[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
LEFT IN THE DARK: EXAMINING THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION'S EFFORTS TO
ELIMINATE THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST'S CLEAN ENERGY PRODUCTION
=======================================================================
OVERSIGHT HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES
of the
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
Tuesday, December 12, 2023
__________
Serial No. 118-86
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
or
Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
54-449 WASHINGTON : 2024
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
BRUCE WESTERMAN, AR, Chairman
DOUG LAMBORN, CO, Vice Chairman
RAE1L M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Member
Doug Lamborn, CO Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Tom McClintock, CA CNMI
Paul Gosar, AZ Jared Huffman, CA
Garret Graves, LA Ruben Gallego, AZ
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS Joe Neguse, CO
Doug LaMalfa, CA Mike Levin, CA
Daniel Webster, FL Katie Porter, CA
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR Teresa Leger Fernandez, NM
Russ Fulcher, ID Melanie A. Stansbury, NM
Pete Stauber, MN Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
John R. Curtis, UT Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, NY
Tom Tiffany, WI Kevin Mullin, CA
Jerry Carl, AL Val T. Hoyle, OR
Matt Rosendale, MT Sydney Kamlager-Dove, CA
Lauren Boebert, CO Seth Magaziner, RI
Cliff Bentz, OR Nydia M. Velazquez, NY
Jen Kiggans, VA Ed Case, HI
Jim Moylan, GU Debbie Dingell, MI
Wesley P. Hunt, TX Susie Lee, NV
Mike Collins, GA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL
John Duarte, CA
Harriet M. Hageman, WY
Vivian Moeglein, Staff Director
Tom Connally, Chief Counsel
Lora Snyder, Democratic Staff Director
http://naturalresources.house.gov
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES
CLIFF BENTZ, OR, Chairman
JEN KIGGANS, VA, Vice Chair
JARED HUFFMAN, CA, Ranking Member
Robert J. Wittman, VA Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Tom McClintock, CA Mike Levin, CA
Garret Graves, LA Mary Sattler Peltola, AK
Aumua Amata C. Radewagen, AS Kevin Mullin, CA
Doug LaMalfa, CA Val T. Hoyle, OR
Daniel Webster, FL Seth Magaziner, RI
Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, PR Debbie Dingell, MI
Jerry Carl, AL Ruben Gallego, AZ
Lauren Boebert, CO Joe Neguse, CO
Jen Kiggans, VA Katie Porter, CA
Anna Paulina Luna, FL Ed Case, HI
John Duarte, CA Ra uAE1l M. Grijalva, AZ, ex
Harriet M. Hageman, WY officio
Bruce Westerman, AR, ex officio
------
CONTENTS
----------
Page
Hearing held on Tuesday, December 12, 2023....................... 1
Statement of Members:
Bentz, Hon. Cliff, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon............................................ 1
Huffman, Hon. Jared, a Representative in Congress from the
State of California........................................ 3
Westerman, Hon. Bruce, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Arkansas.......................................... 5
Statement of Witnesses:
Maunu, Neil, Executive Director, Pacific Northwest Waterways
Association, Portland, Oregon.............................. 7
Prepared statement of.................................... 9
Supplemental testimony submitted for the record.......... 10
Falkenberg, Humaira, Power Resources Manager, Pacific County
PUD, Raymond, Washington................................... 28
Prepared statement of.................................... 29
Slater, Lindsay, Vice President of Government Affairs, Trout
Unlimited, Arlington, Virginia............................. 37
Prepared statement of.................................... 38
Supplemental testimony submitted for the record.......... 44
Simms, Scott, CEO and Executive Director, Public Power
Council, Portland, Oregon.................................. 45
Prepared statement of.................................... 46
Additional Materials Submitted for the Record:
Submissions for the Record by Representative Bentz
Governor Greg Gianforte, Letter to President Biden dated
December 8, 2023....................................... 74
NRECA and APPA, Letter to Secretary Granholm, Dept. of
Energy dated December 1, 2023.......................... 75
Public Utility District No. 2 of Pacific County, Letter
to Deputy Secretary Turk, Dept. of Energy dated
November 22, 2023...................................... 76
Public Power Council, Letter to NOAA dated June 9, 2023.. 79
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, Letter to
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services and CEQ
dated November 21, 2023................................ 81
Submissions for the Record by Representative Huffman
National Congress of American Indians, Resolution #AK-21-
009.................................................... 85
Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Resolution #2021-
23..................................................... 89
American Rivers, Statement for the Record................ 93
American Fisheries Society, Letter to the Committee dated
December 23, 2023...................................... 95
AFS News, ``Statement of the American Fisheries Society
and the Western Division of AFS About the Need to
Breach the Four Dams on the Lower Snake Rivers''....... 99
Submissions for the Record by Representative Rodgers
U.S. Government Commitments in Support of the Columbia
Basin Restoration Initiative and in Partnership with
the Six Sovereigns, Confidential Mediation Document.... 102
OVERSIGHT HEARING ON LEFT IN THE DARK: EXAMINING THE BIDEN
ADMINISTRATION'S
EFFORTS TO ELIMINATE THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST'S CLEAN ENERGY PRODUCTION
----------
Tuesday, December 12, 2023
U.S. House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries
Committee on Natural Resources
Washington, DC
----------
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:48 p.m., in
Room 1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Cliff Bentz
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Bentz, McClintock, LaMalfa,
Gonzalez-Colon, Duarte, Hageman, Westerman; Huffman, Mullin,
Hoyle, and Porter.
Also present: Fulcher, Newhouse, Rodgers, Rosendale, and
Zinke.
Mr. Bentz. The Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and
Fisheries will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a
recess of the Subcommittee at any time.
Good afternoon, everyone. I want to welcome our witnesses,
Members, and our guests in the audience to today's hearing. The
Subcommittee is meeting today to hear testimony on a hearing
entitled, ``Left in the Dark: Examining the Biden
Administration's Efforts to Eliminate the Pacific Northwest's
Clean Energy Production.''
I ask unanimous consent that all other Members' opening
statements be made part of the hearing record if they are
submitted in accordance with the Committee Rule 3(o).
I also ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from
Washington, Mrs. McMorris Rodgers; the gentleman from
Washington, Mr. Newhouse; the gentleman from Idaho, Mr.
Fulcher; and the gentlemen from Montana, Mr. Rosendale and Mr.
Zinke be allowed to participate in today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. CLIFF BENTZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
FROM THE STATE OF OREGON
Mr. Bentz. Again, I thank all of you for being here. As
Chairman Conrad Burns said years ago regarding a somewhat
similar situation, this dam case is back. And indeed, it is.
To set the stage for today's hearing, here is a narrow
snapshot of the last 3 years of the 22 years of litigation and
politicalization of the Columbia and Snake Rivers power
navigation and salmon conflicts. On July 24, 2020, NOAA's
National Marine Fisheries Service issued its final biological
opinion, as required by section 7(a)(2) of the ESA on the
effects of the operation and maintenance of the Columbia River
system of Federal dams.
In that opinion, NMFS concluded that the operation and
maintenance of the Columbia River system was not--and I repeat,
was not--likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the
Snake River spring, summer Chinook salmon, steelhead, sockeye
salmon, fall Chinook salmon, and 11 other species of fish. The
analysis upon which this opinion was based took 4 years to
complete, involving an EIS that cost some $50 million. The
document is 1,400 pages long.
With total predictability, about 7 months later, in 2021,
the National Wildlife Federation filed in Federal court the
eighth supplemental complaint challenging NMFS's decision. Also
with total predictability, NMFS, noting that there was a new
president in the White House, promptly reversed course and,
without a care about its credibility, issued a new report
called ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and
Steelhead,'' claiming in this document, ``The science robustly
supports dam removal on the Snake River.'' It is astounding,
just the opposite of what this very agency had decided a mere
24 months earlier. It is enough to give the casual observer
whiplash.
Following the filing of the eighth amended complaint
mentioned earlier, Federal District Court Judge Simon entered a
stay of court proceedings in October 2021 based on the
assertion that the parties to the lawsuit were ``in good faith
discussions to resolve the entire litigation.'' His stay of
proceedings has been extended several times. The most recent
stay will end in just several days, on December 15, 2023.
A few words about these ``good faith discussions'' upon
which Judge Simon relied are in order. The so-called
negotiations were closed to the public, the parties were bound
by gag agreements, and the group was designed to leave out
ratepayers, irrigators, navigational interests, and communities
dependent upon the flow of commerce up and down the 465 miles
of Columbia and Snake Rivers. Since all the parties at the
table shared the same goals, it is difficult to understand why
it took so long to create the so-called mediation document.
The same ``good faith'' discussions were the focus of a
hearing this very Committee held in Richland, Washington on
June 26 of this year. Sadly, the government agencies who are
parties to the lawsuit and deeply involved in the so-called
mediation refused to answer my questions or, for that matter,
any of the questions we Congressmen and women asked about the
content of the secret agreement. These officials repeatedly
refused to discuss or share any part of their sue-and-settle
contrivance, the product of about 2 years of backroom collusion
that we now know will cost billions of dollars, if enacted,
perhaps double the $3 million Northwest ratepayers' electricity
bills, cripple important parts of the Northwest economy, and
decimate any number of river communities.
About 2 weeks ago, the sue-and-settle document containing
the collusive efforts of this narrow group of self-dealing
plaintiffs led by President Biden's Council on Environmental
Quality was leaked. And we have it in front of us today. This
agreement, entitled, ``Confidential Mediation Document,'' is a
narrow, elitist, top-down, big government, progressively
burdened product of the first order. A worse approach than the
one found in this instrument to solving the truly difficult and
decades-long problems posed by the challenges to our
communities and our fish would be hard to imagine.
So, what is this hearing for today? Here is what we hope to
accomplish.
First, call out from the rooftops the incredible damage the
provisions found in this mediation document will do to the
billion-dollar negotiations now occurring between BPA and its
millions of ratepayers as customers of the BPA, as they
struggle to find certainty in an agreement that is
intentionally and dangerously ambiguous.
Second, call out the absolutely undeniable fact that this
agreement will and already has led to even more litigation. It
is not a settlement agreement so much as a litigation cluster
bomb.
Third, call out the incredible damage done by the CEQ in
ignoring the APA and exceeding its statutory purpose. Director
Mallory needs to re-read the provisions of NEPA that describe
her CEQ's authority. The challenge of protecting the millions
of ratepayers against dramatic increases in their utility bills
and the thousands of businesses and communities that rely on
river commerce on the one hand, and the fish on the other is
not a problem that will be solved by unelected bureaucrats
hiding behind the skirts of the Federal Court.
Again, I thank all of you for being here. I look forward to
your testimony.
I now recognize Ranking Member Huffman for his opening
statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. JARED HUFFMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is something we
should be shouting from the rooftops, and it is the fact that
the status quo in the Columbia River Basin is not working.
We are on the verge of losing iconic salmon runs. There are
orca whale populations that will blink out if that happens. And
unless you are comfortable with all of this extinction, unless
you are comfortable with sticking it to the tribes that have
depended on these resources for millennia, unless you are
comfortable sticking it to the commercial and recreational
fishing interests that are going to lose big-time if we
continue to be in denial about the status quo, then I would say
it is long overdue to move past this failed situation and start
modernizing the Federal Columbia River Power System so that it
can actually balance ecological, cultural, and economic
benefits across the region.
But rather than discussing ways to modernize our existing
infrastructure, diversify our energy resources, and restore
ecosystems, today's hearing focuses on confidential mediation
documents leaked by Republicans on this Committee between
parties engaged in active litigation over the operation of the
Columbia River Basin Power System.
It is important to point out that these leaked documents
were drafted in early November, and may not even reflect the
current state of the negotiations. I must say it is deeply
inappropriate for Members of Congress to leak confidential
documents in an apparent attempt to disrupt and sabotage
ongoing negotiations.
The same is true for the decision to hold today's hearing 3
days before the December 15th settlement deadline in that case.
And by the way, there have been decades of litigation over this
broken, dysfunctional status quo in the Columbia River Basin.
I expect today's discussion will also attempt to create a
narrative that this Administration is somehow hiding its
actions from the public by not being here today. I would like
to remind everyone that it is standard practice to have
confidential mediations in these things called lawsuits. It
happens all the time. It is overseen by the courts, and there
is nothing nefarious about it.
If my colleagues were serious about making progress that
moves us past failed status quo management in the basin, we
could have held this hearing once settlement terms were
publicly released, which could be as soon as Friday. Instead,
we are here today talking about confidential mediation
documents, which, again, is the standard in mediation and
litigation.
Not only is it concerning that my colleagues received a
copy of these documents from one of the parties in the
litigation, but more concerning is that they determined the
best course of action was to leak them further and use this
Committee's time and resources in an apparent attempt to hobble
settlement negotiations that could, if they were successful,
move us past this dysfunction, these decades of impasse and
conditions that are trending toward extinction.
While business as usual benefits a narrow few and some
select industries, it harms a lot more. This is especially true
for tribal communities that bear the greatest burden from
current operations. Through signed treaties, the Federal
Government made promises on tribal fishing rights and continued
tribal access to salmon fisheries that are of great cultural
and religious significance and a key source of sustenance.
These promises continue to be broken. This follows a shameful
history of the Federal Government forcibly displacing and
prohibiting Indigenous people from practicing their own
cultures, including traditional fishing.
Today, the Columbia River Basin, which was once abundant
with salmon, is facing decimated populations, with numerous
tribes at risk of losing a significant component of their
culture and their sustenance. The Federal Government has a
legal and moral responsibility to honor the promises it made in
treaties, and that is why we will hopefully see, as a result of
the settlement discussions happening now between the Federal
Government and tribal nations, a resolution.
As we move forward in the self-determination era, it is
essential that the Federal Government work with the tribes to
ensure that the future management of the Columbia River is
linked with the health and well-being of these impacted
fisheries and of these impacted tribes.
And finally, I should note that the management of this
basin continues to be a contentious issue among many
stakeholders. We may hear today that the Administration is
trying to circumvent Congress through these negotiations to
breach the lower Snake River dams. However, my colleagues know
that breaching those dams requires an Act of Congress. They are
not going to just go around us and somehow make this happen. If
they read the documents that they themselves leaked, they would
know that the agencies did not propose to breach the lower
Snake River dams, but rather outlined actions to take if
Congress authorized such action.
I also think it is important to note that a member of the
Republican Party is leading the only active proposal in
Congress to remove Snake River dams, our colleague from Idaho,
Congressman Simpson.
While much of today's hearing will focus on unfinalized
leaked documents, I hope moving forward we can have a
discussion that acknowledges the historical trauma Indigenous
people have faced due to broken promises from our government.
Thankfully, mediation is being used as an alternative to
costly and lengthy litigation. That is a good thing. I look
forward to discussing serious solutions to modernize
infrastructure, diversify our energy sources, and restore
ecosystems across the basin, especially as climate change
presents new management challenges in these areas.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. Bentz. I now recognize the Full Committee Chairman, Mr.
Westerman, for his opening statement.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. BRUCE WESTERMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS
Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Chairman Bentz. Good afternoon,
everyone, and I want to thank the witnesses for their
participation this afternoon and to the Members for their
attention to this critical issue. And it is obvious, with the
number of Members that asked to waive on to today's hearing,
that there is a lot of interest in this hearing.
Today's hearing is this Committee's latest effort to
highlight the importance of hydropower to the United States'
electric grid and the Biden administration's ongoing efforts to
dismantle critical parts of our infrastructure. And let me
repeat that again: the Biden administration's ongoing efforts
to dismantle critical parts of our infrastructure.
Who would have thought the administration that talks about
green power and touts green energy would be pushing to tear out
over 3,000 megawatts of the cleanest, greenest energy that we
can produce, megawatts and infrastructure that is already paid
for, when you look at the impact of these dams, compared to the
number of windmills and solar farms it would take to produce
this energy, the reliability of these dams, it is just mind
boggling that we are actually having to have a hearing to talk
about pushing back on the administration that is trying to tear
out green energy from the Pacific Northwest.
Over the summer, Congressman Bentz led a Subcommittee field
hearing in Richland, Washington, where people described the
real consequences of dam removal. They talked about the
critical role the lower Snake River dams play in sustaining
industries like trade and agriculture. These industries are
vital to the Pacific Northwest economy.
The four lower Snake River dams are part of the 31
facilities that make up the Bonneville Power Administration's
hydroelectric fleet. They play a vital role in providing
carbon-free, reliable, and affordable electricity for customers
across the Western United States. The hydropower generated by
these dams makes up more than 80 percent of the Bonneville
Power Administration's fuel mix, helping it to deliver
electricity to more than 3 million people in the Northwest.
Importantly, in addition to serving its 3 million
customers, the flexibility of Bonneville's power generation
allows hydropower to frequently be used across the entire West,
including in California, during emergencies caused by weather
or grid instability. The importance of this resource,
particularly at a time where so many Americans are dealing with
the impacts of the higher cost of living, the importance cannot
be overstated.
Unfortunately, over the last few years, this incredibly
valuable public infrastructure has been placed under great
threat. In a scheme that circumvents the role of Congress, and
by design avoids public participation, the Biden administration
ginned up a process that advances its preferred political
outcome: the removal of these four dams and the expenditure of
millions, if not billions, of rate and taxpayer dollars on
partisan causes over sound science and real-world impacts.
Organizations representing Bonneville's customers across
the region, those of other impacted sectors, and members of our
states' delegations have repeatedly tried to bring their
concerns to the table. Inexcusably, they have been stonewalled
by Biden administration officials here in Washington. And as we
sit here, according to the leaked secret mediation document
which most of you have, the Biden administration is preparing
to aggressively move toward breaching four of the Snake River
dams.
Let me be clear. Dam removal would cause tremendous harm to
the Pacific Northwest. Our witnesses here today will talk about
the flawed process that the Administration has deployed and the
impacts that the decision to breach would have in coming years
and decades.
Rather than rushing a decision through a closed-door
process, a totally opaque, self-dealing process, the Biden
administration must listen to every point of view on this
issue, use the best available and most up-to-date science, and
take actions that recognize the vital role that the lower Snake
River dams play in the Pacific Northwest.
We look forward to hearing testimony from our witnesses and
our Members on this important issue, and I yield back.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will now introduce our
witnesses.
Mr. Neil Maunu, Executive Director of the Pacific Northwest
Waterways Association in Portland, Oregon; Ms. Humaira
Falkenberg, Power Resources Manager at Pacific County PUD in
Raymond, Washington; Mr. Lindsay Slater, Vice President of
Government Relations with Trout Unlimited in Arlington,
Virginia; and Mr. Scott Simms, CEO and Executive Director for
the Public Power Council in Portland, Oregon.
Let me remind the witnesses that under Committee Rules, you
must limit your oral statements to 5 minutes, but your entire
statement will appear in the hearing record.
To begin your testimony, please press the ``talk'' button
on the microphone. We use timing lights. When you begin, the
light will turn green. When you have 1 minute remaining, the
light will turn yellow. And at the end of the 5 minutes, the
light will turn red, and I will ask you to please end your
statement.
I will also allow all witnesses to testify before Member
questioning.
I now recognize Mr. Maunu for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF NEIL MAUNU, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PACIFIC NORTHWEST
WATERWAYS ASSOCIATION, PORTLAND, OREGON
Mr. Maunu. Good morning, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member
Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today.
My name is Neil Maunu. I serve as the Executive Director of
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, or the PNWA. PNWA
is a non-profit, non-partisan trade association that advocates
for Federal policies and funding supporting regional economic
development. We represent ports, public utilities, farmers,
forest products, producers, and public agencies that support
navigation, energy, trade, and transportation.
A subset of PNWA membership, the Inland Ports and
Navigation Group, or IPNG, has been a defendant intervenor in
the decades-long litigation surrounding salmon and 14 Federal
dams in four Northwest states. That litigation has been under a
stay since October 2021, during which time the litigants
engaged in a so-called mediation process led by the White House
Council on Environmental Quality and the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service, FMCS.
Early on, the mediation broke down into a series of
bilateral discussions between the U.S. Government defendants
and the plaintiffs, known as private caucuses. The subject
matter of private caucuses within the FMCS mediation process is
kept confidential to the participants therein, so the millions
of Northwest residents that we represent were effectively cut
out of any negotiations.
We sought to participate in good faith and provided
numerous documents outlining our concerns. Those documents are
attached to my written testimony, including several letters
raising process concerns, a scientific literature review
regarding the controversial concept of delayed mortality, and a
socioeconomic impact study regarding the devastating impacts to
the Pacific Northwest if the lower Snake River dams are
removed. None of these submissions appear to have had any
impact on the mediation process or its outcome.
The USG commitments document was shared with us in early
November, and this was the first time in nearly 18 months we
were presented with any substantive information. We have been
given a very brief opportunity to provide feedback on a plan
that intends to significantly impact the operation of 14 dams
across four states for the next 10 years, and proposes massive
new Federal programs and controversial dam breaching studies.
This mediation process has been the complete opposite of the
meaningful public involvement warranted for such a far-reaching
and impactful plan for our region and our nation.
We are frustrated. We have made it clear to CEQ, to FMCS,
and to anyone who will listen, that we are tired of not being
represented in this mediation process. We are tired of not
being able to take part in meaningful negotiations. But we
refuse to be sidelined. We could actually get behind a lot of
what is in this document, but the rest, the parts that were
negotiated in secret without proper stakeholder input, input
from those of us who live and work in this region, are
showstoppers.
This is a failed process. I have outlined many of our
primary concerns with the USG commitments document in my
written testimony, but I would like to highlight a few here.
First, the USG commitments relies on the fundamentally
flawed NOAA Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and
Steelhead Report. This unauthored report lacks the support of
the scientific community and directly contradicts the existing
NOAA biological opinion. They pursue an objective untethered to
any lawful standard and that lacks any legal foundation.
``Healthy and abundant salmon populations'' is a vague and
undefined policy objective that is not required by the ESA.
The USG commitments failed to address river navigation as a
critically impacted, congressionally-authorized purpose of the
current system. They failed to consider the carbon impacts of
transitioning from river navigation to roads and rail.
The USG commitments fail to ensure the many resilience
needs of stakeholders across the region, and threatens the most
disadvantaged populations.
Finally, the complexity of the proposed operational changes
in the commitment document's appendix B warrant a thorough
study of their impacts on river navigation at the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineer Research and Development Center prior to
implementation. Such a study was directed by the court in 2017
out of safety concerns.
A critical reassessment of this process is essential. The
USG commitments lack specificity, rely on flawed science, and
completely overlook the vital transportation, supply chain, and
resiliency concerns of our membership. We demand a seat at the
table. The CRSO BiOP and Record of Decision exemplified a sound
approach to navigating complex issues and diverse stakeholder
perspectives, and we advocate using that as a benchmark for
ensuring a fair and transparent process.
Beyond the immediate risks to river navigation,
transportation, and safety, the very livelihoods of the
hundreds of thousands reliant on this river system hang in the
balance.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am happy to
answer the Subcommittee's questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Maunu follows:]
Prepared Statement of Neil Maunu, Executive Director, Pacific Northwest
Waterways Association
Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members
of the Subcommittee; thank you for the opportunity to testify before
you today. My name is Neil Maunu. I serve as the Executive Director of
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, or PNWA. PNWA is a non-
profit, non-partisan trade association that advocates for federal
policies and funding supporting regional economic development. Founded
in 1934, our membership has grown to over 150 entities, including
ports, public utilities, farmers, forest products producers, and public
agencies that support navigation, energy, trade, transportation, and
economic development throughout the Pacific Northwest.
A subset of PNWA membership, the Inland Ports and Navigation Group,
or IPNG, has been a defendant-intervenor in the decades-long litigation
surrounding salmon and 14 federal dams in four Northwest states. That
litigation has been under a stay since October 2021, during which time
the litigants engaged in a so-called mediation process led by the White
House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the Federal Mediation
& Conciliation Service (FMCS). Early on, the mediation broke down into
a series of bilateral discussions between the U.S. Government
defendants and the plaintiffs known as Private Caucuses. The subject
matter of private caucuses within the FMCS mediation process is kept
confidential to the participants therein. The millions of Northwest
residents that we represent were effectively cut out of any
negotiations.
We sought to participate in good faith and provided numerous
documents outlining our concerns. Those documents are attached to my
written testimony including several letters raising process concerns, a
scientific literature review regarding the controversial concept of
delayed mortality, and a socio-economic impact study regarding the
devastating impacts to the Pacific Northwest if the Lower Snake River
Dams are removed. None of these submissions appeared to have had any
impact on the mediation process or its outcome.
The USG Commitments document was shared with us in early November.
It was the first time in nearly 18 months we were presented with any
substantive information. We have been given a very brief opportunity to
provide feedback on a plan that intends to significantly impact the
operation of 14 dams across four states for the next ten years, as well
as proposals for massive new federal programs, and controversial dam
breaching studies. This mediation process has been the complete
opposite of the meaningful public involvement warranted for such a far-
reaching and impactful plan for our region and nation.
Our response to the Commitments document is a letter outlining six
primary concerns:
First, the USG Commitments relies on the fundamentally
flawed NOAA ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and
Steelhead Report'' (NOAA Paper). This is an unauthored
report that lacks the support of the scientific community
and directly contradicts the existing NOAA Biological
Opinion. It is not consensus science regarding the four
Lower Snake River Dams and salmon.
The USG Commitments pursue an objective untethered to any
lawful standard, that is subjective, and that lacks any
legal foundation. ``Healthy and abundant'' salmon
populations is a vague and undefined policy objective that
is not required by the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
The USG Commitments fail to address river navigation as a
critically impacted Congressionally authorized purpose of
the federal projects and proposes only a paltry $750,000
for a study. Washington state alone is spending $5M on a
similar study, and the Murray-Inslee report released last
year recommended a $10M study to fully analyze what it
would take to replace transportation on the Snake River
with rail and trucks. The Commitments fail to consider the
carbon impacts of transitioning from river navigation to
roads and rail. Removing the Snake River locks would cause
diesel fuel consumption to increase by nearly 5 million
gallons per year as barges are replaced by less efficient
truck-to-rail shipments, dramatically increasing carbon
emissions (to the tune of over 1.25M tons per year)--this
is the equivalent of building one large coal-fired plant
every two to three years. Assuming that barged wheat simply
shifts to non-existent truck and rail, it would be
unmarketable in the global market due to cost--destroying a
generation-long way of life.
The USG Commitments fail to ensure the delivery of
affordable and reliable clean power as pledged by the USG
in their mediation guiding principles from August 2022.
While creating renewable tribal energy projects may be
laudable, they cannot replace the reliability and
pollution-free benefits of the four Lower Snake River Dams.
Removing carbon-free hydropower in a time of increasing
demand for renewable power generation is nonsensical.
The USG Commitments fail to ensure the many resilience
needs of stakeholders across the region. The loss of clean,
reliable, and responsive hydropower and the removal of one
of only three transportation modalities (the cleanest among
them) available to support the region's economy cannot meet
the resiliency needs of impacted communities. We presented
a socio-economic study that found removing the four lower
Snake River Dams could jeopardize over 7,000 family farms.
This proposal threatens the region's most disadvantaged
populations and flies in the face of any concept of
community resilience.
The complexity of the proposed operational changes in the
Commitments document's Appendix B warrant a thorough study
of their potential impacts on river navigation at the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers' Engineer, Research and Development
Center (ERDC) in Vicksburg, MS prior to implementation, and
a new NEPA analysis. Such a study was directed by the Court
in 2017 out of safety concerns when operational impacts
were to be adopted.
A critical reassessment of this process is essential. The USG
Commitments lack specificity, rely on flawed and singular scientific
data, and conspicuously overlook the vital concerns of our membership,
particularly in areas of transportation, supply chain, and resilience.
Active inclusion in the decision-making process is imperative; we
demand a seat at the table. The CRSO BiOP and Record of Decision
exemplified a sound approach to navigating complex issues and diverse
stakeholder perspectives, and we advocate using it as the benchmark for
ensuring a fair and transparent process. Beyond the immediate risks to
river transportation, navigation, and safety, the very livelihoods of
the thousands reliant on this river system hang in the balance.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I'd be most pleased to
answer the subcommittee's questions.
*****
The following documents were submitted as supplements to Mr.
Maunu's testimony.
July 3, 2023
Council on Environmental Quality
Docket No. CEQ-2023-0002 via Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov
Cover Letter for Comments on Columbia River Salmon & Other Native Fish
Request for Information
To Whom It May Concern:
The Inland Ports & Navigation Group (IPNG), a defendant intervenor in
the litigation underlying the current mediation process, is pleased to
submit the following comments regarding Columbia River Salmon & Other
Native Fish. IPNG is comprised of ports, farmers, river pilots,
transportation companies, terminals and water resources stakeholders
who work to balance economic prosperity with environmental stewardship.
They strive to protect inland navigation, hydropower, irrigation on the
Columbia Snake River System (CSRS), while supporting a healthy
environment and robust fish runs in the Northwest. IPNG is a subset of
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA), a broad regional
trade group representing over 150 members from Oregon, Washington, and
Idaho.
The restoration of Columbia River Salmon & Other Native Fish can and
must be achieved while also maintaining the maritime transportation,
irrigation, hydropower, and other benefits provided by the current
CSRS. The removal of the 4 lower Snake River dams (LSRD) is neither
warranted nor necessary to recover ESA-listed salmon species. A
comprehensive Columbia Basin-wide approach to salmon recovery including
tributary habitat access and restoration, estuarine habitat
restoration, predation and competitor control, hatchery improvements,
reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph dams, harvest
reductions, ocean life stage research, minimization & mitigation of
non-point source pollution, and continued fish passage improvements at
all CSRS projects, will provide more benefits to salmon at a lower cost
than LSRD removal. As outlined in greater detail in the attachment, a
coordinated effort across these areas will cost less than removal of
the 4 LSRD, provide more benefit to salmon, and result in less adverse
socioeconomic impacts.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments.
Sincerely Yours,
Heather Stebbings,
Inland Ports & Navigation Group
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association
*****
July 3, 2023
Council on Environmental Quality
Docket No. CEQ-2023-0002 via Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov
Extended Comments on Columbia River Salmon & Other Native Fish Request
for Information
To Whom It May Concern:
As mentioned in our cover letter, the restoration of Columbia River
Salmon & Other Native Fish can and must be achieved while also
maintaining the maritime transportation, irrigation, hydropower and
other benefits provided by the current Columbia Snake River System
(CSRS). The removal of the 4 lower Snake River dams (LSRD) is neither
warranted nor necessary to recover ESA-listed salmon species. The
principal argument for the removal of the LSRD is the theory of delayed
mortality, which posits that fish passing through the CSRS dams are
``beat up'' when they enter the estuary and the ocean. The science
associated with this theory is unproven and widely disputed.
A comprehensive Columbia Basin-wide approach to salmon recovery
including tributary habitat access and restoration, estuarine habitat
restoration, predation and competitor control, hatchery improvements,
reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph dams, harvest
reductions, ocean life stage research, minimization & mitigation of
non-point source pollution, and continued fish passage improvements at
all CSRS projects, will provide more benefits to salmon while
maintaining the current federally authorizes purposes of the projects,
as well as the greater benefits the dams provide for the region and the
nation.
The areas where we believe the biggest gains could be made for
salmon without impacting the benefits of the CSRS include:
Tributary Habitat Access and Restoration
Tributary habitat restoration plays a crucial role in the recovery
of salmon populations in the CSRS. Tributaries serve as critical
spawning and rearing grounds for salmon. They provide important
features such as clean gravel beds for spawning, cool and clean water
for incubation and growth, and sheltered areas for young salmon to
develop before heading out to the ocean.
Land use patterns have significantly impacted the tributary
habitats basin-wide in the CSRS, resulting in blocked access to
tributaries, degradation of riparian zones, and increased water
pollution.
Restoring tributary habitat is crucial for the recovery of salmon
populations as it:
Provides the necessary conditions for successful salmon
spawning and reproduction. By restoring gravel beds,
creating off-channel habitats, and improving water quality,
tributary restoration projects enhance the survival and
productivity of salmon populations;
Contributes to the overall resilience of salmon
populations. By increasing the availability of diverse and
high-quality habitats, salmon have more options for
spawning and rearing, which can buffer against
environmental variability and improve their chances of
survival; and
Can help address the key limiting factors that salmon face
in their life cycle. For example, culvert repair,
replacement, or removal can restore tributary flows and
connectivity, enabling salmon to access essential spawning
and rearing areas that were previously blocked.
