[Senate Hearing 108-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES
[Clerk's Note.--At the direction of the subcommittee
chairman, the following statements received by the subcommittee
are made part of the hearing record on the Fiscal Year 2005
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act.]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL
Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers
Prepared Statement of the City of Los Angeles Board of Harbor
Commissioners and Port of Los Angeles
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to submit testimony in support of the Channel Deepening
Project at the Port of Los Angeles, the largest container seaport in
the United States. Our testimony speaks in support of an fiscal year
2005 appropriation of $35 million for the Federal share of continued
construction of the Channel Deepening Project at the Port of Los
Angeles. This critical Federal navigation improvement project underpins
the United States' decisive role in international trade. Consistent
with the goals and priorities of the administration and Congress, the
Channel Deepening Project will provide immediate and significant
economic return to the Nation, fulfill the commitment to environmental
stewardship, and foster positive international relations. We
respectfully request the subcommittee to fully fund our fiscal year
2005 appropriation request of $35 million.
The Corps of Engineers recently revised the cost of the Channel
Deepening Project, and the Federal share, to account for credits for
in-kind services provided by the Port and other project modifications.
The Corps issued these credits before the Port and Corps' execution of
the Project Cooperation Agreement. The modifications include
adjustments to the disposal costs for dredged material, adjustments for
construction contract changes, and project administration costs. The
Corps' revised cost is now $222,000,000, representing a Federal share
of $72,000,000 and a local share of $150,000,000. Furthermore, in
fiscal year 2003, we experienced a funding shortfall challenging the
Port to meet construction contract earnings. As such, under authority
provided by Section 11 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1929, the Port
of Los Angeles advanced more than $13,000,000 to the Corps of Engineers
to cover the shortfall, and avoid costly construction shutdown or debt
service due to interest accruals. Similarly, fiscal year 2004 funding
shortfalls may also prove to be insufficient to meet construction
contract earnings and could significantly slow the current construction
schedule for this year. Mr. Chairman, while we are so grateful that the
President's fiscal year 2005 budget includes $23 million for the
Channel Deepening Project, the previous funding shortfalls and the
increased project costs compel us to request the higher funding level.
As you may be aware, the Corps of Engineers reprogrammed $23 million
from the South Pacific Division last year without allocating any
portion of those dollars to the Channel Deepening project that is
performing well.
Dramatic increases in Pacific Rim and Latin American trade volumes
have made infrastructure development at the Port of Los Angeles more
critical than ever, with more than 42 percent of containerized cargo
entering the United States through the San Pedro Bay port complex. The
Port of Los Angeles, alone, handled more than 7.2 million 20-foot
equivalent units of containers (TEUs) in calendar year 2003 (a 20
percent increase over 2002), representing ongoing unprecedented growth
for any American seaport. This burgeoning trade has resulted in the
manufacture of larger state-of-the-art container ships. As such, the
Port embarked upon the Channel Deepening Project--along with its
Federal partner, the Army Corps of Engineers--to deepen its Federal
channel from -45 feet to -53 feet. Currently, more than 50 of these
state-of-the-art container ships are on order to serve the United
States West Coast container fleet. The first of these deeper-draft
ships is scheduled to call at the Port of Los Angeles in August of this
year, carrying 8,000 TEUs and drafting at -50 feet.
As we have testified before, cargo throughput for the San Pedro
Bay--and the Port of Los Angeles in particular--has a tremendous impact
on the United States economy. We at the Port of Los Angeles cannot over
emphasize this fact. The ability of the Port to meet the spiraling
demands of this phenomenal growth in international trade is dependent
upon the speedy construction of sufficiently deep navigation channels
to accommodate the new container ships. These new ships provide greater
efficiencies in cargo transportation, carrying more than 8,000 TEUs and
one-third more cargo and making available to the American consumers
more product inventory at lower prices on imported goods. In addition,
exports from the United States become more competitive in foreign
markets. However, for American seaports to keep up, they must,
immediately, make the necessary infrastructure improvements that will
enable them to participate in this rapidly changing global trading
arena.
Mr. Chairman, these state-of-the-art container ships represent the
new competitive requirements for international container shipping
efficiencies in the 21st Century, as evidenced by the increased volume
of international commerce and the new deeper-draft container ships now
on order for service at ports across the United States within the next
few years. It is imperative that Congress appropriates the requested
funding that will enable the Channel Deepening Project to continue on
schedule through the project's anticipated completion in 2006 to meet
these new efficiencies.
The Channel Deepening Project is clearly a commercial navigation
project of national economic significance and one that will yield
exponential economic and environmental returns to the United States
well into the future. The national economic benefits are evidenced by
the creation of more than 1 million permanent well-paying jobs across
the United States; more than $1 billion in wages and salaries, as well
as local, State and Federal sales and income tax revenues deposited
into the Federal treasury. As an aside, the 7.2 million TEUs handled by
the Port of Los Angeles in 2003 had a commercial value of more than
$300 billion in container cargo, with significant tax revenues accruing
to the Federal Government. Similarly, according to the U.S. Customs
Service, users of the Port pay approximately $12 million a day in
Customs duties, with the Los Angeles Customs District leading the
Nation in total duties collected for maritime activities. As you can
see, the return on the Federal investment at the Port of Los Angeles is
real and quantifiable, and we expect it to surpass the cost-benefit
ratio as determined by the Corps of Engineers' project Feasibility
Study many times over. The Federal investment in the Channel Deepening
Project will ensure that the Port of Los Angeles, the Nation's largest
container seaport, remains at the forefront of the new international
trade network well into the 21st Century. The Channel Deepening Project
marks the second phase of the 2020 Infrastructure Development Plan that
begun with the Pier 400 Deep-Draft Navigation and Landfill Project. The
Port of Los Angeles is moving forward with the 2020 Plan designed to
meet the extraordinary infrastructure demands placed on it in the face
of the continued explosion in international trade. Mr. Chairman, the
Port of Los Angeles respectfully urges your subcommittee to include an
earmark of $35 million for fiscal year 2005 to support the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers' continued construction of the Channel Deepening
navigation project on behalf of the Port of Los Angeles.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to submit this
testimony in support of continued Congressional support of the Channel
Deepening Project at the Port of Los Angeles. The Port has long valued
the support of your subcommittee and its appreciation of the port
industry's importance to the economic vitality of the United States,
and, in particular, the role of the Port of Los Angeles in contributing
to this country's economic strength.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Stillwater
Chairman Domenici and members of the Energy and Water Development
Subcommittee, I thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony
requesting the $1.8 million needed to construct Stage 3 of the
Stillwater, Minnesota flood control project. In 2001, the City
experienced its seventeenth flood since 1941, immediately after the
Corps completed construction work on Lock and Dam No. 3 20 miles South
of the convergence of the Mississippi River and the St. Croix River.
The first two stages of the project have been completed, and
Congress appropriated $2.3 million in the fiscal year 2002
Appropriations Bill to begin construction the critical Stage 3 of the
project. The $1.5 million in Federal funds requested this year, plus
State appropriated, and local funds should be sufficient to complete
the $13.2 million project.
The project is divided into three stages. Stage 1 included the
repair and reconstruction of the existing retaining wall which extends
1,000 feet from Nelson Street on the South to the gazebo on the North
end of the levee wall system. Stage 2 consists of the extension of the
levee wall about 900 feet from the gazebo North around Mulberry Point.
The completion of Stage 2 was delayed by floods of 1997, costing
the City and the Federal Government nearly a half million dollars.
After the waters subsided, it was discovered that the soil beneath the
planned levee extension was very unstable, requiring a revision of
plans, and the addition of another stage in the construction process.
The flood waters of the St. Croix River did not recede until August
of 1997. The construction area remained under water preventing
construction work to proceed as scheduled. Lowell Park, which extends
the full length of the levee wall system, several structures, and the
emergency roadway which is used to provide emergency medical assistance
for those using the recreational St. Croix River, and as a water source
for local fire departments, were all either under water or
inaccessible.
Phase I, the repair and reconstruction of the original levee wall,
was completed in the Summer of 1998. Work on Stage 1 was completed in
late Summer of 1997, and additional soil borings were taken for Stage
2. The soil was found to be very unstable, and unable to support the
levee system designed for Stage 2 of the project. The construction of
Stage 2 required remedial action, and was been designated as Stage 2S.
A contract was awarded for Phase 2S in November, 1998, and was
completed in 1999. Phase 2 was begun in the late Fall of 1999, and the
major construction work was completed at the end of the year 2000. Only
some landscaping, and finishing work on the levee wall system remains
to be done. The Design Memorandum schedule calls for the construction
of Stage 3 in fiscal year 2002, and to be completed in fiscal year
2003, according to the Corps schedule.
Stage 3 expands the flood protection system by constructing a 3
foot flood wall, and driving sheet piling below the surface to reduce
seepage and to provide a base for the wall. The flood wall will be
constructed about 125 feet inland from the riverbank. Stages 1 and 2
were critical to the protection of the fragile waterfront, and also, to
prevent minor flooding on the North end of the riverfront. Stage 3 is
the component that provides the flood protection for the City. The
rising elevation of the terrain, the flood wall, and minimal emergency
measures are designed to provide the City with up to 100 year flood
protection.
The Mayor, City Council Members, and Engineering staff all
understand that Stage 3 of the flood control project is essential for
the protection of life and property of the citizens, that the Stage 3
flood wall is a critical phase of the project, and that the project
must be completed at the earliest possible date. The Corps acknowledged
the necessity for all three stages of the project when the Design
Memorandum included plans for all three stages.
The U.S. Congress directed the Secretary of the Army acting through
the Chief of Engineers to proceed with the design and construction to
complete the Stillwater Levee and Flood Control Project under Section
124 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2005. The City
and the State of Minnesota have allocated matching funds for this work,
and it is in an escrow account for that purpose. The Corps of Engineers
have said the monies appropriated to begin this work on Stage 3 have
been redirected, and Federal funds are not available.
This fact is born out by the support of the Minnesota Department of
Natural Resources, the Governor of Minnesota, and the State
Legislature. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources made funds
available based on this premise. The State has appropriated half of the
Non-Federal matching funds needed to complete Stage 3 of the project,
as well as for Stages 1 and 2. The City has provided the remainder of
the required matching funds, consequently, only the Federal share is
missing to complete the project.
stillwater--a national historic site
The City of Stillwater is recognized for the 66 historic sites on
the National Register of the U.S. Department of Interior, as well as
other historic structures. Many of these sites are located in the flood
plain of the St. Croix River. Designated the ``Birthplace of
Minnesota,'' the City of Stillwater was founded in 1843.
When Wisconsin became a State in 1848, a portion of land West of
the St. Croix and Mississippi Rivers, including much of what is now the
Twin Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul, was excluded. The prominent
citizens of the excluded area convened in Stillwater on August 26,
1848, passed a resolution to be presented to Congress asking that a
``new territory be formed,'' and that the territory be named
``Minnesota.'' Henry Sibley carried the petition to Washington, DC, and
in March, 1849, Minnesota Territory was established. Stillwater then
became the only city in the Nation to become the county seat of two
different territories, St. Croix County in Wisconsin, and Washington
County, Minnesota. The Stillwater Convention firmly established
Stillwater as the ``Birthplace of Minnesota.''
Stillwater grew and prospered as the Lumber Capitol of the Midwest.
Billions of feet of timber was cut, and floated down the St. Croix to
the nine sawmills that were located on the riverbank of the St. Croix
at Stillwater between 1848 and 1914. More logs were carried through the
boom site North of Stillwater than any other place in the United
States. Three billion feet of lumber was produced by the nine lumber
mills in the 1880's alone. All nine lumber mills wee located on the
riverfront The lumber from the Stillwater mills were the primary source
of wood-constructed buildings throughout the Midwest.
Much of the lumber was carried down the St. Croix to the
Mississippi River, and on to St. Louis, the ``jumping off'' point for
the Westward movement. Sawdust and wood debris from these mills helped
created the fragile riverbank that the levee wall system protects
today.
Later in the 19th Century, five railroads carried lumber from
Stillwater Westward to Nebraska, North and South Dakota, and points
West, as the Nation expanded beyond the Mississippi River into the
plains States. Many of the Midwest's oldest buildings still carry the
mark of the Stillwater mills.
