TABLE OF CONTENTS(Click on Section)

PURPOSE

BACKGROUND

WITNESSES

The Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee is scheduled to meet on Wednesday, May 7, at 2:00 p.m. in 2167 RHOB, to receive testimony on H.R. 135, the “Twenty-First Century Water Commission Act of 2003.” Testimony is expected from Representative John Linder, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, and the Interstate Council on Water Policy.

The United States has significant water resources that support the nation’s economy and quality of life. Water supports interstate trade on our navigable waterways, allows industries to operate, produces hydroelectric power, supports recreation and aquatic ecosystems, and makes the United States the largest producer of agricultural commodities in the world.

However, quantity, use, and management of water in the United States are not uniform. There are significant geographic and legal differences. In the water-rich East, water resources management often has meant protecting lives and property from excess water during floods and maintaining navigable waterways. In the arid West, water is scarce and has long been managed for multiple competing purposes, including irrigation, and municipal and industrial water supply, as well as flood control and navigation.

In recent years, droughts have created water scarcity in the East. In addition, there have been increased demands for water resources in both the East and West, in part due to increased population and an increased recognition of the need to reserve water for aquatic ecosystems, as well as consumptive uses.

As a result, the disputes over water uses have increased. For example, water rights in the Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa (ACT) River Basin and the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) River Basin have been disputed among Georgia, Alabama, and Florida since a 1990 proposal to build the West Georgia Regional Reservoir. Atlanta needs additional water to support its burgeoning population. Alabama wants to ensure it has water to support expanding municipalities and industries along its eastern border. Florida wants to protect the oyster beds in the brackish Apalachicola Bay. Water issues in these basins are governed by an interstate compact among Georgia, Alabama, and Florida, with the ultimate resolution of issues residing in the courts. These states have held off filing lawsuits and have been attempting to resolve their dispute through negotiations. Recently, these states reached a 30-year agreement on water allocation for the ACT River Basin. No agreement has yet been reached for the ACF River Basin.

Another example is the dispute over water allocations from the Colorado River. The 1,450 mile-long Colorado River and its tributaries flow through seven states from Colorado to the Gulf of California in Mexico. The rights of these seven states and Mexico to use Colorado River water is governed by a series of agreements, treaties, laws, and court decisions, collectively referred to as the "Law of the River." Under this legal regime, the Upper Basin states (Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, and New Mexico) and the Lower Basin states (California, Nevada, and Arizona) are collectively entitled to an equal portion of Colorado River water in a normal year. From within the Lower Basin states' entitlement, California is entitled to 4.4 million acre-feet of water, however, in 2002, California used 5.2 million acre-feet. California is currently using 20 percent more Colorado River water than it is entitled to under the "Law of the River." On April 29, 2003, the Department of the Interior announced that, while it was cutting Southern California’s share of the Colorado River by 17%, farmers in the Imperial Valley will receive the full 3.1 million acre feet they requested. The Department of the Interior is requiring California to take specific actions to reduce its Colorado River water use to 4.4 million acre-feet in 2003, in accordance with the 1998 Quantification Settlement Agreement between the San Diego County Water Authority, Metropolitan Water District, Coachella Valley Water Authority and the Imperial Irrigation District.

On a smaller scale, Maryland and Virginia have had disputes over rights to water in the Potomac River. Maryland maintains that under a 1632 English charter, it owns the Potomac. Virginia maintains that under a 1785 interstate compact, it has the right to take water and construct docks or piers in the Potomac without permission from Maryland. Virginia wants to construct a new, larger pipe farther from shore that would allow for increased withdrawals of less silt-laden water. The new pipe would increase Virginia’s water withdrawals from the Potomac by 312 million gallons a day to provide half of the water supply needed for Northern Virginia. The Supreme Court has primary jurisdiction over disputes between States and recently agreed to hear this case.

Water resource management falls under the jurisdiction of a multitude of Federal, State, Interstate, and local agencies. There is a great deal of overlap in responsibilities and jurisdiction of agencies; many believe that there is not sufficient coordination. To encourage coordination and planning, some argue that water resource management agencies need a comprehensive strategy to improve water resource management and increase available water supplies to maintain and improve the economic and environmental future of the nation. Others argue that the current regional and incremental approach to water policy allows for appropriate consideration of geographic differences and States’ rights.

Since 1950, no fewer than seven commissions have examined aspects of Federal water policy. The National Water Policy Commission was made up of water professionals and was established by executive order in 1950. In 1959, the U.S. Senate convened a Senate Select Committee on National Water Resources, consisting of 17 United States Senators. In 1965, Congress established the Water Resources Council, made up of the heads of Federal agencies. The Water Resources Council conducted two national water assessments, the most recent one in 1978. In 1968, Congress established the National Water Commission, consisting entirely of non-Federal members, to provide a national, long-range perspective on water problems in the United States. This Commission issued its report in 1973. In 1988, the National Council on Public Works Improvement, which was created by Congress and consisted solely of private sector members, issued a report on the state of America’s public works, including water supply infrastructure. The Western Water Policy Advisory Review Commission, which was created by Congress in 1992 and consisted of 22 members appointed by the President and additional Congressional ex officio members, issued its report in 1998.

Notwithstanding all these commissions, councils, and committees, there has not been a comprehensive assessment of water resources in the United States since 1978 and there has not been a comprehensive review of water policies since 1973.

H.R. 135, the Twenty-First Century Water Commission Act of 2003

H.R. 135, the “Twenty-First Century Water Commission Act of 2003,” would establish a commission to provide for water assessments to project future water supply and demand, review current water management programs at each level of government, and develop recommendations for a comprehensive water strategy, and would authorize $9 million to carry out these functions. Modeled after the 1968 National Water Commission Act, the “Twenty-First Century Water Commission” would consist of 7 non-Federal members, appointed by the President.

Specifically, H.R. 135 would require that the recommendations developed by the Commission must: respect the rights of States in regulating water rights and uses, identify incentives to ensure a dependable water supply for the nation over the next 50 years, develop strategies to avoid unfunded mandates, eliminate duplication among Federal agencies of jurisdiction, consider all available technologies, make recommendations for capturing excess water and flood water for conservation and subsequent use in times of drought, develop financing options for public works projects, and develop strategies to conserve existing water supplies and repairs to infrastructure.

The Commission would issue interim reports every six months and a final report within three years. After issuing its final report, the Commission would cease to exist.