Tributary habitat restoration can have broader ecological benefits
beyond salmon recovery. Restoring riparian vegetation and improving
water quality can enhance overall ecosystem health, benefiting other
fish species, aquatic organisms, and wildlife that depend on healthy
river systems.
Tributary habitat restoration efforts can create the necessary
conditions for successful salmon reproduction, enhance population
resilience, and contribute to the overall health of the ecosystem.
Federal programs to help protect and restore tributary habitat such
as the USDOT Culvert Repair, Replacement, & Removal Grant Program, USDA
Riparian Buffer Program, suite of applicable USFWS Programs (such as
but not limited to the Ecosystem Restoration Program, National Fish
Habitat Partnership, Wildlife & Sportfish Restoration Program, Pacific
Region Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Program), and NOAA Habitat
Conservation Program should receive increased funding to better protect
tributary habitat. A coordinated regional effort could be made to bring
these dollars to the Columbia River basin.
Estuarine Habitat Restoration
Restoring the estuary and other estuarine habitats is important for
salmon recovery because they:
Serve as a transition zone between freshwater and marine
environments, providing critical nursery areas for young
salmon. These habitats offer food resources, shelter, and
protection from predators, enabling juvenile salmon to grow
and develop before entering the open ocean. By restoring
estuarine habitats, we can ensure the availability of
suitable rearing areas, increasing the survival rates of
juvenile salmon and bolstering their overall population
numbers.
Act as crucial stopover sites during the migration of
adult salmon. Adult salmon returning from the ocean to
their natal rivers rely on these habitats to rest and
regain energy before continuing their journey upstream to
spawn. The restoration of estuarine habitats ensures that
these resting areas are preserved and maintained, allowing
adult salmon to successfully complete their migration and
reproduce; and
Play a significant role in the ecological connectivity of
the Columbia Snake River System. They provide a link
between upstream and downstream habitats, facilitating the
movement of salmon populations and maintaining genetic
diversity. Restoring estuarine habitats allows for natural
processes and connections within the ecosystem, supporting
the long-term viability of salmon populations.
By restoring these critical habitats, we provide essential rearing
areas for juvenile salmon, resting sites for adult salmon during
migration, and facilitate the ecological connectivity of the entire
system. It is a crucial component of comprehensive efforts to restore
and conserve salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River System
Federal programs to protect and restore the estuary and estuarine
habitats such as the EPA National Estuary Program and NOAA National
Estuarine Research Reserve System and Habitat Conservation Program,
including Coastal Habitat Restoration and Resilience Grants, should
receive increased funding.
Predation and Competitor Control
Sea Lions: According to the Oregon Department of Fish &
Wildlife, sea lions consume significant numbers of fish--up
to 44 percent of the Columbia River spring Chinook run, for
example. The 2023 forecast for upriver spring Chinook is
198,600 fish according to the Washington Department of Fish
& Wildlife. 44% of that is 87,384 fish consumed by sea
lions. While the sex ratio of returning salmon can be
highly variable, they average 50% females. Therefore, sea
lions will eliminate nearly 44,000 egg-producing female
spring Chinook in 2023. Spring Chinook females lay between
1,500-10,000 eggs with an average of 2,500, sea lions
therefore remove 110 million eggs of spring Chinook. 8% of
these eggs survive to smolts that begin their migration to
the ocean for a total of nearly 9 million juvenile salmon
heading downriver if not for sea lions.
In addition, the California sea lion population along the West
Coast (the `U.S. Stock') is no longer considered at risk
and has likely reached its ``optimum sustainable
population. Similarly, the Eastern stock of Steller sea
lion stock is considered healthy and has no special
designation under ESA or MMPA. The population has been
growing annually since the 1980s and the most recent
population estimate was 52,139 non-pups and 19,423 pups.
NOAA has concluded that the stock is likely at its Optimum
Sustainable Population. Like California sea lions, the
Steller sea lions that migrate upriver into the Columbia
Basin are all male. Lethal removal of salmon-predating sea
lions in the Columbia River occurs but should be a higher
priority for our salmon recovery efforts. In 2020, the
States and Tribes estimated that there may be up to 290
California sea lions and 130 Steller sea lions predating on
salmon in the Columbia Basin, which is less than 0.1
percent and 0.18 percent of their total populations,
respectively. Removal of these individuals will have no
impact on the population health of either sea lion species
and should therefore be expanded with increased funding and
implementation.
Avian Predation: Double-breasted cormorants, Caspian terns
and other birds consume considerable numbers of juvenile
salmon. Evans et al. (2019) estimated that avian predation
accounts for 42% to 70% of total steelhead smolt mortality,
suggesting that more steelhead were consumed by avian
predators than died from all other mortality sources
combined. Results indicate that avian predation, although
not the original cause of steelhead declines in the basin,
is now a factor limiting the survival of upper Columbia
River steelhead.
In December 2020, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
established a new permit for States and Tribes for the
management of double-crested cormorants. The new permit
authorizes specific take activities to protect threatened
and endangered species from impacts from double-crested
cormorants. This permit should be used to its fullest
extent by the States and Tribes and should be expanded to
include the take of Caspian terns or other avian predators
of salmonids;
Piscine Predation: Non-native species such as the Northern
Pike Minnow are known to consume juvenile salmon. Since
they are a non-native species to the Pacific Northwest,
management actions seeking their extirpation should be
maximally implemented; and
Niche Competition: In addition to direct predation, non-
native species such as Smallmouth bass, Largemouth bass,
Walleye, Northern pike, Brook trout, Brown trout, Channel
catfish, American shad, striped bass all compete for
habitat and food with native salmon species. As mentioned
above, given these species non-native status, management
actions seeking their extirpation should be maximally
implemented.
Hatchery Improvements
Improving hatchery operations is of crucial importance to the
recovery of salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River System.
However, the traditional methods used in hatcheries have sometimes
inadvertently contributed to the decline of wild salmon populations.
Hatchery fish, bred and raised in captivity, often exhibit reduced
genetic diversity, decreased fitness, and altered behavior compared to
their wild counterparts. These factors can negatively impact the
survival and reproductive success of hatchery-produced salmon.
To address these issues, it is essential to focus on improving
hatchery operations. Two key aspects contribute to the success of
hatchery programs in supporting salmon recovery:
Genetic Diversity: Maintaining and enhancing genetic
diversity in hatchery fish is critical. By incorporating
genetic management practices such as incorporating wild
broodstock, minimizing inbreeding, and using local fish
populations, hatchery-produced salmon can have a higher
chance of survival and adaptation to the natural
environment.
Behavior and Fitness: Hatchery fish often lack the natural
behaviors and survival skills necessary for life in the
wild. Hatchery reform efforts aim to mimic natural
conditions and provide fish with opportunities for natural
selection and imprinting on their natal streams. By
incorporating environmental enrichment, reducing hatchery-
related domestication, and implementing programs that
promote natural selection, the fitness and survival
capabilities of hatchery-produced salmon can be improved.
By addressing genetic concerns, enhancing natural behaviors and
fitness, hatcheries can play a more effective role in supporting the
restoration and long-term sustainability of salmon populations in the
region.
Reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief Joseph
The reintroduction of salmon above Grand Coulee Dam and Chief
Joseph Dam holds significant importance for the overall recovery of
salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River System. The construction
of Grand Coulee Dam in the 1930s and Chief Joseph Dam in the 1950s
blocked access to vast stretches of historical spawning grounds and
disrupted the natural life cycle of salmon.
Reintroducing salmon above these dams will:
Allow salmon to regain access to their historical spawning
grounds. By reintroducing salmon, we can restore their
natural migration patterns and provide them with the
opportunity to reproduce in the upper reaches of the
rivers. This is particularly significant as the upper
tributaries often offer more pristine and suitable habitats
for spawning and rearing;
Help restore ecological balance within the Columbia Snake
River System. Salmon play a vital role in nutrient cycling,
as their carcasses provide essential nutrients to the
surrounding ecosystem when they return from the ocean and
spawn. The absence of these nutrients in recent decades has
had cascading effects on other species, including birds,
mammals, and even plants. Reintroducing salmon would
revitalize this nutrient cycle, benefiting the entire
ecosystem and promoting the recovery of other species.
Furthermore, the reintroduction of salmon above the dams has
cultural and socioeconomic significance. Indigenous communities in the
region have long relied on salmon for sustenance, ceremonial practices,
and cultural identity. The decline in salmon populations has
disproportionately affected these communities, undermining their
traditional ways of life. By restoring access to ancestral spawning
grounds, we honor their rights and contribute to the preservation of
their cultural heritage.
Economically, the return of healthy salmon populations can have a
positive impact on the fishing industry and tourism in the region.
Salmon fishing has been a significant economic driver, attracting
anglers and tourists from around the world. The revival of salmon runs
would not only benefit commercial and recreational fishing but also
stimulate local economies through increased tourism and related
industries.
Harvest Reductions
The reduction and/or elimination of both commercial and
recreational non-tribal salmon harvests in the short-term with
compensation to fishermen for their lost harvest opportunity would be
far more cost effective and non-irrevocable when compared to removal of
the 4 LSRD. Commercial fishermen could be compensated in cash while
recreational fishermen might be compensated with cash, increased
harvest opportunities on other non-salmonid stocks, or increased
bounties on non-native fish. While dam removal would irrevocably
eliminate maritime transportation and alter agricultural supply chains,
forgone harvest opportunities could be restored upon salmon recovery.
Ocean Life Stage Research
The ocean life stage of salmon is a critical and complex phase yet
it remains relatively understudied compared to other stages such as
spawning and freshwater rearing. There is an urgent need for increased
research on the ocean life stage of salmon due to several important
reasons.
The ocean life stage represents a significant part of salmon's
overall life cycle. During this stage, salmon undergo remarkable
physiological changes, including rapid growth, adaptation to saltwater,
and preparation for their return to freshwater for spawning.
Understanding the factors that influence salmon survival, growth, and
behavior in the ocean is therefore vital.
The ocean life stage of salmon is increasingly impacted by various
environmental stressors and human activities. Climate change, ocean
acidification, pollution, habitat degradation, and overfishing are
among the factors that can significantly affect salmon populations
during their time in the Pacific Ocean. Robust research is necessary to
comprehend the specific effects of these stressors on salmon during
their oceanic journey and to develop effective conservation and
management strategies.
Advancements in technology and research methodologies present new
opportunities to study the ocean life stage of salmon. Techniques such
as acoustic telemetry, satellite tagging, genetic analysis, and remote
sensing provide unprecedented capabilities for tracking salmon
movements, identifying migration patterns, studying feeding habits, and
examining the impacts of environmental factors. Leveraging these
technological advancements can enhance our understanding of the oceanic
phase and inform evidence-based management practices.
Increased research on the ocean life stage of salmon is vital to
comprehend the ecological, physiological, and environmental dynamics
that shape their survival and population dynamics. By expanding our
knowledge of this critical life stage, we can improve salmon recovery
efforts.
Mitigation of Non-Point Source Pollution
The mitigation of non-point source pollution plays a crucial role
in the recovery of salmon populations in the Columbia Snake River
System. But unlike point source pollution, which originates from
identifiable and controllable sources, non-point source pollution is
challenging to pinpoint and regulate.
Salmon are highly sensitive to water quality. Excessive
sedimentation caused by non-point source pollution can smother salmon
eggs, suffocate aquatic vegetation, and hinder the ability of fish to
find food. Nutrient pollution can trigger harmful algal blooms,
creating low oxygen conditions that harm or kill salmon. Chemicals
released by all facets of modern life can directly impact salmon by
disrupting their reproductive systems, impairing their ability to
navigate, and increasing their vulnerability to diseases.
To achieve salmon recovery in the Columbia Snake River System, it
is crucial to address and mitigate non-point source pollution. This
requires implementing effective land and water management practices
that minimize the runoff of pollutants into water bodies. Much has
already been accomplished in agriculture with conservation practices in
such as the adoption of best management practices including
implementing buffer strips, cover crops, and precision application of
fertilizers and pesticides to reduce nutrient and sediment runoff and
protect water quality.
Some key strategies in other areas include:
Urban stormwater management: Implementing stormwater
management practices in urban areas, including green
infrastructure solutions such as rain gardens, permeable
pavement, and retention ponds. These measures help capture
and treat stormwater runoff, preventing pollutants from
entering streams and rivers.
Riparian zone restoration: Restoring and protecting
riparian zones, the areas of land along rivers and streams,
helps filter out pollutants, stabilize stream banks, and
provide shade and cover for salmon. This can be achieved
through tree planting initiatives and fencing off sensitive
areas from livestock.
Education and outreach: Raising awareness among
communities, landowners, and stakeholders about the impacts
of non-point source pollution on salmon and the importance
of implementing pollution reduction strategies. Providing
technical assistance and financial incentives can also
encourage voluntary adoption of mitigation practices.
By mitigating non-point source pollution, we can improve water
quality, enhance the resilience of salmon populations, and support
their recovery in the Columbia Snake River System
Continued Fish Passage Improvements at All CSRS Projects
The Corps of Engineers is currently installing fish friendly
turbines to units at Ice Harbor dam, and they are already seeing
improved juvenile passage. Future improvements are slated for McNary
and John Day dams. The Snake River projects, including Lower
Monumental, Little Goose and Lower Granite, are not anticipated to
receive new turbines for at least 20 years. We recommend prioritizing
fish friendly turbines at all of the CSRS projects, including Snake
River dams, in the near-term to ensure maximum passage at the projects
as quickly as possible.
Response to Key Questions for Input
Lower Snake River
What constitutes ``restoration'' of the Lower Snake River
and what steps should the Federal Government take to
restore the lower Snake River?
``Restoration'' of the lower Snake River to a free-flowing
river such as existed prior to the completion of the 4 LSRD is
neither warranted nor justified in terms of the economic and
community impacts it would impose on the region. The objective
under federal law should be to increase the abundance of salmon
species such that they can be delisted from the ESA while
maintaining the current authorized purposes and benefits of the
CSRS. In this context, ``restoration'' consists of:
+ Continued improvements of fish passage at projects while
maintaining their hydropower and transportation benefits;
+ Maximizing access to and the quality of spawning habitat
in the many tributaries feeding the lower Snake River;
+ Maximizing reductions in predators and non-native
competitive species;
+ Increased and more effective hatchery practices;
+ Mitigation of non-point source pollution where
appropriate; and
+ Water quality management while maintaining an operational
transportation channel and preserving sufficient reservoir
capacity to generate hydropower.
What considerations should inform the Federal Government's
approach to restoring the lower Snake River?
Most importantly, the economic, climate, food security, trade,
national security, and underserved & underrepresented community
impacts should be fully considered before defining and
achieving lower Snake River ``restoration''. IPNG reiterates
that the legal objective should not be some form of lower Snake
River restoration but rather the recovery of ESA-listed salmon
species to the point that they can be delisted.
What information should the Federal Government develop to
support discussions in the Northwest and in Congress on the
restoration of the Lower Snake River?
The following information should be robustly developed and
assessed:
+ A definition of ``restoration'' which maintains
hydropower, maritime transportation, irrigation and other
benefits of the CSRS;
+ The total cost of ``restoration'' for the federal
government, States, and Tribes;
+ The economic impact of ``restoration'' efforts to the
region and nation;
+ Any infrastructure needs and cost to mitigate for lost
CSRS benefits;
+ Impacts to BPA rate-payers, especially from underserved &
underrepresented communities;
+ Impacts to the agricultural community, including farm
workers;
+ Impacts to cities, counties and other municipalities,
including those related to reduction in land values, tax base
and municipal water supplies;
+ Climate cost of deconstruction of the any federally
authorized projects, as well as the costs to construct any new
infrastructure needed to replace services;
+ National security, food security, and international trade
implications; and
+ Net carbon emission changes from the ``restoration''
effort as well as associated mitigation measures for lost CSRS
benefits.
Upper Columbia River
What considerations should inform the Federal Government's
approach to supporting the Upper Columbia River Tribes'
reintroduction plan?
Reintroduction of salmonids, provided such are certain to be
non-listed and non-listable species, is an appropriate and
necessary step to aid in CSRS salmon recovery and to assist the
U.S. in fulfilling its obligations to the Upper Columbia River
Tribes. That said, the following considerations should inform
reintroduction:
+ As stated, the need for reintroduced species to be non-
listed and non-listable under the ESA;
+ The cost of up- and down-river fish passage at projects;
+ The implications of LSRD removal for habitat access and
restoration in the Upper Columbia; and
+ The role of hatchery production.
Funding
What steps should the Federal Government take in response
to this commitment (actions and funding to address
unmitigated Tribal needs, avoiding future issues with
respect to creating inequities, and actions supporting
salmon & other fisheries and fish & wildlife programs and
infrastructure)?
What considerations should inform the Federal Government's
approach to funding and actions to restore fish populations
throughout the Columbia River Basin?
As stated above, the Federal Government should be implementing
a comprehensive Columbia Basin-wide approach to salmon
including tributary habitat access and restoration, estuarine
habitat restoration, predation and competitor control, hatchery
improvements, reintroduction above Grand Coulee and Chief
Joseph, harvest reductions, ocean life stage research,
minimization & mitigation of non-point source pollution, and
continued fish passage improvements at all CSRS projects while
also maintaining the hydropower, maritime transportation, and
other benefits provided by the current CSRS.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments.
Sincerely,
Heather Stebbings,
Inland Ports & Navigation Group (IPNG)
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA)
*****
March 28, 2023
Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary
U.S. Department of Agriculture
1400 Independence Ave., S.W.
Washington, DC 20250
Dear Secretary Vilsack:
We write to you today on behalf wheat farmers and agricultural
producers to voice our concerns with the current state of the mediation
regarding the Federal Columbia River Power System, which includes
irrigation activity and barge transport through the dams on the
Columbia Snake River System (CSRS). As you may be aware, the decades-
long litigation regarding Pacific Northwest salmon in the Columbia
River Basin is currently under a stay agreement until August 31, 2023.
During the stay, the primary parties to the litigation entered a
mediation process led by the White House Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) and the Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service (FMCS)
in the hopes of reaching a settlement. Many of us are members of an
organization that has served as a defendant intervenor since the
beginning of this litigation nearly 30 years ago, and we have been
active participants in the case on the side of the United States
Government (USG).
As part of the stay agreement, the federal government committed to
``exploring'' removal of the four Lower Snake River dams (LSRD). Prior
to the last several months, the USG has never supported a position of
dam breaching; however, we are increasingly concerned that the USG
position is shifting to support a dam breaching action that would
completely devastate the Pacific Northwest agricultural community. Dam
breaching would eliminate irrigation from the pool behind Ice Harbor
Dam and would remove barge access for our farmers, requiring them to
turn to either rail or truck to move their product. As you well know,
neither form of transportation is as safe, efficient, or
environmentally friendly as barge navigation.
During the last several years the U.S. rail system has faced
significant congestion and supply chain bottlenecks. The Columbia Snake
River System moves more than 60 percent of the nation's wheat, as well
as a large amount of corn, soybeans, lumber products, and crop inputs--
with harvested crops coming to the Pacific Northwest from as far as the
Midwest via rail. Eliminating barging as an option for our Northwest
goods would increase demand on limited Class 1 railroad capacity and
exacerbate an already tenuous supply-chain balance across all cargo
classes. This means further unpredictability for intermodal cargo,
energy products, and agricultural movements. Additionally, the
logistics of expanding rail access is not feasible in our Snake and
Columbia River corridors due to the geographical landscape, cultural
and historic land importance, and strict regulatory processes.
It is important to note that barging also provides an important
competitive check on the rail system. Losing barge access would give
railroads the power to raise rates further, which will affect the long-
term competitiveness of U.S. wheat exports moving to global markets. As
we saw in the April 2021 U.S. International Trade Commission report on,
``The Effects of Rail Prices on U.S. Agricultural Exports'' higher rail
transportation costs are often transferred to the producer, reducing
the incomes and profit margins of producers and negatively affecting
the competitiveness of U.S. grain exports. The report estimates that
rail transportation may account for more than 40 percent of the price
of wheat.
These types of rising costs ultimately put small family farms out
of business. As you very much understand, farmers are already facing
significant increases in the cost of production. Fertilizer prices
alone are up 12 percent in the last year, and while some operations can
absorb increased costs, at the end of the day, smaller and family farms
would bear the brunt of these increases and could be forced to shut
down altogether. Increased costs to farmers due to a dam breaching
scenario would only intensify the challenges we already face.
It is also important to note the role that the Snake River dams
play in irrigating more than 50,000 acres of Northwest crops. The
Columbia Basin is one of the most productive agricultural areas in the
world. The variety of crops we produce is second only to California.
Washington State alone produces more potatoes, apples, and corn per
acre than any other state in the nation.
Removing acres irrigated by Ice Harbor Dam, located on the Snake
River, would eliminate enough apples to feed 18 million people, sweet
corn to feed 19 million people, potatoes to feed 6.4 million people,
and so on. The farms irrigated by this pool directly and indirectly
drive up to $2 billion in annual economic value and support more than
10,000 jobs. You cannot measure the economic impact of dam removal
solely on the impact to our irrigated land value. This has been done in
the past, but land value is just a tiny fraction of the overall impact.
It does not capture the devastating effect removal of these dams would
have on the overall American economy and food security. In other words,
any actions taken that impact these farms will have a reverberating
effect on millions of Americans, not just the local community that
produces the food.
We strongly request that you engage on this issue, to provide an
added USG perspective at the table to CEQ, the FMCS and others. Our
concern as deeply affected stakeholders is the failure of USG to take
the full regional and national agricultural and economic impacts of a
pro-dam removal position into account. Despite our concerns, and many
others being raised repeatedly throughout this process, the USG
participants appear to be looking at this issue solely through the lens
of salmon recovery and not through the greater public policy objectives
of the Biden Administration such as food security, clean energy, de-
carbonized transportation, infrastructure capabilities, environmental
justice, or international trade objectives.
We therefore respectfully ask that you consider and respond to the
following questions regarding LSRD removal in as timely a manner as
possible. This process is moving very quickly, and it is important for
us to understand the full position of the USG, including the Department
of Agriculture, on this issue.
The removal of the 4 LSRD will inevitably result in a
significant reduction in agricultural production in the
Pacific Northwest (PNW) from both irrigated and unirrigated
lands due to the loss of irrigation water as well as supply
chain disruptions and cost increases. How are such outcomes
consistent with USDA's priority to ``work every day to
strengthen the American agricultural economy'' (https://
www.usda.gov/farming)?
The removal of the 4 LSRD will by definition eliminate
barging as a transportation mode for moving PNW grain into
the global supply chain, forcing growers to depend on
increased rail and trucking. How is such an outcome
consistent with USDA's stated priority, ``to transform our
nation's food system to create more options for producers
and consumers and improve the resiliency of our food supply
chain'' (https://www.usda.gov/priorities)?
The Columbia Snake River System trade gateway transports
60 percent of the nation's wheat export and is part of the
fully integrated inland and deep draft transportation
system. An action such as dam breaching would have rippling
effects throughout this trade gateway, likely resulting in
export reductions. How is such a reduction consistent with
USDA's stated priority of ``Creating More, Better, and New
Market Opportunities'' including overseas markets (https://
www.usda.gov/priorities)?
How is such a reduction in food exports consistent with
The Joint Declaration of Agriculture Exporters at the June
2022 Summit of the Americas Agricultural Producers stating
that one-third of the world's food is produced in the
Americas, and the current global food crisis is an
opportunity and responsibility for the region to step up to
supply a greater share of the world's commodities and the
United States commitment during the Summit to work together
to increase food production for export, increase fertilizer
production and transportation, and to improve agriculture
efficiency through technical solutions and information
exchanges?
In closing, we feel it is important to also recognize that we
strongly consider ourselves good stewards of the environment. We
support broader salmon recovery throughout the Columbia River basin and
are actively looking for areas where we can support science-based
efforts by the states, federal government, and Tribal Nations. Our
Lower Snake River dams have state-of-the-art fish passages, and the
Army Corps is continuously looking at how they can improve their
efforts to get the salmon returns desired by so many in our region. We
support those efforts and many more throughout the basin, but we cannot
support the removal of the Snake River dams and this critical trade
gateway for the region's and nations agricultural products.
Thank you for your leadership on our issues in so many areas, and
for considering these questions going forward. We look forward to your
response.
Sincerely,
AgriNorthwest Oregon Farm Bureau
Almota Elevator Company Oregon Wheat Growers League
Columbia Grain Pacific Northwest Farmers
Cooperative
Highline Grain Growers Pomeroy Grain Growers
Idaho Farm Bureau TEMCO
Lewis and Clark Terminal
Association The McGregor Company
McGregor Land and Livestock United Grain Corporation
Mid Columbia Producers Washington Association of Wheat
Growers
Montana Grain Growers
Association Washington Farm Bureau
Morrow County Grain Growers Washington Grain Commission
Northwest Grain Growers Washington State Potato
Commission
*****
April 19, 2023
Hon. Pete Buttigieg, Secretary
U.S. Department of Transportation
West Building
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, 9th Floor
Washington, DC 20590-9898
Dear Secretary Buttigieg:
As you may be aware, the decades-long litigation regarding Pacific
Northwest salmon in the Columbia Snake River System is currently under
a stay agreement until August 31, 2023. During the stay, the primary
parties to the litigation have entered into a mediation process led by
the Federal Mediation & Conciliation Service (FMCS) in hopes of
reaching a settlement. We write on behalf of the defendant intervenors,
whose members include ports throughout Oregon, Washington, and Idaho,
consumer-owned utilities, farmers, s, transportation companies,
terminals, and water resources stakeholders. The defendant intervenors
entered the litigation on the side of the United States Government
(USG) but were excluded from all negotiations leading up to the stay
agreement. Nevertheless, we have remained as engaged as possible during
the mediation process, although our concerns have not been prioritized
to date.
The primary topic of discussion throughout the mediation has been
the removal of the four Lower Snake River Dams (LSRD). While this
proposal lacks consensus, it remains a topic of great consideration in
this process, and we understand may be advocated for by elements of the
USG. The removal of the LSRD would eliminate barging on the Columbia
Snake River System (CSRS), requiring its replacement by rail and truck.
As deeply affected stakeholders, our concern is the apparent failure of
the USG to take freight transportation issues into consideration in any
meaningful way. These issues include replacement infrastructure
feasibility and cost, carbon and other pollution impacts resulting from
the required mode shift, shipping rate impacts on agricultural
producers and suppliers, and the impacts on underserved and
underrepresented communities.
The replacement of barging would require a substantial expansion of
road and rail infrastructure, the scope and scale of which has not been
fully calculated but would most certainly include rail line extensions
and expansion, the addition of railcar capacity, road expansion and
extension, and substantial bridge modifications over the CSRS. There
are real concerns regarding the geographic/topographic feasibility of
such infrastructure projects in areas such as the Columbia River Gorge
and the Snake River Canyon. There are also serious concerns regarding
the political feasibility of such projects given state and federal
permitting processes such as the National Environmental Policy Act.
We are particularly concerned that the developing USG mediation
position stands in contradiction with other Administration policy
objectives. For example, in February the Administration released its
Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization.\1\ That Blueprint notes
in Figure B (Page 5) and elsewhere that maritime transportation
(including river barging) accounts for only 3% of transportation-
related emissions and in Figure 6 (Page 43) that maritime
transportation has the lowest emissions per ton mile for freight. The
Blueprint calls for actions before 2030 (Pages 7, 78) to ``provide
incentives to support greater use of efficient travel modes and
vehicles . . .'' (underline added). Given that maritime movement of
freight is the most efficient mode of transportation we fail to
understand how removal of the 4 LSRD could be consistent with this
Blueprint.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/climate-and-
sustainability/us-national-blueprint-transportation-decarbonization
Even if a shift from barge to rail and truck were feasible,
increased reliance on truck and rail will result in an increase of 23.8
million miles of travel per year on county, state, and federal
highways, increasing net transportation costs substantially.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ National Transportation Impacts & Regional Economic Impacts
Caused by Breaching Lower Snake River Dams. January 2020.
www.fcsgroup.com Contracted by Pacific Northwest Waterways Association.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the impacts of such a shift are that:
Total truck transit times would increase by at least
408,262 hours per year;
The expanded trucking activity will increase fuel costs,
highway maintenance costs, terminal facility and
maintenance costs, driver time, and vehicle maintenance
costs, to the tune of $63.6 million per year;
The shift in ton-miles from barge to rail and truck will
increase fuel consumption by 4.67 million gallons per year,
thereby reducing our nation's ability to achieve energy
independence; and
Increased transportation and storage costs will put more
than 1,100 farms at risk of bankruptcy.
Shifting commodity flows from barge to truck and rail will be bad
for the environment. Annual emissions will increase as follows:
860,000 additional tons of CO2 per year;
306.5 additional tons of NOx per year;
7.5 additional tons of PM per year;
69.7 additional tons of CO per year; and
7 additional tons of VOC per year.
These increased emissions would be equivalent to cumulative impact
of the Boardman coal-fired power plant every 5-6 years. The region has
made the collective decision to close the Boardman plant because it
generates 4.6 million tons of CO2 annually. Removing the Snake River
dams would reverse the environmental progress associated with its
closure. It would also have an environmental impact equivalent to:
Adding 90,365 standard size homes;
Adding 181,889 passenger cars; or
Removing 6,927 acres through deforestation.
Such infrastructure projects commonly adversely impact low-income
and other underserved/unrepresented communities residing adjacent or in
close proximity to such projects. These communities suffer during land
acquisition and construction of new projects as well as from exposure
to increased pollutants from exhaust emissions, tire wear, and other
environmental exposures. In addition, the agricultural impacts outlined
above will not only impact landowners but also their workers, the
majority of whom are Hispanic. Tribal treaty rights and environmental
justice for Native Americans are crucially important, but the impacts
on other underserved/underrepresented communities must also be taken
into account. We therefore urge DOT and the mediation participants to
engage with the White House Environmental Justice Advisory Council
(https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/white-house-
environmental-justice-advisory-council/) to assess the full suite of
environmental justice concerns related to LSRD removal.
We believe it is imperative that DOT lean into the mediation
process, as the process appears to be operating in a vacuum separate
from broader public policy objectives such as these transportation
issues as well as other issues like clean energy, environmental justice
concerns, agricultural impacts, international trade objectives, and
even national security concerns. Thank you.
Sincerely Yours,
The McGregor Company Diversified Marine, Inc
Great Northwest Transport Port of Longview
Tidewater Port of Whitman
Shaver Transportation Port of Clarkston
Port of Lewiston Port of Benton
Port of Woodland Port of Walla Walla
Columbia River Towboat
Association Port of Pasco
*****
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
.epsThe full document is available for viewing at:
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II13/20231212/116632/HHRG-
118-II13-20231212-SD009.pdf
*****
REGIONAL & NATIONAL IMPACTS TRIGGERED BY LSRD BREACHING
QUICK SUMMARY OF TRANSPORTATION, CLIMATE AND SOCIAL JUSTICE CONCERNS
Introduction
LSR dam breaching would have detrimental economic, climate and
social justice impacts for local governments, communities, property
owners, farmers and businesses in Washington, Oregon and Idaho.
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association contracted with FCS GROUP
(financial and economic consultants) to provide an independent and
economically conservative evaluation of the social/infrastructure/
transportation/farm impacts that would be caused by Lower Snake River
(LSR) dam breaching and closure of four LSR locks.
With the elimination of the Snake River barge transportation option
and reduction in the aquifers that over 7,640 farms in Washington,
Oregon and Idaho depend upon, LSR dam breaching will fundamentally
change this tri-state region. The paper evaluates the expected economic
and social justice impacts on 12 counties and several cities located in
the tri-state region.
Overall findings illustrate that dam breaching would exacerbate
existing climate and social justice issues in a tri-state region that
includes 350,183 people and 90,124 jobs. It is expected that existing
social justice concerns will grow exponentially should the land be left
without a reliable, consistent supply of surface water.
Social Justice Findings
The tri-state study region includes 350,183 residents
(U.S. Census, ACS, 2021). The majority of residents are
White (83.5%). Other races include Latino/Hispanic (17.2%)
and American Indian (2.03%).
The share of the study region's population that is
disabled (15.3%) is higher than the national average (13%).
The median age of the region's residents is older (41.2)
than the national median (38.8).
Net cash income for farms reporting receipts averaged only
$52,695 in 2017.
