# Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR46911 ## Record - **Collection:** Congressional research report - **Document type:** CRS Report - **Published:** March 9, 2023 - **Citation:** R46911 ## Text Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Updated March 9, 2023 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46911 SUMMARY Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Drought―a deficiency of moisture that results in adverse effects―occurs to some extent almost every year in areas of the United States. Droughts can simultaneously reduce available water supplies and increase demands for water. Drought has the potential to affect economic and environmental conditions on local, regional, and national scales, as well as to disrupt water supplies for households and communities. Droughts are a component of climate variability and may be seasonal, multiyear, or multi-decadal in duration. According to a 2021 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report on the physical science of climate change, variable precipitation and rising temperatures are intensifying droughts in some U.S. regions. According to the report, certain types of droughts—such as those causing agricultural impacts—are expected to be more likely in the western and central regions of the United States in the future. R46911 March 9, 2023 Charles V. Stern, Coordinator Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Eva Lipiec, Coordinator Analyst in Natural Resources Policy The federal government generally defers to state primacy in surface and groundwater allocation, and states and local entities typically lead efforts to prepare for drought. Multiple federal agencies contribute to these efforts to predict, plan for, and respond to drought. The federal government, and in particular the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, plays a key role in researching and monitoring drought through the National Integrated Drought Information System and the U.S. Drought Monitor. Other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Geological Survey, also research and monitor drought factors and conditions. The U.S. Department of Agriculture provides the primary federal financial aid to lessen the impacts of drought and compensate for agricultural production loss after drought onset. Other federal programs may assist with drought in their support of other water investments. For example, Congress authorized programs supporting nonfederal and tribal efforts to develop water conservation, water reuse and recycling, rural water supplies, or other municipal and industrial water supplies. Some of these programs may prioritize projects that lessen the impacts of drought even if these programs do not focus exclusively on drought. Congress has authorized federal assistance for other aspects of drought, but these programs generally are limited in scope. In localities or watersheds with major projects managed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation, which operates exclusively in the 17 western states) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE, which operates nationwide), the federal role in water management is more direct and can be especially controversial during times of drought, when multiple users compete for water. Congress has directed both Reclamation and USACE to plan for future droughts at federally authorized projects. Recent severe droughts, including widespread drought conditions in some areas of the western United States, have raised the profile of drought and led to congressional and administrative proposals to prepare for and respond to its impacts. The 117 th Congress enacted funding for drought activities in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58) and in P.L. 117169 (commonly referred to as the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022). Congressional interest in drought during the 118th Congress may include new and amended authorities for drought planning and response; emergency appropriations to alleviate drought impacts and enhance related activities; and oversight of ongoing federal drought science, preparedness, and management efforts. Congressional Research Service Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview of Drought in the United States ...................................................................................... 1 What Is Drought? ...................................................................................................................... 2 Drought and Climate Change .................................................................................................... 4 Drought Classification .............................................................................................................. 7 Drought Forecasts for the United States .................................................................................. 11 Federal Drought Policy and Coordination ..................................................................................... 12 Selected Federal Response Authorities.......................................................................................... 14 Monitoring and Research ........................................................................................................ 15 USDA Drought Support Programs for Farmers and Ranchers................................................ 17 Direct Payments ................................................................................................................ 18 Insurance ........................................................................................................................... 20 Cost-Share Assistance ....................................................................................................... 20 Loans................................................................................................................................. 21 Conservation ..................................................................................................................... 22 NOAA Drought Support Programs ......................................................................................... 23 Drought and Federal Facilities and Projects ........................................................................... 23 Expanding Western Water Storage .................................................................................... 25 Drought Operations Manuals and Planning ...................................................................... 27 Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations .......................................................................... 29 Drought Flexibilities and the Endangered Species Act ..................................................... 32 Other Drought Authorities: Support for Nonfederal Drought Planning and Projects ............. 33 Bureau of Reclamation WaterSMART Program: Drought Response and Other Authorities ..................................................................................................................... 33 USDA Programs and Authorities ...................................................................................... 35 USACE Authorities........................................................................................................... 36 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Programs ............................................................ 37 Selected Federal Drought Programs for Tribes ................................................................. 39 Proposed Drought Authorities and Enacted Supplemental Funding in the 117th Congress ........... 42 Proposed Drought Authorities ................................................................................................. 43 Coordination ..................................................................................................................... 43 Monitoring and Research .................................................................................................. 43 NOAA Drought Support Programs ................................................................................... 43 Federal Facilities: Western Water Supplies and Reclamation Programs ........................... 44 Enacted Supplemental Funding for Drought Activities .......................................................... 44 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ............................................................................. 44 Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act................... 46 Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ....................................................................................... 46 Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2023 .................................................. 47 Figures Figure 1. Example of a U.S. Drought Monitor Map........................................................................ 8 Figure 2. Percentage of United States in U.S. Drought Monitor Categories ................................... 9 Figure 3. Percentage of the Northeast and the West in U.S. Drought Monitor Categories ........... 10 Congressional Research Service Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Figure 4. Example Comparing Widespread and Regional Drought in the Continental United States ............................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 5. Examples of U.S. Monthly and Seasonal Drought Outlooks in the United States......... 12 Figure 6. Selected Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dams with Water Supply and/or Irrigation Purposes ................................................................................... 24 Figure 7. Atmospheric River Originating Near Hawaii and Extending to the U.S. West Coast ........................................................................................................................................... 31 Contacts Author Information........................................................................................................................ 48 Congressional Research Service Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Introduction Drought―a deficiency of moisture that results in adverse impacts―occurs to some extent almost every year in areas of the United States. Drought has the potential to create economic and environmental impacts on local, regional, and national scales, as well as disruptions in water supplies for households and communities. For example, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) estimates the United States has experienced 30 billion-dollar drought events since 1980, at an estimated total cost of over $309.4 billion.1 Although droughts are generally a common component of climate variability that may be seasonal, multiyear, or multidecadal in duration, variable precipitation and rising temperatures are intensifying droughts in some regions.2 Severe droughts in California from 2012 to 2016, as well as widespread drought in the western United States in 2021 and 2022, have raised the profile of drought and led to increasing congressional and administrative proposals to prepare for and respond to its impacts. Multiple federal agencies contribute to efforts to predict, plan for, and respond to drought. NOAA plays a key role in monitoring drought through the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) and the U.S. Drought Monitor (through a partnership with the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and the U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA]). USDA provides the primary federal financial aid to lessen drought’s impacts and compensate for agricultural production loss after its onset. Federal water resource agencies such as the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) may face difficult tradeoffs in operating federal water projects during drought; both agencies also have the authority to and conduct activities to mitigate drought impacts. Various other federal agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and emergency authorities also have a role in drought response and mitigation. This report provides an overview of drought in the United States, including information on drought science, monitoring, and forecasts and on drought types and intensity classifications. It discusses federal authorities related to drought planning and response, with a focus on selected water-related agricultural, environmental, and natural resource authorities with explicit ties to drought. It does not discuss broader disaster-related authorities and their potential nexus to drought, such as the programs and authorities of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and interactions between drought and other hazards and concerns (e.g., wildfire, dust, and public health). Overview of Drought in the United States3 The following sections provide information about drought in the United States, including a discussion of the different causes of drought, potential linkages between drought and climate change now and in the future, and how the impacts of drought are classified and forecasted in the United States. 1 Costs represent the 2021 Consumer Price Index-cost adjusted value if different from original value. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), National Centers for Environmental Information, “Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters: Events,” at https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/summary-stats. 2 For more information, see “Drought and Climate Change.” 3 For more information, contact Eva Lipiec, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy, or Nicole T. Carter, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy. Congressional Research Service 1 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities What Is Drought? Drought is a natural hazard with significant economic, social, and ecological consequences. Drought broadly refers to periods of substantially below-average moisture conditions. Droughts are a component of climate variability and may be seasonal, multiyear, or multi-decadal (sometimes called megadroughts) in duration. Drought may be defined in various ways; NOAA, for instance, defines it as “a deficiency of moisture that results in adverse impacts on people, animals, or vegetation over a sizeable area.”4 Although a lack of precipitation is often central to drought, high temperatures, high winds, lack of clouds, and low humidity also can contribute.5 Experts categorize definitions into four basic approaches to measuring drought: meteorological, hydrological, agricultural, and socioeconomic.6 However, no one definition applies to all circumstances.  