Statute: Section 403 or 502 of the Stafford Act

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct in Section 102 (2) of Stafford Act (Sections 403 & 502 are indirect)

Functions: Response

Agencies (primary agency listed first): FEMA

Funding History (1985 to the present): $10,519,464* for drought; $179,894,956* for fires in the wildland/urban interface (includes recovery efforts and administrative expenses)

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial assistance in the form of cost-shared grants; technical assistance

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: After receiving a Presidential declaration, the state enters into an agreement with FEMA which outlines the conditions for receiving assistance and cost-sharing arrangements. Once signed, local governments and other state organizations may apply through the state for subgrants.

Effectiveness: Effective for addressing short-term emergency shortages of potable water (and sometimes food).

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: In keeping with the agency's mission, this program provides for the general public's emergency needs directly related to drought: the need for food and for potable drinking water.

Contact Name and Phone Number: No data

Statute: Housing Act of 1949, as amended, Section 514 and 516, Public Laws 89-117 and U.S.C. 1484 and 1489

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Response, Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): USDA--RD

Funding History (1985 to the present): No data

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial assistance for project grants; guaranteed or direct loans to provide decent, safe and sanitary low-rent housing and related facilities for domestic farm workers

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No data

Effectiveness: Housing must be of a practical type and must be constructed in an economical manner; loan and grant funds and any funds furnished by the applicant may be placed in a supervised bank account. Loans and grants may be used for construction, repair or purchase all year round for seasonally occupied housing.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: No data

Contact Name and Phone Number: Tracee Lilly (202) 720-1604

Statute: Title IV, Housing Act of 1949

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Response, Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): USDA--RD

Funding History (1985 to the present): No data

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial assistance to buy, build, repair, or rehabilitate rural homes and related facilities, including water and waste disposal systems

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No data

Effectiveness: No data

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Applicant must be a U.S. citizen or legally admitted for permanent residency.

Contact Name and Phone Number: William M. Toney (202) 720-1474

Statute: Housing Act of 1949, Public Law 10415, Section 515, Rural Rental Housing

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Response, Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): USDA--RD

Funding History (1985 to the present): No data

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial assistance to buy, build, or repair apartments, duplexes and multi-unit rental housing for very low-income to moderate-income families or senior citizens in rural areas. Funds can be used to provide water and waste disposal systems and other uses.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No data

Effectiveness: No data

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Funds may not be used for nursing, special care, or institutional housing. Housing must be occupied by people of very low to moderate incomes or senior citizens. Communities of 10,000 to 20,000 people have some limitations.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Obediah Baker, Jr. (202) 720-1604

Statute: Housing Act of 1949, as amended, Sec. 523 and 524; Public Law 89-117; Public Law 89-754, 42 U.S.C. 1490c and U.S.C. 140d.

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Response, Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): USDA--RD

Funding History (1985 to the present): No data

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial assistance for direct loans for the purchase and development of adequate sites, including the necessary equipment which becomes a permanent part of the development; for water and sewer facilities if not available; payment of necessary engineering and legal fees and closing costs.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No data

Effectiveness: No data

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Loan limitation of $100,000 without national office approval; loan funds may not be used for refinancing of debts or for payment of any fee or commission to any broker, negotiator or other person for the referral of a prospective applicant or solicitation of a loan; no loan funds will be used to pay operating costs or expenses of administration other than actual cash cost of incidental administrative expenses if funds to pay those expenses are not otherwise available. Repayment of the loan is expected within 2 years.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Lucia McKinney (202) 720-1474

Statute: Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Response, Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): USDA--RD, Rural Business Cooperative Service

Funding History (1985 to the present): No data

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial assistance for direct and guaranteed loans for developing or financing business or industry, increasing employment and controlling or abating pollution. Funds may be used for real estate, operation expenses, and purchases of equipment for support of businesses.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No data

Effectiveness: No data

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Loans must be used to assist businesses in rural areas. Rural areas are generally well outside of cities that have more than 50,000 inhabitants and their immediately adjacent urbanized areas. Priority is given to projects located in communities of 25,000 or fewer. Guaranteed loans to business and industry are limited to $25 million. Direct loans to business and industry are limited to $10 million.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Dwight Carmon (202) 690-4100

Statute: PL 74-46; PL 100-233, Section 622 of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1987

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Response

Agencies (primary agency listed first): USDA--NRCS, FSA, RD, CSREES, NASS

Funding History (1985 to the present): No data

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial and technical assistance for conservation plans and rapid response that should address drought impacts and corrective actions.