In addition to households experiencing poverty (16.5%),
United Way indicates that 31% of the study region's
households are Asset Limited Income Constrained and
Employed (ALICE). The combination of poverty and ALICE
measurements indicate that nearly half of all households in
the region are living ``on the edge''--going paycheck to
paycheck to make ends meet relative to housing, childcare,
health care and transportation costs.
Regional income is lower and poverty rates are higher in
the study region compared with the nation. In 2021, 16.5%
of the study region's residents between the age of 18 and
64 were below the poverty level--compared to 11.9% for the
nation. Exhibit 1 reflects Census Tracts within the region
that have ``Persistent Poverty.''
Home ownership rates in the region (58.7%) are lower than
the national average (69.4%).
The share of regional households experiencing severe rent
burden (with over half of annual income paid towards
housing) is higher (24.4%) than the national average
(22.9%).
The share of households participating in SNAP
(Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programs) is higher in
the study region (13.4%) than the nation (12.3%).
The share of unemployed civilians in the region is higher
than the national average. The crucial jobs at risk of
being lost include hard working haulers, planters, pruners,
harvesters--all crucial for providing agricultural produce
to consumers. They are already in short supply with first
generation Americans, seasonal farm workers, and
disadvantaged workers.
According to current White House Climate and Social
Justice data, the region is at a relative disadvantage in
terms of unemployment, poverty, energy cost burdens, risk
of natural hazards (such as fire), asthma and travel
barriers. See Exhibit 2.
Economic Impacts
Removal of the locks is likely to bankrupt thousands of
farms (producers) as they attempt to change their freight
distribution network from efficient river barges to far
more costly long-haul truck or rail service.
The existing highway and rail network would need a short-
term capital investment of $1.3 billion to handle the 4.2
million tons of annual shipments to and from the tri-state
region. (Source: Appendix A, engineering cost estimates
prepared for the Washington Transportation Commission,
adjusted to 2023 dollars).
If billions in federal dollars were somehow appropriated
to increase the highway and rail capacity and address
required local street and infrastructure needed to mitigate
the impact of LSR locks/dam removal, the design and
permitting time would take several years and inflationary
pressure would push these cost estimates up even higher.
Potentially shifting commodity exports from barge to truck
and rail would increase the overall cost of shipping
commodities to export terminals along the Pacific. Moving
commodities by truck/rail would increase the cost per
bushel of wheat by 8% or more. An increase in the wholesale
cost of grain would push the breakeven price for grain up
to nearly $8.00 per bushel--well above the spot price of
$7.19 in today's market (per USDA, Wheat Index, July 26,
2023).
Because the market price for grain is determined by global
factors such as international demand, global supplies, and
currency rates, increasing wholesale prices for commodities
is not really an option and has a high probability of
bankrupting over 7,600 farms, unless U.S. farm subsidies to
the tri-state region increased by $55M/year or $1.65
billion over 30 years (FCS Group estimates).
Removal of the LSR dams would also impact underground
aquifers by requiring irrigation water for crops to be
pulled from groundwater sources. Non-irrigated land in this
region is inhospitable for food production. With nearly
352,000 acres of irrigated farmland in the tri-state
region, the loss of irrigated farmland would potentially
reduce land value by $1.1 to $1.6 billion (values reported
by the USDA, Land Values Summary, Aug. 2022).
As farmland valuation is reduced, local assessed values
will decline in the tri-state region. This will in-turn
reduce local property tax revenue by over $17 million per
year in the tri-state region--$520 million over 30 years.
The consequential negative fiscal impact would devastate
local municipalities, schools and special districts--as
municipal and county tax revenue is reduced by $12M/year
($360M over 30 years) and public-school tax revenue is
reduced by $6M/year ($180M over 30 years) in the tri-state
region.
Regional farm and government sectors account for nearly
15% of the tri-state GDP with 15,700 jobs. The long-term
permanent job losses in the tri-state region attributed to
LSR breaching is difficult to quantity but would likely
place 15,000 jobs at risk. The secondary and tertiary
impacts of these job losses would be far greater.
The Port of Clarkston has identified six specific
businesses and cruise ship operations at risk, which
support 6,811 workers. These businesses generate $625.7
million in total annual GDP. A subset of GDP includes $65.5
million in state and local tax payments and $86.6 million
in annual Federal tax payments.
Multiple cruise lines would cease ALL operations if the
Snake River portion of the waterway is unavailable. This
would cause a ripple effect on local economies and at
several ports of call along the lower Columbia River in
Oregon and Washington.
At least three cities (Clarkston, Lewiston and Asotin),
regional counties and major industrial businesses have
permits for discharge of treated wastewater into the river.
A share of the economic contribution of these communities
will be at-risk with dam breaching, with nearly $1.5
billion in combined annual GDP. Note, this is a
conservative estimate of the regional GDP, since many other
communities in Washington and Idaho will also be impacted.
Transportation Impacts
The removal of four lower Snake River dams are expected to
increase transportation and related environmental costs in
the U.S. by over $8.1 billion over 30 years. This equates
to a net present value of $4.2 billion (based on standard
7.0% annual discount rate).
Removing the Snake River locks would cause diesel fuel
consumption to increase by nearly 5 million gallons per
year as barges are replaced by less efficient truck-to-rail
shipments.
The current distribution of commodities moving out of the
10-county bi-state region to deep draft export ports as
follows: 90% barge and 10% rail. With removal of the LSR
locks, commodities transported by barge would decrease--as
producers try to shift commodity freight from efficient
river barge to truck and rail.
Even if billions in federal and state transportation
mitigation was appropriate, LSR dam breaching would require
at least 201 additional unit trains and 23.8 million miles
in additional trucking activity annually.
Related engineering studies have concluded that over $1.3
billion in infrastructure investments would need to be
constructed in the near-term to address transportation,
railroad, grain storage capacity and local infrastructure
changes that would result with LSR dam breaching.
Increased reliance on truck-to-rail or truck-to-barge
terminal shipping (on Lower Columbia) is expected to result
in an increase of 23.8 million miles of travel per year on
county, state and federal highways. The increased trucking
activity will increase fuel costs, highway maintenance
costs, terminal facility maintenance cost, driver time, and
vehicle maintenance costs by over $69 million per year.
Diesel fuel consumption will increase by nearly 5 million
gallons per year; thereby reducing our nation's ability to
achieve energy independence.
An increase in unit trains of 1-2 per day enhances the
probability of train related incidents and fatalities, the
cost of train safety incidents has not been included in
this study.
Climate Impacts
Shifting commodity flows from barge to truck and rail will result
in increases in NOx, CO2 and other harmful emissions by over 1,251,000
tons per year (source: Appendix C, FCS Group).
This annual amount of harmful air emissions is equivalent to:
Removing 6,927 acres of trees through deforestation
Adding 181,889 passenger cars
Adding 90,365 standard size homes
Adding one new large coal fired power plant every 2-3
years--such as the recently decommissioned PGE plant in
Boardman, Oregon.
*****
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
.The full document is available for viewing at:
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II13/20231212/116632/HHRG-
118-II13-20231212-SD011.pdf
------
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I now recognize Ms. Falkenberg for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF HUMAIRA FALKENBERG, POWER RESOURCES MANAGER,
PACIFIC COUNTY PUD, RAYMOND, WASHINGTON
Ms. Falkenberg. Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz, Ranking
Member Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is
Humaira Falkenberg, and I am the Power Resource Manager at
Pacific PUD. With significant weight and responsibility, I am
here today to plead the case for not-for-profit utilities,
including millions of consumers in communities across the
Pacific Northwest.
The pending settlement between the U.S. Government and the
six sovereigns just became public, and is alarming. Pacific PUD
is an 80-year-old utility serving the coastal communities at
the confluence of the Columbia River and the Pacific Ocean in
Southwest Washington. Nearly one-third of the county's
population is over the age of 65. Poverty is rampant among
families in our community; 14.7 percent of all families with
related children under the age of 18 live in poverty. Nearly 40
percent of all households with children under the age of 18 are
headed by single women living in poverty. Over 70 percent of
our total school enrollment is considered low-income. Layering
on additional costs from the settlement serves as a
disproportionate, regressive energy burden for our most
vulnerable members in our community.
Using CEQ's climate justice tool, we rank in the 97th
percentile for energy costs and 85th percentile for low-income
households. Using the same exact tool over the entire Pacific
Northwest reveals that vast areas of BPA's customer communities
are also marginalized and under-resourced.
Currently, our coastal communities bear the brunt of
climate change, and experience increasingly regular atmospheric
rivers. Heavy winds routinely damage our transmission lines and
other critical infrastructure.
Because we purchase 100 percent of our wholesale
electricity from BPA, Bonneville power rates have the single
greatest impact on our retail rates. The greatest threat to our
utility and the people we serve is uncertainty.
The settlement threats come in three distinct forms: (1)
lack of clarity on BPA costs; (2) lack of operational
certainty; and (3) lack of meaningful litigation forbearance.
We are already in an operational and cost environment that is
extremely challenging from adequacy, reliability, and
affordability perspectives. It becomes even more difficult as
we work to meet the strict decarbonization goals of the region.
The injection of intolerable uncertainty in managing and
planning future electric rates for our customers is causing us
to evaluate the viability of a 20-year contract with BPA. The
intergenerational impacts of uncertainty will be felt beyond
2044.
Given the poverty in our community, not surprisingly, our
customers expect us to hold the line on electric rates. We are
committed to the concept of restorative justice and ensuring
all communities, particularly our most vulnerable, benefit from
our existing renewable infrastructure as we advance our clean
energy transition. In confronting the need for justice in
particular situations, we should avoid deepening injustice
elsewhere. We remain empathetic to the origin story and the
importance of salmon to the First Nations of Columbia River and
the needs of consumers for affordable, reliable, clean power.
We support scientific, cost-effective mitigation efforts for
fish and wildlife that have a clear nexus to the impacts of the
hydropower system.
But the U.S. Government must exercise moral courage and use
principles of distributive justice while honoring BPA's organic
enabling statutes, specifically, its rate-making directive, to
set the lowest possible rates to ensure that potential burdens
resulting from a settlement process are fair and responsive to
the needs of the entire region.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Falkenberg follows:]
Prepared Statement of Humaira Falkenberg, Power Resources Manager,
Public Utility District No. 2 of Pacific County, Washington
Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz and members of the Subcommittee. My
name is Humaira Falkenberg. I am the Power Resources Manager of Pacific
PUD. I also serve as the Chair of the Allocation, Rates and Contract
Committee of the Public Power Council and as the Vice Chair of
Northwest River Partners. With significant weight and responsibility, I
am here today to plead the case for not-for-profit utilities, our
consumers and communities in the Pacific Northwest in light of the
potential settlement between the U.S. Government (USG) and Six
Sovereigns by December 15, 2023.
As Pacific County PUD's (Pacific) Power Resources Manager, I manage
and oversee all wholesale power supply costs for our utility.
Currently, wholesale purchase power makes up nearly 50% of our total
annual operating expenses. We have a $31.1 million operating budget
where $14.2 million is attributed to purchased power. As a Full
Requirements customer of Bonneville Power Administration, we rely on
BPA to provide 100% of our wholesale electricity. Therefore, BPA power
rates have the single greatest impact on the rate we must charge to our
customers to recover costs.
As a not-for-profit consumer owned utility for 80 years, Pacific
has relied on BPA to supply reliable, affordable, and low carbon
wholesale electric power. Recently, Pacific engaged with BPA on the
next ``Provider of Choice'' 20-year contract, as our current contract
expires in 2028. Accepting long-term power sales contracts is among our
utility's most significant actions; we do it with utmost care and
thought towards long-term intergenerational impacts that will last well
beyond 2044.
Procedural Injustice
When we learned that the USG was in secret negotiations with select
parties from the CRSO litigation and drafted commitments without our
knowledge, we were outraged at the lack of procedural justice
demonstrated by FMCS and CEQ. The Council on Environmental Quality
(CEQ) engaged the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) to
attempt to make progress in resolving issues in the long-running CRSO
litigation in the Federal District Court. Yet, those processes have not
been fair, transparent or impartial and have not allowed other parties
to have a voice. The collective voice of millions of people in the
Pacific Northwest was silenced as the USG spent more than six months
behind doors negotiating with the plaintiffs without meaningful
engagement with us. As a result, any USG's potential agreement
resulting from these proceedings carries a shroud of procedural
injustice. Any aspirational hope of genuine mediation and conflict
resolution was abandoned.
Nevertheless, we remain empathetic to both the origin story and the
importance of salmon and other fish to the Columbia River Basin Tribes
and the needs of stakeholders for affordable, reliable clean power.
However, Pacific's customers demand decision making to be guided by
impartiality, ensuring that biases and politics do not influence the
decision and, ultimately, any outcomes. Under challenging negotiations,
it would not be uncharacteristic for parties to sit in extreme
discomfort jointly. Still, the responsibility of FMCS and CEQ would
have been to preserve procedural fairness and to allow adequate time to
review positions. The fruit from a procedurally unjust tree is unjust.
It is with this frustration we plead with Congress.
Strategic Ambiguity
When the commitments made by the USG in the ``U.S. Government
Commitments in Support of the Columbia Basin Restoration Initiative and
in Partnership with the Six Sovereigns'' (USG Commitments) came into
the public domain on November 29th, 2023, we were alarmed at the
strategic ambiguity contained therein. The implications of the
potential commitments by the USG in the CRSO litigation pose
significant threats to the long-term value of the FCRPS. This strategic
ambiguity within the USG Commitments is revealed in three key areas: 1)
lack of clarity on the costs confronting BPA and its customers 2) lack
of operational certainty and 3) lack of litigation forbearance.
Given the massive uncertainty regarding the future of the Federal
Columbia River Power System (FCRPS), it becomes painfully challenging
for us to consider signing the next 20-year contracts in light of
unknown costs in the out years. The document creates intolerable
ambiguity in predicting and planning future electric rates for our
customers. A shorter-term contract with BPA may help us better limit an
unacceptable exposure to risk, given so many unknowns created through
this agreement.
Lack of Clarity on the Costs Confronting BPA and Its Customers
Many of the USG commitments made in the document do not have an
underlying specific appropriations strategies or budget commitments or
named federal agencies for such responsibilities, creating the concern
that BPA and its ratepayers will be the default funding source if and
when Congress fails to act. The document labeled as ``draft'' dated
``11/2/2023'' exposes at least $100 million in long term additional
Fish and Wildlife expenses, and $200 million in capital investments.
These costs are in addition to the $200 million of Phase 2
Implementation Plan (P2IP), various other long-term and short-term
funding agreements, the Fish Accords, and the existing Fish and
Wildlife Program. Additionally, BPA could bear an undefined share of
the $200 million ``Mid C Restoration Plan'' costs per year. It is still
being determined whether BPA would be left to fill the gap if Congress
does not make the expected appropriations. BPA could be the payer of
last resort.
Separately, the USG Commitments propose an Advanced Tribal Energy
Sovereignty program. We want and need all communities to expand efforts
to promote a clean energy future while doing so reliably and
affordably. While we support Tribal Energy independence and would
welcome the collaboration with LRTT to realize their goals, in the
document, the Department of Energy is charged supporting tribal
development of 1-3 GW of new renewable energy resources to be
``accounted'' for as replacement for the output of the LSRDs. The
commitments presume LSRD breaching and as a remedy create the
problematic optics of BPA's role as the off taker of such
``replacement'' resources.
It is reckless energy policy to presume that 1-3 GW of wind or
solar could be considered ``replacement'' of LSRD output. The LSRDs
provide nearly 1,000 aMW of energy at average water and provide 25% of
the ancillary services of the FCRPS. These projects are equipped with
Automatic Generation Control (AGC) making them an important part of the
sixty-second demand and supply balance necessary for power grid
stability and operations. These projects' operating reserves aid BPA in
meetings its Balance Area Authority functions. As more intermittent and
variable renewable resources are integrated into the grid, flexible and
controllable hydroelectric dams become even more critical for grid
reliability--removing them isn't the answer; quite the contrary, it is
their very existence that allows the abundant integration of variable
fuel-saving resources and accelerates the clean energy transition.
Besides contributing to grid reliability, according to BPA, the
LSRDs generate electricity at a cost of $14 MWh, which is well below
the cost of developing new renewable resources. These legacy resources
are vital to maintaining affordable rates in the region and thereby
contributing to economic justice for those the most financially
marginalized.
In conclusion, there is great deal of ambiguity and uncertainty as
how the USG commitments in the document would impact BPA's rates. There
is no plain and explicit language in the document that cabins BPA's
financial obligation; given the extreme uncertainty of funding
obligations in the agreement, we estimate potential rate impacts from
5% to over 50%.
Lack of Operational Certainty
We have significant concerns pertaining to the vulnerability of
hydro operations to other lawsuits, including river temperature
lawsuits that the plaintiffs and their colleagues have threatened. The
USG commits to developing and using a Sovereign-driven process for
``durable operations'' without any protections or standards for the
power system impacts. The language, ``(The) USG is committed to
developing and using a Sovereign driven process to focus on maintaining
and adaptively implementing (managing) the durable set of operations
agreed to that govern at the lower Snake River and lower Columbia River
dams prior to potential breach of the lower Snake River dams,'' is
alarming.
That being said, ambiguity still arises with the following sentence
``USG commits to working with the Six Sovereigns on potential changes
such as interim project operations, more aggressive advancement of mid-
Columbia River habitat restoration, and fish passage,'' which can be
implemented after supplemental or additional environmental compliance
documents are completed.
We also reject the need to conduct a new FCRPS related Biological
Opinion, conduct new USACE feasibility studies, and an EIS. The USG
spent more than $45 million on the CRSO EIS in 2020 and a related
Biological Opinion.
Furthermore, the agreement does not firewall BPA from exposure to
further operational changes through the CRSO claims not excluded by the
agreement such as the Clean Water Act claims.
Lack of Litigation Forbearance
We have learned several lessons from the failed Columbia Basin Fish
Accords. To provide a much more predictable path forward for the
region, this document needs to require that the plaintiffs commit to
discontinuing their ESA litigation for the ten-year duration of the
agreement; they should commit to refraining from other litigation that
could adversely impact FCRPS operations and BPA power customers. The
plaintiffs should be bound to be co-defendants with the USG in case of
lawsuits from other organizations that seek to reduce the value of the
FCRPS capabilities. A piecemeal approach to litigation forbearance will
invariably result in future concessions on part of BPA. BPA's customers
should only have to pay higher electric rates if they are receiving
commensurate financial and legal protections in the future.
In summary, the USG commitments document is repeatedly ambiguous.
The strategic ambiguity will lead to decades of litigation and
represents irresponsible public policy. It is imperative that the
language in the agreement be made simple, clear, and precise if it were
to advance.
BPA Rates and Impacts to Pacific
The nexus of cost and operational uncertainties coupled with lack
of litigation forbearance could result in BPA's ratepayers being held
responsible for undefined future liabilities. Unlike other Federal
agencies, BPA funds its operations entirely though the rates it charges
its customers like Pacific and BPA's customers repay all costs
associated with the production and transmission of power from the
multipurpose federal projects. This includes the costs related to
mitigating the impact of federal hydropower generation on threatened
and endangered fish species. About 25 percent of BPA's Tier 1 rate,
which includes foregone revenue for the cost of lost generation, is
paid by BPA's consumer owned utilities for BPA's fish and wildlife
programs; in the last ten years, we have paid an average of $685
million per year and during the course of the current power sales
contract, BPA's Tier 1 power rates have already increased 24 percent.
While Pacific takes its obligation to fund the largest and most
comprehensive environmental mitigation program in the United States
seriously, BPA's authority to undertake any costs is restrained by its
organic, enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set
``the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent with sound business
principles.'' In other words, BPA is a creature of its statutes, and it
cannot, despite the nobleness of the cause, improperly use ratepayer
funds. The use of rate payer funds for potential USG commitments is not
a matter of ``ends justify the means'' but rather about the impact on
the people in our community, and I care deeply about the residents of
Pacific County.
Our rate payer funds are not dividend checks from the shareholders
of for-profit companies; instead, rate payer funds are monies that
represent the sweat of labor from the vast majority of our blue-collar,
working-class customers employed in seafood processing, cranberry bogs,
and agricultural farms, including those members of our community that
are most marginalized like migrant workers, elderly, disabled, and
Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed (ALICE) populations.
ALICE populations earn more than the Federal Poverty Level but not
enough to afford the basics where they live. ALICE workers were
celebrated as essential heroes during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet they
do not earn enough to support their own families. 45% of Pacific County
residents qualify as ALICE. Pacific County has the largest percentage
of ALICE population in all of Washington state. ALICE populations have
insufficient income. When households can't afford the basics, they are
forced to make difficult choices and trade-offs every day--impossible
decisions like whether to pay for prescriptions or keep enough food on
the table. The larger the gap between income and expenses, the more
extreme the decisions and the greater the risks to a family's immediate
health, safety, and financial stability. The slightest impact to the
cost of an essential service like electricity can have significant
consequences for both ALICE populations and those below the federal
poverty line.
Pacific County Service Territory, Demographics, and Electric Rates
Pacific County spans nearly 1,000 square miles with a population of
less than 25,000 individuals sparsely dispersed (fewer than 25 people
per square mile) along the mouth of the Columbia River. Nearly 70% of
the county's population resides in unincorporated areas, with only four
small municipalities (South Bend, Raymond, Long Beach, and Ilwaco)
defined by urban growth areas. Because of the inherent costs of
electrical infrastructure investment in areas lacking concentrated
population centers, we face significant pressures in capital costs. Our
low number of customers per mile of transmission and distribution lines
means we have a higher proportion of fixed costs. Further these are
precisely the areas most affected by supply chain issues and inflation.
This makes any BPA rate increases more challenging for us to absorb, as
there are limited opportunities in our cost structure for offsetting
reductions.
Separately, the county experiences extreme weather events due to
the proximity of the Pacific Ocean, and high wind events are common.\1\
We are also at severe risk of disruption of roads and services by
earthquake and/or tsunami \2\ and susceptible to ever frequent impacts
of climate change. Between December 3rd and 5th, 2023, Pacific County
and the adjacent communities experienced 12 to 16 inches of heavy rain
resulting in severe flooding due to increasing regular atmospheric
rivers affecting the region. Conditions were so dire that a U.S. Coast
Guard rescue swimmer was lowered by a helicopter to save a person
stranded on a partially submerged vehicle in Western Wahkiakum County.
In addition, winter storms typically include hours of 60-100 mph winds,
causing trees to fall and damage lines and structures. Our coastal
communities are taking the brunt of climate change impacts while the
USG is ambiguously envisioning a future without the LSRD that provide
carbon free electricity and aides the nation in clean energy
transition. When we solve for climate change, we will solve for salmon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://mynorthwest.com/3937904/what-is-washingtons-windiest-
city/
\2\ https://mil.wa.gov/asset/
5ba420aa1c85c#::text=For%20example%2C%20the%20
unincorporated%20areas,could%20have%20county%2Dwide%20repercussions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separately, the topography of our county includes a mountainous
landscape with heavily forested terrain, dense canopy cover, numerous
wetlands, and geologic hazard areas. Furthermore, there are prevalent
corrosive aerial salts that degrade free-standing outdoor assets; with
all these challenges, we still strive to have the most affordable rates
in the state of Washington at 6.3 cents per kWh versus the state's
average at 8.5 cents. But despite our best efforts to have the lowest
rates for a non-generating PUD in Washington, 2,805 households are
below the 200% Federal Poverty Level and hence have an energy burden of
more than 6%.
We must do more with less because nearly one-third (34%) of the
county's population is over the age of 65. The median household income
of $50,873 is 35% lower than the state median income of $80,219. These
earnings translate into considerable poverty across the county. Nearly
15% of the population lives at or below the poverty line, approximately
11% of the population has no health insurance and 25% of residents
claim a federal disability and 17% of the people under the age of 65
are disabled.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/
pacificcountywashington/AGE775222# AGE775222
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, poverty is rampant amongst families in our community:
14.7% of all families with related children under the age of 18 live in
poverty. Nearly 40% of all households with children under the age of 18
and headed by a sole female live in poverty. Every school in Pacific
County qualifies for Title I federal funding. Over 70% of our total
school enrollment is considered ``Low Income.'' Layering on avoidable
energy burden is a disproportionate regressive tax for our most
vulnerable community members.
Per the Biden Administration's Justice 40 Initiative \4\ and CEQ's
Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, Pacific County has
multiple tracts considered disadvantaged because the meet more than one
burden threshold and the associated socioeconomic threshold. Pacific
County's multiple census tracts rank 97th percentile for energy costs
and 85% percentile for low-income households where income is less than
or equal to twice the federal poverty level. Our customers expect us to
hold the line on electric rates. For us to do that, BPA costs must be
kept as low as possible while continuing to responsibly fund fish and
wildlife mitigation efforts that are effective and proportionately
funded by all who benefit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/justice40/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separately, when using CEQ's Climate and Economic Justice Screen
Tool over the entire Pacific Northwest, the geospatial mapping tool
reveals vast areas of BPA's customer communities are some of the most
marginalized and under resourced.\5\ In the screen shot image below,
areas highlighted in blue in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana are
identified as disadvantaged communities that are overburdened. The USG
must be mindful of minimizing adverse rate impacts to these communities
to access essential human services like electricity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/#4.64/46.7/-114.77
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was centuries of oppression by the USG against Native Americans
under the Doctrine of Discovery and subsequent Congressional policies
of allotment and termination that cost Native Americans and First
Nations hundreds of millions of acres of homelands of spiritual,
ceremonial, and ancestral significance. Now, the federal taxpayer
should bear potential commitments made by the USG as part of the CEQ-
FMCS settlement process, for the atonement of past actions.
Respectfully, the USG must reconcile the uncertain financial burden
of its extensive potential commitments in support of the Columbia Basin
Restoration Initiative to the ratepayers of the BPA in the Pacific
Northwest considering the results presented from CEQ's geospatial map.
Any rate increases on BPA's customers will result in regressive harm to
the communities most disproportionally disadvantaged and overburdened.
The USG's potential assurances in the CRSO litigation also pose
significant threats to the long-term value of the Federal Columbia
River Power System (FCRPS). Considering the substantial financial
reliability and FCRPS operational uncertainty, committing to a 20-year
Provider of Choice take or pay contract is difficult when long-term
intergeneration impacts that will last beyond 2044 remain unknown.
While we support scientific, cost-effective mitigation efforts for
fish and wildlife impacts that have a clear nexus to the impacts of the
hydropower system, I humbly request that USG exercise moral courage and
use principles of distributive justice while honoring BPA's organic,
enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set the
``lowest possible rates'' to appropriately ensure that potential
burdens resulting from a settlement process are squarely cabined to the
federal taxpayer.
The future of an urgent clean energy transition must prioritize
important procedural, distributive, and restorative justice components
that embraces equity and does not leave people behind. Hydropower
remains the centerpiece of the Northwest's energy infrastructure and
provides reliable, affordable, carbon-free power. We can only achieve
our multiple policy objectives with it.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
.eps*****
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I now recognize Mr. Slater for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF LINDSAY SLATER, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT
AFFAIRS, TROUT UNLIMITED, ARLINGTON, VIRGINIA
Mr. Slater. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Huffman, and
members of the Subcommittee, thank you for inviting me today to
speak. My name is Lindsay Slater. I am the Vice President of
Government Affairs for Trout Unlimited, and I am here today on
behalf of our more than 300,000 members and supporters across
the country. We are a bipartisan cold water conservation
organization made up of members who invest in their communities
through stream restoration and collaborative conservation.
I grew up in Wallowa County in Chairman Bentz's district on
my family's fifth-generation farm, where salmon pass on their
way up the Wallowa River. I worked for 26 years in Congress,
first in Chairman Bentz's district for the late Congressman Bob
Smith and then Congressman Greg Walden. I spent the next 22
years with Congressman Mike Simpson of Idaho as his chief of
staff, leaving last March.
Six years ago, during another dust up in the region over
salmon and dams, Congressman Simpson said, ``Let's roll up our
sleeves and figure out what this conflict is about.'' We went
down a rabbit hole we could never imagine. To the extent my
participation in this hearing implies familiarity or even
expertise with this issue, it is because we ended up spending
the next 4 years holding over 300 meetings with stakeholders
across the spectrum of all relevant touch points to salmon,
dams, agriculture, and energy.
We learned a few things, that wild salmon are
irreplaceable, they stitch together the fabric of an ecosystem
that stretches from the continental shelf to the continental
divide.
We learned that not going extinct isn't a recovery goal we
should be striving for, that salmon have faced many obstacles
over the last 200 years, including dams, fish wheels, over-
fishing, timber harvesting, predation, non-native fish, water
pollution, over-production of hatcheries, climate change, and
poor ocean conditions, that we have spent over $20 billion in
the last 30 years trying to address these problems and it
hasn't worked.
We concluded that dams were the problem by looking at
salmon populations that passed through three dams that are
doing much better than salmon populations that pass through
eight. Salmon need a river, not a series of warm, slow moving
lakes. If we allow salmon to go extinct, we are breaking the
covenant with the Pacific Northwest sovereigns. This covenant
is not an implied responsibility to the tribes. It is an
explicit legal obligation and treaties as enshrined in the U.S.
Constitution.
So, we looked at the lower Snake dams as part of the
Federal Columbia River Power System. We asked three questions:
Who or what interests would be affected if the dams were
removed; could the benefits from the dams be replaced; and what
would it cost to replace those benefits?
Some people in this room might have seen the walls in my
office covered top to bottom and corner to corner in big,
laminated puzzle pieces of the Pacific Northwest that came
together in a concept that would replace energy, protect
stakeholders, and provide a free-flowing river for salmon. We
believed a win for each party and stakeholders was preferable
to the existing status quo of lawsuits, appeals, and
uncertainty.
In February 2021, Congressman Simpson released his vision
as the Columbia Basin Initiative that determined the benefits
of the dams could be replaced. A year later, Governor Inslee
and Senator Murray came to a similar conclusion. Despite the
ominous title of this hearing, ``Left in the Dark,'' the lights
in the Northwest are not going to go out when the four lower
Snake dams are removed. It has been made clear by Congressman
Simpson, Senator Murray, and Governor Inslee that the energy
and capacity of the dams must be replaced prior to dam removal.
Climate change is already reducing overall flow, and the
Northwest must diversify its generating mix beyond snowpack-
dependent hydropower, and invest in expanded and modernized
transmission and distribution systems to ensure reliability. At
the same time, we can take this opportunity to examine and
address the Federal hydropower system's legacy of injustice.
For almost 100 years, the Federal energy system has thrived
at the expense of the Northwest tribes, whose villages and
fishing grounds were submerged and salmon decimated. It is
unacceptable for any administration to continue prioritizing
the competitive position of BPA at the expense of tribal
interests in salmon. We should all welcome any extent to which
the Federal Government is contemplating a leadership position
for regional tribes. They are due and ready for an elevated
role in delivering a future of shared abundance through
restored salmon runs and delivering a clean energy future. The
government took the rivers and salmon from the tribes, but they
could never figure out how to take the wind and the sun.
I will conclude with a message from our CEO, Chris Wood. We
can save salmon. We can take care of stakeholders and develop
and build new sources of energy while modernizing our
electrical grid. But doing nothing is failing future
generations in the Pacific Northwest, tribes, and salmon.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Slater follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lindsay Slater, Vice President of Government
Affairs, Trout Unlimited
Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and Members of the
Subcommittee: Thank you for the invitation to testify. My name is
Lindsay Slater. I am the Vice President of Government Affairs for Trout
Unlimited and I am here today on behalf of our more than 300,000
members and supporters across the country. Trout Unlimited is a
bipartisan, coldwater conservation organization made up of members who
invest in their communities through stream restoration, collaborative
conservation, and spreading the joy of fishing and the outdoors. Our
diverse membership grounds us in the places where our supporters and
staff live and work, including the Snake River and Columbia River
basins.
I grew up in Chairman Bentz's district in eastern Oregon's Wallowa
County on my family's fifth generation farm where salmon pass on their
way up the Wallowa River.
Through last March, I worked for 26 years in Congress. First, in
Chairman Bentz's district for the late Congressman Bob Smith, next for
Congressman Greg Walden as his Legislative Director, and then for 22
years with Congressman Mike Simpson of Idaho as his Chief of Staff. I
was fortunate to have a career working for three great men and
legislators.