Meteorological drought is typically the degree of dryness, in comparison to a “normal” or average amount of dryness, and the duration of a dry period. Meteorological drought is region-specific, because precipitation deficiency varies regionally.  Hydrological drought reflects reduced surface and subsurface water supplies, such as streamflows, reservoir and lake levels, snowpack, and groundwater. The frequency and severity of this type of drought are measured on a watershed or river basin scale. Agricultural and ecological drought links characteristics of meteorological or hydrological drought to agricultural and ecological effects (such as plant-waterstress contributions to tree mortality), often determined using precipitation shortfalls, evapotranspiration differences,7 soil moisture deficits, reduced groundwater or reservoir levels, and other variables. Socioeconomic drought associates the “supply and demand of some economic goods with elements of meteorological, hydrological, and agricultural drought.” 8   Scientists also have been studying a phenomenon referred to as hot drought. In contrast to precipitation-driven droughts, hot droughts are a result of high air temperatures, as warmer air absorbs more water than cooler air.9 Additionally, experts have begun to characterize drought by how quickly drought conditions develop, with some scientists using the term flash drought to identify rapid-onset drought 4 Drought.gov, “Defining Drought,” at https://www.drought.gov/what-is-drought/drought-basics#defining-drought. 5 National Drought Mitigation Center (NDMC), “Types of Drought,” at https://drought.unl.edu/Education/DroughtIn- depth/TypesofDrought.aspx. 6 NDMC, “Types of Drought,” at https://drought.unl.edu/Education/DroughtIn-depth/TypesofDrought.aspx. 7 Evapotranspiration may be defined as the loss of water from a land area through transpiration from plants and evaporation from the soil and surface water bodies such as lakes, ponds, and man-made reservoirs. For more about evapotranspiration, see U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), “Evapotranspiration and the Water Cycle,” at https://www.usgs.gov/special-topic/water-science-school/science/evapotranspiration-and-water-cycle?qtscience_center_objects=0. 8 NDMC, “Types of Drought,” at https://drought.unl.edu/Education/DroughtIn-depth/TypesofDrought.aspx. 9 NOAA, Climate.gov, “Beyond 2016: Year in Review,” January 4, 2017, at https://www.climate.gov/news-features/ blogs/beyond-data/beyond-2016-year-review; and Bradley Udall and Jonathan Overpeck, “The Twenty-First Century Colorado River Hot Drought and Implications for the Future,” Water Resources Research, vol. 53, no. 3 (February 17, 2017), pp. 2404-2416. Congressional Research Service 2 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities conditions. Flash drought is usually set in motion by precipitation deficits, accompanied by anomalously high temperatures, winds, and/or solar radiation.10 Higher demand for water for human activities and vegetation in areas of limited water supply increases the severity of certain types of drought. For example, drought during the growing season is often considered more severe—in terms of impacts—than similar conditions when cropland lies dormant. For policy purposes, drought often becomes an issue when it results in a water supply deficiency. Drought can lead to water restrictions affecting municipal and industrial supplies, decreased hydropower generation and power plant cooling efficiency, navigation limitations and disruptions, harm to drought-sensitive ecosystems and species, and increased fire and heat wave risk, among other effects.11 Scientific advances, such as improved observation and understanding of atmospheric variability and of North American precipitation and temperature variations, have enhanced understanding of drought and the forces that contribute to it, although debates remain on those forces’ relative importance. Drought at a specific location often results from a mix of various interacting atmospheric anomalies, land-atmosphere feedbacks, topographic features, and human activity, such as water use, among other forces and factors. Prolonged droughts typically occur when certain spatially and temporally large-scale anomalies in atmospheric circulation patterns persist (such as multiyear La Niña conditions contributing to drier conditions in the U.S. Southwest). These anomalies are referred to as teleconnection patterns and typically last several weeks to several months but also can be prominent for several consecutive years.12 Ocean conditions contribute to some teleconnection patterns, including the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO).13 (For more on the role Pacific Ocean conditions play in droughts in the United States, see text box “Droughts and the El Niño-Southern Oscillation.”) Other atmospheric conditions, such as blocking ridges, also may contribute to drought conditions.14 10 Drought.gov, “What is Drought: Flash Drought,” at https://www.drought.gov/what-is-drought/flash-drought. 11 For more on wildfire, see CRS In Focus IF10732, Federal Assistance for Wildfire Response and Recovery, by Katie Hoover, and CRS Report R43429, Federal Lands and Related Resources: Overview and Selected Issues for the 118th Congress, coordinated by Katie Hoover. For more information about the potential relationship between droughts and heat waves, see, for example, Linyin Cheng et al., “Physical Understanding of Human-Induced Changes in U.S. Hot Droughts Using Equilibrium Climate Simulations,” Journal of Climate, vol. 32, no. 14 (July 15, 2019), pp. 4431-4443. 12 For more about teleconnection patterns, see NOAA, National Weather Service Climate Prediction Center, “Teleconnection Introduction,” at https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/data/teledoc/teleintro.shtml. According to NOAA, a teleconnection pattern refers to a recurring and persistent large-scale pattern of pressure and circulation anomalies that spans vast geographical areas. Many teleconnection patterns are planetary-scale in nature spanning entire ocean basins and continents. Teleconnection patterns reflect large-scale changes in the atmospheric wave and jet stream patterns, and they influence temperature, rainfall, storm tracks, and jet stream location and intensity over vast areas. 13 El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is a periodic fluctuation in sea surface temperature (El Niño) and the air pressure of the overlying atmosphere (Southern Oscillation) across the equatorial Pacific Ocean (NOAA, “El Niño/Southern Oscillation (ENSO) Technical Discussion,” at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/teleconnections/enso/ensotech.php). For more information about the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, see Climate.gov, “Going out for ice cream: a first date with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation,” August 25, 2016, at https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/enso/ going-out-ice-cream-first-date-pacific-decadal-oscillation. 14 Blocking ridges are regions of high atmospheric pressure that disrupt typical wind patterns in the atmosphere. Scientists identified a persistent ridge pattern, often referred to as the Ridiculously Resilient Ridge, contributing to California’s 2012-2016 drought by diverting winter storms northward, thereby preventing them from reaching California. For more information see, for example, Haiyan Teng and Grant Branstator, “Causes of Extreme Ridges That Induce California Droughts,” Journal of Climate, vol. 30, no. 4 (February 15, 2017), pp. 1477-1492. Congressional Research Service 3 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Droughts and the El Niño-Southern Oscillation The El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) is an anomaly associated with central and eastern tropical Pacific Ocean conditions―particularly sea surface temperatures (SSTs) and air pressure―that can affect the path of the jet stream over mid-latitude North America and other regions globally, thereby influencing regional temperatures and precipitation. ENSO conditions often are described by phase: El Niño, neutral, or La Niña. The La Niña phase refers to the cooler-than-average SSTs in the central tropical Pacific region in the oscillating warming and cooling pattern of ENSO. Scientists have increasingly linked drought in portions of the United States to SST anomalies in the Pacific Ocean. La Niña’s influence on drought varies across the continent and may vary seasonally.  La Niña conditions can correlate with drier-than-normal winter conditions in California and the southwestern United States, while also contributing to wetter-than-normal conditions in other regions of the United States. ENSO’s impact on southwestern summer weather and precipitation is less clear.  In the southeastern United States, La Niña appears to be a contributor to some droughts (e.g., there seems to be a weak link between La Niña and dry winter conditions), with multiple other factors also corresponding or contributing to droughts in the region.  The effects of El Niño and La Niña on drought conditions on Hawaii and the insular areas of the Pacific vary within the region.  In many regions of the country, ENSO forces play an unclear role and combine with multiple other factors, such as topography, to determine conditions that could lead to drought (e.g., the effect of the Rocky Mountains in Colorado).  Widespread flash droughts over the United States are often associated with La Niña conditions. Sources: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, “What Are El Niño and La Niña?,” at https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/ninonina.html; National Integrated Drought Information System, “Western Drought Webinar,” July 20, 2021, PowerPoint presentation, at https://www.drought.gov/webinars/ western-drought-webinar-july-20-2021; Climate Assessment for the Southwest, “How Does ENSO Affect SW Weather Patterns?,” at https://climas.arizona.edu/content/how-does-enso-affect-sw-weather-patterns; Richard Seager et al., “Drought in the Southeastern United States: The Recent Drought in the Context of a Millennium of Climate Variability, Physical Causes and Future Hydroclimate Change,” July 2008, at http://ocp.ldeo.columbia.edu/ res/div/ocp/drought/SE.shtml; A. Park Williams et al., “The 2016 Southeastern U.S. Drought: An Extreme Departure from Centennial Wetting and Cooling,” Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, vol. 122, no. 20 (2017), pp. 10888-10905; Colorado State University, Colorado Climate Center, “ENSO and Colorado,” at https://climate.colostate.edu/co_enso.html; and L. Gwen Chen et al., “Flash Drought Characteristics Based on U.S. Drought Monitor,” Atmosphere, Special Issue: Meteorological and Hydrological Droughts, vol. 10, no. 9 (2019), pp. 498513. Notes: Some researchers associated the 2019 southeastern drought to a waning El Niño and other ocean and atmospheric phenomena (see Siegfried D. Schubert et al., “On the Development and Demise of the Fall 2019 Southeast U.S. Flash Drought: Links to an Extreme Positive IOD,” Journal of Climate, vol. 34, no. 5 (March 1, 2021), pp. 1701-1723). For more on the ENSO effects on Hawaii and Pacific insular islands, see U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), “Hawai‘i and U.S.-Affiliated Pacific Islands” in Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, vol. II, 2018, p. 1251; or Benjamin I. Cook et al., “Pan-Continental Droughts in North America over the Last Millennium,” Journal of Climate, vol. 27, no. 1 (January 1, 2014), pp. 383-397. Drought and Climate Change The scientific understanding of the relationship between drought and climate change is evolving. Droughts are challenging to understand, because they are shaped by interactions between natural weather and climate variability, climate change, ecosystems, and human activities (e.g., land and water development and use). Multiple researchers are evaluating the contribution of humaninduced warming to observed droughts and to droughts under a warmer climate. Some researchers are attempting to identify the role that human-induced warming may have on the severity of observed droughts in specific U.S. regions such as the southwestern United States, which has a history of droughts, including megadroughts. Congressional Research Service 4 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), an entity composed of representatives from U.S. federal agencies, released its special report on the state of climate science in 2017 and its periodic national climate assessment in 2018.15 In these reports, USGCRP made various observations related to drought, including the following:     Variable precipitation and rising temperature were intensifying droughts, with groundwater depletion (from withdrawal for human uses exceeding aquifer recharge) further exacerbating drought risk.16 Annual trends toward earlier spring snowmelt and reduced snowpack were affecting water resources in the western United States, and those trends were expected to continue.17 Future droughts in most regions of the United States likely would be more intense and could last longer due to projected decreases in soil moisture, with trends likely strongest in the Southwest and the southern Great Plains.18 The then-recent droughts and heat waves (as of 2017) had reached record intensity in some U.S. regions but had not reached the geographical scale and duration of the Dust Bowl era of the 1930s.19 Regarding teleconnections patterns that may contribute to drought, a 2019 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on climate change and land had low confidence in how large-scale systems,20 such as ENSO, would respond to a warming climate and therefore how those changes might affect the frequency and severity of drought.21 In 2021, IPCC released its sixth assessment on the underlying physical science of climate change. The report provided observations by drought type and region, and it synthesized projections regarding future drought risk. For more on the drought discussion in the 2021 IPCC physical science report, see text box “Overview of the IPCC 2021 Findings on Drought in the Continental United States.”22 15 USGCRP expects to release the next iteration of its reports in 2023. 16 USGCRP, “Water,” in Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, vol. II, 2018, p. 2. 17 USGCRP, “Executive Summary,” in Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, vol. I, 2017, p. 11. 18 USGCRP, “Our Changing Climate,” in Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, vol. II, 2018, p. 91. 19 USGCRP, “Executive Summary,” in Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, vol. I, 2017, p. 21. 20 For the drought information in IPCC reports, the term low confidence was used for various reasons, including if there is limited evidence, which may be due to a lack of data or studies, and if there is a lack of agreement on the type of change (e.g., mixed signals). 