ensuring public health and safety and other effects as you've heard from many of our panelists. states and local water entities typically lead efforts to prepare for a drought. i think you've heard excellent examples of that today. due to their primary role in water allocation. even without drought, though 80% of state water managers expect water shortages weren't next decade. key concerns range from population growth and lack of information on water availability and use to potential impacts of climate change and effects of extreme weather events such as floods and droughts. the bureau of reclamation faces similar challenges, especially for its large multiple purpose projects, that involve balancing multiple objectives across large areas. challenges in the colorado river basin and the central val eye of california and to some degree the columbia river basin are

prime examples. challenging include how to accommodate existing and new demands, including growing populations and competing uses, while also complying with federal and state environmental and other laws. as you've heard again from chairman murkowski and mr. conner as well reclamation has estimated that supply shortages for the colorado could be in effect as early as 2016 and 2017. meanwhile, central valley project water deliveries, we've also heard have been significantly cut back affecting junior and senior water users fish and wildlife resources, recreation and other industries. smaller reclamation projects are also challenged by drought and experiencing water delivery cut backs. again, we've heard more of that

today today. although there are wide range of options for addressing drought, the federal rule in implementing options is not always clear cut. options often discussed can be categorized as follows. they're supply driven options they can be demand driven, those that involve new governance are institutional structures and those that monitor activities that support state and local efforts. all of these options have their pros and cons and involve tradeoffs. for example, developing or augments supplies through construction of surface and water and groundwater storage projects may provide more water. but opportunities are fewer than they once were and their costs are often significant. likewise, developing water use can be costly. project devaluations have also become more complex and lengthy. hence some observers suggest removing federal regulations to

facilitate project development and operations while others are more protective of the status quo. to address authorization and funding issues, some have called for an authorization process for reclamation, similar to that enacted for the core of engineers and the water resources reform and development ability of 2014. they also call for public/private partnerships, authorization of nonfederal funding of some projects or coordinated funding, and creation or reactivation of federal loan programs. some have also proposed new governance such as drought commissions, drought counsels or water transfer such as water banks or water markets. a difficulty in expanding water markets is it this relationship between state water rights and the federal government's rule, and having to deferred primarily to states. lastly, some commonly pursued

options to support drought resilience and support at the local level include providing technical and financial assistance for drought planning monitoring and mitigation providing conservation, and supporting technological research and development. in summary, addressing drought in the west is a challenge for decision makers and we've seen today at all levels of government, whether the federal government should continue to expand its existing policies supporting these efforts or pursue other legislative options is likely to be a matter of ongoing debate. that concludes my testimony, i'm happy to answer questions. thank you. >> thank you, i was hoping you were going to have the silver bullet. we've done this analysis. >> we all wish that you did. each and every one of you has mentioned collaboration, cooperation, flexibility, but it

seems that collaboration amongsted our agencies, whether on state side federal side working with our tribes this is all key. we clearly hear that and yet we are still faced with a situation where the drought is extreme in places and the forecast is not looking very good, and the uncertainty is even more difficult, more complicated. are there beyond what we see today, i'd be interested in hearing your perspective in what area area is doing, are there ways that we can provide for greater collaboration with our federal agencies? what are the barriers that we have right now that are limiting our opportunities to do more

clearly with less. and i'm going to throw this out to all of you. and then i'm going to have to go vote but i'll be back for a followup with this. if you want to lead off, and i would really ask all of you to weigh-in on this. >> so chairman murkowski, first i'll say that the collaboration with the federal government, the department of interior has been exemplary so far i think the biggest roadblock for further collaboration and dealing with drought contingency on the colorado river in the lower basin is really number one, the drought in california has reduce reduced their flexibility to participate, and potential ways to save water in lake meade. the environmental issues revolving around the sultan sea, drain water goes into the sultan sea from the imperial irrigation district. we could save a lot of that water by creating efficiencies in that air gas station district.

but for the environmental issues, really into the sultan sea, lastly honestly, the fact that california under the 1968 basin project act does not take shortages, only nevada and arizona do p.m. has created a bit of an unlevel playing field. i think we can use the help of the department of interior, specifically on that issue finding a way to create more equity at that negotiating table. >> mr. conner? comments on that? >> well, i do agree that the issues raised are the next wave of areas of collaboration that we have to deal with, and some of those issues are fairly tough, which is why they haven't been resolved at this point, the sultan sea is one of those areas. nonetheless, i can point in the colorado river basin where over the last 15 years, we've had 6 or 7 major agreements reduced water use, that have increased

storage in lake meade created institutional mechanisms to incentivize the saving of water and yet here we are facing significant percentage possibilities that we're going to face a shortage in 2016 and 2017. but yet the states are still at the table, we have a conservation agreement that we've all put together, upper basin and lower basin and the federal government to create more water to look for new ways to conserve and place more walter in lake meade, there's an mou that's just been agreed to, where i think the states are looking at mechanisms to create another million acre feat by 2018. and these are the mechanisms that we are going to have to finalize through our agreements. but the idea also is that we've got to create new relationships between the parties. and that's what we've been

doing. i would just note real quickly that the success of the arizona water bank which has been tremendously successful, as i found out even more so this morning was facilitated in great part by the 2004 arizona water settlement act that the congress passed. it facilitated taking the colorado every year, a good portion of that has been stored to alleviate drought situations and it resolved two major indian water rights settlements. it's a combination of the investments we make for conservation, for looking at new storage opportunities, one of the more recent storage facilities we have is in the kohl cool river basin. a regulating reservoir saving 60 to 70,000 acre feat per year keeping that water in lake meade, investments new agreements, new relationships, and certainly i think for the

sultan sea we're going to have to look at new authorities, probably. >> thank you. >> i'll continue with you on this issue, thank you for visiting the northwest i think you were out at yakima basin compact meeting years ago with myself and senator -- and then secretary salazar and congressman hastings, along with others, i know you have great familiarity there. >> as we've seen the drought conditions persist over the years and tried to make plans for changes, you know, you mentioned increasing storage capacity, what are the major barrier barriers for the department -- if we continue to do authorization project by project, and it takes years of planning and studying, again i'm not talking about changing environmental laws what do we

need to do to give more flexibility. what are the major barriers that exist to more rapid response to some of these conditions? >> well, i think obviously the larger the project the more complicated, the more likely to impact other water users as well as the environment and i think there's a fundamental question related to the economic feasibility of some of those larger projects. sometimes we have been focused on larger is better, but it boggs down our ability to move through permitting processions, et cetera. and i will give the yakima basin is a perfect example with the black rock reservoir proposal which took a lot of time which proved to be probably one of the more expensive ways to yield water supply. and when the numbers came out, i think it called into question whether it could be afforded and caused the parties to go back to the table to a much morrow bust and comprehensive approach to

dealing with water supply issues from the environment to new water supply, to facilitating conservation efforts and i think at the end of the day those smaller projects -- and we've been doing this in the yakima basin for 10 to 15 years. i think through a ten-year period from 2003 to 2013 we created 30 to 35000 acre feat of reduced diversion demand. that water has been allocated to improve the conditions of the fishery, while also being retained by the irrigation community to help weather times of drought, i think we're making great advances through a series of smaller projects that i think are less controversial, that are more affordable and prove to be yielding -- adding to the bottom line, and bringing in more broad

support, it's not always smaller is better, but i do think at times we get bogged down with the larger projects. >> you're reminding me that a process does solve most problems. that step of going through that larger exercise it was a catalyst to bringing all the parties together at the table. as a hearing that i once chaired for this committee on the san joaquin, after 18 years of legal battles, people decided to come to the table. what do we need to do to provide more flexibility to the agency, to support those kinds of collaborative efforts? >> i think we have good authorities right now that allows us to participate as a cost share partner in a number of these projects. what's happening in a lot of cases, and i think we should look at more opportunities to facilitate this the federal government is a participant in a lot of projects.