During my years working in Congress, I helped to develop solutions-
focused legislation that created outcomes for interests and
stakeholders that I believe were more favorable than the zero-sum game
of picking winners and losers in the stewardship of our federal lands.
The Steens bill with Congressman Walden and the Boulder White Clouds
with Congressman Simpson are two examples of bills with outcomes more
favorable to all parties.
I also learned from some of the best energy experts in the United
States. There is an informal network of Northwest energy experts--many
who are former Congressional staff--who educate the staff of the
Northwest delegation through meetings and tours. I took my first PNGC
power tour across Oregon and Idaho in 1998. This network is important
to educate Congressional staff about very complex issues related to the
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) and the Northwest energy system.
In the late 90s, the first pieces of BPA legislation I helped work on
with the Northwest delegation were JOE and SLICE. We worked as a
bipartisan team in those days.
Trout Unlimited has been involved in the dams and salmon discussion
for decades. In conjunction with our Washington State Council, we
recently held our annual meeting in Spokane, Washington, which is in
Congresswoman McMorris-Rodgers's district. More than 300 people from
around the country turned out to learn about Trout Unlimited's work in
the Northwest and our efforts to recover wild salmon and steelhead
populations. Approximately 70 people made the long bus ride to tour
Lower Granite Dam to learn about what role the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers plays in trying to mitigate the impacts of the four lower
Snake River dams.
Trout Unlimited has 25 chapters and nearly 10,000 members in local
communities across the Pacific Northwest. Our members in Idaho,
Washington and Oregon want to see wild salmon and steelhead return to
their home rivers each year and want the same for their children and
grandchildren. Many utilize electricity brokered by Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA) through local public utility districts and
electric cooperatives. They live in the very communities that rely on
the agricultural economies of the fertile Palouse and Camas Prairies.
They live in communities with seasonal economies that once were fueled
by abundant salmon and steelhead. They want a region with a thriving
economy; abundant, clean, and affordable energy, and wild salmon. And
with the right investments and a strong commitment we can have all
three. We can save salmon. We can develop and build new sources of
energy, while modernizing our electrical grid. We can give the
stakeholders the certainty they need for a strong economic future. But
we cannot have all three as long as the four lower Snake River dams and
the deadly reservoirs behind them remain. There is no future for wild
Snake salmon and steelhead with the dams in place. So long as they
block the rivers, the communities that rely on them for their well-
being--especially the northwest tribes who have been sustained by wild
salmon spiritually and materially for millennia and have federal
treaties guaranteeing them the right to salmon harvest--will continue
to be harmed.
It is important to note there are many dedicated people and
organizations across the region who have spent years working to
proactively solve this problem. A coalition of conservation groups has
spent countless hours working with stakeholders and local communities
to find solutions and provide the needed services for the region.
Currently, the state of Washington--at the behest of these advocates
and inspired by the work of Gov. Inslee and Sen. Murray--is leading a
planning effort to design the infrastructure, irrigation, and energy
services that will move the region into the 21st century.
I want to note that this hearing is driven by a leaked draft
document from the settlement negotiations between the Biden
Administration and the plaintiffs in a long-running court case. Trout
Unlimited is not a party to those negotiations and as such I am unable
to respond to any questions directly related to them. As the members of
the committee are certainly aware, settlement negotiations are by their
nature confidential. That said, the discussion around the need for dam
removal should not come as a surprise. It has been a topic of
scientific inquiry and regional discussion since the dams'
authorization in the 1945 Rivers and Harbors Act. I would urge this
committee to join the dialogue about the services needed to replace the
benefits provided by the lower four Snake River dams.
The science of dam impacts on salmon is clear.
The Columbia River Basin once hosted the largest salmon runs on the
West Coast, with 10 to 16 million fish returning to the mouth of the
Columbia River from the ocean each year. Half of them returned to the
Snake River watershed in Idaho, where the thousands of miles of
coldwater, high elevation forested streams that produced this
remarkable abundance of fish are still largely intact.
The potential for recovery of Snake River wild salmon and steelhead
is enormous. The Snake's thousands of miles of high-quality habitat and
cold, clean water could support thriving wild salmon and steelhead
populations if they could safely access it. Currently, Snake River
spring chinook, Snake River fall chinook, Snake River sockeye and Snake
River steelhead are listed as threatened or endangered and wild Snake
River spring/summer Chinook runs are approaching a ``quasi-extinction
threshold.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Northwest Power and Conservation Council (2021). Nez Perce
Tribe staff presentation on their analysis of Snake River Basin Chinook
and Steelhead--Quasi-Extinction Threshold and Call to Action. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2021_05_4.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For 50 years, we have attempted to mitigate the harmful impacts of
the dams and hydro-system by barging, adult fish ladders, juvenile
bypass, turbine screens, spillway modification increased spill,
hatcheries, and dozens of other mitigation efforts. But since the
completion of the dams, we have never reached two percent fish returns;
in fact, wild Snake River salmon and steelhead are near all-time lows.
Stakeholders have spent half a century of rate payer money (including
$24 billion in mitigating funds from Bonneville Power Administration)
and taxpayer money in the form of the Lower Snake River Fish and
Wildlife Compensation Plan (LSRFWCP) doubling down on a failed system
while some of the most miraculous and prolific wild salmon and
steelhead runs in the world circle the drain.
The simple fact is that the four lower Snake River dams and their
deadly reservoirs kill too many salmon and steelhead. Smolt (juvenile
salmon and steelhead) are forced to swim to the ocean rather than drift
backward as they do in a free-flowing river, letting the current carry
them. These small fish--carrying distinct genetic code thousands of
generations old that will lead them back to Idaho--die in turbines or
are predated on by invasive smallmouth bass, walleye, and birds.
Despite our best attempts, they die in the holding tanks of barges that
attempt to move them past the dams, and others fail to return as adults
because their ocean entry timing is disrupted. In fact, nearly 50
percent of smolts from Idaho never make it past the 8 dams that stand
between the ocean and the Snake Basin.
The best coldwater salmon habitat left in the contiguous United
States is in the Snake River Basin. Within the current native
distribution of salmon and steelhead on the West Coast, the Snake's
30,000 miles of stream habitat represents 40 percent of all Pacific
salmon habitat in the lower 48. Take a second to think about that. The
Snake River Basin makes up 40 percent of Pacific salmon and steelhead
habitat on the entire West Coast. And it's blocked by four aging, fish-
killing dams.
Salmon recovery requires dam removal. The upper Snake River basin
is the largest piece of intact coldwater habitat left for wild salmon
in the lower 48. If we want to provide salmon with access to the
critical high elevation coldwater spawning grounds, the easiest path is
the removal of the lower four Snake River dams. The National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) noted in their September 2022
report, ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead,''
that the four lower Snake River dams would have the most significant
impact for salmon recovery.\2\ Specifically the report noted, ``For
Snake River stocks, the centerpiece action is restoring the lower Snake
River via dam breaching.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2022).
Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead. https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/resource/document/rebuilding-interior-columbia-
basin-salmon-and-steelhead
Removal would accomplish three important things for wild salmon.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Trout Unlimited (2023). Why We Need a Free-Flowing Snake River.
https://www.tu.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/TU_SnakeRiverReport_F2-
2.pdf
Would reduce water transit time. The science is clear: a
natural outmigration closer to historical norms of two days
minimizes exposure to predators, reduces unmitigated energy
expenditure, and results in healthier smolts when they
arrive at the estuary. Outmigration time has increased by
tenfold, from 2 days in a free-flowing riverine
environment, to upwards of 20 days in the current system of
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
dams and slack water.
Would reduce lethally elevated water temperatures. The
140-mile-long chain of reservoirs created by the hydro
system are a deadly heatsink for migrating adult salmon and
steelhead. These elevated temperatures cause migration
delays by blocking access to adult ladders. In 2015, an
estimated 4,000 returning endangered Snake River sockeye
were exposed to lethal thermal maximums. Only around one
percent escaped to spawning grounds, compared to the annual
average of 25 to 50 percent.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Northwest Power and Conservation Council (2016). Presentation
on NOAA Fisheries' 2015 Adult Sockeye Passage Report. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2016_0412_5.pdf
Would eliminate mortality from dam contact, including
direct or indirect contact with turbines, spillways, and
bypass facilities. The U.S. Army Corps currently estimates
a 96 percent survival rate through a given dam facility but
fails to account for mortality once smolt depart the
tailrace. BPA and the U.S. Army Corp acknowledge that
measured cumulative mortality through the hydro system is
48 percent, though latent mortality likely drives that
number higher before smolt reach the ocean. Some estimates
show that latent mortality through the hydro system can
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
kill up to 67 percent of out-migrating smolt.
The impacts of the four lower Snake River dams cannot be put into
any starker contrast but to compare the John Day and Grande Ronde
Rivers of Oregon. Each have headwaters in the Blue Mountains, the John
Day flowing west into the Columbia River, the Grande Ronde flowing east
into the Snake River. The difference is that salmon and steelhead
returning to the John Day River have three dam passages on the Columbia
River while the Grande Ronde salmon and steelhead pass eight dams. John
Day smolt-to-adult returns (SAR) are approximately three and four
percent for wild Chinook salmon and steelhead, while Snake returns--
including the Grand Ronde--hover at 0.7% SAR (Appendix A). Currently,
the SAR goals for ESA-listed salmon populations established by the
Northwest Power and Conservation Council are set at two percent to six
percent, with an average of four percent.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Northwest Power and Conservation Council (2020). Columbia River
Basin Fish and Wildlife Program: 2020 Addendum. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/reports/2020-9/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We have spent billions of dollars and it's not working. Neither of
Congress' attempts to remedy the dams' long-acknowledged impacts--the
Northwest Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act of 1980 and the
Lower Snake River Fish and Wildlife Compensation Plan (LSRCP)--have
stopped the tragic decline of wild Snake River salmon and steelhead.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Public Law 96-501 96th Congress (1980). Pacific Northwest
Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act. https://www.Congress.gov/
96/statute/STATUTE-94/STATUTE-94-Pg2697.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the completion of the dams in the 1970s,\7\ runs of Snake
River wild salmon and wild steelhead have declined precipitously from
their historical numbers, prompting each of their ESA listings
throughout the 1990s. Today, both remain listed and hover ever closer
to extinction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ BPA Fact Sheet. (2023) https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/
publications/general-documents/bpa-facts.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPA is failing to meet objectives for recovery and blocking investments
for the future of the region.
These dams contribute less than 1,000 megawatts annually, but cost
billions to operate and mitigate. The Bonneville Power Administration,
which operates the lower four dams, has spent $24 billion in ratepayer
funds on unsuccessful mitigation efforts over the past two decades.
The current resources for the BPA grid are 87 percent
hydroelectric.\8\ Drought and reduced snowpack are likely to further
impact capacity. BPA must start planning a future that includes new,
reliable, and robust sources of energy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ BPA Fact Sheet. (2023) https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/
publications/general-documents/bpa-facts.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tribal sovereignty
The tribes are the voice that must be heard and listened to. These
rivers were theirs and their cultures have been devastated when the
rivers and salmon were taken from them when their traditional fishing
grounds, villages and cultural sites were flooded by the dams.
The tribal nations of the Pacific Northwest, have treaty rights for
``the exclusive right of taking fish in the streams running through and
bordering said reservation is hereby secured to said Indians; and at
all other usual and accustomed stations, in common with citizens of the
United States.'' These rights were guaranteed by the United States
through agreement, in the Treaties of Hellgate, Medicine Creek, Neah
Bay, Point Elliott, Point No Point , Quinault , Walla Walla, Wasco,
Treaty of 1855--Yakima Nation and Treaty of 1855--Nez Perce. These
agreements between the US government and the sovereign nations of the
Pacific Northwest are a constitutional mandate.
The guaranteed right to salmon was ratified by this body in 1859.
The courts have continually upheld this right and the urgent
requirement to meet our treaty obligations are not in question. We must
uphold the constitutional and ethical obligations to all sovereign
nations of the Pacific Northwest.
Moving Forward
Three years ago, U.S. Rep. Mike Simpson (R-ID) said what
conservationists have long known: we can remove the dams, reopen
hundreds of miles of rivers to recover wild salmon and steelhead, and
replace all the dams' socio-economic benefits: irrigation, power,
barging for agricultural products.\9\ This was later affirmed by
Washington Gov. Mike Inslee and U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA).\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Congressman Mike Simpson (2021). Columbia Basin Initiative.
https://simpson.house.gov/salmon/
\10\ Lower Snake River Dams: Benefit Replacement Report (2022).
https://governor.wa.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/
LSRD%20Benefit%20Replacement%20Final%20Report_August%202022.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
But other elected leaders and policymakers, building on decades of
inaction, are choosing the status quo over the most promising
opportunity in decades to recover imperiled Snake River salmon and
steelhead, and in the process failing to make good on America's treaty
obligations to tribal nations and people of the Northwest. We must
seize the opportunity now and figure out how to make it work.
Representatives Simpson, Murray, and Inslee each showed that we can
have our salmon and protect the Northwest energy system and river
stakeholders. This is not a zero-sum game of winners and losers. We are
presented with an opportunity to diversify and reset all aspects of the
energy and transportation system to prepare for the next 50 years in
the Columbia basin. We should seize this opportunity rather than
clinging to the status quo of biological opinions, lawsuits, appeals,
and Congressional hearings. If we adhere to status quo, salmon, tribes,
and stakeholders lose.
We can do better. For the salmon, the tribes, and the people of the
Northwest. We can give the Snake River salmon their free-flowing river
back.
Appendix A: Smolt to Adult Returns (SARs)
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The following document was submitted as a supplement to Mr.
Slater's testimony.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
.The full document is available for viewing at:
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/II/II13/20231212/116632/HHRG-
118-II13-20231212-SD012.pdf
------
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I now recognize Mr. Simms for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF SCOTT SIMMS, CEO AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PUBLIC
POWER COUNCIL, PORTLAND, OREGON
Mr. Simms. Good afternoon, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member
Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee. My name is Scott
Simms, and I serve as the CEO and Executive Director of the
Public Power Council, or PPC.
PPC is the non-partisan trade group representing the
interests of non-profit, consumer-owned electric utilities in
the Pacific Northwest which serve millions of people in
Washington, Oregon, Idaho, western Montana, and parts of Nevada
and Wyoming. PPC's member utilities in rural and urban areas of
the Northwest purchase electricity and transmission services
from the Bonneville Power Administration, or BPA, and they
collectively pay 70 percent of BPA's $3.9 billion annual
revenue requirement.
Our utilities fund is the largest ESA effort in the nation,
and we have a keen interest in ensuring that fish mitigation
measures are science-based, cost-effective and have a clear
nexus with the operations of the Federal Columbia River Power
System, or FCRPS. We are fully committed to paying our fair
share of mitigation responsibilities, no more and no less. This
balance is what enables PPC members to offer affordable,
reliable, clean, and environmentally responsible power to the
communities they serve.
Unfortunately, as we have heard here today, the FCRPS
operations have been mired in long-running litigation. Roughly
18 months ago, the Federal District Court judge overseeing
litigation on the Columbia Basin System approved a stay, while
the Council on Environmental Quality, or CEQ, engaged Federal
mediators to resolve the issues being litigated.
We are now facing a U.S. Government agreement that could be
devastating for Northwest electricity consumers. We anticipate
under the best case scenario the impact to rates would be 5
percent and in the worst case it would be 50 percent. PPC
entered the CEQ-led Federal mediation process with guarded
optimism that it would be operated in a fair, confidential, and
collaborative manner. Regretfully, it has been the contrary.
Now, this region must grapple with an agreement between the
U.S. Government and six selected sovereign parties forged in
secret many months ago, and only recently made public thanks to
the brave acts of a few Northwest congressional leaders who are
in this room today. This U.S. Government agreement shows a path
toward lower Snake River dam breaching was always CEQ's master
plan for the process. PPC has repeatedly raised new ideas and
proposed tangible solutions. CEQ clearly wasn't interested.
The fiasco began when CEQ conveniently floated NOAA's so-
called latest science as a basis to push a specific, breach-
focused agenda. That new NOAA report paved over NOAA's prior
decades of established record of scientific evidence. Many,
including PPC, have pointed out its long list of inaccuracies,
but CEQ pressed on.
Then, at the end of October, the U.S. Government abruptly
signaled a package of actions and commitments that had been
developed for the region with the six sovereigns. Other
parties, like us, in the process scrambled to understand the
sweeping impacts of the agreement. Even both sides of the aisle
in Congress were left in the dark.
With my limited time left, let me share why it is the
single greatest threat to Northwest hydro in decades, which is
expanded upon, by the way, in my written testimony.
No. 1, there is no limit to BPA's and Public Power's cost
exposure. Again, our members anticipate that under the best
case scenario the impact on power rates would be 5 percent and
in the worst case 50 percent. This agreement is riddled with
unacceptable risks and a range of potential extra costs for
Northwest ratepayers. For example, the $2 billion mid-Columbia
restoration plan says all government sources will be pursued.
BPA and its customers are in no way spared. As well, there are
numerous other mitigation commitments with no defined funder.
No. 2, the agreement does not provide operational certainty
for the hydro system. Within its own framework the commitments
call for adaptive management driven by the six sovereigns with
no protection or standards for power system impacts. As well,
others outside this agreement can bring claims and apply other
limitations to hydro operations.
No. 3, this agreement does not limit litigation risk or get
us out of the courtroom. Other claims and lawsuits can be
brought at any time. Forbearance does not exist here. Parties
not bound to the agreement can bring lawsuits not barred by the
agreement such as under the Clean Water Act. Parties also not
in this agreement might bring forth separate agreements
outlining new costs and operational constraints in a
compounding effect. Other than the six sovereigns, the
opportunity for more litigation concessions is endless.
The agreement implies that BPA will be induced to acquire
tribal energy resources to replace lower Snake River dam
output. These resources are described specifically as
replacement resources and implicate BPA's statutory acquisition
authority under the Northwest Power Act. This $2-$6 billion
endeavor to bring on 1 to 3 gigawatts of renewables ignores the
fact that reliable 24/7 hydro might be replaced by variable and
intermittent resources, a setup for serious grid reliability
problems.
This U.S. Government agreement is evidence of CEQ's failure
in this process.
Thank you for your leadership and for hosting this hearing
today, and I will gladly answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Simms follows:]
Prepared Statement of Scott Simms, CEO & Executive Director,
Public Power Council
Good morning, Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, and members
of the Subcommittee. My name is Scott Simms, and I serve as the CEO and
Executive Director of the Public Power Council (PPC). While it is
always a pleasure to testify before this Committee, I wish it was under
better circumstances. The topic we are discussing today is the single
greatest threat to the Northwest's hydropower system in decades.
Background
PPC is the non-partisan trade association representing the
interests of non-profit, consumer-owned electric utilities in the
Pacific Northwest, which together serve millions of people and
businesses in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, western Montana, and parts of
Nevada and Wyoming. These large and small utilities in rural and urban
areas of the Great Pacific Northwest purchase electricity and
transmission services at cost from the Bonneville Power Administration,
or BPA--which is one of four U.S. federal Power Marketing Agencies
(PMA). BPA is the clean energy frontrunner among these PMAs, with a 95
percent emission-free power portfolio. The consumer-owned utilities
served by BPA collectively pay 70 percent of BPA's $3.9 billion annual
revenue requirement, with the remainder of BPA's budget covered by
sales to others, such as through short term surplus power sales to
other Western states. BPA is unique among the PMAs in that all of its
revenue requirements are provided by its customers and operations. As
well, all of BPA's consumer-owned utility customers are invested in
BPA's success, which includes ensuring BPA complies with its statutory
obligation to provide the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent
with sound business principles.
BPA markets power from 31 federal hydroelectric dams on the
Columbia River and its tributaries, plus the output of the Columbia
Generating Station, a nuclear power plant located on the Hanford Site
in Eastern Washington. BPA has more than 15,000 miles of high voltage
transmission lines and 261 Substations with a footprint of about 75% of
the total transmission resources in the Northwest.
The State of Salmon Today
As stewards focused on affordability and reliability, PPC member
utilities also have a solid environmental interest and are committed to
mitigating the impacts of Federal Columbia River Power System (FCRPS)
operations. As the most significant single contributor to the nation's
Endangered Species Act effort, we have a keen interest in ensuring that
fish mitigation measures are science-based, cost-effective, and have a
clear nexus with the operations of the FCRPS. Such actions serve dual
purposes--they promote the restoration of the region's valued
endangered and threatened species and, ultimately, reduce the impacts
on fish and wildlife and costs associated with FCRPS operations. We are
committed to paying our total mitigation share--no more and no less.
This balance enables PPC members to offer their communities affordable,
reliable and clean power in an environmentally responsible manner.
As a matter of perspective, BPA's total fish and wildlife expense
category, supported by public power revenues, stands at an average of
$685 million a year over the past 10 years. These funds and operational
concessions result in better habitat, critical land set-asides,
thriving hatcheries, robust fish predation reduction programs, Tribal
program partnerships that provide Tribal community jobs and the
application of on-the-ground Indigenous Basin expertise, fish friendly
hydro turbines and an exhaustive list of other meaningful
contributions. Sadly, in today's world, these steady and extensive
science-led investments in the Columbia River Basin do not grab the
headlines, though the achievements over time are certainly notable and
undeniable.
While these Columbia River Basin fish mitigation efforts are
producing measurable improvements in certain salmon runs--especially
when compared to the decimation of salmon from aggressive Columbia
Basin harvesting and cannery operations in the late 1800s to early
1900s before the FCRPS dams were constructed \1\--the successes of
today's mitigation efforts are rejected by those who refuse to
acknowledge the decades of steady progress. Even in recent years, the
Columbia River Basin recorded banner years of salmon returns in 2014
and in 2022. These successes are especially notable, though, when
considering the strong headwinds of continued off-shore and in-river
salmon harvesting, unfavorable ocean conditions, predation and impacts
from pollution that these fish face, among other factors.
Interestingly, as side note, recent news coverage of the pristine Yukon
River in Alaska is showing massive declines in Chinook and Chum salmon
varieties.\2\ This is very recent news on top of ongoing similar media
coverage of analysis of salmon returns up and down the West Coast,
which is a cause for overall concern. As context, continued Columbia
River salmon returns--though varied by year given factors mentioned
above--stand out as a bright spot in comparison to these other downward
trending West Coast stocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Northwest Power & Conservation Council Website, ``Canneries,''
https://www.nwcouncil.org/reports/columbia-river-history/canneries/
\2\ Marlena Sloss and Dino Grandoni, ``There's a crisis in the
Yukon River,'' Washington Post, December 3, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With so much concern about the state of the world's climate and the
desire among many of our nation's utilities and communities to have a
clean, reliable power portfolio such as ours in the Pacific Northwest,
why in the world would the US Government set out a path to breach these
highly productive, emission-free hydro projects?
FMCS Process Flawed from the Start
It's unfortunate that FCRPS operations have been mired by long-
running litigation, and that a lack of logic and reason seems to
prevail. Roughly 16 months ago, the federal district court judge
overseeing litigation on the Columbia Basin System Operations approved
a stay in that litigation. At the same time, the Council on
Environmental Quality (CEQ) engaged the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service (FMCS) to resolve the litigated issues. The stay
in litigation was launched with this US Government commitment:
``The Biden Administration is committed to supporting development
of a durable long-term strategy to restore salmon and other native fish
populations to healthy and abundant levels, honoring Federal
commitments to Tribal Nations, delivering affordable and reliable clean
power, and meeting the many resilience needs of stakeholders across the
region.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ``United States Commitments,'' Case 3:01-cv-00640-SI, Document
2423-2, Filed August 4, 2022.
Now, almost two years later, we are fully aware the US Government
fell far short of that mark, failing to meet ``the many resilience
needs of stakeholders in this region.'' In fact, one could legitimately
argue that the divisions between various stakeholders in the region
have only worsened as a direct result of the US Government's efforts
during this stay in litigation.
PPC entered these negotiations with guarded optimism that the
process would finally be pursued in a fair, confidential, and
collaborative way led by skilled third-party mediators. Regretfully,
our experience has been to the contrary. What has resulted is a
frustrating bureaucratic process with little discussion of new ideas
and much less progress toward a regional compromise. Confidentiality
has been conveniently used to protect ``private caucuses'' between CEQ
and select parties. Meanwhile, many official participants in the
process and their stakeholders have been left in the dark and have yet
to be equal parties despite, continued efforts to advance new ideas,
explore compromise solutions and share further information. Our voice
was not sought out, despite the dire financial and operational
consequences--and even health and human safety risks--that electric
utilities and their customers would face from ill-conceived
``agreements.'' Again, it's worth noting that public power utilities
pay the lion's share of FCRPS costs. Yet, we've been walled off from
CEQ and plaintiff party conversations inevitably involving future cost
obligations of Northwest ratepayers either from further operational
constraints; direct cash outlays--or both.
On November 27, 2023, PPC and other parties in the region \4\
received a copy of the 34-page confidential document titled ``U.S.
Government Commitments in Support of the Columbia Basin Restoration
Initiative and Partnership with the Six Sovereigns'' (US Government
Commitments). Simply put, PPC believes these commitments are egregious
and put into question our utilities' core mission of system reliability
and affordability. Further, PPC continues to be gravely concerned about
the ambiguity surrounding these obligations and the continued
uncertainty and associated risks that jeopardize the long-term value of
the Federal Columbia River Power System. The level of concern in the
region has risen in recent weeks as a group of Congressional offices
posted the U.S. Commitments document on November 29, 2023,\5\ widening
the aperture to the greater public and uncovering the secrecy
surrounding the development of these commitments over many months and
involving a very small number of interests in conjunction with the US
Government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ PPC received a copy of the USG Commitments from an email
forwarded by a reputable media organization on Nov. 27, 2023. Other
regional stakeholders stated they received a similar email that same
day.
\5\ ``Washington Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Dan Newhouse,
Oregon Rep. Cliff Bentz, and Idaho Rep. Russ Fulcher published the
draft mediation document Wednesday . . .''; Jennifer Yachnin, ``GOP
leaks draft settlement in Pacific Northwest dam dispute,'' E&E Daily,
November 30, 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
US Government Commitments Are Problematic In Many Ways
From the perspective of BPA customers, what the US Government has
proposed is an unthinkable venture with no upsides, only downsides.
Imagine being expected to sign a 20-year commercial real estate lease
when the landlord and the adjoining tenant negotiated the terms--you,
as the funder, were not present. The deal says the square footage can
be dramatically reduced at any point in the future. You may show up at
the space 1 day and find out that it's no longer wired for internet.
With vague initial lease price estimates and unknown hidden fees, you
are told the lease rate can change at any point, with the landlord
loading on even more additional costs later. Also, the adjoining tenant
can sue you at any moment, whether you've violated your lease terms or
not. No one would sign such a lease, yet the US Government expects PPC
member utilities and their customers to do so. Adding insult to injury,
the US Government keeps telling us and the rest of the region that it's
a ``good deal.'' Clearly, this agreement is anything but that.
The foundation for the US Government Commitments is built on sand.
On the first page, the agreement cites a 2022 report by the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) titled ``Rebuilding
Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead'' and says the ``science
is clear''--in reality, the opposite is true. Over a year ago, PPC
submitted (and has received no response to date) a detailed letter
citing official technical and scientific documents that pointed out the
many inaccuracies and shortcomings of the report.
Essentially, the NOAA report ignores the substantial increases in
salmon and steelhead abundance observed since ESA protections were
established in the 1990s--including some stocks returning in numbers
not marked before the construction of the dams. Abundance goals also
neglect to account for millions of adult anadromous and non-native fish
that are now part of the Basin's ecosystem. The report ignores
substantial contributions, neglecting to cite the considerable contrary
research from organizations that did not contribute to the report's
development. PPC remains committed to scientific and cost-effective
mitigation for the effects of the CRSO, but this single, unattributed
NOAA report should not be the foundation.
The US Government agreement itself is not an agreement at all.
Public power has no certainty or benefits from its sweeping actions yet
is poised through seemingly purposeful ambiguous language to leave the
door open to nearly all the costs and risks to be borne by public power
ratepayers. The deal features a ``Partnership with the Six
Sovereigns.'' The Six Sovereigns include the State of Oregon, the State
of Washington, the Nez Perce Tribe, Confederated Tribes and Bands of
the Yakama Nation, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian
Reservation, and the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs
Reservation.
No Forbearance = No Certainty
The basis for the mediation was to bring to an end the decades long
CRSO litigation. While the US Government Commitments seek to hold the
parties accountable for this specific litigation, there is no legal
forbearance for BPA, and it is unlikely to result in regional
certainty. Specifically, there is no protection in the agreement for
BPA and its customers from exposure to further operational changes
through CRSO claims not barred by the contract. For example, a claim
through the Clean Water Act would trigger a different court to order
new functional changes to address LSRDs' water temperature impacts that
could result in additional operational changes. The fact that the US
Government is settling with six parties does not preclude other non-
signatory parties or non-parties from bringing claims. As well, this
agreement does not rule out the prospect of other agreements the US
Government might accept from other parties, which could saddle
Northwest public power ratepayers with additional cost or operational
impacts--or, again, both.
The US Government Selects A Chosen Few Among Many Interests
This agreement also calls into question the US Government's secret
and prejudiced approach to recognizing certain interests and ignoring
others, notably the majority of federally-recognized Tribes and
multiple Northwest states--who are their own sovereign entities--along
with a long list of other interests that include navigation, water
users, recreation, ports, farmers, and--the party that has been
historically expected to pick up the majority of costs from such
ventures as this agreement--our non-profit, community-owned public
power utilities and their customers.
It's notable how few Tribes in our region were included by the US
Government as part of this agreement, considering the wide array of
sovereign Tribes and their lands that cover the Pacific Northwest.
Specifically, the US Government agreement describes that only four
federally recognized Tribes were part of this agreement out of a total
of well more than 40 Tribes and other Tribal interests in the Pacific
Northwest. To that end, as the secret agreement is starting to get more
exposure in the public domain, we are hearing more and more news from
other Tribes in the region who are expressing concern about this
narrowly-structured agreement that was developed in the absence of
consultation or consideration of other Tribes' interests.
Additionally, the two sovereign states of Oregon and Washington in
BPA's service territory were apparently involved in the formulation of
the agreement with the US Government, but the other sovereign states in
BPA service territory--Idaho, Montana, Wyoming and Nevada--were left
out. Interestingly, though the states of Oregon and Washington are part
of this agreement, ironically, many of these state's residents--
including low income and economically disadvantaged citizens in both
rural and urban areas--would likely see the most severe negative
impacts from increased electricity rates if this proposed agreement
moves forward.
BPA And Ratepayers Largely On The Hook For Costs
Among the most appalling components of the US Government
Commitments are the costs borne by ratepayers and the operational
impacts that will inevitably impact system reliability. The definite
BPA cost commitments are approximately $370 million. It breaks down to:
$20 million in combined capital and expense increases for
Fiscal Year 2024-2025,
$100 million for expenses over ten years for additional
projects,
$200 million in capital over ten years for Lower Snake
hatchery improvements, and,
$50 million for funding ``backlog'' projects from the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers.
Additional cost implications are unknown and could have a heavy
price tag borne by ratepayers, as there are references to other federal
agencies providing support, but no details on the appropriations and
budgeting strategy. There are also sizable and ambiguous cost
commitments, including an estimated $2 billion responsibility for a 10-
year ``Mid-Columbia Restoration Plan.'' Again, promises like this one
in the document are undefined and do not have a funding source.
The concerns continue to compound with the US Government committing
in this proposed agreement to develop between 1-3 GW of Tribal-owned
renewable ``replacement'' generation for the Lower Snake River Dams.
While the costs are unknown, initial estimates are that such an
investment could range from $2-6 billion in overnight capital costs
without addressing capacity replacement for dispatchable resources.
While the encouragement of Tribal-owned energy projects is a positive
and noble policy goal in its own right, the implication in this
agreement is that BPA would ultimately be the off-taker of these
resources, despite limitations in the Northwest Power Act allowing it
to do so. The agreement does not state that BPA shall NOT be compelled
to acquire the replacement resources. If the agreement did not intend
to compel BPA to acquire the replacement resources, then the agreement
should very specifically say so.