21 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), “Land-Climate Interactions,” in Special Report on Climate Change and Land, 2019, p. 146. According to IPCC, author teams evaluated their confidence about the validity of a finding, providing a synthesis of the evaluation of evidence and agreement (levels of confidence include five qualifiers: very low, low, medium, high, and very high; Virginia R. Burkett et al., “Point of Departure,” in Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Part A: Global and Sectoral Aspects. Contributions of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014, p. 9). 22 IPCC, “Chapter 11: Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate,” in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2021, Table 11.21, pp. 11-229 to 11-231 (hereinafter, report cited as IPCC, AR6 Physical Science Basis). For a depiction of the areas included in the western, central, and eastern North America designations, see IPCC, “Chapter 1: Framing, Context, and Methods,” in AR6 Physical Science Basis, p. 1-197. Congressional Research Service 5 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities The 2021 IPCC report identified research that projected an intensified rainfall response over the equatorial Pacific Ocean as a result of ENSO-related sea surface temperature changes under a warming climate, with resulting impacts over land.23 For a discussion of how ENSO’s La Niña conditions may contribute to drier conditions and droughts in the continental United States, see text box “Droughts and the El Niño-Southern Oscillation” above. Overview of the IPCC 2021 Findings on Drought in the Continental United States Regarding observations of changes in drought for North America compared to a pre-industrial baseline (18501900), the 2021 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on the physical science of climate change indicated  low confidence on the type of changes to dryness relative to normal—meteorological drought—for both western and eastern North America, and medium confidence in a decrease in the duration and frequency of meteorological droughts in central North America;  medium confidence in an increase in agricultural and ecological drought in western North America, and low confidence on the type of changes for agricultural and ecological drought in central and eastern North America; and  low confidence for identifying changes to hydrologic drought for western, central, and eastern North America. Confidence in projected future drought changes for North America with a warming climate varied by region, type of drought, and assumed temperature increase. Source: IPCC, “Chapter 11: Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate,” in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2021, Table 11.21, pp. 11-229 to 11-231; and IPCC, “Summary for Policymakers” in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2021, p. 10. Notes: According to IPCC, author teams communicated the degree of certainty in key findings by expressing the qualitative confidence about the validity of a finding and degree of agreement (levels of confidence is expressed using five qualifiers: very low, low, medium, high, and very high) or quantified measure of uncertainty expressed probabilistically (e.g., exceptionally unlikely, likely, virtually certain, etc.). For instance, the term low confidence was used for various reasons, including if there is limited evidence, which may be due to a lack of data or studies, and if there is a lack of agreement on the type of change (e.g., mixed signals). (Mastrandrea, et al., Guidance Note for Lead Authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on Consistent Treatment of Uncertainties, IPCC, July 2010) Some researchers have undertaken efforts to calculate the contribution of human-induced warming to specific U.S. droughts (known as attribution science).24 Experience with trying to 23 IPCC, “Chapter 11: Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate,” in AR6 Physical Science Basis, pp. 11-17 and 11-110. The report did not identify a robust consensus in the research literature regarding changes in amplitude of ENSO-related sea surface temperature variability (e.g., an intensification of how much warmer or cooler than normal the surface ocean is along the equator in the central-to-eastern Pacific for El Niño and La Niña, respectively). 24 For example, see A. Park Williams et al., “Large Contribution from Anthropogenic Warming to an Emerging North American Megadrought,” Science, vol. 368, no. 6488 (April 17, 2020), pp. 341-318; A.P. Williams, et al., “Rapid intensification of the emerging southwestern North American megadrought in 2020-2021,” 2022, Nature Climate Change, vol. 12.; and Andrew Hoell et al., Drought Assessment Report: The Causes, Predictability, and Historical Context of the 2017 U.S. Northern Great Plains Drought, February 2019, NOAA, Earth System Research Laboratory, and University of Colorado, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, at https://www.drought.gov/ sites/default/files/2020-09/2017-NGP-drought-assessment.pdf. Using research like the former articles, the IPCC AR6 Physical Science Basis indicated medium confidence in western North America’s observed agricultural and ecological drought having a human contribution (IPCC, “Chapter 11: Weather and Climate Extreme Events in a Changing Climate,” in AR6 Physical Science Basis, Table 11.21). The report identified low confidence in the attribution to human-induced climate change of observed changes for meteorological drought (limited evidence) and hydrological drought (inconsistent trends in observations in central North America and limited evidence in and eastern North America) (pp. 11-230 to 11-232). The report identified low confidence in attribution for western North America for Congressional Research Service 6 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities understand the ongoing southwestern drought and the effects of climate change has led experts to identify some ways to improve understanding of future drought risk; these include better understanding of the following:      Effects of climate change on atmospheric behavior leading to regional precipitation patterns The importance of the interrelated variables that influenced the current southwestern drought and other droughts The impact and influence of key ocean-atmosphere interactions that influence weather and climate variability over the United States (e.g., the influence of La Niña events) Changes to western snowpack and the implications of these changes Forecast errors that impact water management decisions25 Drought Classification Certain measures, often referred to as drought indicators, are typically used to assess and classify the intensity and type of drought. Local, state, and federal entities may have different ways to classify drought. These measures may depend on a single indicator or on several indicators, often combined with expert opinions from the academic, public, and private sectors. The U.S. Drought Monitor, a partnership between federal and nonfederal entities, uses multiple indicators and indexes together with expert opinions and stakeholder information to estimate the intensity and effects of ongoing drought conditions (Figure 1).26 According to NOAA, roughly 40-50 unique indicators are used to create the U.S. Drought Monitor map, but not all geographic areas are represented equally by the indicators.27 The U.S. Drought Monitor intensity scheme— D0 (abnormally dry), D1 (moderate), D2 (severe), D3 (extreme), and D4 (exceptional)—depicts broad-scale conditions but not necessarily drought circumstances at the local scale. For example, the regions depicted as red in Figure 1 faced extreme drought conditions for the week preceding January 31, 2023, but they may have contained local areas and individual communities that experienced less or more severe drought. The estimated drought intensity can be a trigger for local, state, and federal responses to drought. In addition to the color-coded D0-D4 designations, U.S. Drought Monitor maps often include “S” and “L” designations to provide additional information about the nature of drought (Figure 1). The “S” designation indicates the existence of short-term effects: a combination of different drought indexes that approximates responses to precipitation over days up to a few months. These effects would include impacts to agriculture, topsoil moisture, unregulated streamflows, and aspects of wildfire danger. The “L” designation indicates the existence of long-term effects; it meteorological drought (limited evidence) and hydrological drought (mixed signal) (pp. 11-229 to 11-230). 25 NOAA Climate Program Office, Assessment Report, 2020-2021 Southwestern U.S. Drought, at https://cpo.noaa.gov/ MAPP/DTF4SWReport#8405161-highlights. 26 The U.S. Drought Monitor represents a consensus view between academic and federal scientists of ongoing drought conditions. The U.S. Drought Monitor is produced jointly by the NDMC at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, NOAA, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). For more information, see U.S. Drought Monitor, “What Is the USDM,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/About/WhatistheUSDM.aspx. 27 NOAA, “NOAA Drought: Science, Observations, and Services,” July 15, 2021, PowerPoint presentation. Key indicators and indexes include the Palmer Drought Index, the Climate Prediction Center soil moisture model, USGS weekly streamflow data, the Standardized Precipitation Index, and short- and long-term drought indicator blends. For a discussion of drought indicators, see NOAA, National Centers for Environmental Information, “Drought: The Importance of Drought Indicators,” at https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/drought-importance-drought-indicators. Congressional Research Service 7 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities approximates responses to precipitation over several months up to a few years. These effects include reservoir levels, groundwater, and lake levels. As Figure 1 shows, some regions of the United States include both an “S” and an “L” designation, indicating that in January 2023, those regions experienced both short- and long-term impacts. Figure 1. Example of a U.S. Drought Monitor Map Source: U.S. Drought Monitor at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/. Note: U.S. Drought Monitor national maps are updated weekly. Since the U.S. Drought Monitor began in 2000, some portion of the land area of the United States has experienced drought of at least moderate intensity (D1) each year (Figure 2).28 The land area affected by drought can vary widely by year and within a particular year. There is particular concern about locations experiencing the most intense drought conditions: extreme and exceptional drought (D3 and D4, respectively). Some portion of the country has experienced extreme (D3) or exceptional (D4) drought in every year since 2000 (Figure 2).29 28 U.S. Drought Monitor, “Time Series,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/DmData/TimeSeries.aspx. A 2013 article stated that, based on a monthly precipitation and mean temperature drought indicator, each decade from 1900 through 2012 had experienced drought episodes that covered 30% or more (by area) of the contiguous United States (Thomas C. Peterson et al., “Monitoring and Understanding Changes in Heat Waves, Cold Waves, Floods, and Droughts in the United States: State of Knowledge,” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, vol. 94, no. 6 [June 2013], p. 827). 29 There have been some periods since 2000 where extreme (D3) or exceptional (D4) drought did not affect any portion of the country. For example, from January 2000 through early April 2000 and more recently, from late March 2019 through mid-March 2020. Congressional Research Service 8 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Figure 2. Percentage of United States in U.S. Drought Monitor Categories (January 4, 2000, through January 31, 2023) Source: U.S. Drought Monitor, “Time Series,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/DmData/TimeSeries.aspx. Modified by CRS. Note: Includes the continental United States and Puerto Rico. Drought may affect certain regions of the United States on a short-term or a longer-term basis, with varying intensity over time. For example, the Northeast region has rarely experienced extreme (D3) or exceptional drought (D4) since the U.S. Drought Monitor began issuing maps in 2000 (Figure 3).30 In contrast, periods of extreme and exceptional drought have been relatively common since 2000 in the western region of the United States.31 30 The Northeast region includes Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and West Virginia. 31 The western region includes Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, also referred to as the West. Congressional Research Service 9 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Figure 3. Percentage of the Northeast and the West in U.S. Drought Monitor Categories (January 4, 2000, through January 31, 2023) Source: U.S. Drought Monitor, “Time Series,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/DmData/TimeSeries.aspx. Modified by CRS. Notes: The Northeast region includes Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and West Virginia. The West includes Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington. Some drought conditions can stretch across the continental United States, whereas others affect only a comparatively small region. For example, Figure 4 illustrates how drought can stretch across the continental United States or can affect only a comparatively small region. On July 17, 2012, abnormally dry or drought conditions (D1-D4) covered roughly 81% of the continental United States, with about 42% of the nation experiencing severe drought or worse (D2-D4). In contrast, on July 20, 2021, about 54% of the continental United States faced abnormally dry or drought conditions (D1-D4), with 38% experiencing severe drought or worse (D2-D4).32 32 U.S. Drought Monitor, “Compare Two Weeks,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Maps/CompareTwoWeeks.aspx. Congressional Research Service 10 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Figure 4. Example Comparing Widespread and Regional Drought in the Continental United States Source: CRS from U.S. Drought Monitor, “Compare Two Weeks,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/Maps/ CompareTwoWeeks.aspx. Drought Forecasts for the United States Reliable drought forecasts depend on effectively integrating interactions of multiple variables, including surface temperature, precipitation, air-sea interactions, topography, soil moisture, land surface processes, and weather systems at the global scale (e.g., ENSO). Scientists seek to understand how these variables interact in order to forecast drought onset, drought severity, and drought duration. Among other issues, predicting the onset of drought remains difficult.33 The drought onset forecasting challenge is due, in part, to limitations in accurately predicting precipitation beyond a two-week period.34 Other factors, such as land cover changes, dam operation, irrigation works, groundwater extraction, and other engineered changes, also confound understanding of hydrologic extremes such as drought. Understanding potential changes in long-term drought trends is important for water managers at all levels—federal, state, local, and tribal. Water project operations and state water allocations typically are based on past long-term hydrological trends; significant deviations from such trends result in challenges for water managers and water users alike.35 In spite of these challenges, NOAA periodically releases monthly and seasonal U.S. drought outlooks. According to the agency, the outlooks are based on temperature and precipitation outlooks, including seasonal and multiyear patterns of precipitation, various short- and mediumrange forecasts and models, and previous U.S. Drought Monitor maps.36 The outlooks depict 33 NIDIS and National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP), Second National Drought Forum, July 30-31, 2019, Washington, DC, December 2020, p. 13, at https://www.drought.