i would concede that when the federal government leads a project development activity, there's a lot of hoops to be -- to leap through with respect to the regulatory permitting process, there's some of that when we participate, but in a lot of cases, the states and local entities are looking for federal permits as well as federal assistance with respect to cost share. we have our trust responsibility in the yakima nation. we have the gomes with -- we all have respective fisheries and we have a federal project that we want to maintain its viability. in a lot of cases i think facilitating the federal government to be a partner in these efforts, whether they're conservation projects, environmental restoration projects, as a partner providing flexibility from a

financing standpoint for nonfederal entities will help facilitate results. >> thank you. >> thank you all for being here. it's great to see tom here and first question for you, you talk about lake meade it looks like we're in our 16th year of below average runoff. lake meade is going to hit the fall below the 1,075 feet mark over the next two years and will trigger the shortage declaration. you talk about structural deficits, you touched on it in your comments. can you explain that further, evaporation, delivery losses and how that affects allocation? >> the structural deficit is a function of the fact that those losses in evaporation losses

the volumes of water in the lower basin nevada, colorado mexico, in a decree, each state's allocation was for the total consumeptive use. so more water has to really be in the system for actual use. and so that impacts the lower basin by driving lake meade toward shortage, even in normal years. the brunt of again, those impacts fall on those who take shortage basically california does not take shortage there are also impacts to the upper basin states, colorado, wyoming, mexico, utah potentially 37 and

so theiry incorporate the uses. because lake powell and lake meade are con junktively balanced, the losses not being accounted for, versus more water from lake powell to go to lake meade, the potential impacts there are loss of revenues. most power revenues are used to fund environmental programs and other things in the upper basin and also lake meade and powell continue to drop, potentially those upper basins curtailment under the 1922 contract if they can't deliver over a 10-year period to the lower basin.

>> during the times of water storage in the west we often see these contracts portrayed as agriculture agriculture. will you explain how these tensions will be dealt with in arizona, where we're trying to allow growing urban economy, but still maintain healthy agricultural economy? >> there are some tens in arizona between our senior priority users for the colorado river in the yuma arizona area in the cities in central arizona, who take central arizona project water, we've been working with the central arizona project and the yuma area ago feweral interests in trying to come up with a way to do things that create surplus, to try to prop up the levels of lake meade. i think those things have been going fairly well, we don't have a deal on the table yet. our agricultural users suffer the brunt of the shortage, if

there's a tier 1 shortage in 2016 or 2017, they'll lose about half of their colorado river supplies. they have options to pump groundwater under state law. under our underground storage and recovery program, they have options to partner with arizona tribes and arizona municipal users who have higher arizona water. they can partner with those entities, take their colorado river water and they will get a future credit to pump groundwater from under the agricultural land. the department of water resources has looked at the permitting that goes along with that program to make those more probable as we approach the shortage in 2016 or 2017. >> you talk about augmentation for areas, what are the most promising areas to augment the

resources that we have? >> i think the lower basin help funding weather modification to try to increase the flows there. we also are looking at potential desalination of brackish groundwater within our state. of course, we're participating through the auspices of the treaty implementation with mexico. to look at potential national desalination with mexico, and also potentially partnering with california for desalination with california and arizona. those are probably the main sources. >> thank you thank you madam chair. >> deputy secretary conner. in its colorado river basin study, the bureau of reclamation identified efficiency and conservation projects as some of

the most cost effective approaches to increasing viable water supplies for users, in other words, actual wet delivered water, the state is elected to pursue a new diversion project on the gila river instead of focusing on efficiency projects that would help stretch existing water supplies further i wonder how will the lessons learn from the basin study factor into the costs and benefits that could be pursued under the settlement act. >> i think in looking at -- obviously when we do our studies, one of the areas we look at are alternatives approaches and as you've pointed out i think that will be something that does get scrutiny, as to what are the

water supply demands -- and what are the options available to meet that demand. i think overall through our history in my prior capacity i had the opportunity to spend a lot of time up here testifying on water resources issues. what are the relative -- back of the envelope calculations for the different types of projects we have. there were a couple large scale storage projects, that i mentioned one was the black rock reservoir proposal. the cost per acre foot versus yield were somewhere in the neighborhood of 17,000 to $46,000 per acre foot. you look at the water smart conservation proposals we've gotten water conservation is not going to create a new supply for a new demand it certainly can lead to saving water be able to put that in storage.

those are down 500 to $800 per acre foot. great drought resistance aspects to them, they're -- you know, they provide water in times of plenty as well as times of shortage there are about 8,000, 400, $500 per acre foot. we've made investments, i think the water conservation projects in the yakima river basin are something around $2500 per acre foot, and we did a major infrastructure project in california between two canals which resulted in 40,000 acre foot on average that was $850 per acre foot. cheapest water in the west. we're making improvements that i think are adding to the bottom line availability, every project needs to be evaluated on its own merits, it shows you the range and the differences, quite frankly, what we've found is we have a lot of demand for the conservation and reuse programs,

i think water managers. this is not a federal driven program, we have the availability where we can participate, but we're getting applications on a yearly basis that greatly exceed the viable resources because water managers view that as the best investment. in a lot of cases much better than large storage. >> thank you. i appreciate your focus on looking quite trans parentally at the cost per acre foot, the yield i think that's incredibly important. i want to move to you real quickly. the bureau of reclamation has leased water to maintain flows in the rio grande necessary to support wildlife populations, many have suggested expanding

that program on a voluntary basis. can you tell us how water leasing has been used in other states to meet water needs. what new mexico should keep in mind manneding the toolbox in the rio grande. >> the other areas this has been done, where the department of ecology has worked with water left in streams by having people voluntarily agree to use that water, i don't know honestly if the state is paying for that that would be a question for my colleague over here california is a place where people have entered into long term contracts with municipal areas to move water on a voluntary basis. usually those are structured as a contract reclamation for

transfer of water. the options are out there others have proposed to do similar things in the west that could include new mexico. >> mr. conner, nice to see you again thank you for being here you're aware of my legislation to pass 593. a report that would be available to the public and updated every two years you've been very helpful in working with my office to move this legislation. the last congress you commit once again to continue to work with me to move this legislation so we can understand what the total backlog is? >> that's a very valuable bill.

>> you know, folks across the west, they need water to grow alfalfa, cattle they worry about getting the water they need. the sent imt is whiskey is for drinking water is for fighting over the state of wyoming through our gov negs's office is to increase water storage. i've introduced legislation s s-1305, to provide more catter erwater for southwest wyoming, we're looking at options to expand our reservoirs, will you continue to work with me, with water storage project. what steps are you taking to

address this need. >> to the wyoming specific examples that you reference, senator, we will be happy to keep working. the issue i think we want to work through the technical aspects in particular it's demonstrating where we see there is value and economic viability, seeing how we might increase absolutely committed to working with your office. >> overall, we have a number of storage proposals that we are continuing to do work on particularly in california they required us to look at four major storage opportunities in california. one of those is a facility in the bay delta itself, went

through a phase that increased water storage by 60,000 acre feet looking at a second acre phase. we've completed some we're in the process of completing others, we are looking at increasing stoirj in the reservoir, which is south of the delta in california i think that that might have a great opportunity to provide additional water supply, as i mentioned earlier, we've looked at some smaller regulating reservoirs, one of the most successful aspects of that is the brock reservoir in the lower colorado river we have 60 acre feet in the colorado river. there's great value in the regulating reservoir, that's yielding about yielding about 60 to 70 million acre feed. we provided technical assistance and once again that proved to be great value as to the dollars

per acre foot add eded there's projects id nighs, we want to look at storage, and we certainly believe that's one of the tools we need to address our water storage. >> i know the wyoming water commission is working on a large study. you're familiar with that. we look at congress. will your bureau have the authority to integrate a dam safety safety? >> i think we will look at that under our existing safety of dams legislation i do think it