Energy and Environmental Economics Consulting (E3) conducted an
analysis on behalf of BPA that puts replacing the Lower Snake River
Dams at $415 million to $860 million annually by 2045. Rash decisions
to remove these hydro projects pose devastating consequences. The LSRDs
regularly are the defining line between keeping the power flowing and
parts of the West or being plunged into rolling blackouts. This was
certainly the case during the massive heatwave that gripped California
on Labor Day Weekend of 2022, when surplus electricity--including from
the Lower Snake River Dams--was sent to California just in time,
helping the state narrowly escape blackouts from its new historic peak
of 51 gigawatts of demand. We need more stable, available generation
capacity in the West, not less of it. And remember this point: as our
nation explores policy decisions that will require electricity to play
an even more prominent role in our lives, such as through vehicle
electrification, we will depend even more on the clean, reliable
capacity generation produced by our emission-free Northwest hydro
projects as part of the overall electricity supply in the West.
Conclusion
In total, BPA's cost exposure is significant. Our members
anticipate that under the best-case scenario, the impact on rates would
be 5%, and in the worst case, it would be 50%. Again, the costs and
operational uncertainty in this agreement as-is represents unacceptable
risks and a range of potential extra costs for Northwest ratepayers.
Because of so many encumbrances, quite simply, this proposed agreement
as it exists should be scrapped.
What we must do is return to the government's official record on
this matter. The September 2020 Record of Decision (ROD) from the US
Government on the CRSO Environmental Impact Statement is the decisional
document developed after a multi-year, transparent engagement overseen
by US Government officials who are based in the Northwest and who
engaged a wide array of stakeholders from the Northwest. The outcome of
this ROD arrived at a non-dam breaching solution, but outlined helpful
steps that can be taken for fish and for river operations.
This established CRSO ROD is the blueprint we should be following,
not a half-baked proposal developed in secret between federal agencies
in DC and just a handful of sovereign parties in the Northwest, and
then released to the public only after members of Congress--who also
had been kept in the dark--received a copy and shared it in the
interest of the public at large. This CEQ-led process was clearly a
failure from the start, throughout the duration, and now to this
unfortunate crossroads in which we grapple with this untenable proposed
US Government agreement.
The utilities I represent need to understand what the unknown
provisions and vague references in the USG Commitments mean, and we
need assurances that protect regional electricity consumers from
bearing the brunt of national policy commitments by their US
Government. Let's scrap this agreement as it stands, and do the hard
work necessary in a truly transparent and inclusive way that engages
all of us and our full range of perspectives in the Great Pacific
Northwest.
Thank you for your leadership and for hosting this hearing today.
We greatly appreciate the Committee's attention to this critical topic.
______
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. I will now recognize Members for 5
minutes for questions. The Chair recognizes Mr. McClintock for
5 minutes.
Mr. McClintock. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Simms, hydroelectric power is one of the cheapest
possible ways to produce electricity, is it not?
Mr. Simms. Yes, sir.
Mr. McClintock. It produces zero emissions, does it not?
Mr. Simms. Yes, sir.
Mr. McClintock. And it can be added or withdrawn from the
grid at a moment's notice. And since electricity depends on an
integrated grid, having such reliable electricity available at
a moment's notice is essential to support intermittent power
such as wind and solar, is it not?
Mr. Simms. Absolutely, sir. We always say that when the
wind doesn't blow and the sun doesn't shine, at least we have
hydro.
Mr. McClintock. And you have to have something to
immediately replace that hydro or the grid collapses. The
alternative is intermittent blackouts, is it not?
Mr. Simms. That is correct, sir.
Mr. McClintock. And we are seeing that more and more
wherever green energy is imposed on consumers, are we not?
Mr. Simms. Correct, sir. The capacity resources are
becoming even more important.
Mr. McClintock. So, what is to replace the lost
hydroelectricity when these dams are destroyed?
Mr. Simms. We don't quite know the blueprint of what would
be replacing these resources, frankly. There are talks.
Mr. McClintock. So, we are replacing the cheapest,
cleanest, and most reliable power, and have no idea how we are
going to replace it.
Mr. Simms. That is the concern, sir.
Mr. McClintock. And you said the potential cause for this
could be as high as a 50 percent increase in consumers'
electricity bills. Is that correct?
Mr. Simms. Adding $1 billion a year annually. Yes, sir.
Mr. McClintock. How much is that going to cost, just for an
average consumer's electricity bill every year? Have you
figured that out?
Mr. Simms. Well, I would easily ask Ms. Falkenberg for,
potentially, a consumer bill breakdown. But certainly, you
could see prices skyrocketing for families.
We know from northwestern Montana, Northwestern Energy just
had a 28 percent increase in their residential rates. And
families are really struggling to get by in that situation.
They don't have access to Bonneville's clean hydropower.
Mr. McClintock. California has now paid twice the rate for
electricity as the national average, precisely because of this
kind of environmental lunacy. And the result is that the
state's manufacturing base is disappearing, families and
businesses are now leaving. And one of the principal reasons
given is the outrageous price for electricity. The population
is now shrinking for the first time in the state's history.
This is the hell that the environmental left produces
wherever it seizes control. They obsess over a 1 degree
increase in global temperatures over the next century, but they
couldn't care less that they are making it impossible for
working families to heat their homes in freezing winters. It
seems to me there is a nihilistic vision of rationing,
shortages, skyrocketing electricity costs.
Let me ask you, what is your vision for the future, and how
do we get there?
Mr. Simms. My vision for the future is that we need every
resource that we can get in terms of clean, reliable power like
hydro. We don't need less of our hydro. We need more of it.
We have a situation in which we are seeing more
electrification across the country, more demands for
electricity as a basic human need, and we are needing every
kind of resource out there. Wind and solar have been certainly
a helpful addition; they are by no means the mover of the big
electrons.
Mr. McClintock. Well, when you say a helpful addition, at
enormous expense. Aren't those two of the most expensive ways
we have ever discovered to produce electricity?
Mr. Simms. A diversified portfolio of power is best, but
you need baseload resources like hydro, nuclear, and natural
gas.
Mr. McClintock. Well, but those are precisely the sources
of electricity that the left is forbidding, are they not?
Mr. Simms. If I may, sir.
Mr. McClintock. What does this mean?
Mr. Simms. I have a California example for you.
Mr. McClintock. Yes, sure.
Mr. Simms. When California gets in trouble, they often call
upon us to receive our hydropower in exchange.
Mr. McClintock. Yes.
Mr. Simms. Recently, on Labor Day of 2022, California
turned on every available natural gas generator, diesel
generators. They asked folks to take ships from the ports out
to sea to get rid of them so they didn't have to be in shore
power, and they desperately asked for every megawatt we could
provide from the Northwest Power System, which we did.
Mr. McClintock. In fact, we have depended for years on
surplus Bonneville hydroelectricity, have we not?
Mr. Simms. Absolutely, sir, and you still do.
Mr. McClintock. So, what does this mean to California
consumers?
Mr. Simms. California's consumers and Southwest consumers
absolutely depend on BPA hydro from the surplus reserves.
Mr. McClintock. We are told this is all for the salmon, but
we are about to tear down the iron gate to dam on the Klamath
River under this exact same kind of lunacy. The interesting
thing about that is when the Iron Gate dam goes, so goes the
Iron Gate fish hatchery that produces 5 million salmon smolts
every year, with 17,000 returning to the Klamath every year to
spawn. All of that will be gone. And then you do have a
catastrophic decline in the salmon population.
Why can't we just build a fish hatchery to replace these
fish?
Mr. Simms. If I may just answer the question very quickly,
Federal dams do provide the revenues to support a myriad of
things, including habitat production, hatcheries, and other
estuary actions that make the fish stronger.
Mr. McClintock. And the cold water that is necessary for
those fish hatcheries. Thank you very much.
Mr. Simms. Thank you.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Huffman,
Ranking Member Huffman, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Slater, I know we don't have an actual settlement
proposal yet. We are shadow boxing here with a hypothetical.
But is it your understanding of that potential settlement that
any lost hydropower capacity would have to be replaced before
dam removal could happen?
Mr. Slater. Yes. Congressman Simpson, Governor Inslee,
Senator Murray, conservation community, everybody agrees that
those dams could not be removed. The power cannot be taken off-
line until the power was replaced.
Mr. Huffman. And since Congress would have to authorize the
dam removal, Congress would have an opportunity to make sure
that that is a prerequisite. Correct?
Mr. Slater. Absolutely. It has always been my position that
Congress, only Congress, can authorize the removal of those
dams.
Mr. Huffman. So, all of this end-of-the-world, nihilist
hysteria is not only hypothetical, but not even possible, given
the way this type of deal would have to come together.
Mr. Slater. Yes, the lights are not going to go out in the
Pacific Northwest because those dams are removed.
Mr. Huffman. Do you feel it is appropriate to talk about
these leaked documents from a confidential settlement
negotiation?
Mr. Slater. Trout Unlimited is not a party to the
settlement. I don't know if the documents that were leaked are
accurate or what is going to come out in a couple of days.
Ironically, I think if it was a reverse, the Democrats leaked
it, I think we would be in Chairman Jordan's Committee right
now talking about this.
Mr. Huffman. Yes, I think there is about a 100 percent
chance of that.
Mr. Slater, I have been in your office with your former
boss, Mr. Simpson. I have seen that crazy wall that you have,
the beautiful mind wall where you have it all worked out. You
have clearly thought about every aspect of this, including the
complex challenges of making it work for all of the
stakeholders, and all of the interests, and all the
considerations that have been discussed here today. It is not
simple, but you and others have been giving a lot of thought to
this for a long time.
How should Congress engage in this discussion about the
future management of the Columbia River, including these lower
Snake River dams?
Mr. Slater. Congress needs to have an open and honest
discussion about the Northwest energy system, about the
Bonneville Power Administration, about fish recovery.
What we saw was that, in my belief, we need to reset the
Bonneville Power Administration. In 1937, the Bonneville Act
started building Bonneville Dam. It took whoops in the late
1970s to create the Northwest Power Planning Act. That was
about 50 years after the original. We are 50 years later now,
and we are trying to make this system work now. We should reset
it for the next 50 years, and instead we are trying to force
everything to work.
And it is absurd that this is the Bonneville fact sheet.
Those of us in the energy world love it. Best thing Bonneville
produces, as far as I am concerned. And when you look at it,
Bonneville is spending $932 million this year on fish costs.
And that is both direct, replacement, and purchased power.
Mr. Huffman. I was going to ask you about that. There have
been decades of litigation. Each new court order seems to
require some new attempt to keep these salmon runs on life
support, and it is not working so well, but it is hugely
expensive, right?
And is it fair to assume that those costs are only going to
increase, especially if the salmon populations continue to
decline because of inherent impacts from these lower Snake
River dams?
Mr. Slater. If salmon were doing well, we wouldn't be
spending that much money a year, nearly $1 billion. That is 20
percent of Bonneville's revenue that is going to fish and
wildlife costs.
Mr. Huffman. And it is not working.
Mr. Slater. It isn't working, and it is going to get more
expensive. And I contend the last salmon that goes to Idaho,
they are going to spend $1 billion trying to save it.
Mr. Huffman. Thank you, Mr. Slater.
I yield back.
Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Mr. LaMalfa.
Mr. LaMalfa. Mr. Slater, from testimony of colleagues and
others' letters and comments, et cetera, there is indeed
substantial opposition in the local area for a wide variety of
reasons. As was mentioned earlier, we can expect power rates to
increase up to 50 percent in an already strapped economy.
People are already struggling. So, that will just be passed
right along to them. As what my colleague, Mr. McClintock, was
speaking about, reliable, baseload, the cleanest possible power
at the lowest possible price, we are going to eliminate that in
order to breach these dams as is currently happening on the
Klamath in my own district, and part in Mr. Bentz's district,
to replace it with an unknown source of power. In this case
here that we are talking about, we will probably bankrupt
nearly 8,000 farms and lose $2 billion in revenue that farms
provide, as well as the food that people need and 15 percent of
the local workforce. So, it seems like the locals are being run
over in this process.
In the preamble of the Declaration of Independence,
``Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed.'' Mr. Slater, when you
hear these sorts of things and say, oh, we have all the
stakeholders at the table and such, and environmental community
and the tribes, it sounds like the local residents who really
have an expensive stake in this are not part of this.
So, if the obligation to get the consent of the governed
was removed, would you advocate for removing the dams tomorrow?
Mr. Slater. Well, the dam should come out. The salmon need
a river to get from the high elevation mountains of Idaho,
northeast Oregon to the ocean.
Mr. LaMalfa. At what price?
Mr. Slater. Well, I have a hard time with the premise that
power rates are going up that much when we are taking, at most,
15 percent of Bonneville's hydro off the system.
Mr. LaMalfa. But they don't build back the power.
Mr. Slater. But we can replace the power. It is already
being done.
Mr. LaMalfa. With expensive, unreliable solar or, even
worse, wind.
Mr. Slater. Frankly, it is being done----
Mr. LaMalfa. That is the only thing they will allow.
Mr. Slater [continuing]. In your state, California.
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, and my state is a freaking disaster.
Mr. Slater. It is a freaking disaster. And Elliot Mainzer,
the former Bonneville Power Administrator, is now in charge of
CAISO, the California Independent System Operator, and Elliot
Mainzer in the last 3 years has put in 6,000 megawatts of
battery storage and 3,000 megawatts of solar.
Mr. LaMalfa. Something has to charge the batteries.
Mr. Slater. Wind and solar do. If you are on the east side
of the Cascades, you get a lot of sun and very good wind.
Mr. LaMalfa. God, this place.
All right, Mr. Simms, Moody's credit rating agency
downgraded BPA's outlook to negative. In their analysis,
Moody's noted that the risk of a potential removal of the four
lower dams of the Snake River played a notable part in the
downgraded outlook. Annual costs associated with the
compliance, we have heard a number as much as $900 million. We
see at least $500 million.
The radicals have not yet succeeded in their desire to
breach the dams. But let's just skip to this, can you tell us
how the Public Power Council views this downgraded outlook? Is
it a small bump in the road, or is it a red flag warning for
power not only there, but for everywhere else?
Mr. Simms. Congressman, thank you for the question.
Obviously, Moody's downgraded BPA because they explicitly said,
``We are concerned about the lower Snake River dams and the
loss of that resource.'' The uncertainty presented caused
Moody's to put forth that downgrade.
If I may also just quickly address the issue around
California resources, I think that Mr. Slater conveniently left
out that there are new natural gas plants that have been added
and an emergency authorization for those plants. There is a
system to dispatch diesel generation there. There is a plan to
retire natural gas plants, and that was shelved, as well as a
nuclear plant that has been shelved because they need those
resources. Thank you.
Mr. LaMalfa. Barely. We barely, with aspirations by certain
individuals in California, they are looking at the numbers and
our grid is going to be in bad shape without 9 percent of the
whole grid being Diablo Canyon. We already lost 9 percent in
San Onofre. And we are finding out we are going to pay the
price.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congresswoman
Hoyle for 5 minutes.
Ms. Hoyle. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a comment as
opposed to a question.
I represent southwest Oregon, so the Columbia River and the
Snake River are not my district. But the issue we are
discussing today is a big deal for everyone in the Pacific
Northwest. The U.S. Government has been using confidential
mediation to reach a settlement following decades of litigation
on the Federal Columbia River Power System's impact on
endangered salmon, steelhead.
And normally we would have a more public process that we
would engage in with stakeholders. And that hasn't happened
because this is a response to litigation, which is problematic
for people that are impacted, but it is what it is. It is the
nature of things.
I do support salmon recovery in the Columbia River Basin. I
also recognize the need for affordable, reliable, clean energy,
as well as a strong regional supply chain so farmers can
efficiently get their products to market.
We need to find a way to power the grid and balance those
things, but we need to pick something to power the grid and
then move forward with that, because we can't just keep saying
no.
I am looking forward to seeing the results of the mediation
when they are released on Friday. And I hope that there is a
balance, because there really is a need to balance all of these
things. But I haven't seen the settlement, I have seen leaked
documents, but no one from the Federal Government or the state
of Oregon can speak to that yet. So, until Friday I am going to
wait and, hopefully, when we see what comes out on Friday, it
will be something that balances all of these needs.
And I don't envy anyone that has been in the position to
have to balance this, because it is very difficult. Thank you.
Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Ms. Hageman for 5 minutes.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you.
Mr. Simms, I have long expressed concern with the sue-and-
settle process, where third parties enter litigation in hopes
of reaching a certain outcome. However, this process often
occurs behind closed doors, outside of public view, and without
the input of all stakeholders. In your testimony, you note that
the Biden administration has engaged in private caucuses
between the Council on Environmental Quality and select
parties, while leaving other official participants and
stakeholders in the dark.
Mr. Simms, can you talk about the dangers of this process,
and what its results could be?
Mr. Simms. Yes, thank you for the question, Representative.
As Chairman Bentz outlined in the beginning of this
discussion, we did have a public process that culminated in
2020 with a Record of Decision. We do know the blueprint and
the template for good public process. It was more than 2 years
in the making. It was tens of millions of dollars. But it was a
process in which it was run from the Northwest for the
Northwest, and citizens had opportunities to turn out in
community meetings, they had a chance to go to meetings after
work, because there are a lot of working citizens out there
where every day and every dollar counts. And we had a terrific
process that came about with a resolution that was a non-breach
solution with some additional tactics and strategies that need
to be taking place.
As Chairman Bentz outlined, folks didn't like that answer.
So, now we find ourselves in litigation with the closed room
door exercise where six parties, the U.S. Government, and some
advice from the plaintiffs have apparently been involved in
creating this U.S. Government agreement that is now in the
public domain. And it is highly concerning.
I would add as well that the projections around costs not
are just from power, but from additional costs that would be
ladled upon BPA and its ratepayers from, again, the program
like the Mid-Columbia Restoration Program, which identifies
some government entity is going to pay for it. And in our
region, typically, the default, unfortunately, is Bonneville
and its customers.
Ms. Hageman. Well, and that segues into my next question,
which is what kind of opportunity cost economic analysis was
done in relation to this proposal to breach the lower Snake
River dams? Was there any?
Mr. Simms. To my knowledge, I do not know of any cost
analysis that was conducted by the U.S. Government for release
in this document.
Ms. Hageman. OK. That is one of the things that is so
bizarre to me in the entire discussion about global warming and
the climate crisis and all of the nonsensical words that are
thrown at us, is that nobody ever talks about the opportunity
costs associated with going down that road.
Do you believe in energy poverty?
Mr. Simms. Absolutely.
Ms. Hageman. Do you think energy poverty is a good thing?
Mr. Simms. I absolutely believe in energy poverty, and I
know it absolutely exists in the communities that my utilities
serve, both urban and rural. Absolutely.
Ms. Hageman. Would this proposal exacerbate energy poverty?
Mr. Simms. It would massively exacerbate it.
Ms. Hageman. Mr. Slater, do you believe in energy poverty?
Do you think that is a good thing?
Mr. Slater. There must be energy poverty where people are
paying higher prices, yes. Energy poverty couldn't be a good
thing.
Ms. Hageman. Do you think that is a good thing?
Mr. Slater. No.
Ms. Hageman. You don't think that is a good thing? Well, I
don't, either.
Ms. Falkenberg, do you believe energy poverty is a good
thing?
Ms. Falkenberg. No. And the impacts for those that are most
marginalized, that make the least amount of income, it ends up
being a regressive burden.
Ms. Hageman. Yes, it does.
And for our last witness, do you think that energy poverty
is a good thing?
Mr. Maunu. Not a good thing. No, ma'am.
Ms. Hageman. Almost every policy that this Administration
pursues results in energy poverty. In fact, they have adopted
and are pursuing policies that are intended to increase the
cost of energy because it is the only way that they can make
wind and solar appear to be cost effective.
I am going to read something here, because I think it is
very important for us to keep going back to the moment that we
are living in. This is a quote from an article that I read a
couple of years ago. ``The notion that government should
impoverish actual human beings as a means of promoting `the
welfare of humanity' is a pagan superstition on par with
sacrificing individuals to the sun god.'' I think that kind of
describes where we are at this moment in time.
I will read it again. ``The notion that government should
impoverish actual human beings as a means of promoting `the
welfare of humanity' is a pagan superstition on par with
sacrificing individuals to the sun god.''
I have one final question. Mr. Simms, do you think
prosperous countries do a better job of protecting the
environment than poor countries?
Mr. Simms. That is a great question. I think that we have
energy problems throughout the world, frankly. And I think that
for us and this country, I think we have great opportunity if
we don't squander it like removing the lower Snake River dams.
Ms. Hageman. Well, let's compare the Congo and the United
States. Who do you think does a better job of protecting their
environment?
Mr. Simms. The Congo or the United States?
Ms. Hageman. Yes.
Mr. Simms. I think presently I would say that right now we
have the United States, but we could lose that if we don't
watch it.
Ms. Hageman. And we would lose it because, if we lose our
prosperity and adopt and pursue policies that destroy our
economy, is that right?
Mr. Simms. We absolutely could have that prospect if we
don't watch our energy system closely.
Ms. Hageman. Thank you very much, and I yield back.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Congressman
Duarte for 5 minutes.
Mr. Duarte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the
panelists today.
I represent a district in California's Central Valley that
is a farm district. We have our water challenges there. We also
have some of the lowest income populations in the country. Our
poverty rate is the 18th highest in the country. We would like
that to be different, but it is not.
We know in California, well throughout the United States,
the lowest 20 percent income earners are spending about 33
percent or so on their food right now. You would think, with
food inflation the way it is, that would have gone up, but it
simply can't. So, we may well be the first generation in the
history of the United States to have our working families
taking produce, protein, dietary diversity, and nutrition off
their dinner plate in favor of a starch diet simply to make
ends meet.
We know that water scarcity is not only food scarcity, we
know it is energy scarcity. We have talked about that a lot. It
is also housing scarcity. We can't meet our housing needs in
California because we simply don't have the water resources to
permit new home building to meet market demand. Therefore, our
homeless rate is going through the roof, working families are
exodus.
We think tech entrepreneurs and government retirees are
retiring elsewhere with their pensions following them, but a
great deal of our exodus is actually working families simply
seeking the American dream someplace more welcoming than
California.
Now, we come here and we see in Washington, I guess
California sends us our immigrants as well as our policies, but
this isn't the first regulatory hurdle you have had. We live in
an area with a lot of reservoirs.
Tell me, if you will, Mr. Maunu, Mr. Simms, or Ms.
Falkenberg, are you going through FERC re-licensing?
Are you are already seeing other water grabs, other
hindrances on these dams?
We just heard that, hey, nothing is going to happen to
these dams until Congress allows it. But I think there is quite
a lot happening to our water energy resources without Congress
allowing it. So, I will take response from any of you on that.
Mr. Simms. Yes, it is a great question, and I would say it
goes back to the issue of we need more of what we have.
Essentially, you asked the FERC licensing question. The Federal
facilities that we are involved with, they have a little bit of
a different process than the other dams that are FERC federally
licensed. But I would say that, in general, licensing is
becoming more difficult. It is becoming much more of an
impediment. There are many more challenges than there used to
be.
So, all of those things add costs, they add time. And we
desperately need every resource we can, given, again, that we
have weather patterns that are changing, we have the needs of
electricity for fleets, we have a dramatic amount of needs
that, frankly, we need a wide array of electricity resources.
Mr. Duarte. I often find myself posing these arguments
similar to Representative Hageman's here, as the champions of
abundance are kind of in a death struggle right now on behalf
of the working families, mainly in America with the lords of
scarcity. Do you see yourself taking up sides in that battle?
Mr. Simms. I will tell you one that I watch very carefully
that I am very worried about is, and it is a world away from
us, but the African state of South Africa, they have been
plunged into blackouts and darkness because they did not invest
in their energy infrastructure. They are having rotating
blackouts where families with means are able to go to each
other's homes on a rotating basis, but their kids don't want to
stay there, they want to go to other countries where they have
a reliable system. And the poor folks, the impoverished folks,
they are the ones that are suffering the most.
Mr. Duarte. And that is a developing country. That is one
of our BRICs, right?
But even in the modern world today, I was reading an
article a few weeks ago in one of the major papers titled,
``Europe is Getting Poorer,'' and we have modern nations,
Germany and northern European nations, that were once rich
nations 30 years ago, kind of matching us here in the United
States, following these green energy policies, coming down to a
very human level, where young women are literally, at a very,
very alarming rate, freezing their eggs in their 20s and 30s so
that they can hope to afford to have children in their 40s and
50s. This is where these lords of scarcity policies get us.
And I thank you, three of you, for being the champions of
abundance. I won't give up our future generations. I won't give
up working family affordability. I won't give up on championing
for abundance so that somebody can try to save a few fish that
we may well be able to save through the efforts you are already
undertaking.
You are welcome to respond.
Mr. Maunu. Congressman, if I could just add one point to
the economic piece that you mentioned, and it was mentioned
earlier around any economic or socioeconomic studies that were
completed in this process.
I submitted in our record a report that the IPNG Group had
commissioned this summer. We believe it is the only
socioeconomic study done which really outlines and focuses on
potential poverty. It focuses on the 7,600 farms that would go
out of business just because the water table would drop, and so
many other points. Your point hit home on how much this impacts
farmers, and how much those secondary and tertiary effects can
reach. Thank you.
Mr. Duarte. Thank you very much.
Mr. Bentz. Mr. Mullin, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Mullin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Hello, all. Thank you for
taking the time to be here today.
I have been relieved to hear several witnesses acknowledge
the importance of clean energy, and I look forward to
discussing how diversifying clean energy sources can help our
country's needed transition. My question is for Mr. Slater.
In your testimony, you brought up a point that decades of
inaction have led us to where we are today in the Columbia
River Basin, and briefly mentioned what is at stake if we don't
look towards diversifying the energy and transportation system.
I wonder if you could further elaborate on the need to look
towards the future to plan new, reliable, and robust energy
sources, and how diversifying energy sources would positively
impact the entire region.
Mr. Slater. Thank you. I just really quick would like to
interject. I do think we have to recognize that the tribes in
the Northwest have also faced social economic impacts, and that
shouldn't be forgotten, either, in this conversation.
On diversification of the Northwest Power System,
especially Bonneville, when I was young, a long time ago, in
northeast Oregon, I would go up to the fair in early August,
and you would look at the mountains, the Wallowa Mountains at
Enterprise, there would be snowpack at the top of the
mountains, and it was always there. And now when you go there
in July, 3 weeks, 4 weeks earlier, the snowpack is nearly gone.
And we have a critical problem in the Northwest that, with
climate change, the snowpack is leaving earlier, a couple of
weeks, 3 weeks earlier than it used to. And I think the
greatest threat to Bonneville Power Administration and the
Northwest Energy System is not taking out these four dams. It
is the fact that 80 percent of Bonneville's generation is
hydropower, and that is all your eggs in one basket. And if we
have really, really short water years, the water comes out by
end of June, you can have serious problems come September,
October, November, well, it starts raining again around
September, October in Oregon. But that is a huge problem.
I actually think what the Biden administration is trying to
do with the renewable program is what we need. We need more
wind and solar. We especially need storage. That is what is
finally coming around. We have had the wind and solar. It is
the storage so that we can have firm power to deliver when the
wind isn't blowing and the sun is not shining. So, the
diversification of the portfolio is critical.
Mr. Mullin. Thank you, sir.
I yield back.
[Pause.]
Mr. Mullin. I yield back the balance of my time to Mr.
Huffman.
Mr. Huffman. I thank the gentleman for giving me just a
little bit of time, and I wanted to follow up with Mr. Slater
because we just heard some interesting hyperbolic flourishes
about pagan human sacrifice and lords of scarcity, young women
freezing their eggs because of radical environmental policies.
Mr. Slater, did you have any response to some of these?
They are giving hyperbole a bad name at this rate, but 15
percent, at most, of BPA's hydropower generating capacity if
these four lower Snake River dams are removed, and all of it
would have to be replaced before a single shovel breaks ground.
I mean, seriously? Do you think there may be hyperventilating
here?
Mr. Slater. Hydropower? Congressman Simpson, like myself,
hydropower is a good energy source. In this case, it doesn't
work. It doesn't work for the tribes, it doesn't work for the
salmon.
These four dams wouldn't be built today. They are not the
right place. And when we look at salmon going to the ocean,
they can get through four dams up to Yakima Basin and live in
sustainable growing numbers. John Day Basin does even better.
But the Snake River Basin, less than 1 percent of the salmon
return because of the smolt to adult ratio. So, that is not
sustainable.
And we can definitely replace the power of these dams.
Mr. Huffman. Without human sacrifice or forcing women to
freeze their eggs?
Mr. Slater. Yes, and we would probably be better off
diversifying about half of Bonneville's power to other sources.
Mr. Huffman. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Congressman Fulcher for 5
minutes.
Mr. Fulcher. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and to the panelists,
thank you for your testimony. I thought it was really good.
And, quite frankly, I don't have a lot of questions. I think,
between what you submitted in writing and your testimony, it
was very thorough and very good. We just all, obviously, don't
agree.
I would make some observations, however. Mr. Chairman, I
think it is really unfortunate that the guests that you
invited, the other guests, didn't appear. Yes, I had invited
one from NOAA, one from Council on Environmental Quality and,
obviously, they didn't come. I am not surprised, given the
circumstances. I know confidentiality, supposedly, is the
issue, but there are other issues, too. It would be awkward to
be in their situation. NOAA has flipped on this issue before.
There are some personnel transfers between one of the
plaintiffs, Earthjustice, and CEQ that would be awkward to
discuss. So, I understand why they are not here.
But what we have is a sue-and-settle mediation process.
And, yes, it is designed to bypass Congress. And it may not be
in the traditional breach of the dams or removal, but in how
the water is managed and controlling the flow or bypassing and
going around.
I am concerned about that. This is, in my view, another
attempt by the current Administration to promote an
unreasonable and irrational agenda for their energy policy. The
problem with this one is it would gut the Pacific Northwestern
economy as we know it.
Consider some facts. In year 2000, NOAA, National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration, basically said we needed to
breach these dams in order to save the salmon. Yet, in 2008,
2014 they reversed that position. In year 2022, the Biden
administration goes back to the notion that we have to do a
breach. So, what changed? Nobody told the fish.
What changed is the administration and the energy agenda.
It was political.
Some ramifications, and some of this has been touched on
but not all of it, 3,000 megawatts of hydropower right now, if
that were to go away, that is about 3 million solar panels or
1,830 windmills. We did some mapping. There is a poster that my
staff put together on that where just within Idaho, where that
would have to be, just geographically, and you see that
referenced on the map behind me, 1,830 windmills. And even
then, as has been pointed out, that is expensive peaking power.
That is not reliable baseload and water-stored energy.
Irrigation has not been talked about, or at least not in
any substantial degree. But the Columbia Basin, the Ag base
there is approximately 1 million irrigated acres. Removing that
control would be devastating for that.
Flood control, we haven't talked about that. What happens
during runoff with flood control? In Lewiston and Clarkston,
which are ports, Lewiston is within my district, Clarkston is
right across the border in Washington. Burgeoning industry for
recreation, cruising in particular, 25,000 passengers in 2019.
Tens of millions of dollars in industry. That would be gone.
Barging. We haven't talked about that in any great level of
detail, the impact on the barging. The Ag in the West exports
with barges across the country. That would have to be replaced
with about 200 train loads or 23 million miles of trucking.
Think of the carbon impact of that.
So, this idea of the breach is not good for people.
And there is one other thing. The science says there is not
even confirmation that it will work for salmon. That is why
NOAA has flipped on this issue. There have been studies of the
Fraser River system, which is just north, without dams with
similar fish flows. So, the ocean conditions and predators and
pollution, wildfire, the whole thing. There are so many factors
here.
To gut an economy, Mr. Chairman, to gut an economy with no
assurance of success is just a really bad bet for the
taxpayers, and for the ratepayers, and for people.
I yield back.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Rosendale
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Rosendale. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Chairman
Bentz and Ranking Member Huffman, I appreciate you holding this
hearing, and allowing me the opportunity to address these
extremely harmful policy decisions from the Biden
administration.
This issue is not just important, it is a slap in the face
of the hard-working people of Montana and the entire Northwest.
I find it fascinating that our colleagues across the aisle were
perfectly comfortable with the information about a pending U.S.
Supreme Court decision putting our justices in grave danger,
and potentially inciting hundreds, if not thousands to violate
the law by using intimidation tactics to try to change a
pending judicial decision, but are aghast by information which
affects the dismantling of critical infrastructure, and feel it
should be kept secret.