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/ SecondNationalDroughtForumReport.pdf. Hereinafter, NIDIS and NDRP, Second National Drought Forum, 2020. 34 NIDIS and NDRP, Second National Drought Forum, 2020, p. 13. 35 P. C. D. Milly et al., February 2008, “Stationarity Is Dead: Whither Water Management?,” Science, vol. 319, no. 5863 (February 2008), p. 574. 36 NOAA National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center, “Discussion for the Monthly Drought Outlook,” at https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/mdo_discussion.php; “Discussion for the Seasonal Congressional Research Service 11 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities areas of the United States where drought is likely to persist, improve, or develop in the next month to several months (Figure 5).37 Figure 5. Examples of U.S. Monthly and Seasonal Drought Outlooks in the United States (February 2023 and February 1, 2023-April 30, 2023, respectively) Source: U.S. Drought Monitor, “Outlooks,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/ConditionsOutlooks/ Outlooks.aspx. Modified by CRS. Federal Drought Policy and Coordination States have primary authority to allocate surface and groundwater, with the federal government generally deferring to state primacy. As a result, states and local entities typically lead efforts to prepare for drought. Most states have drought plans in some form, and some of these plans incorporate efforts to reduce drought vulnerabilities.38 Some states and communities have invested in reducing water demand and expanding drought-resilient supplies (e.g., wastewater reuse and recycling, desalination, and groundwater recharge and management) or have facilitated water banks and markets for water transfers. Community-level drought plans are less widespread than state plans, except in states that require or support this planning. Drought Outlook,” at https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/expert_assessment/sdo_discussion.php; and NOAA, Climate.gov, “Data Snapshot Details: Monthly Drought Outlook,” at https://www.climate.gov/maps-data/datasnapshots/data-source-drought-outlook. 37 In addition, to inform stakeholders of the potential for a flash drought, NOAA had issued an experimental forecast depicting where potential flash drought could develop in the next 30 days. NOAA discontinued the forecast, but expects to release new tools and products as they become available. (NOAA, “NOAA Drought: Science, Observations, and Services,” July 15, 2021, PowerPoint presentation; and NOAA National Weather Service, Climate Prediction Center, “Flash Drought,” at https://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/Drought/Flash_Drought/tendency_forecast.php.) 38 NDMC collects information on state drought plans; for more information on state plans, see NDMC, “State Drought Plans,” at https://drought.unl.edu/Planning/DroughtPlans/StatePlans.aspx. Congressional Research Service 12 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Multiple federal agencies contribute to efforts to predict, plan for, and respond to drought. Federal financial aid to lessen the impacts of drought, after its onset, occurs mostly in the form of financial aid for agricultural production loss. Some federal authorities provide financial assistance for other aspects of drought (e.g., drought-related planning or projects), but these programs are limited in scope and authority. In localities or watersheds with major projects managed by USACE or the Bureau of Reclamation, the federal role in water management is more direct and can be especially controversial during times of drought. Federal agency actions are coordinated under a variety of mechanisms, including multi-agency partnerships such as the National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS), the National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP), and the Drought Relief Interagency Working Group. In 2006, Congress directed the Under Secretary of Commerce for Oceans and Atmosphere, also known as the NOAA Administrator, to create NIDIS (P.L. 109-430). Congress modified the NIDIS authorization in 2014 and 2019 (P.L. 113-86 and P.L. 115-423, respectively). NIDIS is primarily focused on drought-related research and communication and is tasked with the following:       Providing a drought early warning system on a national and regional scale Communicating drought forecasts, conditions, and impacts on an ongoing basis to federal and nonfederal entities Providing “timely” data, information, and products on the local, regional, watershed, and state scales Coordinating and integrating federal research and monitoring in support of the early warning system Using existing forecasting and assessment programs and partnerships Continuing ongoing research and monitoring activities related to drought NIDIS is composed of representatives from federal agencies and nonfederal entities (e.g., nongovernmental organizations and local governments).39 The group collaborates with additional regional and state partners, as well.40 In 2013, President Obama created NDRP as a “complement” to NIDIS.41 NDRP aims to coordinate federal drought policies, facilitate access to drought assistance, and improve information sharing to help with drought preparedness. NDRP has representatives from multiple federal departments and agencies.42 In October 2020, President Trump issued Executive Order 13956, “Modernizing America’s Water Resource Management and Water Infrastructure,” which tasked NDRP with implementing the “Priority Actions Supporting Long-Term Drought Resilience” document, released on July 31, 2019.43 The document set out specific actions (for 39 NIDIS, Drought.gov, “Who We Are,” at https://www.drought.gov/about/who-we-are. 40 NIDIS, Drought.gov, “Partners,” at https://www.drought.gov/about/partners. For more information on NIDIS, contact Eva Lipiec, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy. 41 NOAA, Climate Program Office, “President Signs NIDIS Reauthorization Act,” March 7, 2014, at https://cpo.noaa.gov/News/News-Article/ArtMID/6226/ArticleID/1275/President-signs-NIDIS-Reauthorization-Act. NDRP was “institutionalized” by President Obama in a presidential memorandum in 2016 (Executive Office of the President, “Building National Capabilities for Long-Term Drought Resilience,” 81 Federal Register 16053, March 25, 2016). 42 “Building National Capabilities for Long-Term Drought Resilience,” Section 5, 81 Federal Register 16053, March 25, 2016. 43 Executive Order 13956 directed the Water Subcabinet (composed of the Secretary-level representatives from the Departments of Agriculture, the Army, Commerce, Energy, and the Interior, as well as the U.S. Environmental Congressional Research Service 13 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities which it assigned specific lead agencies) related to accomplishing various policy goals identified in the NDRP charter regarding drought information, preparedness approaches, and technologies. In April 2021, the Biden Administration announced the creation of the Drought Relief Interagency Working Group, which is cochaired by the Department of the Interior (DOI) and USDA, with representatives from multiple federal entities. The group aims to identify immediate financial and technical assistance that may be available for impacted irrigators and tribes, undertake other activities to address drought conditions in the West, and support farmers, tribes, and communities impacted by water shortages.44 Long-term goals include the development of measures to “respond to climate change and build more resilient communities and protect the natural environment,” and a “recommitment to strengthening” NDRP.45 The group released a oneyear summary report in June 2022, which highlighted the agencies’ activities in implementing drought-related provisions of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) and other existing authorities.46 In 2022, Congress established the Interagency Committee on Water Management and Infrastructure to include the Administrators of NOAA and EPA and the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, and the Army, and others, as appropriate. 47 The committee’s purpose is to “ensure” the federal government engages in water-related matters, including water storage and supplies, water infrastructure, and water forecasting, among other topics, where agencies have joint or overlapping responsibilities. Selected Federal Response Authorities Congress has enacted a range of authorities related to drought. Some of these authorities deal with drought-related monitoring and research, including early warning and tracking of various drought metrics and conditions. Other authorities involve response to the onset of drought and its effects (e.g., agriculture-related disaster authorities and emergency drinking water supply assistance). Still others focus on longer-term drought response and mitigation. These authorities can take multiple forms, including federal assistance for local and state drought planning, nonfederal water supply projects that increase drought resilience or provide new water supplies, and construction of new or expanded federal water storage projects and the reoperation of existing projects to yield additional water supplies. In some cases, the federal government, at Congress’s direction, also has provided targeted regulatory relief for drought-stricken areas (e.g., relaxation of environmental requirements on pumping water). Protection Agency) to implement the priority actions identified in the report (Executive Order 13956, “Modernizing America’s Water Resource Management and Water Infrastructure,” 85 Federal Register 65647, October 13, 2020.). 44 Department of the Interior (DOI), “White House Launches Drought Relief Working Group to Address Urgency of Western Water Crisis,” press release, April 21, 2021, at https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/white-house-launchesdrought-relief-working-group-address-urgency-western-water-crisis. Hereinafter, DOI, “Drought Relief Working Group” and White House, “Readout of the Third National Climate Task Force Meeting,” press release, April 21, 2021, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/04/21/readout-of-the-third-national-climatetask-force-meeting/. 45 DOI, “Drought Relief Working Group.” 46 White House Drought Resilience Interagency Working Group, Drought Resilience Interagency Working Group 1Year Summary Report, June 2022, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/ DroughtIWGReport_Final_Embargoed-Until-June-1-at-6AM-ET.pdf. Hereinafter Drought Resilience IWG, 1-Year Summary, 2022. For more about the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, see “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.” 47 Section 13 of the FLOODS Act, P.L. 117-316. Congressional Research Service 14 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities Selected federal drought response authorities regarding monitoring and research, support programs for farmers and ranchers, operations at federal facilities, and nonfederal planning and projects are discussed below. The discussion focuses on agricultural, natural resources, and environmental authorities that directly relate to drought and does not include broader disaster authorities that might be applicable to drought under specific circumstances,48 or available to help mitigate future drought-related damage.49 Monitoring and Research Congress has directed multiple federal agencies to support drought monitoring, forecasting, warning, and related research activities. NIDIS has identified such activities at federal agencies including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Energy, the Department of Transportation, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, NASA, National Science Foundation, USACE, EPA, and multiple agencies in the USDA (e.g., Farm Service Agency, U.S. Forest Service, National Resources Conservation Service [NRCS]), the Department of Commerce (e.g., NOAA, National Institute for Standards and Technology), and the Department of the Interior (e.g., U.S. Geological Survey [USGS], Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, BLM, National Park Service, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service).50 These and other agencies also have roles in research to address drought through nature-based or natural infrastructure features—an area of active scientific and policy interest—among other ways.51 Many of the monitoring and research responsibilities lie with NOAA, USDA, and USGS. NOAA’s drought-related monitoring and research responsibilities fall under several authorities.52 Under these authorities, NOAA supports drought-related observations, data, forecasts, modeling, research, products, and services for use across the agency, as well as by other federal agencies; tribal, state, and local governments; and individuals. NOAA’s observations and data come from several sources, including geostationary and polar-orbiting weather satellites, historical climate 48 For an introduction to these authorities, see CRS Insight IN11696, Climate Change, Slow-Onset Disasters, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, by Diane P. Horn, Erica A. Lee, and Elizabeth M. Webster. 