As you know, we are an integral part of the Washington Aqueduct system and directly dependent upon the Washington Aqueduct for that supply, which brings me to a very important part. I think in 1925, the congressional act authorized the Secretary of War at that time to supply water to Arlington. The very last sentence of that act, in essence, says that the permit may be revoked upon the discretion of the Secretary of War. I think over a period of 50 years, the legality of the Secretary having to do that, whether it be from his own volition or any other volition, would probably stand well in the court. However, I would not like to think of that process going on. In that respect, I think it would be most helpful to have some clarifying legislation now that everyone is in accord that perhaps clarifying legislation would be helpful, and I believe most of the parties would believe that's so.

I don't think it would be appropriate, as the Corps of Engineers has stated earlier, and the Secretary of the Army has stated earlier, to cut off any one of its customers. It would be a very high policy decision. I would certainly hope so, knowing that it only takes an hour to mechanically do it or less. It would have to be a high policy decision, but I would look forward to some clarifying legislation that would be more protective of the Washington Aqueduct customers in that respect.

Mr. HARRIS. I make the suggestion that certainly in the spirit of the Low Flow Agreement, obviously, the very fact that we have had the jurisdictions, including the Corps, enter into the Low Flow Agreement, and have said that even at low flow we don't cut off any customers and they have albeit a drawing to it to some extent for water, would indicate that this legislative discretion is not intended to be implemented, and I think making the current legislation compatiibe with the Low Flow Agreement, for example, would be a very logical and very reasonable type of request to make of Congress.

ARLINGTON COUNTY'S POLICY

Mr. HULME. I would like to emphasize and press upon the members of the committee that Arlington is in the position, and has been in the position in the past, and will continue to be in the position to try to assist its neighbors wherever possible. As I indicated earlier, it only took a matter of seconds to say, "Yes, let's supply water where necessary to augment the Fairfax flow."

Certainly, it should augur well that at least on the operating level with the Washington Aqueduct, Arlington, Falls Church, we're in a position to assist each other, and it is not any one jurisdiction that could have made that decision. Falls Church could not have made the decision. Arlington could not have made the decision. Washington Aqueduct could not have made the decision to assist Fairfax County. All three had to make the decision, because it used parts of each of us. It augurs that we must continue to develop somehow an organization, informal as it may be, a mechanism to make sure that communication lines flow as the water lines flow, and I will personally do my best to encourage that and to implement it.

In that same regard, the city of Alexandria has asked their water distributor to make several improvements in the next 3 to 5 years. As a part of that, there is a request to provide an interconnection between

Alexandria and Arlington, and we're working together to ensure that whenever improvements are made that that would be the case.

I have asked our staff-no, I have directed our staff to have water storage and water interconnection the highest priority for the improvement of Arlington's water system. I feel that is essential. As I indicated earlier, it is dangerous not to have backup water supply, and our planning efforts and our construction efforts would be in the line of strengthening those areas which would take care of the short-term emergency.

REGIONAL WATER EMERGENCY PLAN

One final thing with respect to what will take place in the event of emergency next summer, sometime during this summer the Washington Metropolitan Area Council of Governments was working through the drafts of a regional water emergency supply plan. We have worked through that draft ourselves and, to my knowledge, we're probably the only jurisdiction where politically it has been accepted as a draft, as a model, as a foundation for a water emergency plan for Arlington, and for the region. That draft is still going through the process of the Washington Metropolitan Area Council of Governments committees, and that agency itself. We are in the process now of implementing that foundation, in essence, a how-to-manual, which valves to turn, when, and who is to do it, and we anticipate that that will be completed before this summar.

In conclusion, I will continue to pledge Arlington's cooperation and involvement in the regional solutions to this very critical problem, and if at any time you feel that I or Arlington County can be of some assistance, We're a telephone call away.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hulme follows:]

STATEMENT OF H. S. HULME, JR., DIRECTOR, Arlington COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

I have a rather brief written testimony which should not be construed as an indication of Arlington's appraisal of the importance or urgency of the water supply situation in the Washington Metropolitan Region. Quite the contrary, we have been following the events of the State Water Control Board Hearings on this matter; we have participated in the deliberations of COG with respect to regional emergency water shortage planning; have conferred with and assisted our neighboring jurisdictions and have taken a keen interest in the Low Flow Allocation Formula discussions and results.

As you are aware, Arlington is an integral part of the Washington Aqueduct Division of the Corps of Engineers and is totally dependent on the Corps of Engineers for treated water needs.

The County coordinates water supply needs on a regional basis through the Corps of Engineers, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, and Virginia State Water Control Board. On a local level, Arlington currently has interconnects serving Falls Church and portions of Fairfax County. Continuing the water system planning with neighboring jurisdictions, Arlington and Alexandria are planning an interconnect to be completed before 1980.

There is no current approved long range water supply plan for Arlington. A Water Works Improvement Plan was completed in 1969, projection the County's water needs until 2020 and beyond; however, changes in population forecasts in the past eight years will affect the results of this study.