As a result of Stillwater's place in the history of the Midwest,
the lumber industry, the unique homes built by Minnesota's first
millionaires, and the birthplace of both Minnesota Territory and the
State of Minnesota, 66 sites are included on the National Register of
Historic Places. All of the downtown area, which is located in the 100-
year flood plain, is included in this recognition.
the impact of lock and dam no. 3 on floods--stillwater
The Lock and Dam No. 3 was constructed in 1937-38 on the
Mississippi River at Red Wing, Minnesota. The Lock and Dam construction
raised the level of the St. Croix at Stillwater by 8 to 10 feet. It has
made the City of Stillwater vulnerable during periods of high water and
flooding of the St. Croix since that time. Records prove that the lock
and dam construction, raising the water levels of both the Mississippi
and the St. Croix River, has markedly increased the incidence of
flooding at Stillwater. The culpability of the Corps is clearly
evident.
The Mississippi and the St. Croix Rivers merge about 14 miles South
of Stillwater. When constructing the Lock and Dam at Red Wing in 1938,
the Federal officials recognized that detaining the flow of the
Mississippi would back up the water in the St. Croix at Stillwater. A
1,000 foot levee wall system was constructed at Stillwater by the WPA
under the supervision of the Corps to protect the fragile waterfront.
From 1850 to 1938, the 88 years prior to the construction of Lock
and Dam No. 3, only four floods were reported by historians. None were
the result of Spring snow melts. The 1852 flood was the result of a
cloudburst, the destruction of a dam built on McKusick Lake above the
City, and was not the result of the flooding of the St. Croix River.
The floods of June 14, 1885, and May 9, 1894, as well as the 1852
flood, were all the result of cloudbursts in or above Stillwater. These
floods resulted in both loss of life and significant property losses in
the City.
Since the completion of the Lock and Dam 60 years ago, the St.
Croix has flooded on 17 occasions, and only four times in the 90 years
preceding the construction of the Lock and Dam. None of the four were
the result of high water on the St. Croix River. Four floods were
recorded in the 1940's, immediately after the completion of the lock
and dam at Red Wing. The 1952, 1965, and 1969 floods were record-
breaking floods, the result of a heavy snow fall, and early Springs
rainfall, coupled with warm weather. Record flooding was avoided in
1997, by the early planning of City officials, the construction of a
huge emergency levee requiring thousands of truck loads of clay and
sand, the work of hundreds of volunteers, and luck in the avoidance of
a severe rainstorm in or around the flood event.
The 2001 flood was second worst flood in the 160 year history of
the City. It was only topped only by the flood of 1965. The careful
planning and preparation by the City, hundreds of volunteer workers
included high school students and younger, local citizens from
Minnesota and Wisconsin, and dozens of inmates from the near-by State
prison were given credit for preventing a major catastrophe for the
City. The water pump rental, thousands of yards of sand and fill, and a
``round the clock'' line up of trucks, cost the Federal, State, and
local governments nearly $1.3 million.
The planning and preparation of City officials, and adequate lead
time have allowed the construction of levees high enough to avoid
massive flooding in the historic section of the City during most of the
floods, and to prevent further loss of life. However, a 4-5 inch
rainfall during high water levels would be devastating to the City.
Such rainfalls are not infrequent in the St. Croix Valley, and can not
be anticipated. A major concern is the safety of the volunteers.
Working around heavy equipment and massive trucks, day and night, and
on top of 20 foot emergency levees over swirling flood waters, it is
only a matter time until we have serious injuries or loss of life.
A wet Fall that saturates the soil, heavy snows during the Winter,
extended warm spells in the Spring, coupled with persistent Spring
rains, and cloudbursts as experienced in the past, will all come
together in the same year at some point in time. At that point, the
City's emergency responses to flood control will not be sufficient to
cope with the flood waters.
History bears out the City's contention that the raising of the
river levels by ten feet in 1938, when Lock and Dam No. 3 was
constructed, greatly increases the flooding potential faced by the City
during the past 60 years. On this basis alone, the Federal Government
must share in the responsibility for providing a remedy. The
construction of the Stage 3 flood wall at Stillwater will provide this
safety.
environment threatened during flood events
The St. Croix River was designated as one of the first Wild and
Scenic Rivers by Congress and is protected under both Federal and State
laws, as well as by local ordinances. The St. Croix River is carefully
monitored by the Federal Government, an Interstate Commission, and the
DNR's by both the States of Wisconsin and Minnesota.
The City's concern is the trunk sanitary sewer line and pumping
stations for the City of Stillwater. The sewer line runs adjacent to
the riverfront and is frequently under water during major flood events.
More than 2 million gallons of raw sewage is handled daily by the sewer
line and pumping stations that follow the riverfront. Engineers have
advised the City that extended flooding of the flood plain could result
in the rupturing of the trunk line or the surcharging of the pumping
stations.
Either of these event would result in the direct flow of raw sewage
into the St. Croix River. It would be impossible to repair the system
during the high water of a flood event. During the 1997 floods, one
pumping station and a portion of the trunk sewer line remained under
water for 95 days, and required careful monitoring by the City workers.
The protection of the river is not only the dominant theme of the
State and Federal governments, but also by the counties and
municipalities that line the riverbanks of the St. Croix. However, the
greatest protectors of the river are the citizens themselves who take
advantage of the crystal blue waters of the St. Croix for fishing,
boating, and other recreational and scenic purposes.
The topography of the City of Stillwater requires the location of
the trunk sanitary sewer line and pumping stations at the base of the
City's hub, adjacent to the riverfront. The City is built on two hills
that slope toward the river, abruptly interrupted by sandstone bluffs
extending 50-75 feet high above the river level. The sanitary sewer
system serving the 16,000 Stillwater residents flows into the trunk
sewer line that runs parallel to the riverfront. It can not be moved.
The 2 million gallons of raw sewage handled by the system each day, is
gathered in the trunk sewer line and pumped Southward to the water
treatment plant.
According to engineering studies, the trunk line and the pumping
stations are both susceptible to rupture or surcharging during periods
of flooding. Little could be done to stop the flow of raw sewage into
the St. Croix until the water receded. During recent floods, it is not
unusual for high water levels to persist for as much as 2-5 months.
Such an event could release 120 million gallons of raw sewage into one
of America's most pristine rivers over that period of time. If for no
other reason than the protection of the river, the City believes the
Stage 3 flood wall must be constructed with no delay.
legislative background
The Stillwater Flood Control and Retaining Wall project first was
authorized in section 363 of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
of 1992. An allocation of $2.4 million was made in the Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act of 1994.
A Committee Report described the project in three parts--to repair,
extend, and expand the levee wall system on the St. Croix River at
Stillwater, Minnesota:
--``To repair'' (Stage 1) the original existing levee wall system
constructed in 1936;
--``To extend'' (Stage 2) the original wall by approximately 900 feet
to prevent the annual flooding that occurs at that location;
and
--``To expand'' (Stage 3) the system by constructing the flood wall
about 125 feet inland from the levee wall system to protect the
downtown and residential section in the flood plain.
In 1995, the Design Memorandum confirmed the cost estimate for the
project was much too low, and the project was reauthorized for $11.6
million by Congress in the 1996 WRDA legislation. In 2001, the Corps
estimated the Federal cost at $9.86 million, the non-Federal cost at
$3.29 million, and the total cost of the project to be $13.15 million.
Congress appropriated $2 million in fiscal year 2002 for the
construction of the Stage 3 flood wall. The Corps chose not to use
these funds for that purpose, and were redirected to other projects.
Congress then directed the Corps to design and construct the Stage 3
flood wall in Section 124 of the Omnibus Appropriations Act for fiscal
year 2005. While the Corps has now met with the City, and appears
willing to move ahead as Congress as instructed, we are awaiting Corps
action to prepare a Project Cooperation Agreement for all to sign.
Since the reauthorization of the project 5 years ago, and the
completion of the feasibility study, both Stage 1 and 2 have been
completed. Only the completion of Stage 3 will provide the City with
the flood protection that is critically needed. The reconstruction of
the existing levee wall system, the extension of the levee wall, and
the construction of the flood wall are all critical to the safety of
the citizens, the protection of property, and the preservation of
historic sites that contributed to the growth and expansion of the
Midwest in the last half of the 19th Century.
summary
The Mayor and Council for the City of Stillwater, Washington County
Officials, the Governor and Minnesota State Legislature, and bipartisan
support of Minnesota Representatives and Senators in Congress, all
recognize the significant importance of completing this project by
constructing the Stage 3 flood wall on the St. Croix River at
Stillwater. They are committed to the completion of the Flood Wall
Project at Stillwater. It is critical to the protection of property,
the preservation of our history, the respect of historic Indian sites,
and the safety of our citizens and their homes and business.
We respectfully urge the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee
for Appropriations to allocate the $1.8 million needed to begin
construction of the Stage 3 flood wall in the fiscal year 2005
Appropriations Bill. If you have questions or would like additional
information regarding this project, please call on us.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Granite Falls, Minnesota
Chairman Domenici and members of the Appropriations Subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to submit this testimony on behalf of the
City Council and the citizens of Granite Falls, Minnesota. We are
requesting $1.2 million in Federal funds for the development of the
Detailed Design Report (DDR) plans and specifications, and critical
preventative measures to protect the city from future flooding of the
Minnesota River.
This request is based on the ``Supplement to the Locally Preferred
Plan for Flood Damage Reduction, January, 2002'' prepared on behalf of
FEMA, the City, and information from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
Section 205 study not yet completed. This project was authorized in the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee bill, the Water Resources
Development Act of 2003. The project has now been authorized for $8
million in Federal funds in H. Res. 2557, Sec. 3061 as a Section 205
project, in accordance with the Water Resources Development Act of 1986
(100 Stat. 4184) as needed.
The problems confronting the City require a carefully planned
project. The geological features of the terrain discourages the
construction of diversion channels due to the granite subsurface of the
soil. Homes and businesses are being relocated using FEMA, State and
local resources. The existing uncertified and inadequate levee system
will be improved to provide adequate protection for the communities,
and the Municipal Power Plant adjacent to the Minnesota River will
require relocation.
the city of granite falls
The City of Granite Falls is a community of slightly more than
3,000 citizens, is located in West Central Minnesota about 122 miles
west of St. Paul. The Minnesota River runs through the northern and
eastern portions of the City, and is directly adjacent to the downtown
area. The majority of the City's residential and commercial properties
are located on the west bank of the Minnesota River in Yellow Medicine
County. Low-lying residential areas on the north end of the City,
structures in the commercial business district along the river, and
residences located next to the secondary river channels in the
southwest part of the City are especially vulnerable to flooding.
recent disasters
While the river represents a valuable resource to the community, it
has taken a severe toll on residents and businesses during Spring
floods. The 1997 floods which devastated much of Western Minnesota and
North Dakota did not spare Granite Falls. The Flood drove many from
their homes and their downtown businesses, and resulted in millions of
dollars in damages. Virtually every downtown business was flooded. More
than $850,000 was spent by the city, and another $175,000 by the Corps
of Engineers to fight the flood.
Hundreds of volunteers from Granite Falls area and the State
prevented further devastation as the Minnesota River has a peak
discharge of 53,000 cubic feet per second. That's more than 3 million
cubic feet of flood water per minute. The rushing water was within
inches of the top of the temporary dike as volunteers continued to
stack sand bags. If the water had topped the dike, literally dozens of
the workers' lives would have been severely endangered. Total costs and
damages exceeded $5 million.
In July of 2000, the city was hit by an F-4 tornado. An F-5 tornado
is the top of the scale. One person was killed, 14 badly injured, and
325 homes were either totally destroyed or severely damaged. The
tornado caused more than $26 million in damages in the community.
The following year, 2001, the City was again hit by another record
flood event. Though not as severe as the 1997 flooding, damage was
reduced significantly by careful City planning and preparation with
Federal and State governmental units. Even so, the costs to fight the
flood exceeded half a million dollars for the City and the Corps of
Engineers, and much of the downtown commercial area was evacuated.
Other significant floods have occurred in 1951, 1952, 1965, 1969,
and 1994. While floods have cost the community millions of dollars in
extensive property damage and economic hardship, the primary concern is
the significant risk to the hundreds of volunteers whose work is
required building levees during flood events to protect the homes and
business.
Preparation for fighting disaster costs have reached nearly $4
million in the past 4 years. That amounts to thousands of dollars to
every property owner in the City. Other significant flood events have
occurred in 1951, 1962, 1965, 1969, and 1994.
While floods have cost the community millions of dollars in
extensive property damage and economic hardship, the primary concern is
the significant risk to the hundreds of volunteers whose work is
required building levees during flood events to protect the homes and
businesses. Total flood damages and costs are more than $30 million
from 1997 through 2001.