49 FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance programs, such as the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program, can potentially provide funding for mitigation of droughtrelated damage. See CRS Insight IN11515, FEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation: The Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Program, by Diane P. Horn and CRS Insight IN11733, Recent Funding Increases for FEMA Hazard Mitigation Assistance, by Diane P. Horn. Note that FEMA uses the term mitigation rather than adaptation, defining mitigation as “any sustained action to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property from natural hazards and their effects.” 50 NIDIS, Drought.gov, “Partners,” at https://www.drought.gov/about/partners. 51 White House Council on Environmental Quality, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and White House Office of Domestic Climate Policy, Opportunities to Accelerate Nature-Based Solutions: A Roadmap for Climate Progress, Thriving Nature, Equity, and Prosperity, November 2022, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wpcontent/uploads/2022/11/Nature-Based-Solutions-Roadmap.pdf. The report also identified fewer federal resources, such as tools, guidance, and technical assistance, available to stakeholders interested in addressing drought, among other hazards, through nature-based infrastructure (p. 16). See also White House Council on Environmental Quality, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and White House Office of Domestic Climate Policy, NatureBased Solutions Resource Guide: Compendium of Federal Examples, Guidance, Resource Documents, Tools, and Technical Assistance, November 2022, at https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Nature-BasedSolutions-Resource-Guide-2022.pdf. 52 For example, the National Climate Program Act (P.L. 95-367, as amended), Global Change Research Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-606), Weather Service Modernization Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-567), National Integrated Drought Information System Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-430, as amended), and Weather Research and Forecasting Innovation Act of 2017 (P.L. 115-25, as amended). Congressional Research Service 15 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities records and reconstructions, and direct on-the-ground field observations.53 Resulting products and services contribute to global, national, and regional drought-related indexes, the U.S. Drought Monitor, Drought.gov, and large-scale reports (e.g., National Climate Assessment and IPCC reports), among others.54 As discussed above, NOAA’s NIDIS program is the federal government’s primary drought-related research and communication hub and serves as a coordinating mechanism for federal drought-related monitoring and research.55 In 2022, Congress directed NOAA to collect and disseminate data and information regarding certain drought factors through several laws. One law directed NOAA to establish, in partnership with groups such as NIDIS and USGS, a national integrated flood information system with data on streamflow, reservoir release and diversion, precipitation, soil moisture, snow-water equivalent, land cover, and evaporative demand.56 It also instructed the agency to improve precipitation frequency estimates; identify and support research to establish a “consistent federal set of forward-looking, long-term meteorological information that models future extreme weather events,” including drought, for use by other federal and nonfederal entities in their planning efforts; and conduct a gap analysis in the availability of snow-related data, in consultation with USDA, DOI, and USACE.57 Another law directed NOAA to improve maximum precipitation estimates, including through a report conducted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.58 USDA also carries out monitoring and research activities related to drought, in addition to its role of providing direct support. USDA conducts research and collects data related to drought and water supply on topics such as drought-tolerant crop varieties, evapotranspiration modeling, drought-resilient management techniques and practices, and soil moisture capacity and retention. Many of these research projects and programs are collaborative efforts with other federal and state agencies and with universities. For example, USDA’s Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting Program (SSWSF) conducts snow surveys and develops water supply forecasts for western states. USDA’s NRCS administers the program, using over 900 automated data collection sites in NRCS’s Snow Telemetry (SNOTEL) network.59 The data collected at both SSWSF and SNOTEL sites are used to make water supply forecasts. Another USDA monitoring network, the Soil Climate Analysis Network, takes hourly readings of soil moisture content at over 200 stations. USGS also supports a wide range of research and monitoring activities. The agency maintains a network of streamgages across the United States, which provides key information for the development of the weekly U.S. Drought Monitor maps and classifications.60 In the Colorado 53 NOAA, “NOAA Drought: Science, Observations, and Services,” July 15, 2021, PowerPoint presentation. 54 NOAA, “NOAA Drought: Science, Observations, and Services,” July 15, 2021, PowerPoint presentation. 55 For more information on NOAA monitoring and research activities, contact Eva Lipiec, Analyst in Natural Resources Policy. 56 P.L. 117-316, §3. 57 P.L. 117-316, §§12, 15, and 16. 58 15 U.S.C. §§8561 et seq. 59 The Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting Program is authorized under 26 Stat. 653, as amended, and Reorganization Plan No. IV, as a provision of the Reorganization Act of 1939, as amended (54 Stat. 1234). For more information on this program and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS’s) Snow Survey and Water Supply Forecasting,” at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/resources/data-and-reports/snow-survey-and-water-supplyforecasting. 60 See U.S. Drought Monitor, “Drought Classification,” at https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/About/AbouttheData/ DroughtClassification.aspx. For more information about USGS streamgages, see CRS Report R45695, U.S. Geological Congressional Research Service 16 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities River Basin, USGS is also piloting new monitoring tools through its Next Generation Water Observing System and developing machine learning approaches to improve drought prediction.61 Another ongoing effort is the USGS Climate Adaptation Science Center’s effort to synthesize the “state of the science” on transformational drought (i.e., drought events that can permanently and irreversibly alter ecosystems).62 NASA, USGS, and a number of stakeholders launched OpenET that employs several methods to generate monthly and annual satellite-based evapotranspiration estimates at the field scale.63 Multiple federal agencies also work on aspects of drought-related research and monitoring individually as well as together under NIDIS, NDRP, and other partnerships, depending on the issue area. The 2019 NDRP report identified multiple individual agency leads for ongoing and planned data collection and integration actions, among other activities.64 In terms of multi-agency efforts, for example, the 2019 NIDIS Reauthorization Act (P.L. 115-423) directed the NOAA Administrator to develop a strategy for a national coordinated soil moisture monitoring network. The strategy was released in June 2021.65 As part of the strategy, NIDIS, NOAA, USGS, and USDA have supported a joint research effort to develop and share near-real-time soil moisture information.66 USDA Drought Support Programs for Farmers and Ranchers67 Although many factors (e.g., pest infestation, flooding, hail) can pose major production challenges to farmers, drought is the most significant agricultural risk in the United States in terms of production and income loss.68 Due to the complex way in which plants and livestock respond to heat and water availability, the effect of drought on crops and livestock can be highly Survey (USGS) Streamgaging Network: Overview and Issues for Congress, by Anna E. Normand. 61 USGS, “Next Generation Water Observing System: Upper Colorado River Basin,” at https://www.usgs.gov/missionareas/water-resources/science/next-generation-water-observing-system-upper-colorado-river?qtscience_center_objects=0#qt-science_center_objects. USGS, Addressing Stakeholder Science Needs for Integrated Drought Science in the Colorado River Basin, at https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2022/3010/fs20223010.pdf. Personal communication from USACE staff to CRS staff, November 7, 2022. 62 Climate Adaptation Science Centers Project Explorer, “State of the Science Synthesis on Transformational Drought: Understanding Drought’s Potential to Transform Ecosystems Across the Country,” at https://cascprojects.org/#/project/ 4f8c64d2e4b0546c0c397b46/5d40ac2fe4b01d82ce8d9db0. 63 The primary inputs include data from Landsat, Sentinel-2, GOES, and other satellites; weather station networks and models; and field boundary and crop type datasets. The initiative is working toward daily evapotranspiration estimates. For more information, see “OPENET,” at https://openetdata.org/. 64 National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP), Priority Actions Supporting Long-Term Drought Resilience, 2019, at https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ndrp-priority-actions.pdf (hereinafter NDRP, Priority Actions, 2019). 65 See Drought.gov, A Strategy for the National Coordinated Soil Moisture Monitoring Network, June 2021, at https://www.drought.gov/documents/strategy-national-coordinated-soil-moisture-monitoring-network. 66 Drought.gov, “The National Coordinated Soil Moisture Monitoring Network,” at https://www.drought.gov/droughtin-action/national-coordinated-soil-moisture-monitoring-network#goals. 67 For additional information on the USDA disaster assistance programs, see CRS Report RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance, by Megan Stubbs; and CRS Report R42854, Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation, by Megan Stubbs. 68 Steven Wallander, Elizabeth Marshall, and Marcel Aillery, “Farms Employ Strategies to Reduce Risk of Drought Damages,” USDA, Economic Research Service, Amber Waves, June 5, 2017, at https://www.ers.usda.gov/amberwaves/2017/june/farmers-employ-strategies-to-reduce-risk-of-drought-damages/. Hereinafter, Wallander, Marshall, and Aillery, “Drought Damages.” Congressional Research Service 17 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities variable depending on what is being produced, how, and where. For example, dryland farms with shallow soils may experience a significant loss in production during a moderate drought, whereas irrigated production with ample groundwater may experience negative impacts only during an extreme drought.69 Soil structure and soil moisture retention, as well as access to ground or surface water, also can heavily influence the level of agricultural production loss from drought. Congress has authorized support for farmers and ranchers to manage drought risk, pay for losses caused by drought, and incentivize adaptive measures. USDA administers these federal assistance programs, which include direct payments for loss, subsidized insurance, cost-sharing to rehabilitate damaged lands, loans, and financial and technical assistance to implement conservation practices. Most programs have permanent authorization and aim to assist producers recovering from production, financial, and physical loss related to or caused by natural disasters, such as drought. Each program has a different administrative process for producers to request assistance. The loan programs require a disaster declaration or designation for eligibility (discussed further in “Loans,” below).70 The “Other Drought Authorities: Support for Nonfederal Drought Planning and Projects” section below includes discussion of some additional types of USDA programs. Supplemental funding for drought-related agricultural loss is discussed in the “Enacted Supplemental Funding for Drought Activities” section. Direct Payments Some USDA programs provide direct payments to cover production losses above normal mortality. Advance sign-up and fees are not required to participate; however, application deadlines exist following a qualified loss. These programs are permanently authorized and receive mandatory funding amounts of “such sums as necessary.”71 USDA’s Farm Service Agency (FSA) administers the following direct payment programs, for which producers may file applications through local FSA offices.72   Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP). LFP provides payments to eligible livestock producers who suffered a loss of grazing forage for covered livestock due to drought on privately owned or cash-leased pastureland (including cropland planted specifically for grazing).73 A county’s U.S. Drought Monitor intensity level and the drought’s severity and duration trigger payment. LFP payments for drought are equal to 60% of the monthly feed cost for all covered livestock for up to five months, depending on the drought’s severity. For producers who sold livestock because of drought conditions, the payment rate is equal to 80% of the estimated monthly feed cost. Livestock Indemnity Program (LIP). LIP provides payments to eligible livestock owners and contract growers for livestock deaths in excess of normal mortality caused by adverse weather. Drought is only an eligible adverse weather 69 Wallander, Marshall, and Aillery, “Drought Damages.” 70 For additional information on the USDA disaster assistance programs, see CRS Report RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance, by Megan Stubbs; and CRS Report R42854, Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation, by Megan Stubbs. 71 The four direct-payment programs are authorized under Section 1501 of the Agricultural Act of 2014, as amended (P.L. 113-79; 7 U.S.C. §9081). For additional information on the four programs, see CRS Report RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance, by Megan Stubbs. 