Examples: Limited resource farmers may be able to get assistance to address drought concerns.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No data

Effectiveness: No data

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Many needing help are not identified. Pride or distrust may limit the acceptance of help.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Larry S. Holmes (202) 720-1853

Statute: 15 U.S. Code 636

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Response

Agencies (primary agency listed first): SBA

Funding History (1985 to the present): Funded

Type of Assistance / Examples: SBA offers financial assistance with low-interest working capital loans to small businesses and small agricultural cooperatives which have suffered substantial economic injury as a result of an agricultural production disaster. Agricultural enterprises are NOT eligible.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Not applicable

Effectiveness: Not applicable

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Loan amount is limited to the amount needed to meet necessary financial obligations which the business could have met under normal conditions, but is unable to meet as a direct result of the disaster. Maximum loan amount is $1.5 million. Only those businesses determined to be unable to obtain credit elsewhere are eligible.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Bernard Kulik, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Disaster Assistance (202) 205-6734

Statute: Reclamation Reform Act (RRA) of 1982

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Communication, Monitoring and Prediction, Mitigation, Response, Planning

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI-USBR

Funding History (1985 to the present): In existence since 1996, funding is provided through Water Management and Conservation, Reclamation's Reform Act Water Conservation (RRA), Project Operation and Maintenance (Project O&M), and the Efficiency Incentive Program (EIP).

Type of Assistance / Examples: The WCFSP provides professional technical and financial assistance. We have 5 regional coordinators and 21 field services personnel to assist in water conservation in our area offices. Financial assistance is provided through Water Management and Conservation, Reclamation's Reform Act Water Conservation (RRA), Project Operation and Manintenance (Project O&M) and the Efficiency Incentive Program. The distribution of these funds vary from region to region..

Example: Price River Soil Conservation District, et al: A cooperative agreement was negotiated and executed with the Price River, Green River, and San Rafael Soil Conservation Districts (UT). The districts jointly hired a water conservation specialist to provide planning assistance to water user groups and individuals. The specialist used Reclamation's "Achieving Efficient Water Management: A Guidebook for Preparing Agricultural Water Conservation Plans" as a guide.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: The program is designed to build partnerships and bring stakeholders to the table to design water conservation plans. A water conservation plan for our water users would include Districts, irrigation districcts, special districts, and municipalities. Reclamation strives to make our criteria and standards consistent with state and local criteria by integrating both into the Reclamation water user conservation plan.

Effectiveness: Effectiveness is represented by being a proactive agency in water conservation and drought planning prior to disaster. The entity can evaluate its current water use efficiency measures and determine scenarios of implementation depending on what state the drought is in. Those entities with plans in place have also spent the necessary time bringing their stakeholders into the planning process. Effectiveness is determined by how well the water users manage their water resources during a drought.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: The program could improve the drought portion of all water conservation plans by increasing drought planning awareness in field personnel.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Program Manager: Christy Bridges, 303-445-2945, cbridges@do.usbr.gov

Statute: Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (Title XVI of Public Law 102-575, as amended)

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI-USBR

Funding History (1985 to the present): 1995 16.8 million 1996 16.1 million 1997 34.4 million 1998 33.7 million 1999 27.9 million

Type of Assistance / Examples: Financial cost shares or grants.