Granite Falls has received financial support from FEMA, the Corps
of Engineers, and the State of Minnesota to clean up after the
disasters and to repair damages. Funds have been received to repair
streets, housing rehabilitation and construction, economic development,
and special services. All the help has been directed toward restoration
after the floods and tornado event, but no funds have been available to
prevent future flooding.
corps of engineers section 205 study
Following the 1997 flood, the Corps of Engineers initiated a
Section 205 study in May, 1998, to evaluate the extent of the flooding
problem in Granite Falls, and to explore possible remedies. The study
is essentially complete, but has not been released to date. The major
problems of cost and funding level addressed in the 205 study have been
resolved in the project authorization in H. Res. 2557.
studies conducted
The City, through a FEMA project grant under the direction of the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources MN/DNR, conducted a study of
the flood problems confronting Granite Falls. The overall objective of
the study was to evaluate hazards for the Granite Falls area, and to
develop preliminary evaluation and prioritization for those hazards.
The Report states, ``Because of the tremendous impacts of flooding
on the Granite Falls community, and the relative frequency of flooding
events, the report begins with an all hazard evaluation, but then
focuses on flood hazards, and presents mitigation options and
preliminary costs for implementing those options.''
The Report evaluated each area of the community, determined the
risk factors, and suggested options available to protect the area
against flooding. In the conclusion of the Report, it was recommended
the most economical solution to provide the necessary protection was
buy out many of the properties and move them to a location outside the
flood plain. This work is currently in progress.
The elevation of other areas would have to be raised, pump stations
would need to be installed, some levees constructed, and the sanitary
lift station and the water plant would need to be relocated. It is
estimated the cost of this work would be approximately $12 million.
The Supplement to the Locally Preferred Plan (SLPP) provides a
level of flood protection for flood events up to the 500-year event.
The 1998 Corps of Engineers 205 study indicates the 500-year level of
protection is about the same as the 100-year flood plus 3 feet of
freeboard. This level of protection is necessary as the result of a
reevaluation by FEMA which indicated that the current level of
protection for Granite Falls was violated in both the 1997 and the 2001
flood events.
The SLPP identifies seven areas severely impacted by flooding,
suggests the remedial action needed, and the cost of such work.
Relocation costs are not included in this report. The City believes
that with the financial assistance received from FEMA to relocate many
of the structures in low lying areas, the remaining project needs are
appropriately addressed under flood protection programs administered by
the Corps of Engineers.
The Locally Preferred Plan includes the removal of about 41
structures in the lower areas of the City, including several in the
commercial district. FEMA has provided the funds for 25 structure
moves, leaving only 15 additional structures to be moved as a part of
the project.
appropriation request
The city requests $1.2 million from the committee for the purpose
of the development of the Detailed Design Report, preparation of plans
and specifications, and the placement of pumps stations at two of three
critical locations in the city. These pump stations will provide some
immediate flood relief during an emergency, but are also needed
permanently as a part of the total project.
Thank you for your consideration of this request. And may I also
take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the St. Paul
District Office of the Army Corps of Engineers for their help and
assistance during the crisis we have experienced in recent years. We
will be happy to respond to any questions you may have regarding the
needs of the city, and the flood protection project.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Crookston, Minnesota
Chairman and members of the Appropriations Subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to submit this testimony on behalf of the
City Council and the citizens of Crookston, Minnesota. We are
requesting $1.2 million in Federal funds for the development of the
supplement to the environmental assessment study, to prepare the
design, and to initiate construction work in the fiscal year 2004
Appropriations Bill. The purpose of this request is to provide flood
protection for the Chase/Loring and Sampson neighborhoods in the City.
This request is based on the Feasibility Report Supplement: Local Flood
Control completed on April 30, 2002.
First, we would like to thank you and the members of this committee
for the $2.202 million appropriation you provided for the Crookston
Flood Control Project in the fiscal year 2003 Appropriation Conference
Report. These funds made it possible to complete the work on Stage 2 of
the project.
Stages 1 and 2 of the project has provided 100-year flood
protection for Thorndale, Woods, and Downtown/Riverside neighborhoods.
This is a tremendous step forward, and we are very appreciative of the
support given us by this committee and the Army Corps of Engineers.
However, the project still leaves two of our most vulnerable
neighborhoods, Sampson and Chase/Loring, fully susceptible to future
flooding when the Red Lake River again leaves its banks.
The City of Crookston is located in the Red River Valley of Western
Minnesota, in Polk County, 25 miles East of Grand Forks, North Dakota.
The Red Lake River winds its way through the City from its source at
the Upper and Lower Red Lakes, and flows into the Red River at Grand
Forks. The early settlers in Crookston built their homes in the crooks
of the river to be close to the water supply vital to their existence.
As a result, five neighborhoods were established that became the City
of Crookston. The population of the City has remained constant over the
past decade at about 8,200 citizens.
The community was settled in 1872, when the first railroad route
was announced crossing the Red Lake River where Crookston now stands,
and later, extending to Canada. The economy of Crookston is based
primarily on agriculture. It is the home of the University of Minnesota
Crookston, a technology oriented school with a full academic program
enrolling approximately 2,500 students.
The City of Crookston has two recent major flood events--1997 and
again in 2001. The flood of record was at a stage of 27.3 feet in 1969,
and the 1997 flood exceeded it with a stage of 28.6. The 2001 flood on
the Red Lake River at Crookston was 26.38 feet or 11 feet above flood
stage. For both flood events, the city was able with the help of the
Corps of Engineers and the State of Minnesota to take extreme emergency
actions to prevent catastrophic losses throughout the community.
The 1997 flood came within inches of inundating the community with
huge potential for loss of life. This flood further emphasized the need
for a long-term flood damage reduction project to protect the citizens
and the community.
These floods also demonstrated that flood damage reduction must be
at a 100-year level, consistent with the authorized project, and needs
to be looked at from a total community perspective. ``Piecemealing'' a
project, by protecting only certain areas, will not eliminate the need
for significant federally subsidized flood emergency reimbursements in
the future. Not including State and local expenditures, use of
resources, and purchase of materials, the Federal costs alone incurred
in 1997, totaled nearly $1.5 million. State and local costs were
estimated at a similar amount, whereby, the 1997 flood costs totaled
nearly $3 million.
Both floods contributed to the progressive deterioration of the
emergency levee system. The reliability of this system is now much
worse than what was reported in the pre-flood 1997 feasibility report.
The recent flood and the documented and visual impact of the 1997 flood
at Grand Forks, ND, and East Grand Forks, MN demonstrated that failure
of the emergency system would be catastrophic. Not only would many
structures incur irreparable damage, the social and economic impact
from the loss of property value/tax base and cohesion would devastate
the community, potentially threatening the long-term viability and
survival of Crookston.
Due to recent flood events, the views of the City and its
residents, the emphasis of the State of Minnesota Department of Natural
Resources through the flood mitigation program, an efforts of the
Minnesota Flood Relief Task Force, there is a renewed commitment to
provide long-term flood damage reduction for the three remaining
neighborhoods.
The reason that these areas were not included in the 1997
feasibility study was because these areas were incorrectly considered
independent, and concern that the overall benefits may not cover the
costs to provide protection. The primary reason was a low cost-to-
benefit ratio was real estate costs. There were too many structures
that needed to be relocated or purchased.
Reassessing earlier alternative flood damage reduction plans, there
are further justifications for protecting a larger portion of
Crookston, and ways to reduce costs, while continuing to maintain the
necessary degree of flood damage reduction. Likewise, the benefits in
some of these areas increased, based on new benefit categories
identified in the Grand Forks, ND, and East Grand Forks, MN December
1997 feasibility study. The State of Minnesota has already committed to
full protection for all of the six neighborhoods in the City of
Crookston.
The cost/benefit ratio for the three stages of the project is 1.03.
Evaluation by the Corps of Engineers determined a cost benefit ratio
for the Chase/Loring and Sampson authorized in the House WRDA at 1.25.
Continuing assessment of the project plans will increase the project
benefits even further. The City believes that the project should not be
assessed incrementally, but as a total project as were other
communities severely affected by the 1997 and 2001 floods in the Red
River Valley.
All of the property owners in Crookston have assessed themselves
flood protection fees for the past 11 years to provide the local funds
needed to make their families safe during flood events. Without
providing the protection needed for the Sampson and Chase/Loring
Neighborhoods, the work is only half done. Since all of the citizens
have been paying these assessments, it is not right that the Crookston
Flood Control Project would protect only half the community.
conditions change since 1997
Since the completion of the feasibility report in early 1997,
events have greatly impacted flood damage reduction for the city. The
floods of 1997 and 2001 have been a wake up call regarding the
vulnerability of the City and its residents. There is no way that the
1997 feasibility study could have predicted these events. They
demonstrated the extent of the deterioration of the existing emergency
system, and new thinking on how to more cost effectively reduce flood
damages in unprotected areas. The replacement of the city dam is now
underway.
The revised engineering assessment of the trunk sanitary sewer
system located in the Sampson addition, and the electrical distribution
substation located in the Chase/Loring addition. Although, not a
change, the revised engineering assessment of the sanitary sewer system
found conditions that were slightly different from the analysis in the
1997 feasibility report. Several key essential features of the sanitary
sewer system for the entire community are located in the Sampson
neighborhood. Losses to these features would certainly cause the system
to fail, including the system located in areas protected by the Federal
project.
Similarly, the electrical distribution substation located in the
Chase/Loring neighborhood services those areas protected by Stages 1
and 2 of the project. The loss of the substation would at least affect
most of the neighborhoods, including those protected by the original
authorized project. It would at least temporarily result in a loss of
power, and the loss of critical flood damage reduction measures (i.e.
pump stations) of the permanent project and to the sanitary sewer
system.
flooding events and their causes
Floods occurring over the past 40 years have created significant
damage to homes and businesses, and have resulted in the loss of lives
as well. They include the flood events of 1965, 1966, 1967, 1969, 1978,
1979, 1996, and 1997. Floods have been documented at Crookston as early
as 1887. The 1950 flood, though not the maximum flood of record,
created the most damage to the City and resulted in the deaths of two
citizens from the community.
Between 1950 and 1965, clay levees were constructed through local
efforts in an attempt to ameliorate the damages from the flooding of
the Red Lake River. The floods of 1965, however, demonstrated these
efforts were not adequate to hold back the torrents of water during
significant flood events. While certain areas of the City received some
flood protection, severe damages occurred in the South Main Street
area. This section of the City has since been totally cleared.
The 1969 flood established new high water marks, and again, it was
necessary to carry out extreme emergency measures. These efforts were
successful in protecting the community from severe damages. Recognizing
the need for more protection, another locally financed project was
initiated, extending, enlarging, and raising the height of the levee
wall system.
The flood of 1997, was the ``grandaddy'' of all floods. It
established the highest water mark in recorded history when the Red
Lake River crested at 28.6 feet above flood stage, the equivalent of a
three-story building. It is described as a 500-year flood event.
Only the careful planning and preparation by City officials in
cooperation with the Corps of Engineers, the State of Minnesota, FEMA,
the National Guard, and many private citizens, were damages reduced,
and fortunately, no lives were lost. Prior to the crest of the flood,
the City of Crookston completed the work of adding two feet of clay and
sandbags to the entire levee system throughout the town. The Corps of
Engineers constructed clay dikes as a second line of defense,
sacrificing a few homes for the good of many others. As a precautionary
measure, 400 residents evacuated from their homes during the height of
the flood. These efforts spared Crookston from the devastation
experienced by neighboring towns, allowing the City to provide for
8,000 persons evacuated from their homes in nearby communities, But
this disaster and the potential devastation that such floods can bring,
emphasized the critical importance of replacing the temporary earthen
and clay dikes with a well-planned, permanent flood control system.
There are several causative factors that have created flood
conditions for the Red River Valley and the City of Crookston. The Red
River of the North did not carve out the valley, it merely meanders
back and forth through the lowest parts of the floor of the ancient
Glacial Lake Agassiz.
With no definitive flood plain to channel flood torrents, the slow-
moving flood waters quickly overrun the shallow river banks and spread
out over the flat floor of the former glacial lake bed. The small
river's gradient is on one-half foot per mile, as opposed to areas in
Southwestern Minnesota where in one instance, the gradient establishes
a 19 foot drop in one mile. Both extremes have created problems.