72 To find a local Farm Service Agency (FSA) office, see https://offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app. 73 Fire is also an eligible cause of loss on rangeland managed by a federal agency. Congressional Research Service 18 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities event when associated with anthrax, a disease that may occur because of drought and directly results in the death of eligible livestock.74   Emergency Assistance for Livestock, Honey Bees, and Farm-Raised Fish Program (ELAP). ELAP provides payments to producers of livestock, honeybees, and farm-raised fish as compensation for losses due to disease, adverse weather, feed or water shortages, or other conditions not covered under LIP or LFP. ELAP may cover the cost of transporting water and feed but not the cost of water and feed. ELAP also may cover the cost of hauling livestock to forage or other grazing acres during periods of drought. Tree Assistance Program (TAP). TAP makes payments to qualifying orchardists and nursery tree growers to replant or rehabilitate trees, bushes, and vines damaged by natural disasters, including excessive wind and qualifying drought. Insurance programs generally cover losses in crop production (see “Insurance,” below). U.S. Drought Monitor and USDA Programs The U.S. Drought Monitor is a map that identifies areas of drought and drought intensity using four levels of drought intensity (see “Drought Classification”). Congressional interest in the U.S. Drought Monitor has grown in recent years, as additional U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) program benefits have become tied to its drought classifications. Below are examples of how both Congress and USDA have increasingly relied on the U.S. Drought Monitor as a mechanism for triggering drought assistance in USDA programs.  Beginning in 2003, USDA used the U.S. Drought Monitor to determine state and county eligibility to distribute nonfat dry milk surplus stocks for livestock feed in areas experiencing extreme or exceptional drought (D3 or D4 classifications).  In the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 (2008 farm bill; P.L. 110-246), Congress required that specific drought intensity classifications published in the U.S. Drought Monitor be used as triggers for payments under the Livestock Forage Disaster Program (LFP). Subsequent reauthorizations of LFP have retained this funding mechanism and reliance on the U.S. Drought Monitor.  In 2012, USDA amended the secretarial disaster designation process used to trigger emergency farm loans (see “Loans”) by creating an expedited process—referred to as a fast-track designation—for severe drought situations. This fast-track process is based on drought intensity levels from the U.S. Drought Monitor. The process has allowed USDA to issue secretarial disaster designations quickly during periods of severe drought (D2 or higher), expediting access to aid and reducing reporting requirements at the Farm Service Agency (FSA) office level.  The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (2018 farm bill; P.L. 115-334) amended the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP; see “Conservation”) to allow emergency haying and grazing on selected CRP acres when a county is experiencing drought classified as severe (D2) or greater.  In the FY2020 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 116-94), Congress repurposed funding for the Wildfires and Hurricanes Indemnity Program to cover losses related to drought, among other loss types. Drought-related losses must have occurred in counties with a D3 (extreme) or D4 (exceptional) classification in calendar years 2018 and 2019.  The Extending Government Funding and Delivering Emergency Assistance Act (P.L. 117-43, Division B) included $10 billion for agricultural producers impacted by natural disasters, including drought. Congress required that drought-related losses must have occurred in counties with a D2 classification for eight consecutive weeks, or D3 or higher classification in calendar years 2020 and 2021. The same requirement was added to $3.74 billion appropriated in the Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2023 (passed 74 Anthrax is caused by Bacillus anthracis, a spore-forming bacterium that can survive in the soil for decades. Hoofed animals (e.g., cattle, goats, sheep) are the main animals affected by this disease. Outbreaks usually occur after periods of drought followed by heavy rains. Spores can become concentrated on the soil surface and on vegetation, where foraging animals can become exposed to the disease. For additional information, see American Veterinary Medical Association, “Anthrax Facts,” December 4, 2001, at https://www.avma.org/anthrax-facts. Congressional Research Service 19 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities as Division N of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328) for drought-related losses occurring in calendar year 2022. Sources: USDA, FSA, “Sale of Surplus Non-fat Dry Milk,” fact sheet, April 2003, at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/ Internet/FSA_File/nfdm03.pdf; USDA, FSA, “Disaster Designation Process,” 77 Federal Register 41248, July 13, 2012; and CRS In Focus IF11539, Wildfires and Hurricanes Indemnity Program (WHIP), by Megan Stubbs. Insurance USDA administers two insurance programs that offer subsidized or federally supported insurance coverage for yield, revenue, or other financial losses associated with production of eligible crops and livestock. Coverage is available for adverse weather conditions, including natural disasters, and, in some cases, market declines. Most policies consider drought and related conditions, such as extreme heat and irrigation water supply failure, eligible causes of losses. Coverage is available for catastrophic losses—losses in excess of 50% of normal yield. Higher coverage levels may be purchased for less severe losses (referred to as buy-up coverage).75 Policies must be purchased prior to a disaster event, and producers must purchase or renew coverage on an annual basis. These programs are permanently authorized and have mandatory funding authority.   Federal Crop Insurance Program (FCIP). FCIP offers farmers the opportunity to purchase insurance coverage against financial losses caused by various perils, including certain adverse growing and market conditions.76 Crop insurance is available for most major crops, many specialty crops (e.g., fruit, tree nut, vegetable, and nursery crops), forage and pastureland for livestock producers, and revenues from dairy and livestock production. USDA’s Risk Management Agency administers the program, and approved private insurance companies sell and service federal crop insurance policies. Producers must contact their crop insurance agents to file a claim following a loss.77 Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP). NAP provides coverage for crops and in locations where FCIP insurance is unavailable.78 NAP applicants must pay an administrative fee at the time of application, plus any additional cost for buy-up coverage. FSA administers NAP, and producers must notify their local FSA office following a loss. Cost-Share Assistance Some USDA programs pay a percentage of the cost to reinstall conservation infrastructure or rehabilitate damaged land. Advance sign-up generally is not required. However, the programs will not pay for impairments existing before the disaster event. FSA administers the following cost75 Buy-up coverage is available in increments of 5% through the Federal Crop Insurance Program (FCIP) to cover between 50% and 85% of a crop and through the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) to cover between 50% and 65% of a crop. For example, a NAP policy with buy-up coverage of 60% would insure losses greater than 40% of the expected yield and provide no coverage for losses amounting to less than 40% of expected yield. 76 FCIP is authorized by the Federal Crop Insurance Act, as amended (P.L. 96-365; 7 U.S.C. §§1501 et seq.). For more information on FCIP, contact Stephanie Rosch, Analyst in Agriculture Policy, or see CRS Report R46686, Federal Crop Insurance: A Primer, by Stephanie Rosch. 77 To locate an approved insurance provider, visit https://prodwebnlb.rma.usda.gov/apps/AgentLocator/#/. 78 NAP is authorized under Section 196 of the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996, as amended (P.L. 104-127; 7 U.S.C. §7333). For additional information on NAP, see CRS Report RS21212, Agricultural Disaster Assistance, by Megan Stubbs. Congressional Research Service 20 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities share programs, for which producers may file applications through local FSA offices. These programs are permanently authorized but subject to appropriations.79   Emergency Conservation Program (ECP). ECP assists landowners in restoring land used in agricultural production damaged by a natural disaster and in implementing emergency water-conservation measures in severe drought periods. Eligible activities may include providing emergency water for livestock and existing permanently installed irrigation systems for orchards and vineyards. Emergency Forest Restoration Program (EFRP). EFRP provides cost-share assistance to private forestland owners to repair and rehabilitate damage caused by natural disasters, including drought, on nonindustrial private forestland. Eligible practices may include removing debris and replanting to restore forestrelated damage from drought. Loans USDA can provide low-interest loans to help producers recover from production or physical losses due to drought and other natural disasters, or it can provide temporary loan relief for existing FSA farm loans. These loan options are triggered when a county is designated as a disaster area under a presidential major disaster declaration, a presidential emergency declaration pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act; 42 U.S.C. §§5121 et seq.), or a USDA secretarial disaster designation. Although Stafford Act declarations related to drought are uncommon, USDA issues a secretarial disaster designation quickly during periods of severe drought under a fast-track process in accordance with U.S. Drought Monitor intensity (see text box on “U.S. Drought Monitor and USDA Programs,” above). FSA administers the loan programs, and local FSA offices accept applications. USDA loan programs are subject to appropriations.80   Emergency Farm Loans. Loans may help producers recover from production and physical losses.81 A qualified applicant can borrow up to 100% of actual production (e.g., loss of a crop) or physical losses (e.g., repairing or replacing damaged or destroyed structures or replanting permanent crops, such as orchards). Loan totals may not exceed $500,000. A producer must operate in a county declared eligible or in a contiguous county and must meet the loan requirements. Disaster Set-Aside. A producer with an existing FSA farm ownership or operating loan located in a designated disaster area or contiguous county may apply to set aside one payment to allow the operation to continue.82 The payment 79 The cost-share assistance programs are authorized under Title IV of the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 (P.L. 95- 334; 16 U.S.C. §§2201-2206). For additional information on the programs, see CRS Report R42854, Emergency Assistance for Agricultural Land Rehabilitation, by Megan Stubbs. 80 For more information on USDA loan programs, see CRS Report R46768, Agricultural Credit: Institutions and Issues, by Jim Monke. 81 Emergency farm loans are authorized under Title III of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. §§1961 et seq.) For more information, see USDA, FSA, “Emergency Farm Loans,” at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-and-services/farm-loan-programs/emergency-farm-loans/index. 82 The Disaster Set-Aside Program is authorized under Section 331A of the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. §1981a). For more information see, USDA, FSA, “Disaster Set-Aside Program,” fact sheet, August 2019, at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA-Public/usdafiles/FactSheets/2019/disaster-set-asideprogram-factsheet-19.pdf. Congressional Research Service 21 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities set-aside is not forgiven and must be repaid prior to final maturity of the note. Any principal set-aside continues to accrue interest until repaid. Conservation Certain USDA conservation programs that are not emergency programs may provide assistance during drought periods to help alleviate drought’s impacts on agricultural production.83 In many cases, this assistance comes through the use of waivers and flexibility provided to the Secretary of Agriculture. Other assistance is offered through adaptive measures that reduce drought risk through various management decisions and practices, which are not discussed in detail in this report.84   Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). CRP uses mandatory funding to provide annual payments to agricultural producers to take highly erodible and environmentally sensitive land out of production and install resource-conserving practices for 10 or more years.85 Haying and grazing may occur on CRP acres under emergency and certain nonemergency conditions. Emergency haying and grazing of CRP acres is generally authorized during periods of severe drought (D2 or higher, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor) or similar natural disaster (e.g., wildfire).86 Outside of the primary nesting season, up to 90 days of grazing or one cutting of hay is allowed.87 During the primary nesting season, emergency grazing is allowed in approved counties, but at half the normal carrying capacity and only if LFP payments also have been triggered for the county. Emergency haying is not allowed on CRP acres during the primary nesting season. Not all CRP practices are eligible for haying and grazing; a request must be filed with the local FSA office before any activity begins. Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). EQIP is a voluntary program that uses mandatory funding to provide financial and technical assistance to agricultural producers to address natural resource concerns on agricultural and forestland.88 In the past, USDA has announced special EQIP 83 For additional information on USDA conservation programs generally, see CRS Report R40763, Agricultural Conservation: A Guide to Programs, by Megan Stubbs. 84 Examples of adaptive measures include soil health practices—such as no till or reduced tillage, cover crop adoption, and conservation crop rotations—that can increase soil organic matter over time and reduce soil moisture loss. Adoption of irrigation efficiency practices—such as variable-rate irrigation, flow meters, land leveling, and soil moisture sensors—generally reduces evaporation and runoff loss but also may impact ground water infiltration and downstream water availability. 85 The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is authorized under Title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985, as amended (P.L. 99-198; 16 U.S.C. §§3831-3835). For additional information on CRP emergency haying and grazing, see USDA, FSA, “CRP Haying and Grazing: Emergency and Non-Emergency Use,” fact sheet, May 2021, at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA-Public/usdafiles/FactSheets/crp_haying_grazing_factsheet.pdf. 86 Emergency haying and grazing status is reviewed every Thursday using the U.S. Drought Monitor. Approved counties are listed on the FSA “Emergency Haying and Grazing” website, at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs-andservices/conservation-programs/conservation-reserve-program/emergency-haying-and-grazing/index. 