The secretive mediation surrounding litigation and
potential removal of these dams is an outright betrayal of the
citizens who depend upon this infrastructure. It is another
example of the Biden administration's cowardly attempt to
conceal its extremist agenda under the cover of darkness. Their
consistent denial of meaningful public feedback reveals a
blatant disregard for the public will, a will they are well
aware stands firmly against their destructive extremist
policies.
The Administration's exclusion of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming,
and Nevada from the agreement, confining negotiations to Oregon
and Washington, exposes the purely partisan nature of their
decision-making. The Administration's willingness to let
politically-aligned states dictate terms on behalf of others
with conflicting interests is a testament to their favoritism,
prioritizing political allies over the well-being of the entire
region.
There is no other country in the world that would spend
billions of dollars that have been invested in the improvement
of these dams which would provide affordable, reliable
electricity, irrigation for productive farm ground, feeding
millions, flood control to protect local communities, locks for
the transportation of products that we export around the world,
and, yes, fish passage both upstream and downstream to protect
fisheries, and then even have a conversation or consider
destroying all of that. It is insanity. No other country in the
world would do it.
The Administration's purported concern for the Columbia
Basin salmon and the steelhead trout lacks scientific
consensus, and their continued refusal to consider contrary
scientific evidence is infuriating and irresponsible. Their
continued usage of the phrase ``the science is clear'' reflects
their manipulative strategy trying to convince the public to
support their disastrous policies, dismissing any scientific
evidence that challenges their agenda. Despite strong salmon
returns in 2014 and 2022, the Administration continues to
disregard the resilience of these species.
Curiously, while claiming a policy of environmental
protection and reducing reliance on fossil fuels, breaching
these dams would exponentially increase fossil fuel usage in
our region, leading to an astronomical increase in truck
transit hours, soaring costs, and countless farms on the brink
of bankruptcy. The repercussions for producers, particularly
the increased cost and reduced marketability of crops like
wheat, will further disrupt the fragile supply chain, causing
potential catastrophe with elevated prices and decreased
availability nationwide.
Removal of irrigation capabilities from the river will
directly impact farms that contribute more than $2 billion to
the economy annually, and provide over 10,000 agriculture jobs.
Replacing these dams through alternative transportation modes
is projected to cost up to $860 million annually until 2045,
with an estimated total cost of $18 billion for the region.
The potential loss of jobs and industries further compounds
this damage. Energy costs could be skyrocketed up to 50
percent, as has already been mentioned, affecting over 100,000
Montanans relying on the Bonneville Power Administration and
jeopardizing the essential baseload power for many Montana co-
ops, especially during harsh winter months, when temperatures
remain below freezing for extended periods of time.
Mr. Chair, I see that I am out of time. I am going to yield
back. I have much more that I could say about this disastrous
idea, but I hope that we can, as they say, kill it in the
cradle. Thank you very much.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mrs. Gonzalez-
Colon for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I understand
that this is the district of my good friend, Mr. Newhouse, and
I do have questions, and I agree with the statements that have
been made.
My first question will be to my new Executive Director of
the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association. In your testimony,
you stated one of the primary concerns with the proposed U.S.
Government commitment documents is that it fails to address
river navigation as a critically impacted, congressionally
authorized purpose. Can you tell me the difference or elaborate
and discuss the potential impacts that breaching or removing
the lower Snake River dams could have on transportation
emissions supply chains, among other implications?
Mr. Maunu. Sure, thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
The short answer is it is drastic, it is dramatic. It is
hard to quantify. We have heard some numbers already around
economic impacts to farmers, to citizens.
I think the biggest, when you look at the document that is
public now, that has been leaked, it is clear that navigation
is missing from that document. If you do a word search for how
many times ``navigation'' and ``infrastructure'' are brought
up, I don't know that it is even once that navigation is
discussed.
So, when we look at a 37-page document, and we look at all
the money that is thrown at this plan, and again, it is out
there in public, anyone can read it, it is disheartening. And
it just points to the fact, as I said in my testimony, that
transportation and barging in particular has been completely
left out of this process.
Just as the Congressman from Montana said, as Idaho and
Montana have not been included, we, though we are defendant
intervenors, have not been included in this process. And it is
devastating to our members, from farmers, to barge operators,
to cruise ship lines, to ports. It is up and down, up and down
the area.
Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you.
Ms. Falkenberg, could you tell us how the proposed
agreement or settlement will impact the affordability and
reliability of electrical power on your customers?
Ms. Falkenberg. Thank you, Congresswoman, for the question.
The uncertainty in the delivery of power has significant
impacts to us as we negotiate with BPA our 20-year contract. We
take something called a take-or-pay contract for the duration
of 20 years with a fixed system size. Should that system size
diminish, we are still on the hook to pay for the costs
associated with that. That is first.
Second, there is an issue of reliability, particularly
related to the lower Snake River dams. I understand that some
of my colleagues associate the production from renewable
resources as being the same as the production from the lower
Snake River dams. In fact, they are not. Twenty-five percent of
ancillary services come from the lower Snake River dams. Those
ancillary services provide operating reserves. Those are
emergency services in order to keep the grid stable. Those are
laws of physics to balance 60-second demand and load curve.
Those are absolutely necessary.
And that is not to diminish the value of fuel-saving
resources like wind and solar. They are just different. They
provide a different form of energy.
Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. And they will be more expensive.
Ms. Falkenberg. Yes. The lower Snake River dams, according
to Bonneville, cost about $14 to $15 a megawatt hour, which is
1.4, 1.6 cents a kilowatt hour. Our retail customers pay 6.3
cents a kilowatt hour. That is a considerable value to having
them in our resource portfolio to help reduce the overall cost
for purchased power. It is a significant impact, especially for
those that are most marginalized.
Mrs. Gonzalez-Colon. I totally agree with you. Having said
that, I will yield the rest of my time to the Chairman.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you for yielding.
I just want to mention how odd it is that folks would be
flailing out at the fact that we have this document in front of
us when it is of such importance to all of those that are here.
Thank goodness we have it. I am not sure what value would occur
to those who developed it by keeping it hidden for another 3
days, but I am very happy we have it in front of us.
The Chair recognizes Mr. Zinke for 5 minutes.
Mr. Zinke. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for showing
up.
As was just discussed with my colleague from Idaho, dams
are not just power, although much of the discussion has been
power. But dams provide water, irrigation, flood control,
recreation, and infrastructure. In fact, it is a system,
transportation being one of them. And we built a system over
years to do just that, provide a system.
In one case on fish, when the lower Columbia, I believe,
needed more water, they took water out from Hungry Horse Dam in
2001. So, it is a system. When one part of the system needs
more water because we store it, we can. And I don't think there
is any question that hydropower is reliable, it is affordable,
it is abundant.
And affordability should not be overlooked, not just for
those communities that are in the poverty line, but also
manufacturing. You can't build anything in this country unless
you have cheap power, because we pay about the same price for
commodities, but we pay a higher price for labor, and we have
to make up the difference to be competitive with power.
I guess my concern really is sue, settle, and seal. And
when I was Secretary, there was a policy in place previous that
sometimes the Department would make a rule that perhaps would
invite a lawsuit. Those lawsuits were immediately met by
colleagues on the radical side, and would sue. And then what
would be most disturbing is that sue would then be settled and
sealed.
I recall one time, the President of the United States and I
had a discussion. ``Mr. President, what is this settlement? I
would like to see it, sir. It came from seal by the Department
of Justice.''
And the President of United States did not have the
authority to see it. Not only the President and executive not
have an authority to see it, but neither did Congress. And such
acts of sue, seal, and settle, to me, is a violation of the
Constitution, particularly Article I, section 9 that says no
money should be withdrawn for the Treasury unless by
Consequence of appropriations.
So, now what I smell is, if not by law, we are going to
develop a lawsuit with a path to settle and seal. That is
disturbing. It is disturbing because it breaks that
transparency of stakeholders, and there are many stakeholders
in a dam, and not just the fish. And believe me, I respect and
love the salmon. But salmon is not the only interest in our dam
system.
So, I guess my question to you, Mr. Slater, is because you
are an expert, and you worked with Chairman Simpson. I have
long enjoyed his remarks. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we
don't agree. But I know where his heart is, and I deeply
respect Chairman Simpson. And you, as the chief of staff, have
an enormous knowledge, and this is not your first rodeo. So,
given that you are an expert in this field, and CEQ came up
with this document, did you or Trout Unlimited participate in
this formation of this document?
Mr. Slater. Nobody asked me what I thought, and Trout
Unlimited was not a participant in that document at all.
Mr. Zinke. Do you know anyone that is in the non-profit
world which we deal with that participated in this?
Mr. Slater. I know that the plaintiffs were Idaho
Conservation League and National Wildlife Foundation. And
Sierra Club might have been a part of that, as well.
Mr. Zinke. Isn't it troubling that the Congress of the
United States is not a participant, that we have energy, we
have transportation, we have recreation, none of these bodies
were in participation. Does it bother you?
Because you are an expert. I would have figured as a SEAL,
I can tell you I was never the best jumper, diver, explosive
expert, but I always knew who was. And the art of leadership is
you find the best people. And I always said on this issue, I
can't think of anyone that is more competent in knowing the
ground, the history, the goals, and the consequences than you.
So, do you find it strange that Trout Unlimited was not at the
table?
Mr. Slater. Well, we are not plaintiffs to the lawsuit.
Mr. Zinke. But even to the advice of what is going on?
Mr. Slater. No, they are secret. I mean, they are not
secret, they are settlement talks.
Mr. Zinke. Well, the trouble I have, they are secret.
Mr. Slater. They are settlement talks, yes. And we are not
included in those discussions. They are legal discussions.
Mr. Zinke. Well, what bothers me is we weren't, either. And
we are a branch, and we have reasonable people on both sides of
the aisle, believe it or not. But we should be a part of it. To
me, it is skirting the law.
So, let me ask Ms. Falkenberg, and thank you for coming. Do
you know of anyone that was involved with it? Were you ever
called and said, well, maybe we should have some data on this
before they put this draft out?
Ms. Falkenberg. Thank you, Congressman. The plaintiff
intervenors include Northwest River Partners and Public Power
Council. However, the information shared with the plaintiff
intervenors was extremely limited. The procedural justice
demonstrated between FMCS and CEQ essentially precluded direct
communication between the plaintiff intervenors to nearly 3
million people in the Pacific Northwest.
We were unable to speak to our ratepayers. It wasn't until
November 27, when the document became into the public domain
related to the U.S. commitments that we actually learned what
was in the documents. And it was at that time, upon reading the
content of the document, that I actually became quite alarmed.
Up until that point, I was like maybe this isn't such a big
deal. But when I read those documents, and they are one of
three, the other two are not public yet, the commitments, I was
significantly alarmed for the future uncertainty of our
ratepayers in Pacific County and the Northwest.
Mr. Zinke. Thank you. It doesn't sound like we, the people.
And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the extension of time.
Mr. Bentz. Thank you. The Chair recognizes Mr. Newhouse for
5 minutes.
Mr. Newhouse. Chairman Bentz, Ranking Member Huffman, I
appreciate the chance to be a part of this hearing. I also
appreciate the other Members and guests, both questions and
answers on something that is very, very important to me and to
my constituents.
The Columbia River System, the operation of that system,
including the lower Snake River dams, I can't think of anything
more critical to central Washington and the rest of the Pacific
Northwest. If these dams were breached, either literally or
functionally, those that would be negatively impacted would be
electricity customers, transportation stakeholders, river-
dependent ports, communities up and down the Pacific Northwest,
farmers, recreationalists, practically everyone living in the
region.
Back in September, I participated in another hearing by the
Natural Resources Committee, Mr. Chairman, on this very issue,
and I asked Mr. Simms questions about the CEQ, or the Council
for Environmental Quality, their lack of transparency regarding
the litigation and the inadequate solicitation of stakeholder
input, something that Mr. Zinke was just asking some good
questions about.
So, Mr. Maunu, I wanted to ask you a similar question.
Going into the mediation, tell me some of the expectations
that your organization had for this process and for how CEQ
handled it.
And then, in addition to that, in your testimony, you
stated that the intervenors were effectively excluded, the
defendant intervenors were, and I think Ms. Falkenberg just
said that too, from the litigation negotiations that were
taking place in this process.
So, how early in the process did this mediation break down
to the point where you and fellow stakeholders were excluded? A
couple questions there.
Mr. Maunu. Sure, thanks for the questions, Congressman.
I think as far as for expectations, first and foremost, our
organization, like was mentioned previously, we looked at this
as an opportunity for a collaborative process, for a fair
process, and a transparent process. That is not too much to
expect. If you are in a court-ordered mediation, a normal
mediation is a negotiation. It may be confidential, but there
is give-and-take, there is sharing of information, there is
collaboration toward an end goal.
And very early on, though, there were some working groups,
I guess they called them at the time. There were some working
groups that really quickly dissolved within the first few
months into the private caucuses. And as was mentioned in some
of our testimonies here, those private caucuses are 100 percent
just between CEQ and FMCS and either the defendant intervenor
or plaintiff interveners. And anything that is shared in those
is not shared, nor discoverable, or anything else.
We, as I mentioned, throughout that process kept submitting
information. We have a lot of records of the studies that we
did and what we submitted. And we heard nothing back on our
side.
Mr. Newhouse. Thank you.
Mr. Simms, prior to the December 15 deadline, this draft
settlement agreement was released. And shortly thereafter, a
handful of Northwest public power utilities published a press
release where they threatened to pause discussions with BPA, or
Bonneville Power, over the post-2028 contracts because of the
contents of the settlement agreement.
Specifically, you expressed concerns regarding the impact
the draft settlement would have on taxpayers. Could you tell us
a little bit of detail about that, and how ratepayers might be
negatively impacted?
Mr. Simms. Sure, Congressman, and thank you for the
question.
I think what you see from the utilities is a response to
this overwhelming uncertainty that was essentially foisted upon
them from seeing this agreement in public, realizing the
massive expanse of exposure from costs, from operational
uncertainty, from other commitments that the U.S. Government
was making on behalf of the U.S. Government writ large, but no
express provisions of how different agencies might take on that
burden.
And I think you, Congressman, know well that in our region
often the BPA ratepayers and BPA become beholden to U.S.
Government commitments. And this was definitely one of those
concerning elements.
So, the utilities very quickly formed a strategy to say to
Bonneville we need a 5-year contract option on the table so we
can compare it to the 20-year contract option. And our Chairman
at PBC, Bear Prairie from Idaho Falls, said it very well, ``Why
would I write a 20-year blank check when I could write a 5-year
blank check?''
And the point is the utilities are facing such extreme
uncertainty that they want to make sure that they can keep
Bonneville a little bit more on a short leash and see what is
coming at them.
Mr. Newhouse. Thank you for that.
And I appreciate you allowing me to go over time, Mr.
Chairman.
Thank you guys for your testimony today.
Mr. Simms. Thank you.
Mr. Bentz. The Chair recognizes Chair McMorris Rodgers for
5 minutes.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for
allowing me to join today on a very important discussion, a
very important topic for the people that I represent in eastern
Washington and the Pacific Northwest.
Hydropower accounts for more than 80 percent of the energy
in our region and yet ``dam breach'' or ``dam breaching'' is
mentioned 11 times through this exclusionary and secretive
package of commitments, which I would like to submit for the
record, Mr. Chairman.
The package also calls for including and advancing an
``urgent, comprehensive strategy to restore salmon and
steelhead to healthy and abundant levels.'' Mr. Maunu, from
your understanding, how is the Administration defining the
terms ``healthy'' and ``abundant?''
Do you think that this is the correct measure to be using?
Mr. Maunu. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman. A
super short answer is no, I don't know.
We think everyone can agree that healthy and abundant
sounds great. It is the goal, one of the goals that our
organization has is to invest in healthy habitat restoration
and to see salmon runs flourish. But for this specific
litigation, it is around the ESA, and it is around jeopardy. It
is not around healthy and abundant.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you. And I would just note that term is
not included in ESA, that term has never been defined by
Congress.
Mr. Maunu. Right.
Mrs. Rodgers. Last month, we wrote a letter to the
President asking questions to help us determine exactly what
this agreement means for those whose livelihoods depend on the
dams. And although we have yet to receive a response, it seems
that the U.S. Government plans to replace 24/7 baseload energy
provided by the dams with intermittent renewable energy under a
new Pacific Northwest Tribal Energy Program.
Ms. Falkenberg, in his testimony Mr. Slater states that,
``These dams contribute less than 1,000 megawatts annually.''
Is that accurate?
And can you speak to the value these dams bring to the
region?
Ms. Falkenberg. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman.
At average water, a thousand average megawatts of
electricity is generated out of the lower Snake River dams. The
nameplate capacity for these projects is between 2,500 to maybe
3,000 megawatts. These projects provide, as I mentioned
earlier, 25 percent of ancillary services, specifically the
Automated Generation Control, AGC. These are operating reserves
that trigger on demand on an emergency-need basis.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
Ms. Falkenberg. So, when there is a polar vortex, we need
to turn them on, they go on.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
Mr. Simms, in a recent statement you said, ``This package
of commitment poses the single greatest threat to the viability
of the region's hydropower system we have ever faced.'' Would
you briefly explain what you mean by that?
Mr. Simms. Absolutely. Thank you for the question,
Congresswoman. It is a package of issues between the
operational side and the uncertainty it faces, the monstrous
costs that would be foisted upon public power, and, of course,
the litigation uncertainty that would continue to pervade.
There is no forbearance, meaning other parties could simply
pile on lawsuits and other operational constraints for BPA and
its customers.
I might quickly add, as well, today there was a mention of
the Endangered Species Act elements and mitigation work. We
take our mitigation investments very seriously, and folks were
sort of downplaying what have we gotten. We have gotten tribal
employment, we have gotten habitat set-asides, we have gotten
hatcheries, we have predation reduction programs with the local
employment. We have a lot of things that are coming out of that
$700-million-a-year investment.
Mrs. Rodgers. Thank you.
Mr. Slater, I would like to ask what Trout Unlimited has
done to help clean up water pollution in places like Puget
Sound, which, according to GAO, is a mass contributor to the
lethal and non-lethal effects on salmon most critical to the
endangered orca.
Mr. Slater. Trout Unlimited, we are doing significant
conservation projects and work in the Puget Sound. You are
right to point out the rivers became disconnected from the
sound, and we have to reconnect it. We have to get the culverts
replaced with salmon, safe, passable passage. And there is a
lot of work to be done. And we are doing it.
Mrs. Rodgers. What salmon runs are most important to the
orcas?
Mr. Slater. Snake River runs are apparently important to
the orcas.
Mrs. Rodgers. Which ones are most important?
Mr. Slater. Well, on a scientific basis I couldn't tell you
which exact one.
Mrs. Rodgers. OK, I believe it is Puget Sound.
Mr. Slater. OK.
Mrs. Rodgers. And those salmon runs are on decline because
of the mass lethal and non-lethal effects of pollution on the
salmon in Puget Sound. Those are the most important salmon to
the endangered orca, and the salmon runs on the lower Snake are
improving.
I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. Bentz. I thank you. The Chair recognizes himself for 5
minutes.
I am annoyed by this constant reference to the fact that it
is Congress and only Congress that can authorize breaching of
the dams, because I take that as a red herring. Probably the
wrong word in this hearing.
But the point of the matter is there is a memo floating
about which I had the opportunity to look at before we held our
hearing up in June. And the memo was utilized and is being
utilized in the litigation that led to this mediation document.
The memo suggests that, if Judge Simon so desires, he can
operationally reduce the pools behind the dam, reduce the
ability to generate power, and reduce the ability to use the
river for navigation. And that would not be an Act of Congress,
would it?
So, it irks me that there is this constant repetition of
the fact that everything is fine because Congress will have to
act, when in point of fact there are already memos floating
about that suggest that the dams can be basically prevented
from operating through judicial fiat. So, really, what I see
when I saw the so-called secret document, and someone else
leaked it, we didn't. When I saw it, I thought, well, this is
merely a means of creating a framework so when the judge does
choose to operate, and I hope he doesn't, in that fashion,
there are things in place to try to dampen the unfortunate
effects of such a thing.
But I am going to set that aside and go back to the healthy
and abundant standard, because I find that so amazing. It is
not in the leaked document, is it? It is in the document that
was cranked out just a few months after NMFS had found that
there was no jeopardy. And then suddenly we see this document
that rebuilding interior Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead to
healthy and abundant levels. And as Chairwoman McMorris Rodgers
pointed out, that has no business in this particular
litigation.
But my real question to you, Mr. Simms, is who pays? Who
pays to re-establish these runs to a level probably not seen in
the last couple of hundred years, given the nature of the fish?
Please put up the chart that has the fish runs in it.
[Chart.]
Mr. Bentz. But the point is, who pays? Isn't it the
ratepayers of the Northwest that are now going to be saddled
with the burden of bringing these fish back to these healthy
and abundant levels? Is that correct?
Mr. Simms. It is certainly our concern that it could be the
default, as I have said before, that when appropriations are
not outlined, when agencies don't step up for budgets, and we
clearly did not see any of that in the documents that were made
public, that very often Bonneville and its ratepayers are put
on the hook for all of those costs.
Mr. Bentz. Yes, but this is what we would call a
progressive goal to achieve, healthy and abundant. It is not
certainly to avoid jeopardy.
Mr. Simms. That is right.
Mr. Bentz. So, what is going on? It is kind of a means of
imposing an obligation upon the people of the Northwest to pay
millions, if not billions to reach healthy and abundant. What
is going on with that?
Mr. Simms. Congressman, it is an unachievable standard, and
it is not a defined standard, I think, as Neil from PNWA
outlined earlier. It is one in which it is an aspirational and
not at all rooted in the ESA.
Mr. Bentz. And forgive me for interrupting, but you also
used the phrase ``BPA induced to acquire'' some of the
electricity that is going to be generated by these green
sources that would be paid for under the so-called mediation
agreement, ``induced to acquire.''
Now, I know there is a law that suggests that the power
needs to be purchased from tribes in certain situations.
Mr. Simms. Right.
Mr. Bentz. But this document goes quite a bit further than
that. Can you share your thoughts?
Mr. Simms. Sure, absolutely, yes. As I said in my written
and oral testimony, basically the induced to acquire and the
replacement resource label seems very highly inappropriate,
given that the Northwest Power Act clearly defines Bonneville's
acquisition authority for additional resources. There are many
hoops that Bonneville must go through and many processes that
it must go through in order to acquire energy.
My belief, having looked at the document, is it is very
muddy, and walks right up to the edge, and will potentially
harness a future administrator or the current administrator to
have to look myopically at one source.
Mr. Bentz. Right. And forgive me, but I need to go to Ms.
Falkenberg for just a moment.
Mr. Simms. Yes.
Mr. Bentz. You mentioned in our pre-hearing discussion that
the lack of certainty was already creating difficulties in how
you are representing your ratepayers. Can you share your
thoughts?
Ms. Falkenberg. Yes, thank you for the question, Mr.
Chairman. When we have uncertainty on our power supply, that
has downstream implications to how we are going to create our
tariffs for our customers.
If the proposed rate increase is anywhere from 5 percent to
50 percent, our wholesale power supply makes up 50 percent of
our total budget. So, if that is making up 50 percent of our
budget, then we need to pass on those direct costs to our
ratepayers. And it creates an untenable uncertainty for us,
sir.
Mr. Bentz. I am going to have to stop you there. And I want
to share all of it. We have to go vote, but I have to read a
few things in before we can run out the door. I want to thank
all of you for your testimony. I truly want to thank you for
traveling here and, of course, the Members for their questions.
Members may have additional questions for witnesses. I ask
you to please respond to them in writing. Under Committee Rule
3, members of the Committee must submit questions to the
Subcommittee Clerk by 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, December
14. The hearing record will be held open for 10 business days
for those responses.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record documents
received by the Committee which are: a letter to President
Biden from Montana Governor Greg Gianforte expressing concern
over the far-reaching implications of the Biden
administration's commitment document for Montana residents; a
letter to Secretary Granholm from the American Public Power
Association and the National Rural Electric Cooperative
Association expressing concern that the Biden administration's
commitments would jeopardize electric reliability and increase
costs for millions of Americans throughout the Pacific
Northwest; a letter from the Pacific County PUD to DOE Deputy
Secretary David Turk expressing concerns with the mediation
process; a letter from the Public Power Council members to NOAA
from June of this year talking about the importance of the
lower Snake River dams; and finally, a letter from the Pacific
Northwest Waterways Association to the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Service and Council on Environmental Quality
expressing concern regarding the Biden administration's
proposed commitments.
Without objection, so ordered.
[The information follows:]
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR
STATE OF MONTANA
December 8, 2023
President Joe Biden
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear President Biden:
I am concerned that the recently proposed settlement with the Nez
Perce and other lower Columbia River Treaty tribes has negative, far-
reaching implications for Montana residents and the economy of the
entire northwest United States. This proposed settlement will impact
the operations of federal dams located in the Columbia River system and
thereby impact the Montana citizens that rely on these dams for
reliable, low-cost electricity. Montanans simply cannot afford higher
electricity rates.
I am frustrated that the negotiations for this settlement were
carried out in secret. Both the states of Montana and Idaho, as well as
the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) were locked out of these
discussions and were not given a chance to defend their respective
interests in the matter. This closed-door process excluded the State of
Montana despite our long-term status as an intervenor-defendant
supporting the federal government, public power interests, and BPA
itself. It is impossible to have confidence that this proposed
settlement reflects an honest balancing of the interests at stake here.
The result of this flawed negotiation process is a proposed
settlement that will likely have significant negative economic impacts
across the region. The operational changes in the settlement by the
federal government entities will likely reduce electricity supply at a
time when the region is facing ever increasing demand and reliability
concerns. This almost guarantees that rates will rise for Montanans
that purchase power from BPA. Over the long term, this settlement
proposal could pave the way for breaching the Lower Snake River Dams
(LSRD), which would be catastrophic for Montana electricity consumers
and the agriculture industry in the northwest United States. The cost
of replacing the clean, reliable electricity produced by these dams
would be staggering, not to mention the loss of such a key shipping
corridor for Montana agricultural products.
For these reasons, I request that your administration take the
steps necessary to rescind this proposed settlement and reopen
negotiations on these critical issues. The State of Montana has been
heavily involved in the discussions surrounding salmon recovery and the
operations of the federal dams in the Columbia River drainage for
decades. It is unacceptable that Montana is locked out of decisions
that will impact its citizens.
Sincerely,
Greg Gianforte,
Governor
______
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association
and
American Public Power Association
December 1, 2023
Hon. Jennifer Granholm, Secretary
U.S. Department of Energy
1000 Independence Ave. SW
Washington, DC 20024
Secretary Granholm:
The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (``NRECA'') and
American Public Power Association (``APPA'') are alarmed by the Draft
Mediated Agreement, entitled ``U.S. Government Commitments in Support
of the Columbia Basin Restoration Initiative and in Partnership with
the Six Sovereigns'' (``Draft Agreement'') recently released by
Congress. If this Agreement is ratified, it would jeopardize electric
reliability and increase costs for millions of Americans throughout the
Pacific Northwest.
The Draft Agreement clearly shows that the Administration's goal is
dam breaching, a conclusion that runs counter to decades of studies,
science, and governmental actions, and an outcome that would
destabilize the economy of an entire region of the nation. Not only
does this expose a severe lack of understanding about the importance of
keeping the lights on, it also reveals a misplaced desire to undermine
our nation's essential emissions-free hydropower system without
considering the cost.
The Draft Agreement would weaken the Administration's stated
greenhouse gas reduction goals by undermining hydropower, an always
available, emissions-free source of electric generation critical to
grid stability. As our nation depends on electricity to power more of
the economy, we need more generating resources--not fewer. This
proposal flies in the face of common sense and would make hydroelectric
operations unnecessarily costly and unstable. BPA's hydropower system
forms the backbone of reliability in the region. Communities across the
West, including those in rural America, many of which are located in
persistent poverty counties, would suffer the brunt of these impacts.
In addition to the severely questionable obligations of the Draft
Agreement, NRECA and APPA also have significant concerns about the lack
of transparency inherent in this Columbia River System Operations
(CRSO) mediation, as well as the Council on Environmental Quality's
(CEQ) Request for Information on the management of the CRSO (Docket No:
CEQ-2023-0002). This process has shut critical stakeholders and parties
out of this Agreement and the administrative process. It has deprived
our members in the Northwest, intimate stakeholders in CRSO operations,
and millions of their customers of having fair representation in these
proceedings.
We strongly oppose the ratification of the Draft Agreement. The
reliability of the Western electric grid is critical to continued
national security, stability of our domestic food and mineral supplies,
national economic stability, and our nation's energy security.
Reliability should be prioritized as the U.S. Government moves forward
in assessing the legality and appropriateness of these proposed
obligations.
Moreover, the Administration should engage in an open and
transparent process with our members, all CRSO stakeholders, and
Congress to address our concerns going forward.
Respectfully,
Jim Matheson, CEO Scott Corwin, CEO
National Rural Electric
Cooperative Association American Public Power Association
______
PUBLIC UTILITY DISTRICT NO. 2
OF
PACIFIC COUNTY
November 22, 2023
David Turk, Deputy Secretary
U.S. Department of Energy
Dear Deputy Secretary Turk:
I had the pleasure of meeting you and your staff twice this year.
Our first meeting on March 8th, 2023, convened at U.S. Department of
Energy headquarters with Public Power Council (PPC). Our second meeting
on June 14th, 2023, held with Senior Policy Advisor John Podesta at
Bonneville Power Administration offices in Vancouver convened for the
Pacific Northwest meeting on the Federal Columbia River Hydropower
System.
As Pacific County PUD's (Pacific) Power Resources Manager, it is my
responsibility to manage and oversee all wholesale power supply costs.
Pacific is a full requirements customer of Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA), and we are members of Public Power Council (PPC)
and Northwest River Partners (NWRP). We are a not-for-profit consumer
owned utility. For the past 80 years, Pacific has relied on BPA to
supply reliable, affordable, and low carbon wholesale electric power.
For the past few years, Pacific has in earnest engaged with BPA on the
next ``Provider of Choice'' 20-year contract as our current contract
expires in 2028. Accepting long-term power sales contracts is amongst
the most significant actions our utility undertakes; we do it with
utmost care and thought towards long-term intergenerational impacts
that will last well beyond 2044.
Also, as an Officer and Vice Chair of Allocations, Rates and
Contracts Committee for PPC, I'm concerned at the lack of procedural
and distributive justice on part of the concealed negotiations between
the U.S. Government (USG) and the select parties from the Columbia
River System Operation litigation (CRSO). Council on Environmental
Quality (CEQ) engaged Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS)
to attempt to make progress in resolving issues in the long-running
CRSO litigation in the Federal District Court. Yet, those processes
have not been fair, transparent, impartial and have not allowed for the
intervener defendants to have a voice. Our collective voice was
silenced as USG spent five months behind doors negotiating with the
plaintiffs without meaningful engagement with us. Any aspirational hope
of genuine mediation and conflict resolution was abandoned.
As a result, any USG's potential commitments resulting from these
proceedings will carry a shroud of procedural injustice. Nevertheless ,
we remain sympathetic to both the origin story and importance of salmon
and other fish to the Columbia River Basin Tribes and the needs of
stakeholders for affordable, reliable clean power. However, Pacific's
customers demand decision making to be guided by impartiality, ensuring
that biases and politics do not influence the decision and ultimately
any outcomes. It would not be uncharacteristic in difficult
negotiations for parties to sit in extreme discomfort jointly but the
responsibility on part ofFMCS and CEQ would have been to hold separate,
independent, and concurrent caucuses with both the plaintiffs,
defendants, and intervenor defendants to preserve procedural fairness
and to allow for adequate time to review of positions. The fruit from a
procedurally unjust tree is unjust.
With respect to distributive justice, it was centuries of
oppression by the USG against Native Americans under the Doctrine of
Discover; and subsequent Congressional policies of allotment and
termination that cost Native Americans and First Nations hundreds of
millions of acres of homelands of spiritual, ceremonial, and ancestral
significance. Now, potential commitments made by the USG as part of the
CEQ-FMCS settlement process, for the atonement of past actions should
be borne by the federal taxpayer, and/or fees on non-Tribal harvest
and/or pursue private grants and/or advance Corporate Social
Responsibility program.