The Red Lake River flows into Crookston from the Northeast, winds
it way through the City, and flows out of the City, turning in a
Northwesterly direction toward its confluence with the Red River at
Grand Forks, North Dakota. The merged rivers then flow due North into
Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada. As the snow melts in the Southern portion
of the valley, ice often remains in the channel to the North. Ice and
other debris flowing North pile up against the river ice creating ice
dams. These barriers back up the water and increase the flood crest
upstream.
The extremely level terrain also creates a phenomenon during the
Spring thaw which is called ``overland flooding.'' As the snow melts,
the huge volume of water can overwhelm the network of shallow ditches
and creeks. Unable to enter the choked stream channels, the water
travels overland until it meets small terrain barriers such as railroad
beds and road grades, creating huge bodies of water.
In addition to the topography of the area, a combination of factors
such as agricultural drainage, the loss of wetlands, the Federal
governments work in the Red River Basin, and the construction of the
county ditch systems, all these factors have contributed to the
vulnerability of the area.
key points of project development
1992--Feasibility Cost Share Agreement signed.
1997--Feasibility Report and Environmental Assessment completed.
1997--National Economic Development optimizational analysis waived
to provide the entire project with 100-year flood protection.
1998--Preconstruction engineering and design efforts begun.
1999--Project authorized for construction in the Water Resource
Development Act of 1999.
2000--Plans, specifications, and design work for Stage 1 completed.
2000--Congress appropriates $1 million for Stage 1 construction.
2000--Plans and Specifications for Stage 2 commenced.
2001--Corps of Engineers total cost estimates for the project to be
$10.8 million.
2001--Congress provides $2 million for the construction of Stage 2
of the Crookston Flood Control Project in the fiscal year 2002 Energy
and Water Appropriations Bill.
2002--Bids were accepted and construction contract awarded for
Stage 2 work.
2002--Congress provides $3.202 million to complete Stage 2
construction work.
2002--The Feasibility Report Supplement was completed.
2003--Construction work continues on Stage 2.
2003--House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
reauthorizes Crookston Flood Control Project to include Sampson and
Chase/Loring neighborhoods.
2003--Request made to Congress for $1.2 million to provide flood
protection for the Sampson and Chase/Loring neighborhoods.
2003--Senate delays passage of the Water Resources Development Act
until 2004.
2004--Senate Environment and Public Works schedule WRDA mark-up for
Spring, 2004.
non-federal contributions to the project
The citizens of Crookston have demonstrated their commitment to the
project each year since 1997. Every year for since 1997, they have
voted to assess themselves a flood control project fee, over and above
their property taxes. This action by the community has resulted in
raising about $1.4 million up to the present time. One third of these
local funds were used to meet part of the 50 percent match for the $1.2
million feasibility study, and the remainder will be used as a part of
the non-Federal match for the construction Stages of the flood control
project.
The State of Minnesota has also made a significant contribution to
the project. They have appropriated $3.3 million for the dual purpose
of providing funds to match the Federal contribution, and to buy out
homes that have been lost in the construction of the flood control
measures. Nineteen families were required to lose their homes to the
project, including one farm. The State funds were used both for the
purchase of the homesteads, and the relocation of the affected
families.
For these reasons, we respectfully request this subcommittee to
appropriate $1.2 million of Federal funds in the fiscal year 2004
Appropriations Act to be used for the environmental assessment,
preconstruction costs, and immediate work on the protection of the
electrical substation and the pumping stations to avoid severe
personal, ecological and environmental disasters in the Community. The
committee's favorable response to this request will prevent any delays
affecting the completion of the project, and avoid cost overruns that
inevitably occur when construction is delayed.
In closing, I would like to say there is nothing more important to
me as Mayor, and to each Member of the Crookston City Council, than the
safety of our citizens, and the protection of their homes and property.
We can not give them this assurance until we have completed this flood
control project. May I also say that our association with the St. Paul
District of the Army Corps of Engineers throughout this process has
been outstanding. They are an extraordinary organization, working on
the scene during flood conditions, and assisting us as we attempt to
resolve this problem that threatens our citizens. We could not ask for
a better partner in this project.
Thank you for the opportunity to bring this important matter to
your attention through this statement. I will be delighted to respond
to any questions you may have about the project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southeastern Federal Power Customers, Inc.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the
Southeastern Federal Power Customers, Inc. (``SeFPC''), I am pleased to
provide testimony in reference to the administration's fiscal year 2005
budget request for the Army Corps of Engineers (``Corps''). My
testimony will focus primarily on the budget request for the Corps'
South Atlantic Division (``SAD'') and the Nashville District of the
Great Lakes and Ohio River Division (``LRD''). In addition, the SeFPC
customers would like to express our interests related to proposed
legislation that would authorize direct funding for Corps' Operations
and Maintenance (``O&M'') activities at Federal hydropower projects.
The SeFPC has enjoyed a long and successful relationship with the
Corps' SAD and LRD offices that has greatly benefited the approximately
5.8 million customers of the SeFPC members. As the subcommittee is
aware, the Corps is responsible for operating and maintaining Federal
hydropower generating facilities. The Southeastern Power Administration
(``SEPA'') then markets the energy and capacity that is generated from
the Federal projects in the Southeast. The SeFPC represents some 238
rural cooperatives and municipally owned electric systems in the States
of Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Kentucky, North Carolina, South
Carolina, Florida, and Virginia, which purchase power from SEPA. In
some cases, SEPA supplies as much as 25 percent of the power and 10
percent of the energy needs of SeFPC customers, who greatly rely on
this power.
drastic cuts in the corps' budget
The SeFPC membership is dedicated to providing reliable and
economic power for its consumers. We therefore are concerned that the
President has proposed a 13 percent reduction in the Corps' budget for
fiscal year 2005. With these reductions in funding, the Corps will not
be able to undertake the O&M and Renewals and Replacements (``R&R'')
work necessary to ensure the long-term reliability of the Southeastern
Federal hydropower facilities. We are particularly concerned about the
effects of the proposed budget cuts on ongoing O&M work on
infrastructure of hydropower projects whose output is marketed by SEPA.
The proposed reductions will particularly impede the Corps' work in the
following SEPA projects: Walter F. George, J. Strom Thurmond, John H.
Kerr, Allatoona, and Carters.
We also are concerned the President's budget request has zeroed out
funds for construction at many of the projects operated by the Corps.
We remain especially troubled by the badly needed rehabilitation of
generating facilities in the Cumberland River System operated and
maintained by LRD, as well as other Federal hydropower generating
facilities throughout the Southeast. The age of many of the
hydroelectric generating facilities in SEPA's service area is nearing
the 50-year mark, when major rehabilitations are critical if the
projects are to continue. Regrettably, the fiscal year 2005 budget
request does not place a high priority on these critical needs.
When a generating unit becomes inoperable, SEPA may be forced to
pursue the purchase of expensive replacement power; this could result
in a reduction of energy and capacity, forcing the SeFPC members to
purchase expensive capacity elsewhere. This has occurred so frequently
in the last several years that the new SEPA rate design now includes a
charge by customers to cover this replacement power. Such a result is
inappropriate because preference customers already have contributed to
the Corps' O&M and R&R expenses, in essence double-charging the
customers and their consumers. In fact, revenue from the rates paid by
the preference customers has enabled SEPA to repay on time the original
investment incurred to construct these projects. However, when
generating units deteriorate, reliability decreases, and O&M expenses
greatly increase.
We are working on a long-term customer funding proposal that would
facilitate this badly needed R&R work at hydroelectric facilities in
the LRD. We anticipate, however, that this long-term initiative will
not be finalized for a number of years. In the meantime, some of these
facilities will not be able to continue generating without Federal
funds.
administration's proposal for direct funding of o&m
It is important to note that the relationship of the Corps, SEPA,
and the SeFPC, forged pursuant to the Federal Power Marketing Program,
is separate and distinct from other Corps' activities. The Federal
Power Marketing Program is designed to pay for itself--consumers are
responsible for repaying the Federal taxpayer investment in the Corps'
multi-purpose hydroelectric facilities. In the rates charged by SEPA to
preference customers, a portion of each rate is devoted to future O&M
and R&R activities at these facilities. In turn, these revenues are
deposited in the U.S. Treasury and used to reimburse Congressionally
appropriated funds for O&M and R&R expenses at the Corps' hydropower
facilities. Funds collected from consumers may also be used for the
hydropower share of joint costs of dam activities that also benefit
recreation, navigation and flood control. To date, preference customers
have paid in SEPA rates over $114 million in excess of amounts spent by
the Corps on O&M and R&R.
The administration's fiscal year 2005 budget request proposes to
alter this funding arrangement. This year's budget includes a provision
from the President's fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2004 requests
calling for direct funding of routine O&M for hydropower facilities
marketed by SEPA and the other Federal PMAs. While we support the
concept of direct funding for O&M expenses, we want to ensure that any
direct funding legislation would include safeguards to prevent the
Corps from utilizing an alternative source of funding that could lead
to significant rate increases. Specifically, we believe the PMAs must
have the final say in determining the amount of funding available for
the Corps each year. In this regard, funds provided for Corps' O&M
should under this new mechanism have a neutral effect on rate levels.
Also, the Corps and the PMAs must consult with the PMA customers
regarding amounts the PMAs will collect for O&M activities. Finally,
the Corps must be prohibited statutorily from reprogramming funds
provided by the PMAs under this direct funding mechanism.
In advancing the direct funding proposal, the administration has
reduced funds in the Corps' O&M budget by $150 million. Therefore, in
the event the proposed legislation is not enacted, this funding should
be restored to the Corps' O&M budget.
Thank you in advance for your consideration of our comments on the
administration's fiscal year 2005 budget request for the Corps.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Flagstaff, Arizona
Chairman Domenici, Ranking Member Reid, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing me to testify on behalf of
the City of Flagstaff, Arizona in support of $10 million in the Army
Corps of Engineers budget for the Rio de Flag flood control project in
fiscal year 2005. I believe this project is critically important to the
City, to northern Arizona, and, ultimately, to the Nation.
As you may know, Mr. Chairman, with this subcommittee's help last
year, Rio de Flag received $3.5 million to continue construction on
this important project. We are extremely grateful that the subcommittee
boosted this project well above the president's request, and we would
appreciate your continued support for this project in fiscal year 2005.
Like many other projects under the Army Corps' jurisdiction, Rio de
Flag received no funding in the president's fiscal year 2005 budget,
although the Corps has expressed capability of $10 million to continue
construction on the project. We are hopeful that the subcommittee will
fund the Rio de Flag project at $10 million when drafting its bill in
order to keep the project on an optimal schedule.
Flooding along the Rio de Flag dates back as far as 1888. The Army
Corps has identified a Federal interest in solving this long-standing
flooding problem through the Rio de Flag, Flagstaff, Arizona--
Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Study (EIS). The
recommended plan contained in this feasibility report was developed
based on the following opportunities: (1) flood control and flood
damage reduction; (2) environmental mitigation and enhancement; (3)
water resource management; (4) public recreation; and (5) redevelopment
opportunities. This plan will result in benefits to not only the local
community, but to the region and the Nation.
The feasibility study by the Corps of Engineers has revealed that a
500-year flood could cause serious economic hardship to the City. In
fact, a devastating 500-year flood could damage or destroy
approximately 1,500 structures valued at more than $395 million.
Similarly, a 100-year flood would cause an estimated $95 million in
damages. In the event of a catastrophic flood, over half of Flagstaff's
population of 57,000 would be directly impacted or affected.
In addition, a wide range of residential, commercial, downtown
business and tourism, and industrial properties are at risk. Damages
could also occur to numerous historic structures and historic Route 66.
The Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway (BNSF), one of the primary
east-west corridors for rail freight, could be destroyed, as well as
U.S. Interstate 40, one of the country's most important east-west
interstate links. Additionally, a significant portion of Northern
Arizona University (NAU) could incur catastrophic physical damages,
disruptions, and closings. Public infrastructure (e.g., streets,
bridges, water, and sewer facilities), and franchised utilities (e.g.,
power and telecommunications) could be affected or destroyed.
Transportation disruptions could make large areas of the City
inaccessible for days.
Mr. Chairman, the intense wildfires that have devastated the West
during the last several years have only exacerbated the flood potential
and hazard in Flagstaff. An intense wildfire near Flagstaff could strip
the soil of ground cover and vegetation, which could, in turn, increase
runoff and pose an even greater threat of a catastrophic flood.
In short, a large flood could cripple Flagstaff for years. This is
why the City believes it is important to ensure that this project
remains on schedule and that the Corps is able to maximize its
capability of $10 million in fiscal year 2005 for construction of this
flood control project.