Example: Groundwater Replenishment System - Orange County (CA). The Orange County Water District manages the groundwater basin located in the northwestern part of Orange County, comprising an area of about 350 square miles. About 2 million Orange County residents rely on groundwater for 65-70% of their water needs. District constituents use about 481,000 acre-feet of water annually, and about 194,000 acre-feet or 40% of the total water demand is imported from the Colorado River/SWP.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Primarily integrated with municipalities

Effectiveness: Not evaluated

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Stakeholders may be seeking the authorization of additional projects.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Program Manager: Rick Martin 202-208-3965 or 909-695-5310, ramartin@usbr.gov

Statute: National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1)

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Communication, Monitoring and Prediction, Mitigation, Response, Planning

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--NPS

Funding History (1985 to the present): No specific funding information is available regarding the National Park Service's activities related to drought response.

Type of Assistance / Examples: Not applicable

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Not applicable

Effectiveness: NPS is currently evaluating its need relative to (1) the development and implementation of park water conservation and alternative water supply plans, and (2) the evaluation and determination of the extent to which droughts are anthropogenically caused (versus the result of natural process).

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: See notes on effectiveness

Contact Name and Phone Number: Study Contact: Dan Kimball, Chief, Water Resources Division, NPS 970-225-3501, dan_kimball@nps.gov

Statute: Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1764)

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Communication, Monitoring and Prediction, Mitigation, Response

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--BLM

Funding History (1985 to the present): The federal fire-fighting budget has increased gradually over the past 15 years. Congress usually appropriates money after the fact to cover the cost of fire-fighting activities for the previous fiscal year.

Type of Assistance / Examples: Technical assistance to governments and sharing of federal fire-fighting resources with other governmental entities.

Example: Before a drought occurs, the federal government can work cooperatively with other governmental entities to bring additional resources (fire trucks, crews, aircraft, supplies, etc.) into a drought stricken region to ensure that fire occurrences are maintained within public lands.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No data

Effectiveness: A variety of program evaluations have occurred, but not specifically related to droughts.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: No data

Contact Name and Phone Number: No data

Statute: Sections 1 and 2 of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 as amended by the Act of August 28, 1937, sections 102, 401 and 402 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 (PL 94-579) and sections 2, 3, 4 of the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (PL 95-514)

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Communication, Monitoring and Prediction, Mitigation, Response, P

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--BLM

Funding History (1985 to the present): The program has not received any supplemental appropriations to deal with drought related issues. All funds expended to deal with drought issues has come from normal appropriations. Funding spent to support drought related issues is not tracked individually so estimates of funds spent are not available.

Type of Assistance / Examples: Example: During droughts, the BLM will work with the grazing or agricultural community to the extent possible, but will close areas to grazing when resource conditions dictate.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Not applicable

Effectiveness: Not evaluated, however when planning rangeland improvements and their management, such as water developments, droughts are considered.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Not applicable

Contact Name and Phone Number: Tom Roberts 202-208-3965

Statute: The Reciprocal Fire Protection Agreement Act of 1955 (42 U.S.C. 1856), the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971, as amended by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1748, PL 94-579) and Section 102 of the General Provision of the Annual Appropriations Act for the Department of Interior and Related Agencies.

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Communication, Monitoring and Prediction, Mitigation, Response, P

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--BLM

Funding History (1985 to the present): Not applicable

Type of Assistance / Examples: Example: During droughts, the BLM may increase the pre-positioning of resources where drought is locally troublesome, and may occasionally need to retreat from areas where the Emergency Fire Rehabilitation has failed because of drought.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Yes, because the effects of drought crosscut agency ownerships, and state and local land management agencies are also impacted by the increased costs of fire suppression and rehabilitation during droughts, and we are in cooperative agreements with many of them.

Effectiveness: No, specifically, but the impacts of droughts are discussed during the year-end fire meetings. We are pursuing and building improved management and working relationships with local governments and citizens through the Fire Management Plan process.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Stakeholders have asked to be involved. There is a concerted effort at the local level to involve them. From a program management perspective, we are pursuing and building improved management and working relationships with local governments and citizens.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Tom Roberts, 202-208-3965

Statute: Wild Free Roaming Horse and Burro Act (PL 92-195), as amended by section 9 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (PL 94-579) and sections 2 and 3 of the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (PL 95-514)

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Communication, Monitoring and Prediction, Mitigation, Response, P

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--BLM

Funding History (1985 to the present): The program has not received any supplemental appropriations to deal with drought related issues. All funds expended to deal with drought issues has come from normal appropriations. Funding spent to support drought related issues is not tracked individually so estimates of funds spent are not available.