Unlike other Federal agencies, BPA funds its operations entirely
though the rates it charges its customers like Pacific and BPA's
customers repay all costs associated the production and transmission of
power from the multipurpose federal projects. This includes the costs
associated with mitigating the impact of federal hydropower generation
on threatened and endangered fish species. About 25 percent of BPA's
Tier 1 rate, which includes foregone revenue for the cost of lost
generation, is paid by BPA's consumer owned utilities for BPA's fish
and wildlife programs; in the last 10 years, we have paid an average of
$685 million per year.
While Pacific takes its obligation to fund the largest and most
comprehensive environmental mitigation program in the United States
seriously, BPA's authority to undertake any costs is restrained by its
organic, enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set
``the lowest possible rates to consumers consistent with sound business
principles.'' In other words, BPA is a creature of its statutes, and it
cannot, despite the nobleness of the cause, improperly use ratepayer
funds. Use of ratepayer funds for potential USG commitments is not a
matter of ``ends justify the means'' but rather about the impact to the
people in our community and I care deeply about the residents of
Pacific County.
Our ratepayer funds aren't dividend checks from the shareholders of
for-profit companies; rather, ratepayer funds are monies that represent
the sweat of labor from vast majority of our blue-collar working-class
customers employed in seafood processing, cranberry bogs, and
agricultural farms, including those members of our community that are
most marginalized like migrant workers, elderly, disabled, ESL, and
undocumented populations.
Pacific County spans nearly 1,000 square miles with a population of
less than 25,000 individuals sparsely dispersed (fewer than 25 people
per square mile) along the mouth of the Columbia River. Nearly 70% of
the county's population resides in unincorporated areas, with only four
small municipalities (South Bend, Raymond, Long Beach, and Ilwaco)
defined by urban growth areas. Because of the inherent costs of
electrical infrastructure investment in areas that lack concentrated
population centers, we face significant pressures in capital costs.
Separately, the county experiences extreme weather events due to
proximity of the Pacific Ocean, high wind events are common.\1\ We are
at severe risk of disruption of roads and services by earthquake and/or
tsunami.\2\ Winter storms typically include hours of 60-100 mph winds,
causing trees to fall and damage lines and structures. The topography
of the county includes a mountainous landscape, with heavily forested
terrain, dense canopy cover, numerous wetlands, and geologic hazard
areas. In addition, there are prevalent corrosive aerial salts that
degrade free standing outdoor assets; with all these challenges, we
still strive to have the most affordable rates in the state of
Washington. But despite our best efforts to have the lowest rates for a
non-generating PUD in Washinton, 2,805 households are below the 200%
Federal Poverty Level and hence have an energy burden of more than 6%.
We must do more with less because nearly one-third (34%) of the
county's population is over the age of 65. The median household income
of $50,873 is 35% lower than the state median income of $80,219. These
earnings translate into considerable poverty across the county. Nearly
15% of the population lives at or below the poverty line, approximately
11% of the population has no health insurance and 25% of residents
claim a federal disability and 17% of the people under the age of 65
are disabled.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://mynorthwest.com/3937904/what-is-washingtons-windiest-
city/
\2\ https://mil.wa.gov/asset/
5ba420aa1c85c#::text=For%20example%2C%20the%20
unincorporated%20areas,could%20have%20county%2Dwide%20repercussions.
\3\ https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/
pacificcountywashington/AGE775222# AGE775222
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, poverty is particularly widespread amongst families in
our community: 14.7% of all families with related children under the
age of 18 live in poverty. Nearly 40% of all households with children
under the age of 18 and headed by a sole female live in poverty. Every
school in Pacific County qualifies for Title I federal funding. Over
70% of our total school enrollment is considered ``Low Income.''
Layering on avoidable energy burden increases serves as a
disproportionate regressive tax for our most vulnerable community
members.
Per the Biden Administration's Justice 40 Initiative \4\ and CEQ's
Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, Pacific County has
multiple tracts that are considered disadvantaged because it meets more
than 1 burden threshold and the associated socioeconomic threshold.
Pacific County's multiple census tracts rank 97th percentile for energy
costs and 85% percentile for low-income households where income is less
than or equal to twice the federal poverty level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/justice40/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Separately, when using CEQ's Climate and Economic Justice Screen
Tool over the entire Pacific Northwest, the geospatial mapping tool
reveals vast areas of BPA's customer communities are some of the most
marginalized and under resourced.\5\ In the screen shot image below,
areas highlighted in blue in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana are
identified as disadvantaged communities that are overburdened. The USG
should be mindful to minimize adverse rate impacts to these communities
to access an essential human service like electricity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/#4.64/46.7/-114.77
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Source: https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/en/#4.64/46.7/-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
114.77
Respectfully, the USG must reconcile the uncertain financial burden
of its extensive potential commitments in support of the Columbia Basin
Restoration Initiative to the ratepayers of BPA in the Pacific
Northwest considering the results presented from CEQ's own geospatial
map. Any rate increases on BPA's customers will result in regressive
harm to the communities most disproportionally disadvantaged and
overburdened.
The USG's potential assurances in the CRSO litigation also poses
significant threats to the long-term value of the Federal Columbia
River Power System (FCRPS). Considering the significant financial,
reliability and FCRPS operational uncertainty, it's difficult to commit
to a 20-year Provider of Choice take or pay contract when long term
intergeneration impacts that will last beyond 2044 remain unknown.
While we support scientific, cost-effective mitigation efforts for
fish and wildlife impacts that have a clear nexus to the impacts of the
hydropower system, I humbly request that USG exercise moral courage and
use principles of distributive justice while honoring BPA's organic,
enabling statutes, including its ratemaking directive to set the
``lowest possible rates'' to appropriately ensure that potential
burdens resulting from a settlement process are squarely cabined to the
federal taxpayer, and/or fees on non-Tribal harvest and/or pursue
private grants and/or advance Corporate Social Responsibility program.
The future of an urgent clean energy transition must prioritize
important procedural, distributive, and restorative justice components
that embrace equity and don't leave people behind. We need remarkable
partnerships to fight the existential threat of climate change.
Hydropower remains the centerpiece of the Northwest's energy
infrastructure and it provides reliable, affordable, and clean power.
We can't achieve our multiple policy objectives without it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Humaira Falkenberg, She/her
Power Resources Manager
Pacific County PUD
______
PUBLIC POWER COUNCIL
Portland, OR
June 9, 2023
Richard Spinrad, Administrator
NOAA
1401 Constitution Avenue NW, Room 5128
Washington, DC 20230
Janet Coit, Assistant Administrator
NOAA Fisheries
1315 East-West Highway, 14th Floor
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Michael Tehan, Assistant Regional Administrator
NOAA Fisheries
Interior Columbia Basin Office
1201 Northeast Lloyd
Portland, OR 97232
Dear Dr. Spinrad, Ms. Coit, and Mr. Tehan:
The Public Power Council (PPC) represents the interests of non-
profit, consumer-owned electric utilities that rely on the Federal
Columbia River Power and Transmission System to deliver reliable,
economic, and environmentally responsible power to their communities.
PPC member utilities repay all the costs the Bonneville Power
Administration (BPA) incurs in generating and transmitting the power
from the federal hydro system. Indeed, Northwest public power utilities
fund approximately 70 percent of BPA's $3.9 billion annual revenue
requirement through their power and transmission rates and--given their
nonprofit nature--have a keen interest in ensuring that BPA complies
with its statutory obligation to offer ``the lowest possible rates to
consumers consistent with sound business principles.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. Sec. 838(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, the cost of Federal power is not a matter of dry economics
for us. PPC members are community-owned utilities delivering an
essential human service of electricity to their consumers. In many
cases, PPC members serve some of the most economically vulnerable,
underserved, and underrepresented communities in the Pacific Northwest.
In the last 15 years, BPA's Tier 1 power rates have already increased
24 percent, requiring PPC members to figure out how to continue to
deliver affordable electric power to ratepayers who already struggle
with their electric bills. There are no shareholders, investors, or
profit margins to absorb increasing power costs--every cost must
ultimately be recovered from the ordinary folks in our region,
including those who must choose between feeding their children,
purchasing life-saving medication, or heating their homes in subzero
temperatures. Some see the latter as a luxury they simply cannot
afford.
At the same time, PPC and its members have an abiding and vital
interest in the recovery of the endangered fish species because many of
PPC's members have declared their commitment to environmentally-
friendly and sustainable power generation and usage. This commitment
stems in part from the genuine environmental interests and values of
the communities they serve, who desire environmentally-responsible but
also affordable and reliable power. Through BPA's Fish and Wildlife
Program, consumer-owned utilities have funded all of BPA's costs for
mitigating the impacts of federal hydropower generation on threatened
and endangered fish species. Over the last 10 years, the consumer-owned
utilities have paid on average $685 million per year for BPA's program,
which constitutes one quarter to one third of their BPA power rates. In
total, over the last 10 years, the consumer-owned utilities in the
Pacific Northwest have paid more than $6.8 billion for fish and
wildlife mitigation measures.
We know that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries) is currently under intense
pressure to succumb to single-issue advocates demanding the removal of
the Lower Snake River Dams, without either offering credible scientific
evidence of the benefits to the endangered species or addressing the
massive consequences to the communities and businesses served by public
power. The inconvenient truth that these NGOs simply refuse to
acknowledge because it counters the narrative they have created is that
the survival rates at the Lower Snake River Dams are at their record
highs right now. Indeed, as was recently reported, for adult fish
swimming upstream, the survival rate is above 90% and 75 of every 100
young chinook and steelhead that head downstream and past the four dams
survive.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Matthew Weaver, Amid a Battle Over Snake River Dams, a Look at
How the Salmon Are Doing, CAPITAL PRESS, May 18, 2023, retrieved from
https://www.capitalpress.com/ag_sectors/grains/amid-a-battle-over-
snake-river-dams-a-look-at-how-the-salmon-are-doing/article_c76c740a-
dadd-11ed-ad18-9fb96a214c52.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We applaud NOAA Fisheries, and specifically Mr. Ritchie Graves, the
Columbia Hydropower Branch Chief, for doing what NOAA Fisheries does
best--sticking to science and using fact-based data, research, and
analysis--to acknowledge that the Lower Snake River Dams are achieving
required performance standards. In reference to the tremendous passage
rates at the Lower Snake River dams on the Columbia River, Mr. Graves
said that: ``In a lot of river systems, that would be something they
would shoot for.'' \3\ The truth is that the mitigation measures we
have invested so heavily in are working and contrary to the claims that
the endangered species are at the brink of extinction, we appreciated
Mr. Grave's recognition of the real fact that ``we haven't lost any
populations in 25 to 30 years of listing, either.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOAA Fisheries has a long and established history of conducting
research and analysis designed to help scientists understand the
variety of conditions affecting the nation's oceans and their
inhabitants. The NOAA Fisheries scientists have historically been
protected from politics allowing them to focus on the facts and pursue
endangered species mitigation strategies that were truly scientifically
driven. That is why we were so surprised when on July 11, 2022, NOAA
Fisheries released a ``Regional Fishery Co-manager Review Draft'' of a
report entitled ``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and
Steelhead.'' That report was out of character for NOAA Fisheries and
not consistent with the agency's historical practices. It was unusual
in its process, having been prepared in consultation with fishery
managers for the Nez Perce tribe and the State of Oregon, and
unattributed in terms of authorship within NOAA. In response to that
report, PPC sent NOAA Fisheries a letter raising science-based concerns
and laying the report's shortcomings. That letter is attached. To this
day, PPC has not received a response from NOAA Fisheries.
We urge you to resist the undue political pressure to endorse
actions not supported by the facts and the science and to protect NOAA
Fisheries and its scientists from unprecedented and increasing attacks
by environmental extremists to censor their official, science-based
findings.
Regards,
Bear Prairie, General
Manager Joe Morgan, General Manager
Idaho Falls Power Modern Electric Water Company
Chair, PPC Executive
Committee Vice Chair, PPC Fish & Wildlife
Committee
Jim Anderson, General
Manager Max Beach, General Manager
Midstate Electric
Cooperative Idaho County Light and Power
Cooperative
Libby Calnon, General
Manager Megan Capper, Energy Resource Mgr
Hood River Electric &
Internet Co-op Eugene Water and Electric Board
Rick Dunn, General Manager Scott Rhees, General Manager
Benton PUD Franklin PUD
Jason Zyskowski, Asst
General Mgr Scott Simms, CEO & Exec Director
Snohomish County PUD Public Power Council
______
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA)
November 21, 2023
Mr. Gregory Goldstein Ms. Brenda Mallory
Acting Director Chair
Federal Mediation &
Conciliation Services Council on Environmental
Quality
2100 K Street NW 730 Jackson Place NW
Washington, DC 20427 Washington, DC 20503
Subject: Concerns Regarding Proposed Commitments for the CRSO EIS
Litigation Mediation Process
Dear Mr. Goldstein and Ms. Mallory,
I am writing on behalf of the Inland Ports and Navigation Group
(IPNG), a group of thirty-one entities that includes barge operators,
farmers, ports, cruise ships, and many other businesses within the
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA, www.pnwa.net). As one of
the defendant intervenors--who have the same rights as defendants
(USG)--in the Columbia River Systems Operations Environmental Impact
Statement (CRSO EIS) litigation, whose members will be devastated, we
are obliged to voice our serious concerns over the secretly negotiated,
recently circulated, confidential proposed commitments (Exhibit 2,
United States Government (USG) Commitments) set forth by the U.S.
Government.
Our members are the experts on Columbia River system navigation,
river-based commerce, river system safety, and irrigated farming. The
USG Commitments disregard our expertise on river operations, threaten
human life, ignore studies necessary to ensure spill will provide safe
fish passage, and risk environmental disasters from unsafe cargo
passage. The USG Commitments are founded on directing action toward an
assumption of future dam breaching that will devastate the rural
communities in which nearly 50% of households are living paycheck to
paycheck, according to the United Way and the White House Climate and
Economic Justice Screening Tool, without any concern for these social
justice impacts. We will not be co-opted into a process that has left
us out of negotiations for the past 18 months by providing detailed
proposed edits to the proposed USG Commitments. Further, our objections
to those commitments are not just in the details but rather stem from
fundamental overarching assumptions and untenable positions. These
overarching assumptions and an initial response to Appendix B of the
USG Commitments are included below.
Before we discuss these concerns, there are components of the USG
Commitments that we strongly support. We have embodied a spirit of
finding opportunities for solutions. However, we have been given
virtually no opportunity to do so, so we want to make clear that there
are provisions in the USG Commitments that PNWA would likely support
upon seeing a final proposed agreement. PNWA supports many of the
objectives in the USG Commitments, such as energy resiliency,
bolstering Columbia River Basin salmon and steelhead populations,
meeting decarbonization goals, supporting tribal energy initiatives,
and investment in rural communities. Contingent upon final
negotiations, PNWA would potentially support the list of measures in
the USG Commitments for which Northwest River Partners voiced detailed
support. (Northwest River Partners Letter the USG via FMCS, pages 3-7
(Nov. 17, 2023)). PNWA will not reproduce an exhaustive list of those
numerous areas of potential agreement.
Unfortunately, this flawed process has produced a USG Commitments
document that we cannot agree with due to the following overarching
assumptions and positions.
The USG Commitments rely on the fundamentally flawed NOAA
``Rebuilding Interior Columbia Basin Salmon and Steelhead
Report'' (NOAA Paper). This is a political report that
lacks the support of the scientific community. It is not
consensus science regarding the four Lower Snake River Dams
(LSRD) and salmon. Rather, the science is strongly
disputed. The USG Commitments pursue an objective
untethered to any lawful standard, that is subjective, and
that lacks any legal foundation. ``Healthy and abundant''
salmon populations is a vague and undefined policy
objective not required by the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
The USG Commitments fail to address river navigation as a
critically impacted benefit of the current system,
providing only a paltry $750,000 for a study of impacts.
This is inadequate to account for impacts that could be as
much as $30 billion, according to one study.
The USG Commitments fail to ensure the delivery of
affordable and reliable clean power as pledged by the USG
on the August 8, 2022, Commitments commonly referred to as
Exhibit 2.
The USG Commitments fail to ensure the many resilience
needs of stakeholders across the region will be met as
pledged by the USG in the August 8, 2022, Commitments
commonly referred to as Exhibit 2.
The complexity of the proposed operational changes
warrants a thorough study of their potential impacts on
river navigation by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Research and Development Center (ERDC) in Vicksburg, MS,
prior to implementation, as well as a completely new NEPA
analysis.
The Science is Not Clear
The 2022 NOAA Paper calls for breaching the four LSRD in direct
contradiction of the findings of the 2020 Final Environmental Impact
Statement (FEIS) and Record of Decision (ROD), despite the paper itself
stating there is no new science. The NOAA Paper is based on a new,
undefined, policy-driven objective of ``healthy and abundant'' salmon
populations instead of the ESA jeopardy standard (further discussed
below). The 2022 NOAA Paper also suddenly endorses the scientific
hypothesis of delayed mortality, again with no new science, which was
rejected in the FEIS and ROD for not being adequately demonstrated.
IPNG submitted a scientific analysis by well-regarded PNWA scientist,
Mr. Ian Coulter, concluding that the evidence supporting delayed
mortality is contradictory and inconclusive. Mr. Coulter outlined the
significant deficiencies in the delayed mortality hypothesis, including
the mechanism(s), scale, and lack of significance of delayed mortality.
Until these deficiencies in the research are addressed, delayed
mortality cannot be the basis for decisions or commitments by the USG.
``Healthy and Abundant'' has no Enforceable Legal Basis
The proposed USG Commitments establish the goal of ``healthy &
abundant'' salmon populations without a quantitative definition. What
constitutes ``healthy & abundant''? Who is the judge of when it is
achieved? These questions have gone unanswered. Further, there is no
legal justification for the modification of the goal. The ESA requires
agency actions that do not ``jeopardize the continued existence of the
species.'' ``Healthy and abundant'' is an undefined standard with no
enforceable legal basis. We cannot agree to its adoption as an
objective.
Navigation is a Critically Impacted Authorized Purpose of the Current
System
The USG Commitments propose river-system operational changes that
raise serious safety concerns, as discussed below. It also treats the
replacement of river-based transportation as barely a footnote, failing
to acknowledge the harmful emissions and nationwide economic impact
that will result if navigation is eliminated. The river-based
transportation system cannot be replaced with alternatives if the four
LSRD are removed while still meeting the USG's clean energy goals.
Removal of the four LSRD will increase transportation and related
environmental costs in the U.S. by well over $7.3 billion over 30
years. (FCS Group, Aug. 13, 2023). Removal of the four LSRD would
require at least 23.8 million miles in additional trucking activity
annually and more than 201 additional unit trains. (FCS Group, Aug. 13,
2023). This would increase harmful greenhouse gas emissions by the
equivalent of adding one new coal-fired power plant to the grid every
2-3 years. The USG Commitments also fail to account for the likelihood
that the river-based navigation system cannot be replaced by train and
truck transit due to geographic constraints and environmental concerns
in the region.
River barging and river cruising would disappear along with the
jobs and economic contributions they make to the regional and national
economy. Farms will be bankrupted by the shift in freight costs and the
lack of irrigation water caused by removal of the locks and dams. These
impacts will devastate local schools and emergency services-reducing
local tax revenue by $18 million annually and likely eliminating 15% of
the regional workforce. (FCS Group, Aug. 13, 2023).
Despite these devastating impacts, the USG Commitments recommend a
paltry $750,000 for transportation infrastructure impact studies. It is
imperative that the US Government conduct a thorough and complete study
that includes all the region's stakeholders and experts and analyzes
numerous factors, including engineering and permitting of new
infrastructure; environmental impacts from greenhouse gases;
environmental justice; rail and road safety; and workforce
accessibility and readiness. The pragmatic consequences of impeding the
movement of goods via the Columbia Snake River System--integral to our
national trading efficacy--are being overlooked. The intricate network
of river barging, which is pivotal for thousands of farms and a vast
twelve-county region across three states, is integral to our economy
and global, national, and regional food security. The proposed USG
Commitments ignore these concerns.
Affordable and Reliable Energy Cannot be Assured Under these
Commitments
The USG Commitments fail to address how new renewable energy will
replace hydropower reliability and responsiveness. The Commitments also
fail to address how newly proposed power sources will be effectively
integrated into the regional power system nor how such massive
infrastructure projects and associated high-voltage transmission lines
will get permitted.
We had some assurances through the August 8, 2022 Commitments that
the region's and nation's clean power needs would be adequately
addressed. Public Power Council's and Northwest River Partners'
comments demonstrate the impossibility of meeting these USG
Commitments. The failure of the USG to meet these objectives compels us
to reject much of the USG Commitments document as it relates to energy
production.
Resiliency for Impacted Communities cannot be Assured
The loss of clean, reliable, and responsive hydropower and the
removal of one of only three transportation modalities (and the
cleanest among them) available to support the region's economy cannot
meet the resiliency needs of impacted communities, as committed to by
the USG on August 8, 2022.
IPNG submitted a well-researched paper (FCS Group) outlining the
adverse impacts on underserved and underrepresented communities along
the Snake River if the four LSRD were breached. The paper also outlined
the damaging effects of their energy replacements. The failure of these
USG Commitments to seriously estimate the aftermath of dam breaching
compels us to reject the overall document.
Safety of CSRS River Operators
We have serious concerns about the proposed spill and operational
changes in the Commitments document on the eight Federal Columbia Snake
Hydropower Projects. The proposed operational changes do not contain
information like spill patterns and scheduled times of new spills,
which is critical information that is standard in these types of
operational changes. Even more concerning is that these changes are not
undergoing any study at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Engineer
Research and Development Center (ERDC). Expert river Captains and
Pilots with decades of experience have reviewed the proposed changes
and they have safety concerns related to the lack of modeling of these
significant changes. These proposed operational changes pose a genuine
threat to life and property and effective fish passage if these changes
are implemented without first being fully understood. The river system
changes in Appendix B of the USG Commitments ignore Judge Simon's
previous Order requiring that operational and spill changes be modeled
at ERDC because the Court's ``concerns for both human safety and the
listed species require calculating appropriate spill patterns in
advance of increasing spill.'' The Judge's rationale in 2017 holds true
to the changes being proposed in Appendix B.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In his 2017 Order (ECF No. 2194, Amended Opinion and Order,
Apr. 3, 2017) Judge Simon stated ``The Court recognizes that concerns
for both human safety and the listed species require calculating
appropriate spill patterns in advance of increasing spill. As
Defendants describe, the Corps implements spill using particular spill
patterns at each dam, and any change to spill can change the spill
pattern and result in eddies or other flow issues that might delay or
preclude juveniles from downstream migration, prevent adults from
upstream migration, and negatively affect navigation through the lock
systems.
. . .
The Court also recognizes that each dam is unique and an ``across-
the-board'' approach to spill is not the most effective means to
increase salmonid survival at each dam. There are specific
considerations at each dam that affect both juvenile and adult
migration, and providing time to study and prepare for the increase in
spill will allow proper analyses on the best methodology for each dam.
Additionally, it also allows sufficient time to consider whether there
may be other unintended negative consequences unrelated to salmonid
survival.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some of the proposed changes are also unlawful because they would
eliminate the congressionally authorized Federal navigation channel.
The proposed reservoir elevations at McNary Pool and The Dalles Dam
will prevent the maintenance of the Congressionally required 14-foot
navigation channel due to natural shoaling and will prevent river
operators from accessing their docks in the McNary Pool. The USG cannot
modify the Flood Control Act of 1962, by which Congress authorized the
Federal navigation channel, and yet knowingly or unknowingly, Appendix
B of the USG Commitments unlawfully does just that.
Further, these changes are so significant as to warrant a new NEPA
process and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before implementation.
It is imperative to reassess the proposed USG Commitments to
account for the substantial economic, infrastructure, and environmental
ramifications that might ensue. We advocate for a balanced approach
that honors our environmental responsibilities while safeguarding the
region's economic viability. We are discouraged that agriculture,
water-borne commerce, and rural economies, which depend so heavily on
the LSRD, are not accounted for in the proposed USG Commitments.
We urge the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service and the
White House Council on Environmental Quality to reconsider the proposed
USG Commitments, with a realigned focus on achieving a robust, clean
power system and valuing all the region's stakeholders. Our commitment
to a sustainable and thriving Pacific Northwest remains resolute, and
we request, with respect, that our position be given serious
consideration in your ongoing deliberations.
Sincerely,
Neil Maunu,
Executive Director
Pacific Northwest Waterways Association (PNWA) &
Inland Ports and Navigation Group (IPNG)
______
Mr. Bentz. If there is no further business, without
objection, the Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:39 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD]
Submissions for the Record by Rep. Huffman
NATIONAL CONGRESS OF AMERICAN INDIANS
RESOLUTION #AK-21-009
TITLE: Calling On The President and Congress to Invest in Salmon And
River Restoration In The Pacific Northwest
WHEREAS, we, the members of the National Congress of American Indians
of the United States, invoking the divine blessing of the Creator upon
our efforts and purposes, in order to preserve for ourselves and our
descendants the inherent sovereign rights of our Indian nations, rights
secured under Indian treaties and agreements with the United States,
and all other rights and benefits to which we are entitled under the
laws and Constitution of the United States and the United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to enlighten the
public toward a better understanding of the Indian people, to preserve
Indian cultural values, and otherwise promote the health, safety and
welfare of the Indian people, do hereby establish and submit the
following resolution; and
WHEREAS, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) was
established in 1944 and is the oldest and largest national organization
of American Indian and Alaska Native tribal governments; and
WHEREAS, many of the Tribal Nations of NCAI are united by salmon; by
the Northwest rivers that salmon, steelhead, lamprey, and other native
fish depend upon; and by the interconnectedness of salmon with their
ecosystems--from the orca in the ocean and Puget Sound, to the
nutrients salmon supply to the furthest inland streams; and
WHEREAS, through legislation and executive orders, the United States
took land from tribal peoples. Tribal Nations also ceded lands through
treaties, but in so doing reserved certain rights to protect their
cultural way of life; and
WHEREAS, Tribal cultures and lifeways are deeply rooted in place and
tied to their homelands. As such Tribal Nations cannot simply relocate
to access traditional resources or ceremonial places; and
WHEREAS, beginning in the 1930s, and through the use and destruction of
the lands, rivers, and fisheries Tribal Nations have lived with for
thousands of years, the modern Northwest is a maze of massive
irrigation, hydropower, and storage systems built on the backs of
Tribal peoples; and
WHEREAS, the United States has a unique political relationship with
Tribal Nations. Through this special relationship, the United States is
bound to honor the obligations it has made in Treaties, Executive
Orders, adjudicated through numerous federal court decisions, and its
trust responsibility to sovereign Tribal Nations; and
WHEREAS, the fate of many Tribal Nations and the Northwest salmon are
intertwined; and
WHEREAS, in the Columbia Basin, the Northwest Power Act and its promise
of ``equitable treatment'' for energy and fish and wildlife did prevent
the mid-Columbia fall chinook from being listed under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) but failed to prevent the subsequent listings of
salmon and steelhead under the ESA; and
WHEREAS, U.S. District Court for Oregon in its 2016 ESA and National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ruling (Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n v. Nat'l
Marine Fisheries Serv., 186 F.Supp 3d. 861 (D. Or. 2106))--rejecting
the federal government's salmon plan for the Columbia River System dams
for the fifth time emphasized that the Federal Columbia River System
remains a system literally crying out for a major overhaul, as that
Court observed twenty years earlier in the same case; and
WHEREAS, the prior Administration's 2020 salmon plans in response to
Oregon District Court's 2016 ruling--the 2020 Columbia River System
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Biological Opinion (BiOp), and
Record of Decision (ROD)--were politicized with election-driven
timelines, and used the prior Administration's weakened NEPA and ESA
regulations to justify flawed conclusions and attempt to lock in
inadequate dam operations for the next 15 years; and
WHEREAS, Columbia Basin Tribes expressed special concerns with the
prior Administration's Columbia River System EIS with respect to its
inadequate consideration of Tribal rights, interests, resources, trust
lands; its failure to reveal environmental and social justice system
impacts on Tribes; its failure to address fish restoration above dams
that block fish passage; and its inadequate consideration of the
impacts of climate warming; and
WHEREAS, Tribal Nations and Congress has a once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity--a historical legacy moment--to secure funding to invest in
salmon recovery and river restoration throughout the Northwest; and
WHEREAS, Tribal Nations throughout the Columbia Basin have supported
legislative proposals that:
Engage with Tribal Nations directly and regularly;
Emphasize the very real and imminent salmon extinction
crisis;
Recognize a singular, generational legislative moment,
because of the current Administration and current
leadership in the Senate and the House, and that this is a
moment for action, not for more process;
Offer a comprehensive framework that embraces actions that
have been long-standing priorities for Tribes throughout
the Basin: restoring the lower Snake River by breaching the
four lower Snake River dams and optimizing spill to benefit
salmon at the mainstream federal Columbia River Dams;
restoring salmon behind blocked areas in the Upper Columbia
and Upper Snake basins; and ensuring that Tribes and State
co-managers become responsible for implementing salmon
restoration;
Offer a solution that invests in a stronger, better
Northwest that goes beyond salmon, ensuring that
communities impacted by river restoration are made whole--
and in doing so offering additional opportunities for
Tribes within other sectors--from infrastructure and
technology development to energy production;
Highlights that an interest-based solution will involve
legal certainty;
Engages in a bipartisan manner against the backdrop of
these foundational elements;
Speaks the truth that failure to act this critical
historical moment will be looked back on as the tragedy of
the extinction of Snake River salmon populations; and
WHEREAS, the status of Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead species are
dire and getting worse. Many populations of Snake River spring Chinook
salmon and steelhead at the tipping point of extinction--identified by
biologists as the Quasi-Extinction Threshold (QET);
42% of the Snake Basin spring/summer Chinook populations
are at or below the QET; that is, 50 natural origin
spawners or less on the spawning grounds for four
consecutive years;
77% of the populations are predicted to drop below the QET
level by 2025; and
WHEREAS, climatic warming shortens the time to act. Restoring the lower
Snake (now a series of slow-moving, easily warmed lakes) to a naturally
flowing river that connects fish to cold, high-altitude, near-pristine
Salmon and Clearwater Basin habitat is the best possible solution for
ecological resilience to warming temperatures; and
WHEREAS, the initiatives of Tribal Nations to restore salmon behind
dams that block fish passage in the Upper Columbia and Upper Snake
River have been limited by availability of funding and assertions of
inadequate authorizations; and
WHEREAS, on April 14-15, 2021, the Columbia River Tribes gathered and
reached agreement on a set of ``common ground'' principles underlying
their support for Congressman Simpson's Columbia Basin Initiative:
The true wealth of our region begins with the health of
our rivers, fish, and the ecosystem they support, which is
our culture, history and future;
Agriculture is an important part of our region's economy;
Affordable and reliable power is important to regional
families and businesses, tribal and non-tribal;
Providing legal certainty for the vast majority of federal
dams in the Columbia/Snake River basins is a necessary
element of a lasting solution;
Providing legal certainty for the vast majority of federal
dams in the Columbia/Snake River basins is a necessary
element of a lasting solution;
A significant federal infrastructure investment in
alternative energy and transportation provides a unique
opportunity to restore salmon while keeping power
affordable and maintaining agricultural commerce;
A comprehensive legislative solution is preferable to all
other avenues and is urgently needed;
The time for action is now. The Columbia Basin cannot
become another Klamath Basin crisis; and
WHEREAS, the Southern Resident orcas of Puget Sound that are sacred to
many Northwest Tribes, are starving to death because culverts and dams
block and impair Chinook salmon migrations and limit the orcas' food
source; and Governor of the State of Washington's Orca Recovery Task
Force recommended--in addition to other dam and culvert removals--
reviewing the need to breach the four lower Snake River dams to help
recover the struggling Puget Sound orcas, which resulted in the Lower
Snake River Dams Stakeholder Engagement Report and informed Washington
States' statement of management goals and principles for the Columbia
and Snake rivers:
Protecting and restoring abundant, harvestable salmon and
steelhead and other native fish species, including
contributing to a reliable source of prey for southern
resident orcas;
Honoring Tribal rights, including a future for salmon that
supports Tribal cultural, spiritual, ceremonial,
subsistence, and economic needs;
Providing for a clean, affordable, and reliable energy
system that meets our clean energy and climate goals;
Ensuring affordable and reliable transportation
alternatives for wheat farmers in the Palouse and Tri-
Cities areas;
Ensuring reliable irrigation supplies for eastern
Washington farms; and
WHEREAS, implementation of federal court rulings upholding Treaty-
reserved fishing rights and ordering the state of Washington to replace
culverts that block fish passage require funding to implement, as do
Tribal habitat, hatchery, and salmon restoration efforts; and
WHEREAS, NCAI stands united in supporting investment in salmon and
river restoration in the Northwest and throughout Indian Country.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the National Congress of American
Indians (NCAI) calls on the Executive Branch and Congress to ensure
that funding is set aside now at this critical ecological juncture for
salmon and orca, to implement the bold actions for salmon and river
restoration identified in the framework of the Columbia Basin
Initiative legislative proposal, including restoring the lower Snake
River by breaching the four lower Snake River dams; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NCAI requests the Executive Branch and
Congress ensure that Tribal species restoration actions are prioritized
and fully funded; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NCAI calls for the timely convening of a
Tribal Salmon and Orca Summit, at an NCAI location, with invitations to
Executive Branch Officials and to Congressional Members, to meet and
take timely action with respect to the salmon and orca restoration
priorities of Tribal Nations; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NCAI requests the Executive Branch and
Congress prioritize working on actions to protect salmon, and other
culturally and economically important fish and wildlife, and river
restoration actions, and withdraw any federal court defense of the
prior Administration's 2020 Columbia River System EIS, BiOp, and ROD's
and other environmental decisions that are inconsistent with Tribal
environmental principles and priorities; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that this resolution shall be the policy of
NCAI until it is withdrawn or modified by subsequent resolution.