warrants we should look at the opportunities to increase storage. there's an authority issue there, and we'll need to work through cost share issues at that point. >> in your testimony, you mentioned the drought is not just in california, but many states as well. i believe any drought relief bill shouldn't just address california's crisis, it should be a westwide -- i'm wondering what you're hearing from western governors that you represent. >> chair woman her cow ski the governors have been phenomenally engaged in the western drought forum, the invention of our current chairman of nevada, as we've gone across the west, senator, governor martinez of new mexico hosted a workshop on droughts impacts on tourism and

regular reation. governor brown of california hosted a workshop on agriculture. mr. conner participated with us in los angeles. governor sandoval focused on droughts. this is a regional issue, and it demands a regional collaborative solution solution. >> thank you. >> thank you for holding this hearing. they're experiencing record snow pack, warmest temperatures on record, and these drought conditions are having tremendous impacts on our community sies in

our economy. we've heard the cooperation between states and western states and federal government. and different entities to address these impacts. to make matters worse many models are protecting the west is likely to get dryer and hot er now more than ever, i believe that the federal government should take the lead in supporting research on how climate change will exacerbate drought conditions like the ones we've been talking about today. what does the department of interior do to better understand the impacts of these climate related events, and how is that informing our understanding of

what we're going to do going-forward. >> we have a number of different areas by which we are participating, particularly in the area of better understanding the impact of water resources and the right strategies to deal with those implications. and we've participated, our u.s. geological survey participates with the global change program that help put together the national climate assessment certainly within the department itself we have had a focus on putting together more transparent water data. there's a lot of smart people outside the department. and we have an initiative to try to standardize data enough so we can put it out and make it accessible. because we think others can help us use that data to better

understand how it will occur to date. we have a basic studies program we are looking at opportunities to assess supply, demand imbalances over a 50 year period. and down scale models to assess how the supply is change inging. >> as we go forward, since we're projecting dryer, hotter weather going-forward because of climate change, is that going to make certain technologies suddenly economic where they weren't before. i heard about desalonization of bracish waters. san diego has a desalonization

project that will deliver 7% of the counties needs. going-forward, things like i know you mentioned the u.s. geological survey i know that in the aqueducts go through a lot of arid areas. the u.s. geological study covering very low precipitation areas so you don't lose the evaporation. are we going to see certain approach s approaches become economical, start to make sense are we going to start seeing those things become economical? and anyone can weigh-in.

>> we're leasing water, ten years ago, we paid $137 an acre foot, this year it's about $275. this is a reverse option, where we solicit bids from water right holders, costs have doubled and with more frequent droughts, what does that mean for the cost of water, what does it mean for the cost of leasing, for example example, one of the proposals is to have a pumping system set up. there's 200 acre feet of dead storage, if you could pump that water, it's an enormous win for agriculture. it could be as water is more scarce, the projects like that make more economic sense. thank you.

>> any other comment? >> look for desalination of water the cost is about $1,000 per acre foot. it's about $1500 to $2100 an acre foot. you compare that with cities that treat and deliver poetable water at a cost of 1200 to $1600 better acre foot, it's becoming more economical, becoming more in the range of what we're seeing now for the costs of water. >> thank you. i know someone mentioned israel before. great agricultural sector and they're exploring desalonization as we go into the future, there are certain technologies that are going to become economic.

>> i'm happy to allow senator cane. >> just really one major question, and i'm not sure who wants to tackle this. i'm interested in the historic data of water in the west. are we facing a new crisis, or are we seeing a return to a normal situation over the last thousand years or 10,000 years and i think that's an important question. that will inform our re1307bs. does anybody have any response to that question now or is this something that we have to look at. >> i do have a question thought, but i think it deserves a little more elaboration. that's the -- >> that's the blink of an eye. >> a blink of the eye, but i wanted to give -- the example i

wanted to give. the last drought in the colorado river basin, the in stream flows, the runoff within that system is the lowest on record over that period of drought. but through tree ring data there's been some research that it's in the lowest first percentile of the last 1200 years there are new heck nicks to look at the estimates of what the runoff within that basin has been, and we're at the lowest levels of that data. we may have similar basins we can compare to find out where we're at and how significant is this drought the drought is cyclical cyclical. >> any further information, i think that's important to inform our -- how we respond to this pip i was in california in area

i was shocked to see the reservoirs when they should have been full. i was told the snow pack was at 6% of normal and i thought they said 60%, it was 94% down, which is just stunning. it seems to me that one of the things, you all have mentioned this, at various points in our testimony, i really need to talk about conservation and efficiency measures, not necessarily conservation don't use, but used more efficiencily low flow toilets, drip irrigation probably the lowest cost, i think you testified to this, that of all the alternatives those tend to be the lowest cost per acre foot as opposed to reservoirs desalon desalonization -- >> it's one of the most efficient ways.

the low hanging fruit. the plumbing that they use one area our water smart program we've invested something like $460 million of federal money, and we yielded about 860,000 acre feet of water that we view as conserved or contributed as new supply. that we've helped facilitate that braham. one of the ongoing. i just looked at the 50 plus projects that we just announced a couple weeks ago, turf removal programs for a lot of municipalities are very highly leveraged in their water savings, among municipalities across the west, we're still giving out grants along those lines. >> one question about energy efficiency. it's a similar issue of water efficiency is price signals, what will be the incentive for the efficiency if someone's

going to put in a low flow toilet do they -- is there a price signal on the water that will make that a justifiable expense? in other words, are they doing it just to be good citizens, or are they saving themselves money? i think this could be something that we can discuss further. but that's important, are we talking about incremental price increases if you use above a certain amount or regulatory requirements that new insulations have to be more water efficient. it seems to me that's an important discussion, because if water's the same price, whether we're in a terrible drought or in a surplus situation, then there's no incentive for people to do that kind of efficiency. mr. michael, talk to me about your farm and the incentives for water efficiency. >> california, because of the regulatory climate we use every resource as carefully as we can. we have an incentive based on our cost of production to use

things as carefully as possible. we installed the drip irrigation on over 60% of our farm we have very successful partnerships on our bureau. we have a long history working with the bureau, i think it's important as you mentioned not only to look at the large projects, but to find ways to incentivize local efforts to help that along. streamlining some of the environmental requirements, if you were going to have some participation by the private sector and storage projects i think there's ways to encourage participation. we are very proactive in terms of using our water resources. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator king. one of the -- as we talk about infrastructure and updating things around this country one of those areas that we forget we want to talk about efficiency or conservation, is old water

systems that just leak. how much water we lose just because of aging infrastructure. >> thank you, madam chair thank you for holding this hearing today. it's timely we in the west are talking about drought issues that may have spurred this hearing, all of us in the west can talk about water all day every day of the year, regardless of a drought. we see flooding today, two years ago in 2013 we saw massive and catastrophic flooding in colorado, interspersed with drought, in parts of the state as well. if you just look at the needs of colorado. by 2050, the statewide water supply initiative gets estimated that just on municipal and industry uses needs a loan for water. by the year 2050, colorado will have to have an additional