In the City's discussions with the Corps, both the central office
in Washington and its Los Angeles District Office also believe that the
Rio de Flag project is of the utmost importance and both offices
believe the project should be placed high on the subcommittee's
priority list. We are hopeful that the subcommittee will consider this
advice and also place the project high on its priority list and fully
fund the project at $10 million for fiscal year 2005.
As you may know, project construction and implementation of Rio de
Flag was authorized in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of
2000. The total project cost is estimated to be $30,000,000 in and
above the reconnaissance study or the feasibility study. The Non-
Federal share is currently $10,500,000 and the Federal share is
currently $19,500,000. Final project costs must be adjusted based on
Value Engineering and final design features. It is important to note
the City of Flagstaff has already committed more than $10,500,000 to
this project, and an additional $2,000,000 in excess of its cost share
agreement. This clearly demonstrates the City's commitment to
completing this important project.
The City of Flagstaff, as the non-Federal sponsor, is responsible
for all costs related to required Lands, Easements, Rights-of-Way,
Relocations, and Disposals (LERRD's). The City has already secured the
necessary property rights to begin construction in 2004. Implementation
of the City's Downtown and Southside Redevelopment Initiatives
($100,000,000 in private funds) are entirely dependent on the success
of the Rio de Flag project. The Rio de Flag project will also provide a
critical missing bike/pedestrian connection under Route 66 and the BNSF
Railroad to replace the existing hazardous at grade crossings.
Both design and construction are divided into two phases. Phase I
construction will commence in 2004. Phase II of the project is
scheduled to commence in April of 2005.
Mr. Chairman, the Rio de Flag project is exactly the kind of
project that was envisioned when the Corps was created because it will
avert catastrophic floods, it will save lives and property, and it will
promote economic growth. In short, this project is a win-win for the
Federal Government, the City, and the surrounding communities.
Furthermore, the amount of money invested in this project by the
Federal Government--approximately $19 million--will be saved
exponentially in costs to the Federal Government in the case of a large
and catastrophic flood, which could be more than $395 million. It will
also promote economic growth and redevelopment along areas that are
currently underserved because of the flood potential.
In conclusion, the Rio de Flag project should be considered a high
priority for this subcommittee, and I encourage you to support full
funding of $10 million for this project in the fiscal year 2005 Energy
and Water Development Appropriations bill. Thank you in advance for
your consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of the Fifth Louisiana Levee District
In order to continue the essential level of construction on the
Mississippi River and Tributaries Project (MR&T), and to provide proper
maintenance of the completed portions, it is crucial that the $450
million, as requested by the Mississippi Valley Flood Control
Association for fiscal year 2005 (copy attached), be appropriated for
the MR&T Project.
Less than $10 billion has been invested in the MR&T Project since
its authorization following the great flood of 1927, but even in its
incomplete stage, the MR&T project has prevented over $180 billion in
flood damages and makes possible about $900 million in navigation
benefits each year.
Levee enlargements have been completed along most of the
Mississippi River Levee, with one exception being portions of the
system in Louisiana where people and property remain vulnerable to a
Levee that is the lowest in the MR&T system, even though it conducts to
the Gulf 41 percent of the total water runoff of the Nation. It is
imperative that construction of these Levees remain a top priority for
the administration and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and that adequate
funding be provided.
We urge Congress to increase the $4.21 billion contained in the
President's Budget Request for the entire Corps of Engineers' Works
Program. At least $6.00 billion is required in order that the Corps not
halt or delay contracts, shut down facilities, or otherwise disrupt the
economic well-being of this Nation. Failure to provide this much needed
additional funding will have a serious detrimental effect on the
economic conditions in our already depressed area.
We continue to emphasize our objection to dividing the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers into separate, smaller entities and transferring to
the administration of other established departments. It is vital to the
people of Louisiana and to the Nation that the Mississippi River and
Tributaries Project be completed as designed and as quickly as
possible. To transfer any part of the Civil Works mission, or to ``out-
source'' or contract-out positions in the Corps' Civil Works
organization, as proposed by the Secretary of The Army, will wreck the
current construction and maintenance time table and eliminate
approximately 32,000 current employees.
We urge your support for protection of the structure of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers as it currently exists.
We respectfully request that funds be increased for the Corps of
Engineers' Works Program and $450 million be appropriated for the MR&T
Project for the coming fiscal year.
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL ASSOCIATION--FISCAL YEAR 2005 CIVIL
WORKS REQUESTED BUDGET--MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES PROJECT--
MAINTENANCE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's
Project Budget MVFCA Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wappapello Lake, MO..................... $4,046,000 $6,352,000
Mississippi River Levees................ 7,665,000 14,915,000
Dredging................................ 20,515,000 20,515,000
Revetment and Dikes..................... 48,760,000 48,760,000
Memphis Harbor, TN...................... 1,205,000 2,010,000
Helena Harbor, TN....................... 385,000 510,000
Greenville Harbor, MS................... 29,000 412,000
Vicksburg Harbor, MS.................... 32,000 345,000
St. Francis River & Tribs, AR........... 6,080,000 8,805,000
White River Backwater, AR............... 1,316,000 2,260,000
North Bank, Arkansas River, AR.......... 146,000 146,000
South Bank, Arkansas River, AR.......... 122,000 122,000
Boeuf & Tensas Rivers, LA............... 2,160,000 2,160,000
Red River Backwater, LA................. 3,083,000 7,390,000
Yazoo Basin, Sardis Lake, MS............ 7,046,000 19,322,000
Yazoo Basin, Arkabutla Lake, MS......... 5,710,000 12,900,000
Yazoo Basin, Enid Lake, MS.............. 4,954,000 13,679,000
Yazoo Basin, Grenada Lake, MS........... 5,553,000 10,101,000
Yazoo Basin, Greenwood, MS.............. 585,000 2,035,000
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo City, MS............. 729,000 729,000
Yazoo Basin, Main Stem, MS.............. 1,013,000 3,966,000
Yazoo Basin, Tributaries, MS............ 923,000 923,000
Yazoo Basin, Whittington Aux Channel, MS 400,000 400,000
Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower, MS.......... 139,000 2,139,000
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo Backwater, MS........ 440,000 926,000
Lower Red River, South Bank, LA......... 105,000 105,000
Bonnet Carre, LA........................ 2,310,000 3,100,000
Old River, LA........................... 7,350,000 29,900,000
Atchafalaya Basin, LA................... 13,000,000 25,000,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway, LA.......... 2,775,000 4,200,000
Baton Rouge Harbor Devil's Swamp, LA.... 14,000 300,000
Miss Delta Region, LA................... 588,000 588,000
Bayou Cocodrie & Tribs, LA.............. 65,000 65,000
Inspection of Completed Works........... 1,500,000 1,700,000
Mapping................................. 1,112,000 1,325,000
-------------------------------
Total MR&T Maintenance............ 151,855,000 248,105,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL ASSOCIATION--FISCAL YEAR 2005 CIVIL
WORKS REQUESTED BUDGET--MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES APPROPRIATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's
Project and State Budget MVFCA Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surveys, Continuation of Planning and
Engineering & Advance Engineering &
Design:
Memphis Harbor, TN.................. .............. ..............
Germantown, TN...................... $27,000 $27,000
Millington, TN...................... 100,000 100,000
Fletcher Creek, TN.................. 93,000 93,000
Memphis Metro Storm Water .............. 100,000
Management, TN.....................
Bayou Meto, AR...................... .............. 2,447,000
Germantown, TN...................... .............. 200,000
Southeast Arkansas.................. .............. 600,000
Coldwater Basin Below Arkabutla 203,000 750,000
Lake, MS...........................
Quiver River, MS.................... .............. 100,000
Spring Bayou, LA.................... 500,000 600,000
Point Coupee to St. Mary Parish, LA. .............. 100,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, 100,000 100,000
LA*................................
Alexandria, LA to the Gulf of Mexico 435,000 435,000
Morganza, LA to the Gulf of Mexico.. 1,500,000 10,000,000
Donaldsonville, LA to the Gulf of 800,000 1,200,000
Mexico.............................
Tensas River, LA.................... .............. 500,000
Donaldsonville Port Development, LA. .............. 100,000
Collection & Study of Basic Data.... 700,000 700,000
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Surveys, Continuation of 4,458,000 18,152,000
Planning & Engineering & Advance
Engineering & Design.............
===============================
Construction:
St. John's Bayou-New Madrid 8,300,000 8,300,000
Floodway, MO.......................
Eight Mile Creek, AR................ 1,357,000 3,293,000
Helena & Vicinity, AR............... .............. ..............
Grand Prairie Region, AR............ .............. 20,000,000
Bayou Meto, AR...................... .............. 18,000,000
West Tennessee Tributaries, TN...... .............. 700,000
Nonconnah Creek, TN................. 2,153,000 2,753,000
Wolf River, Memphis, TN............. .............. 2,400,000
August to Clarendon Levee, Lower .............. 2,000,000
White River, AR....................
St. Francis Basin, MO & AR.......... 3,000,000 9,500,000
Yazoo Basin, MS..................... 5,850,000 62,775,000
Atchafalaya Basin, LA............... 22,495,000 32,500,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway, LA...... 7,200,000 10,000,000
MS Delta Region, LA................. 1,800,000 4,700,000
Horn Lake Creek, MS................. .............. 203,000
MS & LA Estaurine Area, MS & LA..... .............. 50,000
Channel Improvements, IL, KY, MO, 36,882,000 44,082,000
AR, TN, MS & LA....................
Mississippi River Levees, IL, KY, 38,960,000 54,800,000
MO, AR, TN, MS & LA................
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction............ 127,997,000 276,056,000
Subtotal, Maintenance............. 151,855,000 248,105,000
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Mississippi River & 284,310,000 542,313,000
Tributaries......................
Less Reduction for Savings & -14,310,000 92,313,000
Slippage.........................
-------------------------------
Grand Total, Mississippi River & 270,000,000 450,000,000
Tributaries......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the Louisiana Department of Transportation and
Development
On behalf of the State of Louisiana and its twenty levee boards, we
present recommendations for fiscal year 2005 appropriations for U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Projects in Louisiana.
Louisiana contains the terminus of the Mississippi River, third
largest drainage basin in the world, draining 41 percent, or 1\1/4\
million square miles, of the contiguous United States and parts of two
Canadian provinces. When combined with the other interstate rivers
flowing through the State, almost 50 percent of the contiguous land
mass of this Nation drains through Louisiana. This same river drainage
system forms the backbone of the federally constructed Inland Waterway
System that provides our heartland cost effective access to the global
marketplace via the 230 mile deepwater channel of the lower Mississippi
River from Baton Rouge to the Gulf. This strategic gateway to
international markets is the largest port complex in the world ranking
Louisiana first in the Nation in volume of waterborne traffic. We are
distressed that the Administration's budget proposals in recent years
indicate a lack of concern for the preservation and efficient operation
of this system. The Inland Waterway System--the whole system--allowed
industrial facilities scattered throughout the central portion of the
Nation to obtain raw materials and fuel from distant locations and to
reach worldwide markets. These industries, and most of the agricultural
industries in mid-America, are heavily dependent on the federally
maintained navigable waterways to remain globally competitive in
transporting their products. To consider maintenance of only the main-
stem portion of the waterway system at the expense of the connector
branches will wreak havoc on the economies of all the communities
located on these so-called low-use branch waterways.
A comprehensive and extensive flood control system is required to
protect the landside facilities and related industries supporting that
waterborne commerce. In Louisiana there are almost 3,000 miles of
levees (1,500 in the MR&T system) constructed jointly by Federal, State
and local entities that provide protection from riverine and tidal
flooding. Louisiana's 20 levee boards are responsible for the
maintenance and upkeep of these levees which allow one-third of
Louisiana to be habitable year-round. The petrochemical, oil and gas
industries in Louisiana that contribute to the economic well being of
the Nation are almost totally dependent on the federally constructed
flood control system to protect their facilities. But these same levees
and channel improvements that benefit the entire Nation have been
blamed for the rapid deterioration of our coastal wetlands. The loss of
these wetlands is adversely impacting both the area's natural resources
and the effectiveness of our hurricane protection system. These
wetlands are not Louisiana's alone; they constitute 40 percent of the
Nation's wetlands and their restoration must be considered a national
priority.
