WATER SUPPLY POLICY AND PROGRAMS IN THE WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN REGION WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 25, 1978 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10;15 a.m. in room 1310, Longworth Building, Hon. Herbert E. Harris II (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representative Harris, Delegate Fauntroy, and Representatives McKinney, Whalen, and Steers. Also, Representative Fisher. Also present: Hugh B. Calkin, subcommittee staff assistant; James T. Clark, legislative counsel; Jack C. Barthwell III, counsel; Harry M. Singleton, minority deputy counsel; J. Dent Farr, legislative assistant; and Alfred S. Frank, Jr., minority staff counsel. STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HARRIS Mr. HARRIS. The subcommittee will come to order. These hearings of the Subcommittee on Economic Development and Regional Affairs, Committee of the District of Columbia, were called as oversight hearings on the water supply policy and programs in the Washington metropolitan region. About 11⁄2 years ago, the subcommittee held hearings on water supply and water quality for the Washington area and established a number of objectives to attempt to assure both, especially as it pertained to the Potomac. At that time it appeared to the subcommittee that a number of policies should be adopted and certain objectives should be given a timetable. It was of some concern to the subcommittee last summer to discover that a part of the region was running into what appeared to be a water crisis with respect to supply. I guess 1977 was sort of an historic chapter in the waterbook on Metropolitan Washington. Last spring, for instance, we saw a major outage at Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission cause mandatory water curtailments to over 1.2 million Maryland citizens for 21⁄2 days while citizens in the District and northern Virginia were helpless to assist. During the summer and fall, we had over 600,000 northern Virginians on water restrictions, while the District and suburban Maryland had plenty of water. We entered the summer with much concern over the possibility that the Potomac would run low, and ended the year having used only 5 percent of the water the river made available. Over 2,000 billion gallons of unutilized Potomac water flowed out to sea, while conscientious citizens on water restrictions saw their lawns turn brown in Alexandria, Prince William, and Fairfax Counties. There must be a better way for the Washington area to manage its water resources. LOW FLOW ALLOCATION AGREEMENT On the positive side, we achieved, I think, a major milestone for the region by successfully negotiating and signing an agreement among Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, and the Secretary of the Army on how to share the Potomac during periods of low flow. In addition, we also saw completed the draft environmental impact statement on Potomac River structures of vital importance to the citizens on both sides of the river. The public hearings have now been held, and we look forward to seeing the Fairfax County Water Authority receive its intake permit before next July. During 1977, we also heard some new proposals and some new versions of old proposals to solve Washington area water problems. After such a year, it seems appropriate for the Subcommittee on Economic Development and Regional Affairs to call for an assessment, get a status report of what happened, and whether anything was learned to more effectively serve the public in the future. REGIONAL WATER PROBLEMS All the potential structural solutions to the region's water supply problems are of a long-range nature. Bloomington Dam is under construction and it won't be completed until 1981. What plans or policies do the Washington area jurisdictions have for dealing with water shortages or emergencies from now to the mid1980's and to the year 2000? Are the only solutions Federal solutions, or should each jurisdiction. be reviewing and revising its policies that might lead to greater cooperation and better water policy for all Washington area citizens? For instance, was it necessary for government to require 600,000 northern Virginia citizens to voluntarily restrict their use of water last summer? Could substantial quantities of water have been purchased as an alternate to restrictions imposed on August 5? Water was readily available from the Potomac, treated at Dalecarlia Reservoir, and pumped to Fairfax County via the city of Falls Church. Fifteen million gallons a day were available during the entire summer, yet an average of less than 7 million was taken. This water could have added over 20 days' supply to the Occoquan when it reached its lowest point in late October. Why we routinely passed up nearly a billion gallons of treated water while simultaneously imposing restrictions, is one answer we will seek through these hearings. of Another question we plan to explore is the degree of vulnerability any jurisdiction that has just one source of water supply. Arlington County and Falls Church rely solely upon Dalecarlia, while the Fairfax County Water Authority right next door could provide them no assistance if a breakdown occurred at Dalecarlia similar to the one that occurred last spring at WSSC. This same situation prevails between the District of Columbia and the Washington Surburban Sanitary Commission, next door neighbors, yet there are no facilities that we know of for mutual assistance. Why this is so, and what potential fire hazards this creates, and what might be done about it, will be another facet of these hearings. While water problems appear to becoming an accepted way of life for the citizens of the Washington metropolitan region, there is serious question as to the potential economic impact of this problem. To address that issue, and give it the benefit of their analysis, the subcommittee has invited the Washington Metropolitan Board of Trade to testify. Finally, the subcommittee is most anxious to identify those actions that can be taken to minimize the prospect of water restrictions next summer, and succeeding summers, and then to insure that those actions are actually being taken. As I was coming in this morning through the rain, it seemed to me it was a strange day to be worrying about water supply when it seemed to be fairly adequate, at least today. I told Mayor Mann as we came in, we both share an enthusiasm for jazz, and I was reminded of the old Peggy Lee song that said, "The rain's coming in through the broken window, but if we wait a day or two the rain's going to stop, and there's no use fixing the window on such a sunny day." I think we have a tendency here in the region to handle the water problems this way. "There's no water problem today, so why worry about next summer." Maybe last summer was evidence that we haven't been worrying about next summer enough. The annual data on the flow of the Potomac River demonstrates that we are blessed with 15 to 20 times as much water as we currently need in the Washington metropolitan region. In other words, we have the water. The challenge is to find the spirit of regional cooperation and coordination to