Arlington experienced no problems with low flow in the Potomac River during 1977. In fact, Arlington was able to assist Fairfax County during this period by supplementing the water supply to areas in the northern portions of the County.

24-273-78-8

We are a participant in the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Regional Water Emergency Supply Plan. The County Board approved this plan in late 1977. We are now developing detailed internal implementation plans. It is anticipated to have this completed by early summer.

Mr. HARRIS. Thank you very much. Thank you again, Mr. Hulme, and Ms. Seefeldt. Is there anything additional you would like to present, Mr. Wells?

Mr. WELLS. No, I think we've covered everything.

Mr. HARRIS. I think you all again very much. The subcommittee will stand adjourned until 10 a.m., January 30, Monday morning.

[Whereupon, at 1:10 p.m., Wednesday, January 25, 1978, the subcommittee was adjourned, to reconvene Monday, January 30, 1978, at 10 a.m., 1310 Longworth Building.]

WATER SUPPLY POLICY AND PROGRAMS IN THE WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN REGION

MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 1978

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS,
Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room. 1310, Longworth Building, Hon. Herbert E. Harris II, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding.

Present. Representatives Harris, Meyner, Whalen, and Steers. Also present. Hugh B. Calkin, subcommittee staff assistant; Harry M. Singleton, minority deputy counsel; J. Dent Farr, legislative assistant; and Alfred A. Frank, Jr., minority staff counsel.

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS

Mr. HARRIS. The subcommittee will come to order. This is the second in a series of hearings on short-term water supply policy and programs in the Washington Metropolitan region.

Make note of the fact that the subcommittee had started hearings on water problems with emphasis on long-term water programs about a year and a half ago in August of 1976. With respect to the past year, we had these situations: One saw Maryland out of water because of an outage while the rest of the area had plenty of water; and another situation where the rest of the area had plenty of water and half of northern Virginia was on water curtailment programs.

It seemed appropriate to the subcommittee to see what the shortterm policy and programs were with regard to our water problems. Last Wednesday the subcommittee heard testimony from the Secretary of the Army and Corps of Engineers summarizing the status of their activities in the Washington area. It was rather remarkable, I thought, that they testified to an excess water supply capacity of 115 million gallons a day.

We also heard testimony from Virginia jurisdictions concerning the impact of last summer's water curtailment and their plans for greater coordination of activities in the future.

We have since then had discussions with members of the Fairfax Water Authority. We would like to express surprise and dismay that they did not come with the representatives of Virginia last week. We want them to appear and we've invited them to. Pending their acceptance, they're scheduled this Wednesday to present whatever information they have geared to planning for the coming year.

Today we will hear from the District of Columbia and suburban Maryland and the Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin. Our first witness is Jean Levesque, administrator of the Water Resources Management Administration, Department of Environmental Services of the District of Columbia.

Before I call Mr. Levesque, I will recognize my colleague from Maryland, if he has any statement to make.

Mr. Levesque, we have your statement. I notice it is a fairly brief one. If you wish to read it or summarize it, either way, you're welcome. STATEMENT OF JEAN B. LEVESQUE, ADMINISTRATOR, WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. LEVESQUE. Mr. Chairman, I think I'd just as well read it, because I think it basically is a summary anyhow.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I'd like to read this statement on the water supply policy and programs for the District of Columbia.

WATER SHORTAGE EMERGENCY PLAN (1975)

As far as water supply policy, the District of Columbia in coordination with the Washington Aqueduct Division of the Baltimore District, Corps of Engineers, completed a water shortage emergency operations plan on November 20, 1975. This plan addresses all the emergency situations which might occur, such as: (1) Severe droughts; (2) contamination of the Potomac River by a toxicant; (3) failure of one or more of the water intake structures; (4) partial or complete failure of one or both of the water treatment plants due to an electrical power outage, flooding, or other causes; and (5) failure of the distribution system pumping capability due to electrical power outage, flooding, or other causes.

This is rather a comprehensive plan, and it addresses all the foreseeable situations that we think we might get into.

DISTRICT'S PLANS

Our plans to provide the District of Columbia's water supply needs to the year 2000 are as follows:

(a) The Potomac River Low Flow Allocation Agreement signed by the States of Virginia and Maryland, Secretary of the Army and the District of Columbia on January 11, 1978, will assure that the District of Columbia will get its fair share of the free flowing Potomac River during low flow periods. Furthermore, we have the Upper Estuary Water Pumping Station under construction and that will be completed by the summer of 1978, and this will provide us with emergency supply of up to 100 mgd, million gallons per day, for up to a 90-day period.

(b) The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers also has under construction at Blue Plains, a Pilot Estuary Water Treatment Plant. After the necessary research work is completed, this plant may also provide the metropolitan area with a new source of water.

(c) The Bloomington Dam and Lake is under construction and is scheduled to be completed in early 1981 at which time 135 mgd could be released to augment the free flowing Potomac River.