CERTIFICATION
The foregoing resolution was adopted by the General Assembly at the
2021 Mid Year Conference of the National Congress of American Indians,
held June 20, 2021-June 24, 2021, with a quorum present.
Fawn Sharp, President
ATTEST:
Juana Majel Dixon, Recording Secretary
______
AFFILIATED TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS
2021 Virtual Mid-Year Convention
RESOLUTION #2021-23
``CALLING ON THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND THE 117TH CONGRESS
TO SEIZE THE ONCE-IN-A-LIFETIME CONGRESSIONAL OPPORTUNITY TO INVEST IN
SALMON AND RIVER RESTORATION IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST, CHARTING A
STRONGER, BETTER FUTURE FOR THE NORTHWEST, AND BRINGING LONG-IGNORED
TRIBAL JUSTICE TO OUR PEOPLES AND HOMELANDS''
PREAMBLE
We, the members of the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians of the
United States, invoking the divine blessing of the Creator upon our
efforts and purposes, in order to preserve for ourselves and our
descendants rights secured under Indian Treaties, Executive Orders and
benefits to which we are entitled under the laws and constitution of
the United States and several states, to enlighten the public toward a
better understanding of the Indian people, to preserve Indian cultural
values, and otherwise promote the welfare of the Indian people, do
hereby establish and submit the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians (ATNI) are
representatives of and advocates for national, regional, and specific
tribal concerns; and
WHEREAS, ATNI is a regional organization comprised of American Indians/
Alaska Natives and tribes in the states of Washington, Idaho, Oregon,
Montana, Nevada, Northern California, and Alaska; and
WHEREAS, the health, safety, welfare, education, economic and
employment opportunity, and preservation of cultural and natural
resources are primary goals and objectives of ATNI; and
WHEREAS, the Tribes of ATNI are united by salmon; by the Northwest
rivers that salmon, steelhead, lamprey, and native fish depend upon;
and by the interconnectedness of salmon with their ecosystems--from the
orca in the ocean and Puget Sound to the nutrients salmon supply to the
furthest inland streams; and
WHEREAS, the United States used federal legislation and executive
orders to take land from tribal peoples, and tribes ceded most of their
land through treaties but reserved certain rights to protect their
cultural way of life; and
WHEREAS, tribal cultures and lifeways are rooted in place and tied to
their homelands, but tribes cannot just relocate to access traditional
resources; and
WHEREAS, the modern Northwest with its massive irrigation, hydropower,
and storage systems was built on the backs of tribal peoples from the
1930s on, through the use and destruction of the lands, rivers, and
fisheries we have lived with for thousands of years; and
WHEREAS, the United States shares a unique relationship with the Tribes
of ATNI, with the United States being bound to honor the obligations to
tribes made in Treaties, Executive Orders, adjudicated through numerous
federal court decisions and its trust responsibility to tribal
sovereign nations; and
WHEREAS, the fate of our Tribes and the Northwest salmon are
intertwined; and
WHEREAS, in the Columbia Basin, the Northwest Power Act and its promise
of ``equitable treatment'' for energy and fish and wildlife did prevent
the mid-Columbia fall chinook from being listed under the Endangered
Species Act (ESA) but failed to prevent the subsequent listings of
salmon and steelhead under the ESA; and
WHEREAS, U.S. District Court Judge Michael Simon in his 2016 ESA and
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) ruling--rejecting the federal
government's salmon plan for the Columbia River System dams for the
fifth time--emphasized that the Federal Columbia River System remains a
system literally crying out for a major overhaul, as Judge Marsh
observed twenty years earlier; and
WHEREAS, the prior Administration's 2020 salmon plans in response to
Judge Simon's ruling--the 2020 Columbia River System Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS), Biological Opinion (BiOp), and Record of
Decision (ROD)--were politicized with election-driven timelines, and
used the prior Administration's weakened NEPA and ESA regulations to
justify flawed conclusions and attempt to lock in inadequate dam
operations for the next 15 years; and
WHEREAS, Columbia Basin Tribes expressed special concerns with the
prior Administration's Columbia River System EIS with respect to its
inadequate consideration of Tribal rights, interests, resources, trust
lands; its failure to reveal environmental and social justice system
impacts on Tribes; its failure to address fish restoration above dams
that block fish passage; and its inadequate consideration of the
impacts of climate warming; and
WHEREAS, the new Administration and the 117th Congress face a once-in-
a-lifetime opportunity--a historical legacy moment--to secure
congressional funding to invest in salmon recovery and river
restoration throughout the Northwest; and
WHEREAS, Tribes throughout the Columbia Basin have supported
Congressman Mike Simpson's initiative and his ``Columbia Basin
Initiative'' legislative proposal for:
Identifying this historic moment and opportunity;
Engaging with Tribes directly and regularly;
Emphasizing the very real and imminent salmon extinction
crisis;
Recognizing a singular, generational legislative moment,
because of the current Administration and current
leadership in the Senate and the House, and that this is a
moment for action, not for more process;
Offering a comprehensive framework that embraces actions
that have been long-standing priorities for Tribes
throughout the Basin: restoring the lower Snake River by
breaching the four lower Snake River dams and optimizing
spill to benefit salmon at the mainstem federal Columbia
River Dams; restoring salmon behind blocked areas in the
Upper Columbia and Upper Snake basins; and ensuring that
Tribes and State co-managers become responsible for
implementing salmon restoration;
Offering a solution that invests in a stronger, better
Northwest that goes beyond salmon, ensuring that
communities impacted by river restoration are made whole--
and in doing so offering additional opportunities for
Tribes within other sectors--from infrastructure and
technology development to energy production;
Highlighting that an interest-based solution will involve
legal certainty;
Engaging in a bipartisan manner against the backdrop of
these foundational elements;
Speaking the truth that failure to act this critical
historical moment will be looked back on as the tragedy of
the extinction of Snake River salmon populations; and
WHEREAS, the status of Columbia Basin salmon and steelhead species is
dire and getting worse, with many populations of Snake River spring
Chinook salmon and steelhead on a steep slope to extinction; the point
where populations become doomed to extinction is identified by
biologists as the Quasi-Extinction Threshold (QET); and
right now, 42% of the Snake Basin spring/summer Chinook
populations are at or below the QET; that is, 50 natural
origin spawners or less on the spawning grounds for four
consecutive years; and
77% of the populations are predicted to drop below the QET
level by 2025; and
WHEREAS, time may be even shorter as climate warming advances, and
restoring the lower Snake (now a series of slow-moving, easily warmed
lakes) to a naturally flowing river that connects fish to cold, high-
altitude, near-pristine Salmon and Clearwater Basin habitat is exactly
what is needed for the best possible ecological resilience to warming
temperatures; and
WHEREAS, tribal initiatives to restore salmon behind dams that block
fish passage in the Upper Columbia and Upper Snake River have been
limited by availability of funding and assertions of inadequate
authorizations; and
WHEREAS, on April 14-15, 2021, the Columbia River Tribes gathered and
reached agreement on a set of ``common ground'' principles underlying
their support for Congressman Simpson's Columbia Basin Initiative:
The true wealth of our region begins with the health of
our rivers, fish, and the ecosystem they support, which is
our culture, history and future;
Agriculture is an important part of our region's economy;
Affordable and reliable power is important to regional
families and businesses, tribal and non-tribal;
Providing legal certainty for the vast majority of federal
dams in the Columbia/Snake River basins is a necessary
element of a lasting solution;
A significant federal infrastructure investment in
alternative energy and transportation provides a unique
opportunity to restore salmon while keeping power
affordable and maintaining agricultural commerce;
A comprehensive legislative solution is preferable to all
other avenues and is urgently needed;
The time for action is now. The Columbia Basin cannot
become another Klamath Basin crisis; and
WHEREAS, the Southern Resident orcas of Puget Sound, a being sacred to
many Northwest Tribes, are starving to death because culverts and dams
that block and impair Chinook salmon migrations are limiting the orcas'
food source; and Governor Inslee's Orca Recovery Task Force
recommended--in addition to other dam and culvert removals--reviewing
the need to breach the four lower Snake River dams to help recover the
struggling Puget Sound orcas, which resulted in the Lower Snake River
Dams Stakeholder Engagement Report and informed Washington's statement
of management goals and principles for the Columbia and Snake rivers:
Protecting and restoring abundant, harvestable salmon and
steelhead and other native fish species, including
contributing to a reliable source of prey for southern
resident orcas;
Honoring tribal rights, including a future for salmon that
supports tribes' cultural, spiritual, and economic needs;
Providing for a clean, affordable, and reliable energy
system that meets our clean energy and climate goals;
Ensuring affordable and reliable transportation
alternatives for wheat farmers in the Palouse and Tri-
Cities areas
Ensuring reliable irrigation supplies for eastern
Washington farms; and
WHEREAS, implementation of federal court rulings upholding Treaty-
reserved fishing rights and ordering the state of Washington to replace
culverts that block fish passage require funding to implement, as do
other Tribal habitat, hatchery, and salmon restoration efforts; and
WHEREAS, ATNI stands united in supporting investment in salmon and
river restoration in the Northwest; now
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that ATNI calls on the President of the
United States (POTUS) and the 117th Congress to ensure that funding is
set aside now at this critical ecological juncture for salmon and orca,
to implement the bold actions for salmon and river restoration
identified in the framework of Congressman Simpson's Energy and Salmon
legislative proposal, including restoring the lower Snake River by
breaching the four lower Snake River dams; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ATNI requests the POTUS and 117th Congress
to ensure that the salmon restoration priorities of the Tribes of ATNI
are prioritized and funded; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that ATNI calls for the timely convening of a
Northwest Tribal Salmon and Orca Summit, at an ATNI location, with
invitations to Presidential Administration Officials and to Northwest
Congressional Delegation Members, to meet and take timely action with
respect to the salmon and orca restoration priorities of the Tribes of
ATNI; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that ATNI requests the POTUS to prioritize
working on the actions for salmon and river restoration identified as
the framework of Congressman Simpson's Energy and Salmon legislative
proposal, and withdraw any federal court defense of the prior
Administration's flawed 2020 Columbia River System EIS, BiOp, and ROD
as otherwise a defense of methods and conclusions inconsistent with the
new Administration's environmental and tribal principles and
priorities; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that this resolution be forwarded to the
National Congress of American Indians.
CERTIFICATION
The foregoing resolution was adopted at the 2021 Virtual Mid-Year
Convention of the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians, Portland,
Oregon, on May 24-May 27, 2021, with a quorum present.
Leonard Forsman, President Norma Jean Louie, Secretary
______
Statement for the Record
American Rivers
Tom Kiernan, President and CEO
Thank you for the opportunity to share American Rivers' perspective
on the Pacific Northwest economic, energy, and ecological future. Since
1973, American Rivers has protected wild rivers, restored damaged
rivers, and conserved clean water for people and nature. With
headquarters in Washington, D.C. and 355,000 supporters, members, and
volunteers across the country, we are the most trusted and influential
national river conservation organization in the United States. As the
nation's leading river advocate, American Rivers seeks to ensure our
nation's rivers and floodplains are protected.
The lower four Snake River dams, which stretch between Tri-Cities,
WA and Lewiston, ID, were constructed between 1957 and 1972. These dams
provide around 900 average megawatts of power--around 4% of the
Northwest's energy generation. They also provide irrigation for crops
grown around the Tri-Cities, as well as transportation for barge
traffic between the Tri-Cities and Lewiston. While the services the
lower four Snake River dams provide are valuable to surrounding
communities, those services can be replaced with alternative, and less
damaging to the river, technologies. Science shows us that ``breaching
the four lower Snake River dams is necessary to (1) substantially
improve the probability of recovering these cultural and ecological
keystone species to healthy and harvestable populations and (2)
safeguard those fishes from extinction.'' (American Fisheries Society
2023 citing Williams et al. 1989; Nehlsen et al. 1991; Thurow 2000;
NOAA 2017, 2022; Isaak et al. 2018; Storch et al. 2022; TU 2022).
Losing these iconic keystone species of the Pacific Northwest would be
an economic, cultural, and ecological disaster with long-ranging
implications for Columbia Basin Tribes, and for the coastal communities
of Oregon and Washington, to the uppermost reaches of the Salmon River
in the Sawtooth Mountains of Idaho.
American Rivers applauds the Biden administration for working with
the Yakama, Nez Perce, Umatilla and Warm Springs Tribes and the states
of Washington and Oregon to develop solutions to end the decades-long
logjam of litigation over operation of the Snake River dams. We have
moral, ethical, and environmental obligations to follow the science and
honor our Tribal treaty obligations in pursuit of a solution in the
Snake Basin.
According to fisheries scientists and government agencies,
including the American Fisheries Society and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, the only way to save ESA-listed populations
of salmon and steelhead in the Snake River Basin from extinction and
return them to abundance, is to breach the lower four Snake River dams.
The Columbia Basin Partnership Task Force, a collaboration of states,
Tribes, federal agencies, and stakeholders across the region, adopted
targets for achieving abundant and harvestable salmon and steelhead in
the Columbia Basin. The only way to achieve these agreed upon targets
is to breach the lower four Snake River dams.
The financial burden of recovering of Snake River salmon and
steelhead must not fall only on ratepayers in the Pacific Northwest.
Much like recovery of the Florida Everglades, the Great Lakes, and
Chesapeake Bay, recovering salmon populations in the Snake Basin is a
national responsibility that should be borne by the U.S. Government.
Only the U.S. Government has the obligations and resource ability to
honor Tribal treaties, support communities who will be impacted by the
transition of services, and restore the basin to support salmon
populations.
Efforts to scare the public with outsized estimates of impacts on
utility bills are both misleading and disingenuous. If costs of
replacing the power provided by the lower four Snake River dams are
borne by the US Government, the results will be minimal impacts on
utility bills and greater certainty for utility providers for decades
to come. We have already seen a transformation in our energy portfolio
with new wind, solar, and storage resources that seemed impossible 20
years ago. With unprecedented federal funding available through the
Inflation Reduction Act and the bi-partisan Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act, there has never been a better time to invest in a bold
new vision for the future of power in the Pacific Northwest.
The longer we continue to delay, obfuscate, and distract with
misinformation, the more drastic becomes the need, and more urgent the
timeline, for action to invest in a sustainable economic future to save
these fish from extinction. We have an opportunity to come together as
a region to develop solutions to large-scale challenges involved with
replacing the services provided by the lower four Snake River dams, in
a manner that will keep stakeholders and impacted communities whole and
position the region to move boldly into the next century. American
Rivers stands with Tribal Nations of the Northwest, our NGO partners,
local communities, and impacted stakeholders to help make that vision a
reality. The actions and commitments from the Biden Administration are
a meaningful step in that direction.
American Fisheries Society 2023. Statement of the American Fisheries
Society (AFS) and the Western Division AFS (WDAFS) About the Need to
Breach the Four Dams on the Lower Snake River. https://fisheries.org/
policy-media/recent-policy-statements/statement-of-the-american-
fisheries-society-afs-and-the-western-division-afs-wdafs-about-the-
need-to-breach-the-four-dams-on-the-lower-snake-river
Isaak, D.J., C.H. Luce, D.L. Horan, et al. 2018. Global warming of
salmon and trout rivers in the northwestern U.S.: road to ruin or path
through purgatory? Transactions of the American Fisheries Society
147:566-587.
Nehlsen, W.J., J.E. Williams, and J.A. Lichatowich. 1991. Pacific
salmon at the crossroads: stocks at risk from California, Oregon,
Idaho, and Washington. Fisheries 16:4-21.
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). 2017. ESA
recovery plan for Snake River spring/summer Chinook and Snake River
Basin steelhead. National Marine Fisheries Service, Portland, OR.
https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/dam-migration/final-snake-river-
spring-summer-chinook-salmon-and-snake-river-steelhead-recovery-plan-
2017.pdf.
Storch, A.J., H.A. Schaller, C.E. Petrosky, et al. 2022. A review of
potential conservation and fisheries benefits of breaching four dams in
the Lower Snake River (Washington, USA). Water Biology & Security 1(2).
doi.org/10.1016/j.watbs.2022.100030
Thurow, R.F., T. Copeland, and B.N. Oldemeyer. 2020. Wild salmon and
the shifting baseline syndrome: application of archival and
contemporary redd counts to estimate historical Chinook Salmon
(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) production potential in the central Idaho
wilderness. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 77:651-
665.
Williams, J.E., J.E. Johnson, D.A. Hendrickson, et al. 1989. Fishes of
North America endangered, threatened, or of special concern: 1989.
Fisheries 14:2-20.
______
American Fisheries Society (AFS)
Bethesda, MD
December 23, 2023
Hon. Cliff Bentz, Chairman
Hon. Jared Huffman, Ranking Member
Committee on Natural Resources
Subcommittee on Water, Oceans and Wildlife
1324 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Re: Examining the Biden Administration's Efforts to Eliminate the
Pacific Northwest's Clean Energy Production
Dear Chairman Bentz and Ranking Member Huffman:
On behalf of the American Fisheries Society (AFS), we submit this
information for the record in follow-up to the December 12 hearing of
the Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Subcommittee of the U.S. House of
Representatives Committee on Natural Resources entitled ``Examining the
Biden Administration's Efforts to Eliminate the Pacific Northwest's
Clean Energy Production.''
AFS is the world's oldest and largest professional society of
fishery scientists and resource managers. At its core, AFS is a science
organization. AFS promotes the conservation and sustainability of
fishery resources and aquatic ecosystems through dissemination of
fisheries science via scientific journals on fisheries, conferences,
and continuing education. Many of AFS' members live and work in the
western United States and have long-studied salmon and their declining
populations.
The science is indeed clear and compelling, supported by decades of
rigorously peer-reviewed published reports and manuscripts, and
demonstrates removing the four lower Snake River dams is essential to
restore critically at-risk populations of wild Snake River salmon and
steelhead. Snake River populations are currently hovering on the brink
of extinction and action is urgently needed.
After carefully reviewing the science on this issue, AFS adopted a
policy statement in support of breaching the lower four Snake River
dams in January 2023 (Winters 2023). We attach it here for your
consideration. The policy statement concludes that ``[i]f Snake River
basin salmon and steelhead are to be saved, then policymakers and
stakeholders at all levels will need to implement appropriate processes
and funding provisions to breach the four dams on the Lower Snake
River, as well as implement all necessary habitat rehabilitation.''
Today, only 1-2% of formerly abundant, historic wild salmon and
steelhead return to the Snake River to spawn (Winters 2023). Despite
billions of dollars spent to date on Snake River anadromous fish
restoration (including hatchery stocking), recovery efforts have not
been effective (Hatch Magazine 2021; Storch et al. 2022; Jaeger and
Scheuerell 2023; Winters 2023). Recent reports demonstrate that 42% of
Snake River wild spring/summer Chinook Salmon and 19% of steelhead
populations have declined to the threshold where extinction is highly
likely (O'Toole 2021) and will continue to decline without breach.
The climate crisis increases the urgency for action and will
continue to worsen conditions for these and other coldwater species.
Ensuring access to the Snake River basin's intact and high elevation
habitat provides the best opportunity for broadscale population
recovery and persistence in the face of the climate crisis (Storch et
al. 2022).
In the 1990s, 30 scientists from state, federal, tribal, and other
entities participated in the PATH (Plan for Analyzing and Testing
Hypotheses) process that evaluated smolt-to-adult ratios and the
probability of achieving the interim survival and recovery standards of
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Fisheries
(Marmorek et al. 1998). The PATH analyses concluded that the Natural
River option to restore the Snake River (via breaching the four lower
Snake River dams) was the only option that would provide recovery. This
option was found to have the ``highest certainty of success and the
lowest risk of failure.'' (Storch et al. 2022). The PATH conclusions
have been reaffirmed by scientific review panels, agencies, and
scientists for the past 25 years (ISAB 2019, Hatch Magazine 2021, NOAA
Fisheries 2022).
In 2020, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council ``reaffirmed
the prior benchmark of smolt-to-adult returns (SAR) averaging 4%
(range: 2%-6%) for spring/summer Chinook Salmon . . . (A) minimum SAR
of 2% is required to consistently maintain existing populations,
whereas SARs greater than 2% indicate degrees of population growth . .
. Smolt-to-adult return rates equal to or greater than 4% achieved on a
regular basis should promote a high likelihood of recovery (i.e.,
consistent generational increases in abundance . . . The Independent
Scientific Advisory Board . . . has reviewed . . . the 2-6% SAR
objective and identified extensive evidence to support these goals . .
.''
The need to breach the four lower Snake River dams is further
confirmed by comparisons of SARs versus the number of dams anadromous
fish must pass. Recent SARs for Snake River wild spring/summer Chinook
Salmon have averaged 0.7% above eight dams, in comparison to SARs for
non-ESA listed, wild spring Chinook Salmon that pass fewer dams in the
mid-Columbia River and continue to meet sustainable SAR objectives
(McCann et al. 2019). From 2000-2017, wild Chinook Salmon SARs averaged
3.6% in the John Day River above three dams, 2.5% in the Yakima River
above four dams, and 0.7% in the Snake River above eight dams (McCann
et al. 2019). Importantly, temporal analysis also demonstrates that the
productivity of Snake River Chinook salmon declined much more
precipitously after construction of the Federal Columbia River Power
System compared to productivity of Chinook salmon in the John Day River
(Schaller et. al 2014). The John Day, Yakima, and Snake River
populations experience the same treaty and nontreaty fisheries,
pinniped predation, and ocean conditions; the primary difference among
them is the number of dams they must pass (Storch et al. 2022). Wild,
Snake River anadromous salmon above eight dams are unable to meet SAR
goals and are declining toward extinction. Importantly, recent models
also demonstrate the population's ability to recover and grow with SARs
approaching 2% (Jacobs et al. 2023).
The Columbia Basin Partnership established healthy and harvestable
levels as the population goal for wild Chinook salmon and steelhead
recovery (NMFS 2020). During the December 12 hearing, recent salmon
returns were falsely characterized as ``strong.'' Clearly, returns are
not meeting established healthy and harvestable populations. Indeed,
2022 was a very low return year for wild Chinook salmon in Central
Idaho. The Middle Fork Salmon River total redd count was n=322. That
number is only 1.3% of estimated wild Chinook salmon returns to the
drainage that occurred into the mid-1960s. Many areas with
exceptionally high quality and connected natal habitat had zero fish
return to spawn. These very low returns emphasize the severe threat of
extinction and the urgency of restoring the Snake River migration
corridor.
Hatcheries can provide harvest opportunities, especially in
ensuring Treaty-protected tribal harvest that would not exist otherwise
with the dams in place. However, a recent science review of Snake River
spring/summer Chinook Salmon Hatchery Programs confirms hatchery
mitigation efforts are unable to produce sufficient adult returns to
meet goals and, often, basic broodstock needs (Independent Scientific
Review Panel Review of the Lower Snake River Compensation Plan for
Spring/Summer Chinook, 2022-2023).
Additionally, detrimental effects of hatcheries to wild populations
are well documented (McMillan et al. 2023). For example, hatchery fish
reduce subsequent reproductive capacities by up to 40% of hatchery fish
and wild-born fish from hatchery parents (Araki et al. 2009).
Nonetheless, in the short term, hatcheries serve as a means for tribes
to harvest salmon for cultural, social, and economic reasons and for
states to provide angling opportunities. However, a long-term solution
requires restoring wild populations via breaching the four lower Snake
River dams followed by reduced dependence on hatcheries.
Breach of the lower Snake River dams will also help meet broader
ecological benchmarks for migratory fish rehabilitation (Storch et al.
2022). The lower Snake River dams and reservoirs produce lower and
warmer flows that negatively affect adult immigration and juvenile
emigration. Consequently, increased connectivity in the lower Snake
River is critical for steelhead, Bull Trout, White Sturgeon, and
Pacific Lamprey (Storch et al. 2022). Restoring the Snake River
migration corridor will reestablish opportunities for repeat spawning
to enhance populations (Vadas 2000; Vadas et al. 2016; Storch et al.
2022). This approach has been successfully used in Maine, where dam
breaching increased abundances of repeat spawning Atlantic Salmon and
non-salmon species (Winters 2023).
Despite often considered a ``green energy'' source, hydropower dam/
reservoir systems have profound negative effects on water quality,
cyanobacteria, instream flow, habitat blockage, and greenhouse-gas
(methane/nitrous oxide) emissions (Storch et al. 2022; Winters 2023).
AFS supports actions to breach the four dams on the Lower Snake
River and we further support a clear roadmap for ameliorating the
economic (energy/transportation/irrigation) impacts of breach on those
who rely on the dams (Hatch Magazine 2021; Storch et al. 2022; Winters
2023). To safeguard Snake River salmon and steelhead for future
generations, we urge policymakers to embrace the science, implement
urgent actions to breach the four lower Snake River dams, and to take
additional actions to replace dam services. As a precedent, similar
actions have recently been implemented to recover Klamath River fishes
and to assist the diverse sets of stakeholders collaborating to restore
that system (Davidson 2023; FERC 2022).
Thank you for your consideration. For additional questions, please
contact Drue Banta Winters, [email protected].
Sincerely,
Douglas J. Austen, Ph.D.,
Executive Director
References
Araki H, Cooper B, Blouin MS. 2009. Carry-over effect of captive
breeding reduces reproductive fitness of wild-born descendants in the
wild. Biological Letters 5: 621-624.
Davidson, S., 2023. First of the Klamath dams comes down. Trout
Unlimit. Mag. https://www.tu.org/magazine/conservation/barriers/dam-
removal/first-of-the-klamath-dams-comes-down.
FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), 2022. Final Environmental
Impact Statement For Hydropower License Surrender and Decommissioning
for the Lower Klamath Project. https://elibrary.ferc.gov/eLibrary/
filelist?accession_number= 20220826-3006&optimized=false.
Jacobs, G.R., R.F. Thurow, C.E. Petrosky, et al. 2023. Life-cycle
modeling reveals high recovery potential of at-risk wild Chinook salmon
via improved migrant survival. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences.
Hatch Magazine. 2021. Scientists draft letter calling on governors to
tear down the lower Snake River dams: for salmon and steelhead to
survive, the dams must go. Hatch Magazine (San Diego, CA), January 14.
Available: https://www.hatchmag.com/articles/scientists-draft-letter-
calling-governors-tear-down-lower/7715196 (August 2023).
ISAB (Independent Science Advisory Board). 2019. ISAB review of the
Comparative Survival Study (CSS) Draft 2019 annual report. https://
www.nwcouncil.org/reports/isab-review-comparative-survival-study-css-
draft-2019-annual-report/.
ISRP (Independent Science Review Panel). 2023. ISRP review of the lower
Snake River Compensation Plan Spring/Summer Chinook Program, 2022-2023.
Available: https://www.nwcouncil.org/reports/isrp2023-01/.
Jaeger, W.K., and M.D. Scheuerell. 2023. Return(s) on investment:
restoration spending in the Columbia River Basin and increased
abundance of salmon and steelhead. PLoS (Public Library of Science) ONE
[online serial] 18(7):e0289246. Available: https://doi.org/10.1371/
journal.pone.0289246.
Marmorek, D.R., C.N. Peters, I. Parnell (Eds.), PATH Final Report for
Fiscal Year 1998, Bonneville Power Administration, Portland, OR (1998).
Available: http://www.essa.com/documents/1998_Final_Report.pdf.
McCann, J., B. Chockley, E. Cooper, et al. Rawding Comparative survival
study (CSS) of PIT-tagged spring/summer/fall Chinook, summer steelhead
and Sockeye. 2019. Annual Report to the Bonneville Power
Administration, Contract 19960200. Portland, OR. (2019). Available:
http://www.fpc.org/documents/CSS/2019_Final_ CSS.pdf.
McMillan, J.R., B. Morrison, N. Chambers, et al. 2023. A global
synthesis of peer-reviewed research on the effects of hatchery
salmonids on wild salmonids. Fisheries Management & Ecology 30:446-463.
NOAA Fisheries. 2022. Rebuilding interior Columbia Basin salmon and
steelhead. U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration,
National Marine Fisheries Service. Silver Spring, Maryland. Available:
https://www.fisheries. noaa.gov/resource/document/rebuilding-interior-
columbia-basin-salmon-and-steelhead (August 2023).
NPCC (Northwest Power and Conservation Council). Columbia River Basin
Fish and Wildlife Program 2014: 2020 Addendum. 2020. Available: https:/
/www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2020-9.pdf
O'Toole, P., editor. 2021. Nez Perce Tribe staff presentation on their
analysis of Snake River basin Chinook and steelhead--quasi-extinction
threshold and call to action (memorandum and presentation). Northwest
Power and Conservation Council. Portland, Oregon. Available: https://
www.nwcouncil.org/sites/default/files/2021_05_4.pdf (August 2023).
Schaller HA, Petrosky CE, Tinus ES. 2014. Evaluating river management
during seaward migration to recover Columbia River stream-type Chinook
salmon considering the variation in marine conditions. Canadian Journal
of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 71:259-271.
Storch, A.J., H.A. Schaller, C.E. Petrosky, et al. 2022. A review of
potential conservation and fisheries benefits of breaching four dams in
the Lower Snake River (Washington, USA). Water Biology and Security
[online serial] 1(2):100030. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.watbs.2022.100030. Twidell, J. 2022. Renewable energy sources. 4th
ed. Routledge. New York. Available: https://www.routledge.com/
Renewable-Energy-Resources/Twidell/p/book/9780415633581.
Twidell, J. 2022. Renewable energy sources. 4th ed. Routledge. New
York. Available: https://www.routledge.com/Renewable-Energy-Resources/
Twidell/p/book/9780415633581.
Vadas, R.L. Jr. 2000. Instream-flow needs for anadromous salmonids and
lamprey on the Pacific Coast, with special reference to the Pacific
Southwest. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 64:331-358.
Available: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006486920036.
Vadas, R.L. Jr., H.A. Beecher, S.N. Boessow, and J.H. Kohr. 2016.
Coastal Cutthroat Trout redd counts impacted by natural water supply
variations. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 36:900-912.
Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/02755947.2016.1173138.
Whittum, K.A., J.D. Zydlewski, S.M. Coghlan, Jr., et al. 2023. Fish
assemblages in the Penobscot River: a decade after dam removal. Marine
and Coastal Fisheries: Dynamics, Management, and Ecosystem Science
[online serial] 15:e10227. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/
mcf2.10227.
Winters, D.B., editor. 2023. Statement of the American Fisheries
Society (AFS) and the Western Division of AFS about the need to breach
the four dams on the lower Snake River. Fisheries 48:215-217.
Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/fsh.10906; and https://
fisheries.org/policy-media/recent-policy-statements/statement-of-the-
american-fisheries-society-afs-and-the-western-division-afs-wdafs-
about-the-need-to-breach-the-four-dams-on-the-lower-snake-river (August
2023).
______
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Submission for the Record by Rep. Rodgers
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]