Type of Assistance / Examples: Example: During droughts, the BLM may haul water to wild horse and burro populations, reduce, relocate or remove wild horses or burros to reduce the impacts on soil, water, vegetation, etc. In addition, domestic livestock grazing in wild horse/burro areas may be reduced or eliminated during droughts to provide forage for wildlife and wild horse/burro populations.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Not applicable

Effectiveness: A specific evaluation of the program effectiveness, as it relates to droughts has not occurred.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: None

Contact Name and Phone Number: Bud Cribley, 202-452-5073

Statute: Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act when listed species and/or their critical habitat may be affected. Guidance on emergency consultations is provided in Chapter 8 of the Endangered Species Consultation Manual.

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Communication, Monitoring and Prediction, Mitigation, Response, P

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--FWS

Funding History (1985 to the present): No data

Type of Assistance / Examples: Not applicable. (Note: FWS informs other agencies during drought emergencies of critical wildlife habitat needs, and requirements that trust resource populations will require in a drought emergency. Preparation and coordination of contingency plans with Federal, local, and state agencies.)

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: The Service will work with other agencies to ensure that existing policies, restrictions and assistance to landowners are made in ways that ensure survival of trust resources.

Effectiveness: No data

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Most federal agencies are not promoting a "watershed approach" in assessing environmental conditions and conducting habitat restoration. Healthy watersheds and/or ecosystems are more able to withstand drought conditions or are less severely impacted by drought conditions.

Contact Name and Phone Number: No data

Statute: PL 102-250 as amended

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Response, Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--USBR

Funding History (1985 to the present): FY 1992 $25,000,000 Emergency Supplemental; FY 1993 $30,000000 Emergency Supplemental; FY 1994 $14,000,000 Recission; FY 1995 $0; FY 1996 $0; FY 1997 $$2,000,000 Emergency Supplemental; FY 1998 $0; FY 1999 $1,500,000 Emergency Supplemental earmarked by Congress for San Carlos Reservoir; FY 2000 $3,000,000 Regular Appropriations earmarked by Congress primarily for water leasing. Total funding under PL 102-250 is $47,500,000.

Type of Assistance / Examples: Under Section 101, nonfinancial assistance to willing buyers in their purchase of available water supplies from willing sellers. Participation in water banks established by states, under Section 102, the Secretary may permit the use of Federal Reclamation projects for the storage or conveyance of project or nonproject water for use both within and outside an authorized project service area.

Example: Emergency assistance has been provided to allow for emergency well drilling or water acquisitions to mitigate for fish and wildlife impacts during drought.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Section 104 states that programs and authorities shall become operative only after the Governor(s) of the affected state(s) or, on a reservation, when the governing body of the affected tribe has made a request for temporary drought assistance to implement locally suggested actions.

Effectiveness: Requests for assistance normally exceed the available budget. Until recently, funds have been provided through emergency supplemental appropriations. Public testimoy and public comments indicated customer satisfaction.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Stakeholders who qualify under Title II of PL 102-250 have suggested that the law be amended to allow emergency assistance, under Title I, to be provided to all 50 states and U.S. territories. Customers have also suggested that loans should be provided at a low-interest rate rather than requiring interest rates based on Treasury rates.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Program Manager; Roseann Gonzales, 303-445-2787, rgonzales@do.usbr.gov

Statute: PL 102-250 as amended

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Communication, Response, Planning

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--USBR

Funding History (1985 to the present): 0

Type of Assistance / Examples: Under Title II, the Secretary is authorized to conduct studies to identify opportunities to conserve, augment, and make more efficient use of water supplies available to Federal Reclamation projects and Indian water resource developments in order to prepare for and better respond to drought conditions. The Secretary is authorized to provide technical assistance to states, local and tribal government entities to assist in the development, construction and operation of water desalinization projects.