87 The primary nesting season is established in each state as the nesting season for birds in the local area that are economically significant, in significant decline, or conserved in accordance with federal or state law (7 C.F.R. §1410.2). For a list of primary nesting dates and durations, see USDA, FSA, “Primary Nesting Season Dates and Duration,” June 16, 2020, at https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA-FSA-Public/usdafiles/Conservation/PDF/ Primary%20Nesting%20Season_June_16_2020.pdf. 88 The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) is authorized under Title XII of the Food Security Act of 1985, as amended (P.L. 99-198; 16 U.S.C. §§3839aa-3839aa-7). For additional information on EQIP, see USDA, Congressional Research Service 22 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities sign-ups for farmers and ranchers in hurricane-, flood-, or drought-affected areas. EQIP also may be used to proactively mitigate potential damage from natural disasters through conservation practices (e.g., residue management to improve the soil’s capacity to be more drought resilient). NRCS administers EQIP, and applications may be filed at any local NRCS office. NOAA Drought Support Programs Congress has furnished the Secretary of Commerce, through NOAA, with the authority to provide disaster assistance to the fishing industry when fish populations decline or other disruptions cause economic loss.89 Once a review is initiated and necessary information is obtained and reviewed, the Secretary determines whether a fishery failure or fishery disaster has occurred. In most cases, Congress has appropriated funds to support the fishing industry following the Secretary’s determination. NMFS, states, regional commissions, and industry representatives often work together to plan how to distribute assistance to the fishing industry and allocate assistance among potential projects. The Secretary has declared fishery disasters related to drought in several cases, most recently for Florida oysters in 2012.90 In 2022, Congress amended the Secretary’s authority, explicitly listing drought, among other phenomena, as a natural cause that may be considered under a fishery disaster determination.91 Drought and Federal Facilities and Projects92 The federal government owns and operates thousands of dams and other infrastructure that supports water supplies. These facilities’ operations, particularly the water stored in reservoirs at federal dams, can both assist in meeting water supply needs during droughts and be vulnerable to droughts. Federal dams, particularly in the West, were constructed in part to provide multiyear storage to help with variations in seasonal and annual precipitation. The majority of large-scale federal water resource projects are owned and managed by the two principal federal water resource agencies: Reclamation and USACE. The discussion herein focuses on the federal dams that form storage reservoirs operated by these two federal agencies. Figure 6 shows the Reclamation and USACE reservoirs with capacities greater than 25,000 acrefeet (AF) that have water supply or irrigation among their operational purposes.93 Federal reservoirs are distributed across the conterminous United States; in some watersheds and states, NRCS, “Environmental Quality Incentives Program,” at https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/national/ programs/financial/eqip/. 89 Prior to 2022, Congress provided multiple authorities to the Secretary of Commerce to respond to fishery disasters. For more information about these provisions, see CRS Report RL34209, Fishery Disaster Assistance, by Anthony R. Marshak. Congress amended or repealed these authorities in the Fishery Resource Disasters Improvement Act, Division S, Title II of P.L. 117-328. 90 NOAA, “Fishery Disaster Determinations,” at https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/funding-and-financialservices/fishery-disaster-determinations. 91 Fishery Resource Disasters Improvement Act, Division S, Title II of P.L. 117-328. 92 For more information on the Bureau of Reclamation, contact Charles V. Stern, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy. For more information on USACE, contact Nicole T. Carter, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy. For more information on the Endangered Species Act, contact Pervaze A. Sheikh, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy. 93 An acre-foot of water is equal to the volume of a sheet of water 1 acre in area and 1 foot in depth, equivalent to 43,560 cubic feet of water. Congressional Research Service 23 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities particularly in the West, federal reservoirs and related infrastructure are prevalent and play a significant role in storing and delivering water supplies. Reclamation is a central player in water resource management in the West. It maintains 491 dams and other water supply infrastructure in the 17 arid and semi-arid western states (known as reclamation states), as defined in statute.94 Reclamation’s facilities serve over 31 million people in the West and deliver a total of nearly 30 million AF of water annually. During droughts, these facilities face operational challenges and particular scrutiny, in part due to conflicting priorities among users of the water that Reclamation facilities supply. Figure 6. Selected Bureau of Reclamation and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dams with Water Supply and/or Irrigation Purposes (dams with storage capacities greater than 25,000 acre-feet) Source: CRS, using data from the National Inventory of Dams (NID) and U.S. Geological Survey watershed boundaries, data accessed in August 2021. Notes: AF = Acre-feet (1 AF of water is equal to the volume of a sheet of water 1 acre in area and 1 foot in depth, equivalent to 43,560 cubic feet of water); USACE = U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Reclamation = U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. As discussed in the report, municipal and industrial water supply and irrigation water storage generally are not primary purposes of USACE projects and instead are associated with multipurpose 94 An 1890-1896 drought coincided with a period in U.S. history of federal encouragement of large-scale efforts to irrigate the relatively arid western states. At that time, Congress debated a larger federal role in western states’ irrigation. This debate led to the Reclamation Act of 1902, which was enacted largely to “reclaim the arid West.” The federal government constructed hundreds of dams, reservoirs, and related facilities to provide water to local farmers to reclaim the arid West through irrigation of arid lands. Today, Reclamation is responsible for managing and developing many of the large federal dams and water diversion structures in the 17 coterminous states west of the Mississippi River (referred to as reclamation states): Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. For more information, see CRS Report R46303, Bureau of Reclamation: History, Authorities, and Issues for Congress, by Charles V. Stern and Anna E. Normand. Congressional Research Service 24 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities USACE projects. This figure refers to Reclamation and USACE as the dam owners for consistency with NID classifications, although Reclamation and USACE dams are ultimately owned by the federal government. In contrast, USACE facilities operate throughout the United States and typically have not focused on water supply storage as a principal project purpose; instead, water supply storage is often a secondary purpose of multipurpose USACE facilities. The role of USACE in water storage nonetheless can be regionally or locally significant. USACE has agreements to provide municipal and industrial water supply storage totaling 10.2 million AF at 132 projects, benefitting hundreds of communities.95 In addition, 15 USACE projects have an estimated 0.4 million AF of authorized M&I water storage not yet allocated under an agreement.96 Sustained hydrological drought has other operational effects on USACE-managed reservoirs, dams, locks, hydroelectric facilities, and other components of the nation’s water infrastructure. For example, numerous USACE reservoirs have drought management plans that result in the curtailing of some benefits (e.g., navigation, hydropower) to maintain other benefits (e.g., instream flows to support water quality, aquatic species, and river withdrawals for electric power cooling and municipal and industrial water supplies). Federal facilities’ ability to deliver water supplies can be curtailed by low inflow and storage conditions accompanying droughts. In the past, Congress has conducted oversight of federal facilities’ ongoing operations and has been active in several other areas related to federal reservoirs and drought, including the following activities discussed in more detail below:     Providing authorities and funding to expand western water storage Enacting authorities related to updating operating plans for reservoirs during drought Supporting developments in the area of forecast-informed reservoir operations (FIRO) and other efforts to enhance the data used to inform operations decisions Allowing for regulatory relief, in some instances, for federal water resource project operations during drought Expanding Western Water Storage Reclamation Some long-term federal drought response authorities support the construction of new or expanded water storage projects in drought-prone areas. In 2015, Congress created a new authority for Reclamation to build water storage: Section 4007 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322). The authority provided federal support for the construction of new and augmented surface and groundwater storage projects in the 17 reclamation states. Funding for water storage projects under Section 4007 is available for two primary project types. This section allows that federally owned storage projects (surface water or groundwater storage projects to which the United States holds title and which were authorized to be constructed pursuant to reclamation law and regulations) may receive up to 50% of project costs as federal funding (project sponsors must fund the remainder of costs). State-led storage projects (surface 95 Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), Memorandum, “Army Civil Works Supporting Drought Resilience in America’s Communities,” July 28, 2022. Hereinafter referred to as Assistant Secretary of the Army July 2022 Drought Memorandum. 96 Ibid. Congressional Research Service 25 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities water or groundwater storage projects constructed, operated, and maintained by states or political subdivisions) may receive up to 25% of their costs as federal funding. Prior to the WIIN Act, Congress had not authorized Reclamation to fund state-led water storage projects. Before the federal government can spend or contribute funding for the construction of new water projects under this authority, several criteria must be met:  The Secretary of the Interior must find that the project is feasible and provides benefits proportionate to the federal government’s cost share, and project sponsors must agree to pay their portions of project costs up front.  The Secretary of the Interior must transmit a list of recommended projects and funding levels to Congress, and Congress must designate those projects by name in an enacted appropriations act. The WIIN Act set a deadline of January 1, 2021, for projects to be found feasible by Reclamation and be eligible to receive additional construction funding. Congress approved Reclamation study funding prior to that date for 13 projects in three states (California, Idaho, and Washington). Eight of these projects were found feasible prior to the deadline and thus are eligible for ongoing funding.97 In Section 40902 of the IIJA, Congress built on the WIIN Act water storage authority and authorized a total of $1.15 billion for western water storage projects over five years (FY2022FY2026). The authority approved additional funding for WIIN Act projects and projects meeting other criteria specified in the IIJA, as well as a new grant program for small water storage projects impounding less than 30,000 acre-feet of water.98 USACE Water supply storage typically is not a principal project purpose of USACE-constructed facilities in the United States. In December 2020, Congress authorized USACE to carry out certain water storage projects,99 including for water supply and water conservation. The authority allowed USACE to undertake construction of (1) new water storage projects with capacities between 2,000 AF and 30,000 AF or (2) enlargements between 1,000 AF and 30,000 AF of existing storage; the authority established cost-sharing requirements based on the purpose of storage. This authority has not been funded, and USACE has not released implementation guidance for how the agency would act on this authority if funded. In the same 2020 legislation, Congress directed USACE to provide the congressional authorizing committees with a report that analyzes the benefits and consequences of including water supply and water conservation as a primary mission of USACE in carrying out water resources development projects.100 Congress, in Section 8106 of Water Resources Development Act of 2022 (WRDA 2022, enacted as Division H, Title LXXXI of P.L. 117-263), provided USACE with additional authorities to study water supply and water conservation activities as part of its feasibility studies for new or modified water resources projects. Section 8108 of WRDA 2022 authorized the Secretary of the Army to conduct a national 97 For more information, see CRS In Focus IF10626, Reclamation Water Storage Projects: Section 4007 of the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act, by Charles V. Stern. 98 Congress also appropriated this funding in the bill (see below section, “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act”). For additional information on these authorities, see CRS Report R47032, Bureau of Reclamation Provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58), by Charles V. Stern and Anna E. Normand. 99 Section 155 of WRDA 2020 (Division AA of P.L. 116-260). The provision limits federal project costs to $65 million and specifies that municipal and industrial costs are 100% nonfederal and agricultural water supply cost is 35% nonfederal. 