objective of holding the lake at elevation 1454. The 
     Final Report to Congress will contain a fully coordinated 
     Environmental Impact Statement. It will also address the 
     other criteria of the Energy and Water Development 
     Appropriations Acts of 1998 and 1999.
       The recently completed Technical Report is the product of a 
     joint Division and District team that looked into the timing 
     and consequences of an uncontrolled overflow from Devils Lake 
     into the Sheyenne River. Due to time constraints, that report 
     relied heavily on the data and analyses contained in the 
     Limits Study completed by St. Paul District in 1998. The 
     Technical Report did not analyze the benefits of lowering the 
     lake. There would be minor benefits from the re-emergence of 
     some of the abandoned secondary roads, but since they were 
     not considered in the Limits Study, these benefits were not 
     included. Some benefits would also result from return of 
     submerged agricultural lands to productivity. However, in 
     accordance with the Limits Study, we assumed that these 
     benefits would be negated by the salinity of the saturating 
     water, which would preclude an early return to productivity. 
     If all the cropland and fallow acreage between elevations 
     1440 and 1447 were returned to productivity, the average 
     annual benefits would be about $1 million.
       As to the hydrologic modeling, it is important to note that 
     the inflows were assumed to equal those experienced during 
     the recent wet period from 1993 through 1998. Thus, a high 
     inflow rate to the lake has been assumed in the Technical 
     Report analysis. Even so, this results in the lake taking 
     longer to rise to higher levels than previously estimated 
     because the recent hydrologic modeling results utilized in 
     the Technical Report are based on a more accurate estimate of 
     future evaporation as the lake rises and its surface area 
     becomes much greater.
       The analytical tools used in the Devils Lake study are 
     designed specifically for the unique system at Devils Lake. 
     This, unlike a riverine system, has no outlet and the lake 
     levels are not independent of each other from one year to the 
     next. For example, the model used to estimate the probability 
     of future lake levels, given the current level of the lake, 
     is uniquely suited for a closed basin such as Devils Lake. It 
     has limitations in that following the snow melt and spring 
     runoff each year, the probability of future lake levels must 
     be recomputed. This is required because it is not possible to 
     accurately forecast snow pack and spring runoff for the next 
     year, which will produce next year's lake level.
       I appreciate your continued interest in this effort and 
     look forward to working together to solve this most 
     unfortunate problem.
           Sincerely,

                                          Phillip R. Anderson,

                                         Major General, U.S. Army,
                                                Division Engineer.
       Enclosure.


                            recommendations

       1. Establish six (6) feet of freeboard as design standard 
     for advance measures on Devils Lake.
       2. Immediately proceed with necessary reports to include 
     NEPA compliance and PCA Amendment to raise Devils Lake Levee 
     to TOL 1460.
       3. Following completion of necessary reports and PCA, raise 
     Devils Lake levee to TOL 1460.
       4. Complete Interim Report to Congress within 30 days for 
     submittal to HQUSACE and ASA(CW). Interim Report will target 
     holding lake level at elevation 1454 or lower.
       5. Complete Final Report to Congress with analyses of 
     several alternatives, including outlet plans. One of those 
     plans will have as an objective holding the lake to elevation 
     1454. The Final Report to Congress will include a fully 
     coordinated Environmental Impact Statement. The Report to 
     Congress will also address the other criteria of the Energy 
     and Water Development Appropriations Acts, 1998 and 1999. 
     Subject to analyses favorable to an outlet, plan completion 
     of the Report to Congress to allow initiation of P&S if the 
     lake approaches elevation 1452 (about 2005) and construction 
     if the lake approaches elevation 1453 (about 2006).
       6. Continue to define trigger points for other actions 
     around the lake. Provide incremental protection for Churchs 
     Ferry, Minnewaukan, Spirit Lake Nation, and other communities 
     in accordance with PL 84-99 and in coordination with local, 
     State and other Federal interests.

  Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, I see the Senator from Mississippi, Mr. 
Cochran, is on the floor. I don't know whether he is prepared to call 
up the bill or speak on the bill. If not, I was going to speak for an 
additional 5 minutes, but I certainly don't have to do that. I will 
defer at this point, if the Senator from Mississippi is ready to take 
up the bill.

                          ____________________