Statement by Senator Bob Smith (R-NH)

Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Water hearing

November 14, 2001

As the Ranking Republican of the Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW), I support conducting this hearing which will examine an issue of great importance to the Chair, Senator Graham. Chairman Graham has long had an interest in the issue of water supply. The situation in parts of his home state, Florida, as with other parts of the country, is dire. However, the EPW Committee is charged with ensuring the nation=s waters are clean, not whether there is an ample supply of water.

According to The Authority and Rules for the Senate Committees for the 107^th Congress, EPW has jurisdiction over water pollution and water resources. The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources has oversight over irrigation and reclamation, including water supply. The agency primarily responsible for helping communities meet their water needs is the Bureau of Reclamation which reports directly to the Energy Committee.

The Corps of Engineers, which reports to the EPW Committee was authorized in 1958 to help communities with water supply if it was part of a larger project or the facilities were already available. For instance, if the Corps owns a reservoir for flooding which is going unused, it is permitted to use it as a water supply source for the local community. However, the Corps cannot finance or oversee projects whose sole purpose is to ensure an adequate water supply. The only exceptions are those projects authorized in the biannual Water Resources Development Act (WRDA). Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) and I argued to no avail against the inclusion of supply projects in WRDA 2000 because they exceed the authority of the Corps and this committee which writes the WRDA bill.

During the 106^th Congress, this committee, against my recommendation, exceeded its jurisdiction and that of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) which the Committee oversees. Congress included Senator Graham=s legislation to authorize EPA to administer an alternative water source pilot project. One of my primary concerns about having passed this proposal is that we are blurring the missions of the federal agencies to the point that we will soon have as many as three agencies performing the same function: securing water supply. This is the very type of overlap and redundancy that Members of Congress so often criticize. Further, those three agencies will report to two Senate Committees, one of which doesn=t have jurisdiction over the issue.

I understand that this is a very important issue for Senator Graham and the people of Florida. It is also a concern in New Hampshire albeit not as large a problem. I believe that to the extent that the Committee can promote programs within its jurisdiction that may have a positive impact on water supply problems, it should. For instance, when adequately funded, the revolving loan programs under both the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and the Clean Water Act provide communities with the money necessary to ensure their water supplies are clean and safe, resulting in fewer contamination-caused supply problems. Further, the Environmental Protection Agency has promoted water recycling and reuse through the Clean Water Act. Again, provisions related to recycling and reuse seek to ensure a healthy source of water but also consequently address the supply problem.

Senators Jim Jeffords and Mike Crapo and I are working closely with Chairman Graham on a proposal which will examine ways to extend the life of every dollar in the revolving loan funds. While addressing water supply needs is not a goal of this proposal, just as it is not a goal of the Clean Water Act or SDWA, if our proposal is able to meet its objectives, it may result in the easing of some supply constraints.

Again, I fully understand the extent of Senator Graham=s concerns. However, those concerns must be addressed within the rules of the Senate and the jurisdictions of its Committees.