100 WRDA 2020, Section 221. Congressional Research Service 26 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities assessment of using managed aquifer recharge projects at authorized water resource development projects to address drought, reduce aquifer depletion and enhance water resilience, and to assess and identify opportunities to support nonfederal interests in carrying out managed recharge projects; it further directed the establishment of a USACE-nonfederal aquifer recharge working group. Section 8108 also authorized USACE to perform up to 10 feasibility studies (at 90% federal cost and 10% nonfederal cost) on managed aquifer recharge projects in drought-prone or water-scarce areas. Actions on these USACE authorities are subject to the availability of appropriations. Drought Operations Manuals and Planning Reclamation Reclamation projects typically are governed by operating plans.101 Reclamation also has authority to enter into drought contingency plans—guidance on how the project is to be operated during droughts; in Section 202 of the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (P.L. 102-250), Congress authorized Reclamation to prepare or participate in the preparation of cooperative drought contingency plans, for the prevention or mitigation of adverse effects of drought conditions.102 There is no requirement for Reclamation to formally revise its operating plans with drought contingency plans (DCPs). In practice, Reclamation generally has supported contingency plans developed by nonfederal interests through its Drought Response Program. Most Reclamation contracts with water users include provisions that allow Reclamation to restrict deliveries due to water shortages and other drought-related factors, which allows for some level of operational flexibility during drought.103 In part to facilitate Reclamation’s ability to adapt its operations to changes in water supplies and demand, in 2009 Congress enacted Section 9503(c) of the SECURE Water Act (P.L. 111-11). This directed Reclamation to identify and assess potential water-related risks of climate change in major reclamation river basins and to report on these efforts at five-year intervals.104 Reclamation published reports pursuant to the SECURE Water Act in 2011, 2016, and 2021.105 These reports, coupled with complementary reporting in the form of West-wide climate and hydrology assessments and individual river basin reports, highlight Reclamation’s analysis of and expectations for altered water supply and demand at a variety of geographical levels. The SECURE Water Act also authorized Reclamation to undertake actions to address climate change risks. The act authorized Reclamation to use specific strategies for this purpose, including ones related to (1) modifying reservoir storage or operating guidelines; (2) developing new water management, operating, or habitat restoration plans; (3) water conservation; (4) improved hydrologic models and other decision support systems; and (5) groundwater and surface water storage needs.106 One way Reclamation has used these authorities is by conducting a number of reservoir operations pilot studies at specific locations in the 17 reclamation states; these studies 101 In accordance with Section 7 of the Flood Control Act of 1944 (33 U.S.C. §709), USACE has formal responsibility for preparing water control manuals for reclamation projects with storage space allocated for flood control purposes. 102 43 U.S.C. §2222. 103 See Bureau of Reclamation, “Water-Related Contracts and Charges – General Principles and Requirements,” Reclamation Manual PEC P05, July 24, 2013, at https://www.usbr.gov/recman/pec/pec-p05.pdf. 104 42 U.S.C. §10363. 105 For more information and individual reports, see https://www.usbr.gov/climate/secure/2021secure.html. 106 42 U.S.C. §10363. Congressional Research Service 27 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities seek to identify operational improvements to respond to variable water supplies, including droughts. Beginning in 2015, Reclamation conducted five pilot studies.107 In June 2021, Reclamation announced another six pilot studies in five western states.108 Initial studies employed a variety of approaches, including the increased use of pre-historic hydrology, advanced monitoring, and forecast-informed operations, among others (for more information on forecastinformed operations, see “Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations” below). USACE USACE maintains water-control manuals that detail how reservoirs are to be operated given their congressionally authorized purposes. Since the late 1970s, USACE regulations have required USACE projects that maintain controlled reservoir storage to have a DCP. The DCP informs water management decisions and responses to drought-related water shortages in a basin. Because of uncertainties such as when a drought will end, DCPs generally specify a minimum suite of actions related to water control and allow for additional actions as the specific situation warrants (e.g., approval of deviations from operating plans).109 In 2015, after an internal assessment of the state of USACE drought contingency planning and an effort to develop methods to update DCPs to account for a changing climate, USACE released a report titled USACE Drought Contingency Planning in the Context of Climate Change.110 The report reviewed the 142 existing DCPs for USACE projects, the majority of which were developed prior to 1993, and noted that “none of the DCPs reviewed include information about drought projections under future climate change. Consequently, it is unlikely that these reports provide an adequate guide for preparing for future droughts that may be longer and more intense than recognized by these DCPs.” In 2018, USACE updated the 1981 regulation that guided the development and updating of DCPs.111 The 1981 regulation used the standard engineering practice of preparing DCPs based on observed periods of record for temperature, precipitation, and drought. The 2018 regulation identified actions that “at a minimum” its planners and engineers should undertake to incorporate climate change considerations into DCP development, including the consideration of regional variables. Congress has provided USACE with authorities related to reservoir management for drought and water conservation activities in the last decade.112 According to USACE, limited to no action had 107 For more information, see Reclamation, “Reservoir Operations Pilots,” at https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/pilots/ index.html. 108 For more information, see Reclamation, “FY2021 Reservoir Operations Pilots—Round 1 Selections,” at https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/pilots/docs/FY21-ResOps-R1ProjectDescriptions.pdf. 109 A deviation is the operation of a USACE project in a manner other than specified in the approved water control manual or its associated drought contingency plan (DCP). A detailed assessment is required prior to the execution of a deviation. Since 2015, USACE has maintained a drought portal for its staff, which has expanded to include a collection of DCPs, more than 300 approved deviations, and other drought-relevant materials. Due to portal access limitations, CRS was unable to assess the location or frequency of drought-related deviations for different USACE projects or for specific watersheds. 110 USACE, USACE Drought Contingency Planning in the Context of Climate Change, CWTS Report 15-15, September 2015, at https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p266001coll1/id/6727. The report team identified and assessed 142 DCPs covering 301 projects. 111 USACE, Drought Contingency Plans, ER 1110-2-1941, February 2, 2018. 112 These authorities include provisions in the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (WRRDA 2014; P.L. 113-121) and the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322). In WRRDA 2014, Section 1045, Congress authorized a USACE assessment of the effects of drought conditions on lakes managed Congressional Research Service 28 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities occurred by 2021 under these authorities due to a lack of funding or interest from nonfederal partners.113 One exception is activity under the authority of Section 1116 of the WIIN Act, which authorized USACE to study and perform water conservation measures at USACE reservoirs in certain states that had declared droughts. USACE used this authority to evaluate and approve conservation measures at Prado Dam, Riverside County, CA, for the purpose of downstream nonfederal groundwater recharge efforts.114 Section 8107 of WRDA 2022 further expanded this authority. Separately, Section 8208 of WRDA 2022 directed the Secretary of the Army to conduct a study of the effectiveness of carrying out additional measures at USACE reservoirs in the South Pacific Division to increase water supply and mitigate drought and flood, among other purposes.115 WRDA 2022 also addressed western states’ concerns related to how USACE reservoirs operate vis-à-vis state water rights. In contrast to Reclamation facilities that often have state water rights associated with them, USACE typically does not have water rights associated with its reservoirs. WRDA 2022 directed the Secretary of the Army to establish a Western Water Cooperative Committee to work on identifying opportunities to avoid or minimize conflicts between USACE flood control projects and water rights and water laws in western states. Actions on these WRDA 2022 and other USACE authorities are subject to appropriations. Water supplies for communities and agriculture receive much attention during droughts, but USACE also makes drought-related adjustments to meet its navigation mission at times. For example, in 2012 and in 2022, USACE maintained navigation on the Mississippi River and its tributaries (albeit in a narrower and shallower channel than is available in a normal water year) using a combination of measures: dredging of critical areas, removal of rock pinnacles, and releases of reservoir water within authorized purposes. Forecast-Informed Reservoir Operations Federal dam operators have often used runoff measurements and other observations (e.g., snowpack or soil moisture) to estimate inflow and inform decisions related to storing or releasing water. In some cases, operators are considering also using forecasts to inform inflow estimates. Advancements in weather forecasting, in particular in detecting and forecasting atmospheric rivers,116 have increased decisionmakers’ interest in identifying opportunities to use forecasts for by the Secretary of the Army that are affected by Federal Energy Regulatory Commission-licensed reservoirs. In Section 1046, Congress authorized a USACE assessment of the management practices, priorities, and authorized purposes at USACE reservoirs in arid regions to determine the effects on water supply of periods of drought, among other things. In WIIN Section 1117, Congress authorized USACE, at the request of a governor, to prioritize updating the water control manuals for USACE operated and maintained water control structures in certain states with declared droughts and to incorporate into the updates seasonal operations for water conservation and water supply. Section 8107 of WRDA 2022 also authorized updating of water control manuals for states with a statewide disaster declaration in 2021. 113 Personal communication from USACE staff to CRS staff, July 8, 2021. 114 Personal communication from USACE staff to CRS staff, July 8, 2021. According to the Assistant Secretary of the Army, the Prado Dam FIRO pilot found “that an average of 7000 acre-feet (af) per year of stormwater could be released in a modified manner to allow the Orange County Water District to use the water in its groundwater recharge system and provide additional supply for its customers.” (Assistant Secretary of the Army July 2022 Drought Memorandum.) 115 For a map of the South Pacific Division, see USACE, “Around the South Pacific Division,” at https://www.spd.usace.army.mil/. The division covers the Southwest states of Arizona, California, and New Mexico; most of Colorado, Nevada, and Utah; and portions of Texas, Idaho, Oregon, and Wyoming. 116 Atmospheric rivers are a flowing corridor of concentrated water vapor in the atmosphere that can contribute to significant rainfall or snow upon landfall. According to NOAA, atmospheric rivers on average contribute between 30% and 50% of annual precipitation on the along the West Coast of the continental United States. For more information, Congressional Research Service 29 Drought in the United States: Science, Policy, and Selected Federal Authorities more dynamic dam operations, and in improving precipitation forecasts beyond two-weeks.117 That is, operations would shift from rules that use a single estimate of runoff to rules for making operational decisions based on ensembles of runoff (or streamflow) forecasts and statistical techniques to simulate conditions and operations. This reservoir management approach, referred to as forecast-informed reservoir operations (FIRO), uses data from watershed monitoring and from weather and water forecasting to inform water management decisions to retain or release water from reservoirs. A July 2022 memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works states “FIRO and related initiatives are among the most cost-effective ways to increase water availability in drought-impacted regions. In some cases, water availability may be significantly increased on an annual basis for less than 5% of the cost of new infrastructure investments on a dollar per [acre foot] basis.”118 Researchers and agencies have applied early FIRO efforts to reservoirs in California, a state that is not only pursuing additional water supplies due to being drought-prone but also receives a significant portion of its annual precipitation from atmospheric rivers. An atmospheric river (AR) consists of a long band of water vapor moving through the atmosphere, typically resulting in heavy precipitation over land (Figure 7).119 Reservoir managers are trying to store water supplies to meet demands during dry periods while considering the consequences for how quickly reservoir storage space can be made available to capture floodwaters during wet periods. Managers using FIRO are making these operational decisions based in part on forecasts, rather than following fixed operational rules for how to operate reservoirs during different seasons. see NOAA, “What Are Atmospheric Rivers?,” at https://www.noaa.gov/stories/what-are-atmospheric-rivers. 117 In addition to expressing interest in using forecasts, Congress has supported the expansion of the collection a [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/crs%3AR46911. Public record. Not legal advice.