100,000 acre water. if you look at what happens in colorado, without that water, over the next several decades, we lose between 500 and 700,000 acres of farmland through urban urbanization, urban water transfers, if we don't have the water that we need. we have done a good job of conservation in colorado. can we do better? we can, we should look at ways to develop critical conservation approaches. in colorado, we have resulted through hard work of many people results in 18% water savings per capita in colorado since the year 2000. water efficiency has resulted in an 18% per capita water conservation rate. if we hit the median level, every water storage project that we need. we're looking at a $15 billion

infrastructure cost in colorado alone, simply to develop 800,000 acre feet of additional water that we need by 2050. that's a significant cost. if we build every water project in colorado that is under consideration that is under construction. i guess the acronym is ipp for it, if we build all the plans that we have, we still are somewhere between 500,000 to a million -- excuse me, somewhere between 180,000 feet short of the water that we need by 2015. regardless of the issue of drought, which is severe and catastrophic in parts of this nation the conversation we have to have on water in this country is real. $15 billion in colorado alone, to meet our needs by 2050. a couple questions i have to both of your reclamation, one of

the concerns we hear giving more flexibility. i'm concerned about that, and believe we need more flexibility and management ability at the local and state level. do you think additional flexibility at the local level, water management levels would be preferable to more control over the water projects? >> senator garner, members of the committee. the western governors have adopted policy resolution 2014-03 water resource in the west. with the chairman's permission i'd like to submit that for the record, it's very emphatic about the governor's -- about the state privacy over water management authority. >> and thank you, one of the challenges we also see, it's taken a dozen years for chats field reservoir in colorado to

receive the approvals it needed to move forward in northern colorado, where the flooding is occurring. we have another water storage project that started in 2004, this project could store tens of thousands of acre feet of water. we still don't have the necessary permits for that project. is there something that we can do for a permit point of view to increase our ability to store more water as we work on the needed conservation efforts? >> chair woman murkowski. quoting from that policy resolution, 2014-03. infrastructure planning and permitting guidelines rules and regulations, should be coordinated stream lined and flexible to allow for decision making in the design financing and construction of needed infrastructure, account for regional differences, balance economic and environmental considerations and minimize the

cost of compliance. >> i think there's three legs of the stool to a sound water policy. number one is increased water storage as we see we need. number two is it critical conservation. what we can do to water and become water efficient. number stlee whatthree is what you said, whether that's funding, planning, to make sure we are taking advantage of every opportunity we can to conserve to store additional water. i mentioned other projects, one other that i wanted to ask you about, hi a great conversation with jennifer who pent spent significant time at the water conservation board with the department of interior, we spoke about the arkansas valley conduit, something authorized under president kennedy received funding over the past several years, which we are grateful for, but we hit the point where we need to move forward or figure out another way to move forward, but funding issues need to be resolved figure out a way to ramp up the project to build the desperately 100-mile plus

long pipeline to provide clean water to the people of the arkansas valley. what specific actions would the bureau and department of interior like to see at the local or state level in order for the arkansas valley conduit to move forward? >> thank you senator, for the question, and i think overall it is a time of transition with respect to the conduit. i think we need to look at a different and better funding model. our goal up until this point at the bureau has been to look at the permitting actions that needed to be done, figure out the best alternative and moving forward and laying out that project, and then get it to the full design phase, which is what we've been working on the last couple years invest money necessary, fully understand the costs. we're close to the transition point, and what we've talked about over the last year is there a way to use state money, and i know there's a significant

low interest loan from the state, is that enough to start the project, start phasing in construction, serving that demand, and i agree with you, absolutely, it's a critical and important project, and give us some time to look at other federal programs that might be used to contribute to the cost of the construction. i say that just because in the -- as much as i think the administration has supported a robust budget for bureau of recommendation, and congress added to it, knowing the importance of water resource issues, we're just in a bind overall, particularly with respect to the rural water supply projects. we are 1.5 billion behind with the rural water program, and i think we're looking at 300 to 400 million more for the arkansas valley conduit. we have to look at cobbling together a bunch of sources. >> if there are particular actions you want to see at the local or state level with the arkansas valley conduit, contact the office so we can share them with the local operators and managers. >> we will do that, absolutely, senator. >> thank you.

>> thank you, madam senator, we heard a lot from the western senators, and we know how critical it is. my wife and kids live in montana. checked in on the four kids, the three dogs, and then it's what's the rain gauge say? we just had a bunch of storms come through montana, and may has been a good month making up for lost time, but the west is having drought, a serious issue and though the drought conditions we're seeing in montana are not as severe as though in california we still face below average snow packs, seen much welcomed rainstorms over the last few weeks, but they do not replace the runoff that normally occurs. the headwaters, the three forks of the missouri that form 30 miles from where i grew up. in fact, recent news reports including the flat head river basin shows we're at 55% of normal snow levels.

the river basin in northwest montana reports 16% of normal levels, so the concern now is we look at june 2nd. what's it mean for fire season coming up around the corner? montana has over 7 million federal acres that are at high or very high risk of wildfire, most managed by the forest service. that's approximately one in four federally controlled acres in my home state of montana nearly 2 million of the forested acres are most in need of some kind of treatment because nay are near populated communities or critical water sheds. unfortunately, i was just informed by the forest service that the hazardous fuel treatments were conducted on only 52000 acres in the last fiscal year, seen the current pace of treatment is unacceptable, and now we're staring as a significant fire season coming just around the corner. our communities, our water sheds, habitat, access to

recreation, all critical montana treasures are at real risk because of wildfire. your testimony mentions how a number of national forests in arizona were created primarily for the purpose of water shed protection. in fact, i understand the city of phoenix set aside $200,000 for active forest management. the national forest foundation project on arizona national forests, and the purpose, as i understand it, to protect the water sheds supplying water to the communities. could you expand on the risk to water sheds that unhealthy forests pose? >> senator certainly. so in arizona you looked at the condition of the forest in pre-settlement time and it was less than 50 trees per acre. today, there's over a thousand trees per acre. they are choked. fire risk is high. in the 1980s, we burned 85000

acres in the forests. in the 1990s, 230,000 acres and in the 2000s, over 2 million acres have burned in the forests. we are seeing ways to thin the forest, and, honestly, it's going more slowly than we would like it to go some of that is some of the environmental restrictions underthe endangered species aktd, and we are looking again as we talk potentially about streamlining issues for california for transferring that same streamlining to arizona to help with our forests issues and our forest health. >> so connecting the dots there, what impact on the water shed does a wildfire pose? >> so after the wildfire, the erosion and runoff you get from soil going to the streams creates huge water quality problems raises the treatment

costs for those cities who take water further downstream. that's one of the issues. it chokes reservoirs with silt that rapidly fill up and lose more capacity over the long term, so we'll lose storage long term as well. that's one of the other big issues that the forest fires create. >> in your testimony, you mentioned a resolution in which the western governor's association adopted in a wildland fire management. this draws attention to the use of active forest and rainsland management as means to prevent wildfire and promote healthy landscapes. how are healthy forests linked to helping to maintain clean, reliable water for our communities? >> chairwoman, senator, we understand the various resource issues on which we work and certainly recognize wildfires

and water supply impact one another. we would subscribe to the comments of the previous witness, and beyond that i ask for the ability to -- or permission to answer fully for the record. >> all right. thank you, lastly for deputy connor, your testimony talks about how increased wildland fire risk threatened public health department and variety of resources including habitat for threatened and endangered species. what's the department doing to mitigate that risk? >> a coup of areas to get to the point you talked bowe, eded about there is not sufficient funding we want to see across the agencies with respect to hazardous fuels reduction so what we try to do is expand interest and partnerships available to deal with that, and we started an

enhancement partnership for the very reason identified here. we had a couple situations in colorado where denver water and colorado springs utility faced massive maintenance costs in cleaning up post fire because of sillation and other impacts on the reservoirs, so we formed partnerships, one in montana of hungry horse with local entities and forest service to -- we would add money, do fuels reduction above critical water infrastructure. it's starting to take off. we are getting good city of pace. we were out for an event last year in arizona. we are getting traction with it, interested entities, expanding upon resources to bring to the issue. we have a fire funding proposal in the last two years with great support, we appreciate it. we need over the finish line where we can increase the cap -- the cap in make -- making available emergency funds for