reap the benefits of that water without destroying the Potomac River in the process. FOCUS OF HEARINGS Today's hearings will focus first on an update and status report from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the variety of projects in which they are involved which directly affect the water supply situation in the Washington metropolitan region. JURISDICTIONAL POLICIES AND PLANS The second area of focus will be on the water supply policies and plans of each jurisdiction in northern Virginia, the District of Columbia, and suburban Maryland. Today we will hear testimony from northern Virginia, followed next week by Maryland and the District of Columbia and, of course, we will hear initially from the Corps of Engineers. It seems to me, and I can share with my colleagues, as I talked to some of our colleagues from California and Arizona, and explained to them why we have a water shortage in this area, they frankly get a strange smile on their face. When they realize and see the amount of water that we have and yet have not been able to manage it correctly, given that amount of water, they say they could make the whole desert bloom, and I think maybe we ought to be able to figure out a way to keep our lawns green with that amount of water. It is with a great deal of pleasure that I welcome my colleagues to the subcommittee hearing. Mr. Fauntroy, I'd like to ask your indulgence. I know that my colleague, Mr. Fisher, has another appointment to go to and I know you plan to be here on the subcommittee with me. I wonder if I might call on Mr. Fisher for comments first. Mr. FAUNTROY. I would be very happy to do that. Mr. HARRIS. Thank you very much. Mr. Fisher. STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH L. FISHER, REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS, 10TH DISTRICT, COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA Mr. FISHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I do appreciate the chance to have a couple of minutes, as this will permit me to get to a welfare reform bill markup that may be of some interest to my wonderful colleague from the District of Columbia. LOW FLOW ALLOCATION AGREEMENT I want to compliment you, Mr. Chairman, and Secretary Alexander, Chairman Herrity, and others who have had the key roles in bringing about the low flow agreement. I think without your leadership at a very critical moment, Mr. Chairman, we wouldn't be as far along as we are, and the whole region is grateful to you. While it's important to have arrangements about using the Potomac River water when the flow is low and crisis is upon us, we have to realize that low flow agreements do not increase the supply overall, and that is a subject that should not be lost sight of. It does seem to me that having gotten our act together on the low flow agreement, absolutely vital and critical, we oughtn't to lose momentum but to continue on now to look farther ahead toward the development of additional usable water supplies and the more effective management of water demand for the long pull. On the supply side, the important items are improvements in the interconnections between the water supply systems that we now have, and looking farther ahead, it's important to get on with conclusive studies as to the quality and possible use of Potomac estuary water; it's important to devise ways of encouraging people to use water more conservatively and more efficiently; it's important to get on with agreement on cutback schedules when water supply is stringent; it's important to get on with reconditioning and recycling of water. So, I would call attention, even in the moment of success about the low flow agreement, to the importance of building on that, building on this time of good feeling about it, that your leadership has been decisive in achieving, Mr. Chairman, to longer term arrangements and agreements, both on the side of increasing supply, and on the side of better management of demand and consumption. Beyond that, I would hope that we could think in terms of the numerous interrelationships between water supply and pollution abatement, because the way in which we go about cleaning up the river, and particularly the estuary, can make quite a difference as to the longrun supply of potable water coming into our systems. Where we treat, or how we prevent pollution, is a decisive factor. So, I would like to take advantage of my couple of minutes to compliment you and the others who have really broken through here in terms of regional agreement and cooperation, and urge you forward in the exercise of leadership in meeting these longer term problems, by means of which we can on the one hand truly increase supply, not only in crisis situations, but just all the time, and organize the way we use the water of the Potomac River more efficiently than we've done before. Finally, Mr. Chairman, in a somewhat lighter vein, but still quite serious, you made reference to our friends in California and in the West who have these very serious water shortage problems. I had occasion to be more deeply into this some years ago, and I remember discovering that in central Arizona, one of the driest parts of the country several years ago when I looked into it, the consumers living in Phoenix and Tucson and around there, despite all the dryness and water shortage, were paying no more household by household for a gallon of water than we pay around here-the story of Federal subsidies. So, when the final balance is struck and this part of the country wants Federal help, that's an interesting point to keep in mind. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HARRIS. Thank you, Mr. Fisher. I'm sure that on the Budget Committee you may remind some of our good colleagues from the West of this fact, especially as we, and I think we must, assure adequate funding of completion of the Bloomington Dam, the demonstration treatment plant on the estuary, and the emergency pumping station that has at times not faired too well in the Office of Management and Budget, and we'll be depending on you a great deal on the Budget Committee to carry this message forward. Mr. FISHER. Your message is on my mind and conscience day and night. Mr. HARRIS. Thank you again, Mr. Fisher. I would recognize my colleague from the District of Columbia, the Congressman Mr. Fauntroy. STATEMENT OF DELEGATE FAUNTROY Mr. FAUNTROY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I too want to commend you for a couple of reasons, First, for the attention that your leadership has focused upon this whole problem for the residents of the District of Columbia, particularly the focus that you've brought here in the Congress, because, unlike the other jurisdictions that are involved, our jurisdiction must refer to the Congress directly for much of our decisionmaking, and for that reason I welcome the fact that you have convened this hearing on the Hill so that the Congress may understand the needs of our Federal District here. Let me also commend you for having the hearing, because it is for me an opportunity to learn a great deal more about the agreement, and I hope this hearing will afford residents of the District of Columbia that opportunity. |