Example: Drought preparedness plans have been developed in cooperation with states, tribes and local entities. Drought planning workshops have been conducted throughout the U.S., including Albuquerque, NM; Salt Lake City, UT; Fort Mitchell, KY; Columbia, SC; Hilo, HI, and El Paso, TX.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Drought plans are developed through a cooperative process in order to incorporate local perspectives.

Effectiveness: Requests for assistance normally exceed the available budget. Funds, until recently, have been provided through emergency supplemental appropriations. FY 2000 funding was $3,000,000 in response to an agency request for $500,000; this funding is primarily for water leasing as mandated by Congress. Drought planning workshops have been held throughout the US and have been very well attended. Public comment and public testimony from customers provided positive support for program activities.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Expand authority to allow financial incentives to be provided to stakeholders. Customers have also expressed concern that a specific fund is not available to fund drought contingency plan implementation.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Program Manager: Roseann Gonzales, 303-445-2787, rgonzales@do.usbr.gov

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect

Functions: Monitoring and Prediction

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--USBR; FWS, USGS, COE

Funding History (1985 to the present): $150,000 to $200,000 per year since 1998 from research, water conservation, and operations

Type of Assistance / Examples: Technical assistance as a means of monitoring estimates of precipitation and crop water use in Western states. The information assists water managers and users with a tool for estimating near real-time precipitation over watersheds. Estimates of water depletions for irrigation districts and reservoir-river systems.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Information is provided on an Internet Web site for all state, county, tribal, and local government entities to use.

Effectiveness: Both near real-time and archived precipitation and water use estimates are readily available to monitor drought.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Visit web site at: http://www.usbr.gov/rsmg/nexrad

Contact Name and Phone Number: Al Brower, 303-445-2507, abrower@do.usbr.gov, Curt Hartzell, 303-445-2482, chartzell@do.usbr.gov

Statute: The Organic Act of March 3, 1879, the Sundry Civil Bill of 1888, the appropriation Acts of 1894 and 1896, and the Joint Resolution of May 16, 1902 (Pub. Res. 13, 54th Congress)

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Monitoring and Prediction

Agencies (primary agency listed first): DOI--USGS

Funding History (1985 to the present): Funded

Type of Assistance / Examples: Technical assistance to monitor streamflow, groundwater levels, and reservoir contents. Comparison with previous droughts, drought studies, and service on drought-emergency committees. Information and advice concerning hydrologic conditions.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Streamflow information is available from district offices in nearly every state.

Effectiveness: Realtime and historic streamflow data are available on the Web for 3,000 gauging stations. The USGS operates a national network of 7,000 stream gauges that continuously measure the state and flow at key points on streams and rivers. The agency also monitors groundwater levels, reservoir contents and water quality. Flow data from about 4,600 stream gauges are available via satellite telemetry in near real time. The data available from USGS are used in responding to drought emergencies, characterizing a drought, finding alternative supplies of water, and allocating water resources.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: No data

Contact Name and Phone Number: No data

Statute: Public Law 84-99, as amended by Public Law 95-51

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): Army--COE

Funding History (1985 to the present): Estimated to be much less than $100,000. The cost of transporting water is provided by the Corps, but the cost of purchasing and storing water is the nonfederal sponsor's responsibility. Federal costs associated with well construction must be repaid.

Type of Assistance / Examples: Secretary of the Army can authorize the construction of wells or the transport of water to farmers, ranchers, and political subdivisions of those areas determined to be drought distressed.