The Mississippi River and Tributaries Project (MR&T) has been
underway since 1928 and isn't scheduled for completion until beyond
2031. The Administration's proposed budget of $270 Million for fiscal
year 2005 is totally unacceptable. We strongly support the Mississippi
Valley Flood Control Association's request for $450 Million for the
MR&T Project. We urge support of this requested level of funding.
In making the following funding recommendations for Louisiana
projects regarding specific construction, studies, and operation and
maintenance items, the State of Louisiana would hope that Congress and
the Administration will honor their prior commitments to infrastructure
development and continue to fund our requests. It is appropriate that
the Federal Government has committed to providing combined flood
control and navigation measures that benefit the economy of both
Louisiana and the rest of the Nation. We believe these types of water
resources projects are the most cost effective projects in the Federal
budget, having to meet stringent economic criteria not required by
other programs.
We wish to express our thanks to the Appropriations Subcommittees
on Energy and Water Development of the House and Senate for allowing us
to present this brief on the needs of Louisiana for fiscal year 2005.
We solicit your favorable consideration and request this statement be
included in the formal hearing record.
The State of Louisiana requests funding for the following projects
that differs from what is in the fiscal year 2005 Administration Budget
or is a project of particular importance for the State. Those items
that the State of Louisiana believes have been appropriately funded
have not been included.
FLOOD CONTROL, NAVIGATION, HURRICANE PROTECTION & WATER RESOURCES
PROJECTS SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED APPROPRIATIONS FISCAL YEAR 2005 FOR
LOUSIANA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Louisiana
Louisiana Budget Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS:
STUDIES:
Amite River-Ecosystem $250,000 $250,000
Restoration, LA................
Amite River & Tributaries, LA-- 100,000 1,000,000
Bayou Manchac..................
Atchafalaya River, Bayous Chene, 350,000 800,000
Boeuf & Black, LA..............
Calcasieu Lock, LA.............. 200,000 1,000,000
Calcasieu River Basin, LA....... 350,000 350,000
Calcasieu River Pass Ship 50,000 500,000
Channel Enlargement, LA........
Hurricane Protection, LA........ .............. 200,000
LCA--Ecosystem Restoration, LA.. 8,000,000 12,000,000
Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, 225,000 225,000
LA.............................
Plaquemines Parish, LA.......... 300,000 500,000
Port of Iberia, LA.............. 350,000 730,000
St. Bernard Parish Urban Flood 300,000 550,000
Control, LA....................
St. Charles Parish Urban Flood 300,000 800,000
Control, LA....................
St. John the Baptist Parish, LA. .............. 600,000
Southwest, AR (AR, LA).......... .............. 427,000
Bossier Parish Levee & FC....... .............. 385,000
Cross Lake Water Supply......... .............. 500,000
JBJWW........................... .............. 100,000
Pearl River, MS & LA............ .............. 100,000
Pearl River, Bogalusa (MS)...... .............. 100,000
PED:
Bayou Sorrel Lock, LA............... 550,000 550,000
Lafayette Parish, LA................ .............. 327,000
West Shore--Lake Pontchartrain, LA.. .............. 400,000
West Baton Rouge Parish, LA......... .............. 500,000
NEW STUDIES:
Bayou Nezpique Watershed, LA........ .............. 100,000
Millennium Port, LA................. .............. 100,000
Port Fourchon Enlargement, LA....... .............. 100,000
Port of West St. Mary............... .............. 100,000
Southwest La Multi-Purpose Water .............. 100,000
Resources, LA......................
Tangipahoa River Ecosystem .............. 100,000
Restoration, LA....................
CONSTRUCTION GENERAL:
Comite River, LA.................... 1,500,000 9,900,000
East Baton Rouge Parish, LA......... .............. 8,000,000
Grand Isle, LA...................... .............. 1,900,000
Inner Harbor Navigation Canal Lock, 10,000,000 24,000,000
LA (IWWTF & CG)....................
Lake Pontchartrain, LA.............. 3,937,000 22,500,000
Larose to Golden Meadow, LA......... 583,000 1,500,000
New Orleans to Venice, LA........... 2,965,000 6,600,000
Southeast, LA....................... 30,000,000 78,000,000
West Bank and Vicinity, New Orleans, 37,000,000 59,800,000
LA.................................
Red River Below Den Dam (AR, LA).... .............. 7,000,000
Red River Emergency (AR, LA)........ .............. 10,000,000
J Bennett Johnston Waterway, MS 4,000,000 20,000,000
River to Shreveport................
Ouachita River Levees............... .............. 3,800,000
OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE GENERAL:
Atchafalaya River, Bayous Chene, 13,813,000 26,600,000
Boeuf & Black......................
Barataria Bay Waterway.............. .............. 4,600,000
Bayou Lacombe....................... .............. 860,000
Bayou Lafourche..................... .............. 1,100,000
Bayou Segnette...................... .............. 1,400,000
Bayou Teche......................... .............. 300,000
Calcasieu River & Pass.............. 13,285,000 21,800,000
(T) Chefuncte River................. .............. 800,000
Freshwater Bayou.................... 1,678,000 3,700,000
Grand Isle, LA & Vicinity........... .............. 800,000
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway.......... 17,476,000 27,300,000
Houma Navigation Canal.............. 3,070,000 3,300,000
Mermentau River..................... 4,410,000 6,500,000
Mississippi River, Baton Rouge to 59,125,000 74,400,000
the Gulf...........................
Mississippi River--Gulf Outlet...... 13,004,000 45,000,000
Mississippi River, Outlets at Venice 424,000 3,700,000
Tangipahoa River.................... .............. 800,000
Waterway Empire to the Gulf......... .............. 240,000
Waterway Intracoastal Waterway to .............. 200,000
Bayou Dulace.......................
Ouachita & Black Rivers (AR, LA).... 1,974,000 18,123,000
Bayou Bodcau........................ 776,000 776,000
Caddo Lake.......................... 182,000 182,000
Wallace Lake........................ 290,000 290,000
Bayou Pierre........................ 28,000 28,000
J Bennett Johnston Waterway......... 10,600,000 18,098,000
Lake Providence Harbor.............. 38,000 451,000
Madison Parish Port................. 20,000 120,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--The projects listed above are only those in Louisiana (except
where noted) and directly affect the State.
MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED APPROPRIATIONS
FISCAL YEAR 2005 FOR LOUISIANA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative Louisiana
Louisiana Budget Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FC, MR&T GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS:
Alexandria to the Gulf.............. $435,000 $435,000
Donaldsonville to the Gulf.......... 800,000 1,200,000
Morganza to the Gulf, PED........... 1,500,000 10,000,000
Collection & Study Data............. 200,000 200,000
Collect & Study of Basic Data (AR, 300,000 300,000
LA, MS)............................
Spring Bayou Area, LA............... 500,000 600,000
Tensas River Basin, LA.............. 0 500,000
NEW STUDIES: Atchafalaya Basin Floodway 0 100,000
System Land Study, LA..................
FC, MR&T CONSTRUCTION:
Atchafalaya Basin................... 22,495,000 32,500,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System... 7,200,000 10,000,000
Channel Improvement................. 10,105,000 10,105,000
Mississippi Delta Region (FED)...... 1,800,000 4,700,000
Mississippi River Levees, LA........ 2,680,000 2,680,000
MS--LA Estuarine Area............... 0 50,000
Mississippi River Levees (AR, LA, 20,850,000 30,850,000
MS)................................
Channel Improvement (AR, LA, MS).... 13,582,000 16,782,000
FC, MR&T MAINTENANCE:
Atchafalaya Basin................... 13,000,000 25,000,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System... 2,775,000 4,200,000
Baton Rouge Harbor (Devil's Swamp).. 14,000 300,000
Bayou Cocodrie and Tributaries...... 65,000 65,000
Bonnet Carre Spillway............... 2,310,000 3,100,000
Channel Improvement................. 15,675,000 15,675,000
Dredging............................ 700,000 700,000
Inspection of Completed Works....... 383,000 383,000
Mapping............................. 396,000 396,000
MS Delta Region..................... 588,000 588,000
Mississippi River Levees, LA........ 790,000 5,200,000
Old River........................... 7,350,000 29,900,000
Mississippi River Levees (AR, LA, 2,670,000 3,270,000
MS)................................
Revetments & Dikes (AR, LA, MS)..... 13,400,000 13,400,000
Dredging (AR, LA, MS)............... 6,265,000 6,265,000
Mapping (AR, LA, MS)................ 329,000 329,000
Inspection of Completed Works (AR, 338,000 338,000
LA, MS)............................
Boeuf & Tensas Rivers............... 2,160,000 2,160,000
Red River Backwater................. 3,083,000 7,390,000
Lower Red River..................... 105,000 105,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--The projects listed above are only those in Louisiana (except
when noted) and directly affect the State. We realize that there are
other projects in the Valley. We endorse the recommendations of the
Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association.
______
Prepared Statement of the Association of State Dam Safety Officials
Chairman Domenici and members of the subcommittee, the Association
of State Dam Safety Officials is pleased to offer this testimony on the
President's proposed budget for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACOE) fiscal year 2005. The Association's testimony includes issues
related to the safety and security of the dams owned or operated by the
USACOE and in support of the National Inventory of Dams (NID)
authorized by the Dam Safety and Security Act of 2002.
The Association of State Dam Safety Officials is a national non-
profit organization of more than 2000 State, Federal and local dam
safety professionals and private sector individuals dedicated to
improving dam safety through research, education and communications.
Our goal simply is to save lives, prevent damage to property and to
maintain the benefits of dams by preventing dam failures. Several
dramatic dam failures in the United States called attention to the
catastrophic consequences of failures. The failure of the federally-
owned Teton Dam in 1976 caused 14 deaths and over $1 billion in
damages, and is a constant reminder of the potential consequences
associated with dams and the obligations to assure that dams are
properly constructed, operated and maintained.
national inventory of dams
The National Inventory of Dams is a computer database, maintained
by the USACOE, that houses vital information of Federal and non-Federal
dams across the United States. The database tracks information about
the dam's location, size, use, type, proximity to nearest town, hazard
classification, age, height and many other technical data fields. The
database can be used for States or Federal agencies to access
comprehensive information for planning, security alerts or to use
within a Graphic Information System (GIS) vital in tracking lifeline
systems and responding to emergency events through using the geographic
and mapping abilities along with the engineering information within the
NID database.
The NID can be used by policy makers as a tool when evaluating
national or local dam safety issues. For example, it is extremely
useful in establishing the average age of the dams in the United
States, or identifying the number and location of a particular type of
dam construction (i.e. the number and location of ``thin arch'' dams
greater than 100 feet in height). In addition, the Federal Emergency
Agency uses this data to compute State grant assistance funds, in
accordance with the National Dam Safety Program and to assess the
status of Federal and non-Federal dams.
There are over 78,000 dams on the National Inventory of Dams in the
country. It is essential that this data be current and accurate in
order to have access to this critical data when needed and to be able
to track trends in assessing dam safety improvements. The NID can meet
this need, but it is only as accurate as the last update. The NID has
not been updated since 2000. The database must be continually updated
as the dam information is constantly changing (i.e. new ownership,
major repairs, removal of dams, increasing the height and storage,
additional downstream development or changes to the dam's hazard
classification). This data is now even more important as the
intelligence community and Federal law enforcement agencies have
identified dams as a specific target of potential terrorists attacks.
The data can also be of tremendous benefit to Federal agencies such as
FEMA, NWS, USGS and the new Department of Homeland Security for
locating large dams, for watershed planning, flood control planning or
emergency response to failures or extreme storm events.
Correct and timely data is vital to the national effort to assess
and protect our critical infrastructure, including dams, from
intentional acts of terrorists. The Homeland Security Presidential
Directive No. 7 requires the Federal Government to ``protect critical
infrastructure and key resources'' and includes a ``strategy to
identify, prioritize and coordinate the protection of critical
infrastructure.'' This cannot be accomplished without an accurate NID.
Continuing updates and improvements to this database resource
should be a higher priority. Federal agencies that own dams as well as
State dam safety programs provide updated information and corrections
to the data fields, which provides for accurate and current data. The
NID is also an integral part of the biennial report to Congress which
evaluates the performance of the National Dam Safety Program and status
of the safety of the Nation's dams.
The Association respectfully requests that the subcommittee
recognize the importance of this national dam database and increase the
appropriation amount from the proposed funding level in the President's
budget of $222,000 to the full authorized funding amount of $500,000.
dam safety, security, and operation and maintenance
The USACOE is recognized as a national leader in dam construction
and dam safety. The USACOE currently owns or operates 700 dams in the
United States, and these dams, like other critical components of the
national infrastructure are aging and the require vigilant inspection
as well as routine maintenance. In addition, the security of our
Nation's infrastructure is a major concern. Dams, especially the large
federally-owned dams are a potential target for terrorists attacks.