fire suppression so we don't have to take out of their accounts like hazardous fuels reduction. through that we want more stable budgets or landscape activities to marry up production with landscape improvements that address species issues, the health of the overall forest, and that's the goal with the budget proposal. >> well, i appreciate that and that point that we want to fill our reservoirs full of good clean water and not silt. thank you. >> thank you. i want to continue with the relationship between water and some of the endangered species. when reclamation makes decisions on supply and delivery is the legal contract between the bureau and water users equal to

the federal government cease statutory responsibility to protect threatened or endangered species? is this viewed equally and whatever the answer, i'm curious to why. >> it's not necessarily equal. it depends on the contract language, and the vast majority of reclamations contract contain what's called a shortage clause and that clause depending on the language, but majority interpreted to say shortages to contradicted amounts due to drought and even regulatory requirements result in reclamation not delivering that quality of water. there are some contracts, though, where it's found language is different and that's not been held to be the case. >> using a specific example. i mentioned i was in the central

valley in california, and all the discussion there is about release to provide for the delta. so in that situation is that one where the statutory requirement to protect the smelt overrides the legal contract again with the bureau to have water for users? >> the statutory regulatory requirements manifested in biological opinions are legal requirements that the bureau has to comply with to make water allocation decisions. >> how then as we try to gather the data to better understand whether or not we're making headway whether it was with the delta smelt or others or with the environmental releases how are we doing with

data collection? i mentioned in data questioning the collaboration that's obviously key throughout all our agencies are we also collaborating when it comes then, to data collection necessary for making these decisions as we're talking about these environmental releases? >> chairman, i recognize there are differing views having read all the testimony presented today. i think we are doing a much better job of collaborating and applying the biological opinions. i have several examples. these biological opinions from fisheries and national wildlife service having to do with delta smelt and other species have -- are very significant in how they affect water supply.

over time but they receive a great amount of independent scientific review, which is not always the case in all biological opinions. the two between them subject to four reviews prior and two reviews subsequent. the national academy upheld them as being fundamentally and concept conceptually sound. having said that, they raised issues of several alternatives saying they were not as well grounded in science and needed to be looked at closer. we have a program with users and we gradually made incremental changes how to apply those opinions. we've done a better jo resources, particularly provided by the congress to install monitoring stations, where the fish are, more flexibility to

operate pumps at higher levels. we have just recently this past year made a change to the incidental take statement that applies for the delta smelt which was critical because we were taking smelt at the pumps in a manner that would get close to that incidental take. limitation which would have caused us to reconsult. we took new data presented by the users, and we were convince the scientific data of the use increased the statement. overall, we're getting better, making changes, and you can argue changes should have been made several years ago, but we are moving in the right direction with respect to flexibility and i do think there is data out there that does demonstrate the benefit to the fishery from the application of these biological opinions. i do not believe -- >> i have to ask, then, from the western governors' perspective, are we getting better? are we doing enough? do we have collaboration?

are we gaining data that's helpful? >> chairwoman ranking member cantwell, data emerges as a key theme in the drought forum, workshop form ups in the first year, and moving in years two and three of the western governors' drought forum, that focus on data and data gaps will sharpen. one of the things we heard is yeah, there's a lot of data out there, but it's poorly coordinated, deseminated synthesize synthesized, and interpreted. as we look forward to the coming years of the drought forum, we'll explore ways to ensure the collection and sharing of crucial drought, flooding, and extreme weather data impacts statistics and information is improved and sustained. >> i'm going to ask one more question, and then turn to my colleague and we'll wrap up here.

a lot of headway with the technologies that allow us to conserve more water whether if it is as mentioned by senator king, whether it's low-flow toilets or what we see with low drip irrigation it's incredibly impressive and very expensive, but it goes to the point that these investments will be made for the long term recognizeing we are going to be dealing with these water and drought issues for some time, but considerable technologies that are there. i mentioned energy water nexus, and in my comments, it's my understanding that in the energy producers' world, there has been some pretty considerable technology that allows our energy producers particularly in oklahoma, to manage water

more efficiently in ways that i think catch a lot of people by surprise that they are actually putting more water back into this system than they are using. is this something that your group, the group forum has been looking to in terms of best practices throughout there? >> chairwoman, ranking member, cantwell, absolutely. in fact, our drought forum workshop series began in norman, oklahoma where governor fallon hosted our first workshop and focus went deep on impacts on drought and energy production. we learned a great deal about opportunities that energy producers have to source marginal quality water operations, cool water for reuse, and adjust cooling water consumption through advanced computer controls. we learned a great deal about the opportunities that utilities

have to use -- reuse and bracket water and affluent so by all means. >> thank you. senator cantwell. >> thank you, madam chair. well, i think the hearing is about the new normal that we're seeing in drought conditions and that we need new solutions, so i thank mr. connor and mr. laureniger were talking about the solutions but my colleague got you to be specific on legislation, and i wanted to get your specificity on whether the next parts of the basin project, things like reservoirs, building fish ladders and things of that nature, do you see those as the logical next step? >> i do, senator cantwell. i do see those as logical next steps for moving forward the plan that exists addressing water supply and environmental issues and trust issues.

it represents a very good strategy that seems to have been moving forward with broad -- i would not say consensus, but broad of support as you can get from a number of different constituencies. i think, you know, to be blunt, there's always going to be a question of what's the appropriate federal role in the strategy versus state and local entities, and i know the state has stepped up to fund significant amounts of the program as soon as it got a plan finalized, and we are making incremental investments -- >> i know you're not an expert on agricultural issues, but isn't the federal government going to see this one way or another? i mean, when you have drought -- emergency drought issues related to agriculture, people come here and talk about crop loss and cross damage and ask the federal government to help.

isn't this about measuring the level of investment we can make now that -- i can't remember whether it's you talked about improvements that saved 35,000 acre feet of water that could then be used for something else. that was just, like the beginning of the process right? isn't this about investing now so we don't come back to the federal government later with all these disasters and ask for help? >> senator cantwell i think that's a very good point. i think we have made that point in other basins, and we've advocated for, you know, significant resources for funding, conflict basins and there are, you know assistance program, drought relief programs that continued to go and address those resources and issues and there's an argument to be made that these upfront investments do at -- do help to head off those kinds of shortages conflicts, and relief measures

needed. >> so i think the thing i like best about the cooperation is that then the farmers and ranchers and tribes, everyone comes together, fishermen, and agree on what they think is the best way to increase capacity at this point in time or the best way to relief key issues in drought. them coming to the federal government for us to move faster and to support these efforts that will give us more capabilities. so, to me, i just -- i definitely, i know it's not the department of interior's job to look over your shoulder and say this agency is going to be coming to ask for billions of dollars of relief, but i guarantee that is going to happen in the agricultural communities. prevention up front with this would go a long way. you talked about seattle not having a serious problem because of storage of rain water.