Example: September, 1988. The Corps installed temporary pipes to distribute water from an unused well in Pompineau, IL after 56 of the 70 wells serving the town had gone dry. September 1998, at the request of the Governor, the Corps installed a temporary water supply system using Red River water for the town of Pembine, ND.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: No formal integration process, but states, tribes or local governments may be the requestor. In any event, the appropriate governments would be contacted when the Corps reviews the application.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: This is a program of last resort. The law requires that all other reasonable means must be exhausted before the Corps has authority to help. Corps assistance is supplemental to state and local efforts. Long-term solutions to water supply problems are the responsibility of state and local interests. The authorities are not to be used to provide drought emergency water assistance in cases where an owner of livestock has other options, including raising funds from private sources through a loan, selling all or part of the herd, or relocation of the animals to an area where water is available. Federally owned equipment must be used to the maximum extent possible. Assistance can be made available to transport water for consumption. The cost of transporting water is provided by the Corps; however, cost of purchasing and storing water is the nonfederal sponsor's responsibility. Assistance can also be provided to construct wells. Federal costs associated with well construction must be repaid.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Local Corps district, or Bill Werick, COE, (703) 428-9055

Statute: Section 6 of the 1944 Flood Control Act, Section 322 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Mitigation

Agencies (primary agency listed first): Army--COE

Funding History (1985 to the present): No federal expenditure; all costs are paid by the purchaser of storage.

Type of Assistance / Examples: When available, the Secretary of the Army can sell storage in Corps reservoirs to provide surplus water to a state or political subdivision which agrees to act as wholesaler for all of the water requirements of individual users. Water stored for purposes no longer considered necessary can be considered "surplus." Water may also be considered "surplus" if it could be more beneficially used for M&I purposes and its use would not significantly affect the authorized purpose. The local government determines who is entitled to shares of this surplus water based on assessments of local needs. The price for drought contingency water supply will be determined in the same manner as for surplus water, but it will never be less than $50 per agreement per year. Section 322 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1990 gives the Assistant Secretary of the Army limited discretion to authorize a lower price for low-income communities. All revenues from drought contingency agreements will be deposited in the Treasury of the United States as miscellaneous receipts.

Example: Tarrant County Water Control and Improvement District No. 1 (Texas) purchased 48,792 acre-feet of interim storage in Benbrook Lake, Texas on June 21, 1991. Cost was $2,086,000.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Assistance contingent on the governor having declared a state of emergency due to drought.

Effectiveness: Good emergency program when the appropriate planning has not been done. The Corps prefers to do a permanent reallocation of storage prior to the drought with the appropriate environmental and hydrologic studies.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: The Corps can do the same thing in advance of the drought, so that the water supply is in place and the emergency never develops.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Local Corps district, or Bill Werick, COE, (703) 428-9055

Statute: Public Law 92-251, Section 22, as amended.

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Mitigation, Planning

Agencies (primary agency listed first): Army--COE

Funding History (1985 to the present): No records of how much was spent on drought planning. Total federal allotments are limited to $10,000,000 annually, but typically are less. Funding since 1985 may total $50 mil. Drought planning funds since 1985--less than $1 million.

Type of Assistance / Examples: States may obtain Corps water resources planning expertise in 50-50 cost-shared studies to develop plans related to the overall state water plan.

Example: In 1994, Tarrant County, Texas and the Corps Fort Worth district used the Section 22 program to develop a computer simulation of the Tarrant County water system that was later used in a Virtual Drought exercose conducted by the County.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Corps signs agreement with state or tribe.

Effectiveness: Very popular program, but customers' priorities are generally for water resources other than drought.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Half the study costs are paid by the Corps, half are paid by the state. Nationwide, annual funds cannot exceed $10 million; actual funding has been somewhat less. Not more than $500,000 per state can be spent in any year. This is a popular program used to provide Corps planning expertise to support state water plans for all things, not just drought.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Local Corps district, or Bill Werick, COE, (703) 428-9055

Statute: Not required by law; part of the operation of Corps reservoirs

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct; program covers all water manage-ment issues including drought

Functions: Mitigation, Planning

Agencies (primary agency listed first): Army--COE

Funding History (1985 to the present): No records exist of how much was spent on this program, since the plans were developed as part of the overall operation of the reservoirs.