The USACOE dams are typically very large, provide flood protection,
water supply, hydropower, recreation and many are critical to the
waterway navigation on the Nation's major rivers. The consequences of a
failure or misoperation of one of these dams can cause enormous loss of
life and property damage, as well as the loss of the benefits provided
by the dam. Therefore, the Association strongly supports appropriations
necessary to make needed repairs, to conduct security assessments and
improvements wherever necessary. The Association believes that
operation and maintenance are critical to the continued safe
performance of the dams. Too often deferred maintenance causes a small
problem to become larger and more costly; and if left unattended, may
cause the dam to become more susceptible to failure.
The Association applauds the administration's recognition of the
importance and value of the USACOE's Dam Safety Program and the need to
fund dam maintenance of USACOE dams. ASDSO respectfully asks that the
subcommittee recognize that inspections, safety repairs, security and
routine maintenance are all essential to assure the safety and the
continuing benefits of USACOE dams.
The Association specifically requests that the subcommittee:
--Support the administration's increase in appropriations for the
USACOE Dam Safety Program non-project management funds at
$250,000;
--Increase in appropriations for the USACOE Dam Security Program non-
project management funds to $100,000 from the proposed $30,000
to include assistance to the State dam safety programs in
conducting security vulnerability assessments and for training
in the dam security assessment tools such as RAM-D;
--Restore the USACOE ``Planning Assistance to States Program'' to the
$6,500,000 of fiscal year 2004 from the proposed $4,650,000 to
provide much needed assistance to the States to cost-share
dambreak modeling, flood studies, developing emergency
evacuation plans and to jointly conduct security vulnerability
assessments; and
--Support the administration's fiscal year 2005 budget for
$35,000,000 for emergency maintenance/repairs.
Finally, while the security of the USACOE dams is currently a major
priority, the continued safety, repair and maintenance of the USCOE
dams should also continue as a major appropriations priority and not be
diminished. Improved security on an unsafe dam may deter an attack, but
it still leaves the lives and property downstream at an unnecessary
risk.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for this
opportunity to provide this testimony in support of safe dams. We look
forward to working with the subcommittee and staff on this important
national issue.
______
Prepared Statement of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee
Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished committee, my name
is Lew Meibergen. I am Chairman of the Board of Johnston Enterprises
headquartered in Enid, Oklahoma. It is my honor to serve as Chairman of
the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee, members of which are
appointed by the governors of the great States of Arkansas, Colorado,
Kansas, Missouri, and Oklahoma.
In these times of war on terrorism, homeland defense and needed
economic recovery, our thanks go to each of you, your staff members and
the Congress. Your efforts to protect our Nation's infrastructure and
stimulate economic growth in a time of budget constraints are both
needed and appreciated.
Our Nation's growing dependence on others for energy, and the need
to protect and improve our environment, make your efforts especially
important. Greater use and development of one of our Nation's most
important transportation modes--our navigable inland waterways--will
help remedy these problems. At the same time, these fuel-efficient and
cost-effective waterways keep us competitive in international markets.
In this regard, we must maintain our inland waterway transportation
system. We ask that the Congress restore adequate funding to the Corps
of Engineers budget--$5.5 billion in fiscal year 2005--to keep the
Nation's navigation system from further deterioration. If this
catastrophic problem is not addressed immediately, we are in real
danger of losing the use of this most important transportation mode.
As Chairman of the Interstate Committee, I present this summary
testimony as a compilation of the most important projects from each of
the member States. Each of the States unanimously supports these
projects without reservation. I request that the copies of each State's
individual statement be made a part of the record, along with this
testimony.
Backlog of Channel Structure Maintenance McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River
Navigation System
A $10 million Congressional add to the fiscal year 2005 Operation
and Maintenance budget is urgently needed for critical repairs to
damaged and deteriorated dikes and revetments to maintain channel
alignment and provide original channel configuration while reducing the
need for dredging.
Equus Beds Aquifer--Kansas
Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project.--Continuation of a
City of Wichita, Groundwater Management District No. 2 and State of
Kansas project to construct storage and recovery facilities for a major
groundwater resource supplying water to more than 20 percent of Kansas
municipal, industrial and irrigation users. The project will capture
and recharge in excess of 100 million gallons per day and will also
reduce on-going degradation of the existing groundwater by minimizing
migration of saline water. Federal authorization of the project and
continued Federal funding is requested in the minimum amount of $1.5
million for fiscal year 2005.
Arkansas River System Operations Feasibility Study, Arkansas and
Oklahoma
This study will evaluate how to optimize the reservoirs in Oklahoma
and Arkansas that provide flows into the river with a view toward
improving the number of days per year that the navigation system will
accommodate tows. It will also investigate the impacts of deepening and
widening the navigation channel. We request funding in the amount of
$1.253 million to complete the study in fiscal year 2005. This is
$735,000 above the President's budget request of $500,000.
The testimony we present reveals our firm belief that our inland
waterways and the Corps of Engineers' efforts are especially important
to our Nation in this time of trial. Transportation infrastructure like
the inland waterways, need to be operated and maintained for the
benefit of the populace. Without adequate annual budgets, this is
impossible.
Mr. Chairman, members of this committee, we respectfully request
that you and members of your staff review and respond in a positive way
to the attached individual statements from each of our States which set
forth specific requests pertaining to those States.
We sincerely appreciate your consideration and assistance.
arkansas
prepared statement of paul latture, ii, chairman for arkansas
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to present testimony to this most important committee. I
serve as Executive Director for the Little Rock Port Authority and as
Arkansas Chairman for the Interstate Committee. Other committee members
representing Arkansas, in whose behalf this statement is made, are
Messrs. Wally Gieringer of Hot Springs Village, retired Executive
Director of the Pine Bluff-Jefferson County Port Authority; Scott
McGeorge, President, Pine Bluff Sand and Gravel Company, Pine Bluff;
Barry McKuin of Morrilton, President of the Conway County Economic
Development Corporation; and N.M. ``Buck'' Shell, CEO, Five Rivers
Distribution in Van Buren and Fort Smith, Arkansas.
We call to your attention three projects on the McClellan-Kerr
Arkansas River Navigation System (the ``System'') that are especially
important to navigation and the economy of this multi-State area:
Backlog of Channel Structure Maintenance, Maintenance Dredging, and
Ark-White Cutoff as related to the Arkansas River.
Backlog of Channel Structure Maintenance
--A $10 million Congressional Add to the fiscal year 2005 Operation
and Maintenance Budget is urgently needed for critical repairs
to damaged and deteriorated dikes and revetments to maintain
channel alignment and provide original channel configuration
while reducing the need for dredging.
--More than a decade of neglect to our navigation structures while
funding the construction of Montgomery Point Lock & Dam has
created a critical backlog of channel structure work that
threatens the viability of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River
Navigation System.
--Current grain prices offer a rare potential for our farming mid-
section of the Nation yet a failure to deliver these
commodities to market due to neglect of our transportation
system would have serious economic impacts rippling through the
entire Arkansas River Basin.
Maintenance Dredging
--A $3 million Congressional Add is needed for Maintenance Dredging
in known problem areas with siltation capable of restricting or
closing the navigation channel.
--A closure of the System for even a short period would create
transportation problems with devastating economic impacts on
Arkansas and our Nation at a time when commodity shipments are
at record levels.
--These funds will help ensure the System remains open and allow
users to maximize tonnage by preventing the need for light
loading.
Ark-White Cutoff
--A cutoff is developing between the Arkansas and White Rivers which,
if not corrected, could have dramatic adverse effects on the
navigation system as well as significant bottomland hardwoods
and pristine environment that provides unique wildlife habitat
in southeast Arkansas.
--Unless corrected, it is inevitable that a major cutoff will occur
negatively impacting navigation on the river, significantly
increasing siltation and dredging requirements and, at worst,
cutting off the lower end of the Navigation System from the
Mississippi River.
--Therefore, a $2 million Congressional Add is needed to further the
study of this area and lead to a solution, which will prevent
erosion, cutoffs, and detrimental siltation.
In addition to these three vital requests, we urge you to continue
to support funding for the Construction, and Operation and Maintenance
of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System which provides
low-cost and dependable transportation for farm products, construction
aggregates, raw materials and finished products important to our
Nation's economic recovery.
It is also most important that you continue construction authority
of the McClellan-Kerr Project until remaining channel stabilization
problems identified by the Little Rock District Corps of Engineers have
been resolved. The Corps needs to develop a permanent solution to the
threat of cutoffs developing in the lower reaches of the navigation
system and to use environmentally sustainable methods under the
existing construction authority.
Mr. Chairman, we appreciate the work of this essential committee
and thank you for your efforts that contribute so much to the social
and economic well-being of the United States of America.
We fully endorse the statement presented to you today by the
Chairman of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee and urge you
to favorably consider these requests that are so important to the
economic recovery of our region and Nation.
colorado
prepared statement of james broderick, chairman for colorado
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, we greatly appreciate
the opportunity to present testimony before this committee. My name is
James Broderick, I am the Executive Director of the Southeastern
Colorado Water Conservancy District and serve as Colorado Chairman for
the Interstate Committee.
The critical water resource projects in the Colorado portion of the
Arkansas River Basin are summarized below. The projects are
environmental and conservation oriented and have regional and multi-
State impact. We are grateful for your leadership and your past
commitment to our area.
This request is for two projects $554,000 to provide for:
--Design, installation, and operation of weighing lysimeters at the
Colorado State University Agricultural Experiment Station at
Rocky Ford, Colorado ($422,000).--Install and operate a set of
three monolithic continuous weighing (direct load cell)
lysimeters to accurately measure evapotranspiration of a
reference crop and of production crops under a variety of field
conditions typical of the lower Arkansas River Valley in
Colorado.
--Enhancement of the CoAgMet Electronic Weather Station Network in
the Lower Arkansas River Basin ($132,000).--Enhance and improve
the existing and new Colorado Agriculture Meteorological
(CoAgMet) weather in the Lower Arkansas River Basin and provide
for its adequate operation and maintenance in order to provide
accurate data for predicting evapotranspiration using the
Penman-Monteith method.
In recent litigation the Penman Monteith method has been recognized
as the preferred procedure for calculating crop water use, replacing
the Blaney-Criddle method historically used in Colorado. The importance
of this change is that the Penman Monteith method, requires more data
and information than Blaney-Criddle in order to be used properly. The
Penman-Monteith method will increasingly be used to calculate crop
consumptive use to determine the transferable consumptive use for
changes of agricultural water rights to municipal use in the Arkansas
River Basin and elsewhere in the State.
We fully endorse the statement presented to you today by the
Chairman of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee. We
appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony to your most important
subcommittee and urge you to favorably consider our request for needed
infrastructure investments in the natural and transportation resources
of our Nation.
kansas
prepared statement of gerald h. holman, chairman for kansas
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Gerald H. Holman,
Senior Vice President of the Wichita Area Chamber of Commerce, Wichita,
Kansas and Chairman of the Kansas Interstate Committee for the Arkansas
Basin Development Association (ABDA). I also serve as Chairman of ABDA.
The Kansas ABDA representatives join with our colleagues from the
other Arkansas River Basin States to form the multi-State Arkansas
Basin Development Association. We fully endorse the summary statement
presented to you by the Chairman of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate
Committee.
We are pleased to report that the Montgomery Point Lock and Dam
Project will be operational by July 2004 and that a formal dedication
ceremony is scheduled for July 16, 2004. Completion of this critical
project through your support will maintain viable navigation for
commerce on the McClellan-Kerr Navigation System. This inland waterway
is vital to the economic health of our multi-State area. The Federal
Government invested $1.3 billion in the project. Other public and
private investment totals in excess of $4.2 billion and over 50,000
jobs have been created. Increasing the depth of the navigation channel
to 12 feet will increase the performance of the navigation system by
allowing shippers to move one-third more cargo per barge. We request
funding in the amount of $1.235 million to complete Phase II of the
Arkansas River System Operations Feasibility Study which will examine
the feasibility of increasing the channel depth.
The critical water resources projects in the Kansas portion of the
Arkansas River Basin are identified below. The projects are safety,
environmental and conservation oriented and all have regional and/or
multi-State impact. We are grateful for your past commitment to
critical needs in Kansas.