can you elaborate on that? >> yeah. they -- it was pretty clear early on that snow pack was not accumulating, and, typically, the management curves they let winter rain go because they need capacity for the winter snow pack as it is released, and they have responsibilities for maintaining flows for fish down on the projects, and the nature of the management is such that the rain water was adequate to get them through the season and i'm not sure about their reservoir rules, but in the state of washington, even on the agriculture side, there are concerns, a tough situation but they talk about next year because we're looking at california, and we don't have the year-to-year series of drought yet and what that means for carry over in reservoirs. thank you. >> ms. cody did you have

something to add to this on looking at cost investment issues now relating to helping the situation? you might turn the microphone on. >> sorry. i think you raised an interesting point, and as some people have proposed, that in the past, that would be a way to offset. i'm not an agriculture expert on that, but we do have people at crs that are experts in that to help with that question and follow-up. >> and what about the storage or innovation ideas proposed by cooperation and local communities, support those at the federal level? >> as you know, crs cannot make recommendations or propose solutions. we can outline the options. i'd say there's a lot of innovative options out there that we've heard several of

today. john sat at this table many years ago, said water reuse is the last untapped river in the west, and i think mike points out that a lot of these questions on what's the best option comes down to the fundamental question of what is the federal role in these, in the water supply? does congress take that on? is it a federal taxpayer responsibility for the projects? is it the collaboration approach as seen with local governments? that's a congress -- that's a policy question for congress. >> and why not follow that route? i mean, we're not saying that the department of interior is not involved either way. they are involved either way. >> right. no, certainly, they are. >> i guess, in this world of, you know, information and change, where everything is becoming, you know, flatter, that this is just one more example of where collaboration on the ground by people who do not usually agree about water. >> right. >> agreeing about what the best next steps are. >> right. >> and then the department

aiding with helping those projects to move forward whether it's in moving the authority or in finance. is a better way to go than to say, we're going back to the department of interior to look for bottom-down solutions that might take another ten years. i guess what i'm looking for is i think this is the new normal that we have at least for the next several years. >> uh-huh, i see the point you're making. there is a lot of collaboration going on, yeah. >> so if those are the results that we can get, like the 35,000 acre square feet saving by doing small things i guess let's figure out what we need to give the department of interior to move more quickly with those kinds of projects to help these communities who are making decisions together to alleviate problems in the past when people do not agree. mr. connor? >> senator cantwell if i can

add, i mentioned specific interests in the basin we are involved in, and the reason for on going investments, but it is clear there's an ongoing federal role that needs to be played with respect to these challenges that are upcoming and so the question is recognizing the limitation and resources we have to be as creative as possible and figure out how to address that role because it is critical, and this is the new norm. >> well, i definitely think -- so when you talk about that the resources, i'm saying we're going to see this one way or another. this is going to come back on to us, if it's in the form of again, that ag loss, which i can't, you know, oh protections from washington state, i don't know what it was, 1.2 huge economic impact, sure california's seeing the same thing, but, anyway i thank the witnesses. i think this has been a good discussion, madam chair, and i do think we should continue to get some information from our

national laboratories that are doing, you know work on what is the long term impact or the next ten year projection for indication on what to look at as far as helping to alleviate some of the problems at least in the next, you know, in the next short, you know time period. but, again, thank you for the hearing. >> thank you, senator cantwell, and thank you to each of our witnesses here today. i think that this has been a good discussion. i think that this is clearly highlighting why it's important that we do a broader water bill. initially, the focus has been on california, the very dire situation there, but i think it's clear that focus moving forward needs to be western wide and so the discussion heard today i think will help us as we formulate that.

good discussion on the collaboration, need for flexibility, need for streamlining. we have permitting issues, obviously, storage is a key consideration. the technologies that will allow us to greater have -- have greater efficiencies, greater conservation conservation, these are all going to be critical but i clearly agree with you, senator cantwell that as we -- as we're dealing with the here and the now when it comes to water and water access, we need to be looking long term. if senator king was trying to figure out -- give some -- give some historical context here, is this -- is it cyclical is this a thousand-year event but whether or not we have defined that i think going forward we need to be trying to be as long term in our view and our vision

on this as possible. if this is the new going forward, then we have got a lot of work to be doing and we're willing to take up that work here in the committee. again, working with many of you. we appreciate the perspectives that you have lent and thank you, again, for the time this morning, and with that we stand adjourned. thank you. tonight on "the communicators," we met up with author andrew keen and asked why he feels the internet is not the answer. >> the internet is not the answer at the moment.

it's not the answer in the moment it's not working currently, but lending itself to undermining jobs, compounding inequality of economic life, creating new massive monopolies unimaginable in the 20th or 19 th century, and it's created a data economy in which we've all been internet users have been turned into products. you and i packaged up when we use google or facebook. we are the product. it's a big hitchcock movie. >> tonight on "the communicators" on c-span2. earlier today, president obama told reporters that a the g-7 summit that leaders are ready to impose additional sanctions against russia if russia does not abide by the current mensk agreement. we'll show you the conference as the president talked questions on isis and immigration policy.

that's 8:00 eastern on c-span. tomorrow, a hearing on the transportation security administration with testimony from a homeland security inspector general and a former tsa official who wrote stories about his tenure with the agency. this is live tuesday, 10:30 a.m. eastern on c-span3. the u.s. commission on civil rights held an all day discussion on access to higher education for minority students. this next panel looked at what's being done in different school districts to help students graduate on time and the important role of community colleges. it's an hour an a half.

>> okay, we'll get started the second panel of the day. i'll briefly introduce and swear them in. first is dr. timothy p. white from the california state university. second is dr. william e. -- >> no. >> sorry. i'm looking at the wrong one here? >> no, you're fine. >> he's sitting in. >> okay. you're sitting in. we have scott miller of the university of virginia. we have dean maurice from the university of virginia and we have the cal state fullerton school system, and our final panelist dr. derek hamilton. >> do you swear or affirm information you will provide us is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge or belief? yes, thank you. dr. white, please proceed. >> well, thank you chairman commissioners, and staff for the

opportunity to speak with you today. i'm timothy p. white, chancellor of the california state university. the csu is a public university comprised of 23 campuses, 460,000 students and 47,000 staff, celebrating this year, our graduation of the 3 millionth living alum. we are one of the largest systems in the country. i'm honored tok eded to be before you this morning to discuss what we do to provide access to a quality education, provide tools needed to axel and graduate and provide the good of the people. education has a unique role as either a gateway or in its absence, a barrier to prosperity and civic engagement and responsibility. therefore, equal access to quality education is an important issue in the advancement of civil rights.

the csu is born of the idea that a high quality education should be accessible to all who are willing and able to do the work. this idea was and still is revolutionary. california's public higher education is a model for colleges and universities around the country and the world. by creating multiple points of entry for high school graduates transfer students returning adults, advanced professionals, california's public colleges and universities are meeting the needs of the modern student. in fact, you can see the public mission of the cal state's reflected in the student population. half of our students are earning undergraduate degrees and receive pelle awards and third of the students are the first in the family to attend college. many students commute from their childhood homes and majority work to help cover school and family expenses. students of color make up nearly

two-thirds of the degree seeking students and half of all bachelors earned annually by california's latino students the largest demographic group, are earned at the california state university. expanding access for historically under served students is essential to the mission, but access is only a part of it. it's getting students to complete a high quality degree and flourish thereafter is the true goal. the first and often the most daunting barrier is college readiness. csu embraced several approaches to empower students who need additional preparation to be successful in the university environment. these steps include partnering with k-12 and community colleges to help students develop university level skill sets while also forging clear degree pathways between the systems. for many, the goal is receiving

that university acceptance letter, yet we, as university folk, must look out to the further horizon, and acceptance must come with a plan a plan of support and the will and abilities and resources to execute that plan. that is why we launch the graduation initiative 2025, ambitious effort to raise the four and six year completion rates while narrowing degree attainment gaps for low income and underserved populations. the core princeiple is all students have the opportunity to succeed regardless the neighborhood, schools attended parents' educational level or family increase level. serving the modern student means confronting full range of barriers faced. yes, i'm here to tell you barriers can and will be overcome. csu students faculty, and staff are leading the way. we are bringing individualized

learning to scale in a massive system of nearly half a million students in this bold action requiring a combination of resources from the university, from the state, and from the federal government. university efforts kept fees down for families at an average of $6,759 for california's full-time graduates, and it's been at that rate constant rate now for the past four years. roughly half the students graduate with no student debt, and those who do borrow, do so at levels well below the national average. this combines with reallocation of existing resources help ensure the scu students continue to have resources needed to be successful. for example, and detailed in the written statement, campus paid aide funds are wr58-- allocated. existing dollars go to a few

students at high cost institutions. this is a policy area that lawmakers can and in our judgment should address. likewise, the trio in gear up frame work could be strengthened by strategically investing in programs like summer bridge focusing attention on preparation in the stem disciplines and extending veterans upward bound for example. these suggestions are modest, yet important and achievable. the combination of federal, state, and university efforts help students stick through the early phases of education, the time frame of highest attrition. these coordinated efforts are a tremendous benefit to underserved populations and address the civil rights ramifications of unequal access and unequal support to a degree. in the entire american public sharing in the benefit of better access and student success. through a stronger position and stronger society. we are all in this together.