Type of Assistance / Examples: Plans for the release of water from Corps reservoirs during a drought.

Example: The Corps developed an engineering regulation (available over the Internet) on how to do these plans. Corps districts were required to develop the plans, and all have done so. Plans are generally good at hydrologic analysis, but weak in public involvement due both to the expense of conducting workshops and the disinterest among those who would need to attend.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Varies from reservoir to reservoir. Corps reservoir operators generally have working relationships with the people who use water on and from Corps reservoirs, but (as with all drought programs) collaboration on drought is a low priority until a drought occurs.

Effectiveness: Generally inexpensive plans done by the Corps alone. When serious conflicts over water allocation arise during a drought, these plans do not take the place of plans that involve all decision makers and stakeholders.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Good program that can be a source of information for people depending on a Corps reservoir during drought.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Local Corps district, or Bill Werick, COE, (703) 428-9055

Statute: Public Law 99-662 (WRDA 1986), Section 931

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Direct

Functions: Mitigation, Planning

Agencies (primary agency listed first): Army--COE

Funding History (1985 to the present): Separate accounting for drought planning not done. Estimated costs may be at $2 mil.

Type of Assistance / Examples: The Secretary of the Army may, for an interim period, reallocate for irrigation storage intended for municipal and industrial water supply if that storage is not under a repayment agreement.

Example: The Kaw tribe purchased 6 acre-feet of water from the Kaw Lake (Oklahoma, Arkansas River) for $200 in July 1993.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: On a case by case basis

Effectiveness: Effective

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: The cost to the nonfederal sponsor under Section 931 agreements will be 35 percent of the original project investment cost (including any accrued interest after the 10-year interest-free period) allocated to M&I water supply (for the block of storage to be used for irrigation as determined by the Use of Facilities cost allocation method). The nonfederal sponsor will also be responsible for 100 percent of the operation and maintenance, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, and reconstruction costs allocated to the storage space being placed under the repayment agreement. The term of the agreement for this interim use will not exceed 5 years. An option for incremental 5-year extensions is allowed but only if recalculations of the annual costs are performed at the end of each 5-year increment.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Local Corps district, or Bill Werick, COE, (703) 428-9055

Statute: Public Law 85-500, the Water Supply Act of 1958

Direct or Indirect Linkage to Drought: Indirect. This is a water supply authority. Drought vulnerability depends on long-term water supply decisions.

Functions: Mitigation, Planning

Agencies (primary agency listed first): Army--COE

Funding History (1985 to the present): The Corps has conducted 37 reallocation studies since 1985. No records have been kept of the total costs, but typical costs are around $1 million each since reallocation inherently involves the transfer of benefits from one group to another and often requires an environmental impact statement (EIS).

Type of Assistance / Examples: Reassignment of water storage space in an existing Corps reservoir will be to a higher and better use.

Example: Blue Mountain Lake, on the Petit Jean River in Yell County, Arkansas. The city of Dansville purchased 1,550 acre-feet for $417,200 in 1994. The space was reallocated from flood control storage.

Integration with State, Tribal, or Local Government: Formal integration required because there must be a nonfederal sponsor who pays for the storage, and appropriate NEPA studies must be done.

Effectiveness: Effective. Reallocation can be the most cost-effective way to provide additional water supply, but studies must determine if reallocation is a good alternative, and any controversies regarding the additional supply will have to be considered. Since 1965, more than 400,000 acre-feet of storage has been reassigned to water supply.

Program Limitations/ Recommendations: Reallocation must be evaluated, justified and approved. The sponsor must pay for the reallocated space, including the appropriate share of operation and maintenance of the project. Approvals of reallocations may be made by Congress, the Chief of Engineers, or by division or district commanders, depending on the size of the reallocation and the impact on other project purposes. Reallocations or addition of storage that would seriously affect the purposes for which the project was authorized, surveyed, planned, or constructed, or which would involve major structural or operational changes, will be made only upon the approval of Congress.

Contact Name and Phone Number: Local Corps district, or Bill Werick, COE, (703) 428-9055