for me, it is professional. it is also intensely personal. i like chair castro and commissioner and so many others are first generation. as an immigrant from argentina, i was low income, and my high school, like yours, did not encourage me to consider college, but i attended the california community colleges and two of the california state university campuses, and the university of california berkley, and did a post-doc at the university of michigan. well, here i am. i'm proud to have had the opportunity to public higher education to be lifted and launched into an interesting and consequential life. in part of my support came from the federal government in what was then called the national defense student loan. thank you very much. >> thank you dr. white, mr. hogan? >> thank you, mr. chairman

members of the commission -- it's off? thank you. i'm not chancellor brit curwin, but unfortunately due to a family illness, he had to tend to his wife this morning. i'm pjhogan, i'm happy to be here today e. by way of background, the university system of maryland comprises 12 institutions three research universities three historically black institutions, four traditional comprehensives two regional higher education centers, and one virtual university. we are, i believe, a microcosm of higher education in the united states in a very small geographic state. in that vain, we experience and have a lot of takes on programs i'm going to speak about. in a moment i'll offer thoughts on the programs and their funding, but let me begin by absolutely tharng lyly thanking the

commission for holding these commissions. it's very timely with the reauthorization of the higher education act coming up. chancellor repeatedly said that it is a national disgrace that students and families coming from the lowest income graduate 10 % 9 to 10 % chance of graduating college whereas students in the upper range graduate 85 to 90%. that's just unsustainable as a society. while there are many and complex reasons why more low income students do not complete a college degree obviously, the volume of financial aid dollars, the efficacies of the program expand success rates of the students. as you know, there's roughly 7,000 students of higher education that participate in the federal pell grant and/or federal programs. many of these participate in one

or more of the seog, federal work study and federal perkins loans programs. i'll speak to the three programs and turn my attention to the various trio programs. let me start by noting that there are very positive impacts of the programs. i know there are proponents of rolling a lot of the programs into one loan one grant one work, to make the process more streamlined, and while that sounds great in theory, speaking to our campus based people on the front line the deal with students this does not hold true in practice. they are campus based and student based really. the institutions know their students and have flexibility under program requirements to award the funds accordingly because of that the relatively small dollars invested in the programs have a tremendously high return relative to

retention persistence, and graduation rates for under remitted students. these programs level the educational playing field for underresourced students and often a deciding factor about a student completing his or her degree, but they are woefully underfunded and many students are not able to take advantage of that. for example, one university, one of our comprehensive university enrolls over 20000 undergraduate students. annual cost of attendance for in-state students including housing, you know, room, board, is $24,688. here's how the student aide breaks down from the most recent funding levels of fy14. pell grants are the largest source for underrepresented low income students, more than $20 million regioning 53 00 of the 20,000 students.

institutional need based grants directly from the university, that's 16 million impacting 4500 students. state grants through the maryland higher education, $11 million, that's 4,000 students. then scog, $500,000 touching 313,000 students. work study, 4 40,000 reaching 337 students. you can see the difference. just looking at the example consider how many more low income under represented minority students could be reach the with additional funding or a better formula for better distribution of the funds. as chancellor white pointed out, the formula on some of these it says what is the cost of attendance? what is the family expected contribution? if you have a very high cost of attendance and a very low family

contribution, where is the money going to go? it's going to go to institutions that have very high tuition. it really does not -- it makes sense in theory, i guess, if you think about the need there but it does not serve students well. >> there's the funding, often funds returned to institutions, but not allowed to be recycled to other institutions. the financial aid administrateors place greater emphasis on the neediness of each school students populations unlike the current formula. we want to make it clear that we're all for making every program effective, spending every dollar as efficiently as possible in putting the money where it does the most good for students, but begin the relatively small contribution of

federal work study and scog overall, funding the impact of any change to the efficacy of the programs are minimal. to significantly increase their impact, there needs to be substantial increased funds for the programs. as you know, there's no new perkins funding since fy 2006, and since then, schools collect and relend funds from old contributions and old institutional matching funds. at this point, i want to quickly turn to the trio programs. they frankly have been a wonderful success. we participated in many programs, and there's tremendous graduation rates. it is clear programs are vital in advancing the access and success of low income first

generation students, but trio programs received cuts in recent years. you might say they are flat funded, but if it's not keeping up with inflation, it's a cut. let me close by returning to the original observation that as a nation we have to do much more to support higher education access for low income under represented minority and college students. sadly because of low college participation and completion rates for low income students, the claim america is the land of opportunity in upwardly mobile society are now beginning to ring hallow. for many the american dream became a nightmare. i thank the commission for taking on this very crucial issue in the future of the country and happy to answer questions. >> thank you, dean miller? >> good morning, commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. i'm scott miller from the

university of virginia. thomas jefferson founded university of virginia in 1819 with the goal of creating an educated citizenry to advance ideas of democracy. today there's 11 schools with 15400 undergraduates and 6400 graduate students and approximately 70% of the undergraduate students are virginia residents. the dean and i would like to share today about part of the university's approach to access persistence, and graduation and the partial role campus space funds play in the process. university's office of undergraduate admission reviews student's academic credentials and extracurricular involvement to select the strongest candidates for the student body. there's a neat line method in which the ability to pay for school is not criteria to be considered for admission to the university. in the fall of 2003, the uva president challenged student financial services to develop a program to change the so-so

economic diversity of the university. our office suggested meeting 100% of demonstrated financial need and the university's board of visitors approved access uva in february 2004. the practice of meeting need for all students in state and out of state began with the entering class in the fall of 2004. the university of virginia is just one of two public universities with a neat line admission policy and a commitment to meeting 100% of demonstrated need for all students. if a student is admitted to the university, finances should not be an issue to those with financial need. in order to meet the financial need, there's review of eligible for financial aide from all sources beginning with federal, then state, and finally institutional. in the first year of access uva, federal sources made up 42 % of the financial need and

state sources were 11%. the university spent 30 % of aggregate need of its own money for need-based grants. for 13 -14, the university's cost was $41.1 million to meet the financial need of $100 million for undergraduate population. federal sources dropped to 33 % and state sources dropped to 6%. at the same time campus space funds dropped from meeting 18% of demonstrated financial need to 5%. access uva helped to increase percentage of students with financial need from 23% to 34% of the undergraduate population and pell grant increased from 5% to 13%. to demonstrate further commitment for need-based grants, the university through affordable excellence program set a goal of $1 billion for endowed scholarships. once reached thee endowments generate $50 million each year for scholarships and will help

offset the short fall from the decreased commitments from federal and state sources. after the initial implementation of access uva some concerns arose. some high achieving low income students will self-select out of applying for admission because of information in the media about increases in the cost of tuition, misunderstanding of the ability of financial aid and fears of college loan debt. many low income first generation college and unrepresented students are not receiving the advice and support they need to identify and enroll in colleges where they will persist to degree. with lasting consequences, not only for those students, but also for the nation. nearly 25% of low income studentings who score in the top of standardized tests never go to college. college access studies show complexities of college and applications are a weight for students, many of whom are the

first in the family to consider college. the student guidance ratio means the average student spends 20 minutes a year talking to a counselor. according to the department of education, 90% of the fastest growing jobs today require post-secondary education, yet the u.s. lags behind other nations in young adults enrolled in higher education. to assist with these other issues the university began the virginia college advising court in the fall of 2005. the advising court pleases a recent graduate in a high school in virginia for two years to support the work of the high school counselor by helping all students, not just those interested in the university of virginia to realize a dream of a college degree. they are supported by the university, other sponsors and by the americorp program. the program became the model for the national adviseing corp,

present in 14 states and 423 high schools. the number of advisers receiving funds while a student at university was 65%. advisers use a near peer mentoring model. high school students relate to someone who is not much older than them and who may have come from a similar background. college advisers help students identify and apply to post-secondary programs that will serve them well academically and socially thus increasingly the likelihood the students earn a degree. based on an independent evaluation, when looking at high school served by a college adviser compared to seniors at other schools, studented served by advisers are 23% more likely to apply to college 23% more likely to hear of pell grants 15% more likely to submit fafsa, 15% more likely to attend a workshop.

uva and college advising core with two initiatives that the university of virginia utilized to increase access to higher education. after we meet their demonstrated financial need, we'll talk about efforts regarding persistence in graduation. >> thank you. my approach would be the following. if and when the funding is in place, let's look at what students have the peace of mind to accomplish. i'll begin with the pivotal question. most universities have support services to foster entry attention, persistence, and graduation. these programs include peer support programs, faculty mentoring programs, academic advising graduation mentors,

among others. what is different at the university of virginia that enables these same students, these same programs to yield substantive outcomes? one, there's a clear and explicit strategic position, which i will give you an outline of in a minute. two, the strategic position must have strategic consistency with the equally high expectations of the university. three, operational effectiveness, and, four as a result, our programs work because horizontally, they are sink newsed around leadership and academic performance and they all rise to the explicit and clear-listed strategy.

there has to be a stra junior collegic position that guides the practice of student support. this strategic position is that high graduation rates must align with correspondently graduating grade point averages. translation? for over 20 years, the university led the nation among the flag ship institutions with the highest graduation rates something around 83 to 88%. yesterday's figure came in at 86% for this past year. and what we want to do is create an alignment between that and the grade point averages in which they graduate. two, there must be a strategic consistency between the high expectations to the university program, implement the strategic goals and objectives of the

institution. translation? the university of virginia generally expects the student to graduate within eight semesters. program efforts must therefore use the expectation to guide the strategic implementation. secondly, in addition, students are generally expected are selected as who can both contribute to life at the university and benefit from it. thirdly, strategic position must proceed operational effectiveness used to achieve student success. all programs must coordinate and design their efforts to make that expectation happen. the point here is that gramg graduation rates look good for the university but they do not put food on the table. grade point averages do and that's why that alignment is so important. okay.

next, these three pivots student leadership identity indifference, student academic performance with high gpa matter because at the end of the day, you want our students to have -- to become the leaders that the university was set out to create. two, it matters that an african-american student knows why he or she is a teacher of that particular origin. and, third student academic performance must allow the students to compete for greater access to more opportunities when they graduate. when you put all of these together you will have a set number of programs that make these things happen. facilitate entry adjustment program called peer advice program gets students started. attention programs follow which we call the grad style program

including faculty mentoring, et cetera, and the cultural center also fosters cultural programs to create a background and sense of identity and identity and difference and lastly the stem areas are to be emphasized because many, many, many courses like economics study six, calculus for students going on to professional schools, that's the last five slides. if and when you've done this well, what you'll discover is that the graduation rates will continue to stay high and students who are 3.0 to 3.4 also

increases. and with that in mind, let's go to the next slide all the way to the end. so here, for example, the 3.4 to 2.0 range i gave you 10 data points student ss graduated with 10.4 in the 3.4 to 4.0 range. today it's 20.7 in the 3.0 to 3.99 range 2006 it was 27%

today it's 61. put them all together. 7.4 7.4. more than double the gpa. stra strategic programs. thank you for the attention. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. i'm the associate vice president for student affairs, my testimony aims to support and augment earlier testimony of chancellor white on the federal financial aide programs specifically through the lens of cal state fullerton.

chancellor white often says, and i firmly believe that access without the opportunity to succeed is not true access. a meaningful education means not only getting your foot in the door, but being empowered with the support to succeed all the way through to graduation. enrolling in college is a critical step for low income minority and first generation students. this is only the first step in a long educational journey along with these students face greater cultural barriers than other students. we have an intimate understanding of the barriers they face, and we have a proven record of giving them not just access, but a collegiate experience with the possibility of great success one of the largest campuses in the state university model we are a

designated hispanic serving institution. 63% of our 38000 students identified as native american black, hispanic, asian, pacific islander or multiethnic. 43% of our graduates are pell grant recipients. yet at cal state fullerton, we recognize that access alone is not enough. we are also a national model for student success ranked first in california, and 10th in the nation for graduating latinos and fourth in the nation for graduating underrepresented minority students. furthermore, our students graduate with less debt than the average public university graduate. and earn higher salaries over time. these historic achievements are a foundation for even further growth. beginning in 2012, cal state fullerton president initiated a strategic planning process to guide our institution toward the goal of becoming a national

model for how a comprehensive university can boost rates through the thoughtful efforts to keep students connected and empowered on their way to a degree. i have detailed many of the activities in my written testimony. want to highlight several initiatives that want to be of particular interest today. cal state fullerton is housing educational talent search, two gear up grants, student support services and the mcnair scholarship program. upward bound serve nearly 4500 students who attend local high schools, with the highest need and schools that enrole the majority of their free and reduced lunch programs. this has a profound impact.

beyond establishing a strong pipeline for access cal state fullerton offers programs to bolster student success for our first generation and underrepresented college students. we aim to increase the college retention and graduation rates through academic advising, tutoring, financial advising and other program services. student support services who come from first generation backgrounds, 16% higher than the national institutional average. we also run a mcnair scholarship program committed to empowering higher risk and underrepresented students with access to graduate education. only 11% of doctoral degrees were from underrepresented racial backgrounds. they work to expand our nation's

highly trained intellectual leaders by creating a pipeline for doctoral assistance. cal state fullerton can be seen as a case study for what may be possible at the national level. we're already achieving great things with our past and current initiatives, but without continued and expanded federal support, these initiatives are unsustainable. the current limitations and federal funding disproportionalitily affect students that rely most heavily on programs and grants from the federal government. these limitations are adding additional obstacles for students. we are also keenly aware that these limitations and obstacles can easily be remedied, we believe that a return to the year round pell grant program would serve as a powerful driver for our students.

my president, mildred garcia often speaks about higher education being a private good and a public good. having just watch eded -- just finished commencement, i watched 60,000 family and friends celebrate the attainment of a college degree. when we raise productive families and contribute to uplifting communities. they're achieving the public good that higher education has to offer our society. it is our moral imperative to protect and institutionalize the programs to result in committable outcomes, not just equitable enrollment. this is one of the key civil rights issues of our time. commissioners, thank you for the student to testify today and i welcome any questions you might have. >> dr. hamilton. >> good morning, thank you for the opportunity to present

before this important commission my signed task at the new school my assigned task was to examine the civil rights impact that higher education has on mobility. my comments are going to focus on the racial wealth gap and the lack of role. why focus on wealth? wealth is a paramount indy indicator of well being it provides opportunity and security to take risk and shield against financial loss. some wealth provides people with the initial capitol to purchase an appreciating asset which in turn generates more wealth from one generation to the next wealth is also an indicator in which blacks and whites have persistently been most disparate. the economic recovery period

following the great recession. the typical black and latino family own a little more than a nickel, 6 and 7 cents respectively to every dollar held by the white family. the typical black family has a little over $7,000 in wealth. while the typical white family has close to $112,000 in wealth. research and public policy has focused primarily on higher education as the driver of mobileity mobility. education alone does little to explain differences in wealth across race. it's more likely the case that wealth differences across race explain educational attainment differences. nonetheless, conventional wisdom is that to address racial disparity, blacks need to get over it, stop making excuses and take personal respon