We ask for your continued support for this important Bureau of
Reclamation project on behalf of the Wichita/South Central Kansas area:
Equus Beds Aquifer Storage and Recovery Project.--This is the
continuation of a Bureau of Reclamation project jointly endorsed by the
City of Wichita, Groundwater Management District No. 2 and the State of
Kansas. This model technology has proven the feasibility of recharging
a major groundwater aquifer supplying water to nearly 600,000
irrigation, municipal and industrial users. The demonstration project
has successfully recharged more than one billion gallons of water from
the Little Arkansas River. The project is essential to help protect the
aquifer from on-going degradation caused by the migration of saline
water.
The State of Kansas supports this much-needed project in order to
secure the quality of life and economic future for more than 20 percent
of the State's population. The project is included within the Kansas
Water Plan. All interested parties fully support the project as the
needed cornerstone for the area agricultural economy and for the
economy of the Wichita metropolitan area.
The demonstration project has confirmed earlier engineering models
that the full scale aquifer storage and recovery project is feasible
and capable of meeting the increasing water resource needs of the area
to the mid-21st century. Presently, the Equus Beds provide
approximately half of the Wichita regional municipal water supply. The
Equus Beds are also vital to the surrounding agricultural economy.
Environmental protection of the aquifer, which this strategic project
provides, has increasing importance to ensure quality water for the
future since south central Kansas will rely to an even greater extent
on the Equus Beds aquifer for water resources.
The aquifer storage and recovery project is a vital component of
Wichita's comprehensive and integrated water supply strategy. The full
scale design concept for the aquifer storage and recovery project calls
for a multi-year construction program. Phase One is estimated to cost
$17.1 million. The total project involving the capture and recharge of
more than 100 million gallons of water per day is estimated to cost
$110 million over 10 years. This is substantially less costly, both
environmentally and economically, when compared with reservoir
construction or other alternatives.
We are grateful for your previous cost share funding during the
demonstration phase, as a compliment to funds provided by the City of
Wichita. As we enter the construction phase, we request continued
Congressional support:
--by authorizing as a Federal project, the Aquifer Storage and
Recovery Project and directing the Bureau of Reclamation to
participate in its final design and construction to completion;
and
--through continued cost share funding of the full-scale Aquifer
Storage and Recovery Project in the minimum amount of
$1,500,000 for fiscal year 2005.
Many of our agricultural communities have historically experienced
major flood disasters, some of which have resulted in multi-State
hardships involving portions of the State of Oklahoma. The flood of
1998 emphasized again the need to rapidly move needed projects to
completion. Major losses also took place in the Wichita metropolitan
area. Projects in addition to local protection are also important. Our
small communities lack the necessary funds and engineering expertise
and Federal assistance is needed. This committee has given its previous
support to Corps of Engineers projects in Kansas and we request your
continued support for the following:
--Arkansas City, Kansas Flood Protection.--Unfortunately, this
project was not completed prior to the flood of 1998. The flood
demonstrated again the critical need to protect the
environment, homes and businesses from catastrophic damages
from either Walnut River or Arkansas River flooding. When the
project is complete, damage in a multi-county area will be
eliminated and benefits to the State of Oklahoma just a few
miles south will also result. The Secretary of the Army was
authorized to construct the project in fiscal year 1997. The
project is slated for completion in fiscal year 2005 but the
funding is not adequate in the President's budget. We request
your continued support in the amount of $3.619 million, which
is $2.619 million above the President's budget request so the
Corps of Engineers can complete this project.
--Walnut River Basin, Kansas Feasibility Study.--This basin including
the Whitewater and Little Walnut Rivers is located in south
central Kansas. The feasibility study will identify ecosystem
resources, evaluate the system qualities, determine past losses
and current needs, and evaluate potential restoration and
preservation measures. The non-Federal sponsor is the Kansas
Water Office who believes that environmental restoration is a
primary need in the basin. Environmental restoration features
may also stabilize and protect streambanks from erosion and
improve the water quality in the basin. The need for fiscal
year 2005 is $305,000 which is $86,000 more than the
President's budget request.
--Silver-Grouse Creek Reconnaissance Study.--The Silver-Grouse Creek
area in south central Kansas is a location of natural geologic,
archaeological and biologic attributes of the watershed.
Periodic flooding downstream of the reconnaissance area impacts
neighboring Oklahoma. Smaller Kansas communities without
technical, financial and managerial capacities are all
investigating future sources of water supply which potentially
could be satisfied through impoundment of water. A
reconnaissance study will identify water resource, flooding and
ecosystem restoration issues and will also establish whether
there is Federal interest in feasibility level studies. The
Cowley County Commission has requested a feasibility study be
conducted by the Corps. The Lt. Governor of Kansas has
requested an evaluation through the State Water Planning
Process and the Kansas Water Authority has supported this
request. Funding is requested in the amount of $100,000 for
fiscal year 2005.
--Grand Lake Feasibility Study.--A need exists to complete evaluation
of water resource problems in the Grand-Neosho River basin in
Kansas and Oklahoma to evaluate solutions to upstream flooding
problems associated with the adequacy of existing real estate
easements necessary for flood control operations of Grand Lake,
Oklahoma. A study authorized by the Water Resources Development
Act of 1996 was completed in September of 1998 and determined
that if the project were constructed based on current criteria,
additional easements would be required. Section 449 of WRDA
2000 directed the Secretary to evaluate backwater effects
specifically due to flood control operations on land around
Grand Lake. That study indicated that Federal actions have been
a significant cause of the backwater effects and according to
WRDA 2000, the feasibility study should be 100 percent
federally funded. A Feasibility study is necessary to determine
the most cost-effective solution to the real estate
inadequacies. Changes in the operations of the project or other
upstream changes could have a significant impact on flood
control, hydropower, and navigation operations in the Grand
(Neosho) River system and on the Arkansas River basin system,
as well. We request funding in the amount of $450,000 in fiscal
year 2005 to fully fund Feasibility studies evaluating
solutions to upstream flooding associated with existing
easements necessary for flood control operations of Grand Lake.
Although this has been a Congressional add for the past 2
years, no money was made available in the fiscal year 2005
President's budget request.
--Grand (Neosho) Basin Reconnaissance Study.--A need exists for a
basin-wide water resource planning effort in the Grand-Neosho
River basin, apart from the issues associated with Grand Lake,
Oklahoma. A federal interest has been determined from the
reconnaissance study as a result from a Congressional add in
fiscal year 2003 and another add appropriated in fiscal year
2004. Additional funds are needed to continue the feasibility
stage of the project. The study would focus on the evaluation
of institutional measures needed to improve the quality of the
aquatic and terrestrial habitat in the basin and to assist
communities, landowners, and other interests in southeastern
Kansas and northeastern Oklahoma in the development of non-
structural measures to reduce flood damages. We request funding
in the amount of $225,000 in fiscal year 2005.
--Continuing Authorities Programs.--We support funding of needed
programs including the Small Flood Control Projects Program
(Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act, as amended),
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration (Section 206 of the 1996 Water
Resources Development Act, as amended), Ecosystem Restoration
(Section 1135 of the 1986 Water Resources Development Act, as
amended) as well as the Emergency Streambank Stabilization
Program (Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act, as amended).
Smaller communities in Kansas (Iola, Liberal, McPherson,
Augusta, Parsons, Altoona, Kinsley, Newton, Arkansas City,
Coffeyville and Medicine Lodge) have previously requested
assistance from the Corps of Engineers under the Section 205
and Section 14 programs. The City of Wichita is also requesting
funding through these programs to address flooding problems. We
urge you to support an increase of these programs to a $65
million programmatic limit for the Small Flood Control Projects
Program, $35 million for Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, $35
million for the Ecosystem Restoration Program and $25 million
for the Emergency Streambank Stabilization Program.
The Ecosystem Restoration Programs are relatively new programs
which offer the Corps of Engineers a unique opportunity to work
to restore valuable habitat, wetlands, and other important
environmental features which previously could not be
considered. Preliminary Restoration Plan studies are underway
at Newton, Garden City and Neosho County.
The Planning Assistance to States Program under section 22 of the
Water Resources Development Act of 1974, as amended, provides
federal funding to assist the States in water resource
planning. The State of Kansas is grateful for previous funding
under this program which has assisted small Kansas communities
in cost sharing needed resource planning as called for and
approved in the Kansas State Water Plan. We request continued
funding of this program at the $10 million programmatic limit
which will allow the State of Kansas to receive the $500,000
limit.
Finally, we are very grateful that both the Corps of Engineers and
Bureau of Reclamation have the expertise needed for the development and
protection of water resources infrastructure. It is essential to have
the integrity and continuity these agencies provide on major public
projects. Your continued support of these vital agencies, including
funding, will be appreciated. Our infrastructure must be maintained and
where needed, enhanced for the future.
Mr. Chairman and members of these committees, we thank you for the
dedicated manner in which you have dealt with the Water Resources
Programs and for allowing us to present our funding requests.
Thank you very much.
oklahoma
prepared statement of james m. hewgley, jr., chairman for oklahoma
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am James M. Hewgley,
Jr., Oklahoma Chairman of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate
Committee, from Tulsa, Oklahoma.
It is my privilege to present this statement on behalf of the
Oklahoma Members of our committee in support of adequate funding for
water resource development projects in our area of the Arkansas River
Basin. Other members of the committee are: Mr. Ted Coombes, Tulsa; Mr.
A. Earnest Gilder, Muskogee; Mr. Terry McDonald, Tulsa; and Mr. Lew
Meibergen, Enid, who also serves as Chairman of the combined Arkansas
River Basin Interstate Committee.
Together with representatives of the other Arkansas River Basin
States, we fully endorse the statement presented to you by the Chairman
of the Arkansas River Basin Interstate Committee. We appreciate the
opportunity to present our views of the special needs of our States
concerning several studies and projects.
Montgomery Point Lock and Dam--Montgomery Point, Arkansas.--We have
come to you with requests for funding for this much-needed project for
many years now. We are pleased to tell you this year we will not ask
for additional funds for this project as it is due to be operational by
July. We will have a formal dedication on July 16, 2004 at the site. We
are very grateful for your help and support to see this project through
to its completion.
There may well be some funds needed for final cleanup and
additional maintenance and operational equipment. In that event the
Corps of Engineers should be able to schedule those funds from their
regular appropriations.
Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to point out to this distinguished
committee that this navigation system has brought low cost water
transportation to Oklahoma, Arkansas and the surrounding States. There
has been over $5.5 billion invested in the construction and development
of the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation system by the Federal
Government ($1.3 billion) and the public and private ($4.2 billion+)
sector, resulting in the creation of over 50,000 jobs in this partnered
project.
Maintenance of the navigation system.--We request additional
funding in the amount of $2 million, over and above normal funding, for
deferred channel maintenance. These funds would be used for such things
as repair of bank stabilization work, needed advance maintenance
dredging, and other repairs needed on the system's components that have
deteriorated over the past three decades.
In addition to the system-wide needed maintenance items mentioned
above, the budget for the Corps of Engineers for the past several years
has been insufficient to allow proper maintenance of the McClellan-Kerr
Arkansas River Navigation System--Oklahoma portion. As a result, the
backlog of maintenance items has continued to increase. If these
important maintenance issues are not addressed soon, the reliability of
the system will be jeopardized. The portion of the system in Oklahoma
alone is responsible for returning $2.6 billion in annual benefits to
the regional economy. We therefore request that $3.8 million be added
to the budget to accomplish the critical infrastructure maintenance
items following: Repair weir at L&D 14; repair tainter gates at L&D 17;
upgrade gate motor controls at L&D 14; dewater, inspect, repair Locks
14, 15, & 16; repair tainter gates at L&D 18; L&D 14-18--remote control
tainter gates; R.S. Kerr--repair miter gates; R.S. Kerr--repair Lock 15
support cell; replace pole lighting--Locks 14-18; replace tainter gate
limit switches--R.S. Kerr. These are the very worst of the needed
repairs of the many awaiting proper preventive maintenance and repair.
Tow Haulage Equipment--Oklahoma.--We also request funding of $2.5
million to initiate the installation of tow haulage equipment on the
locks located along the Arkansas River Portion of the McClellan-Kerr
Arkansas River Navigation System. Total cost for these three locks is
$4.7 million. This project will involve installation of tow haulage
equipment on W.D. Mayo Lock and Dam No. 14, Robert S. Kerr Lock and Dam
No. 15, and Webbers Falls Lock and Dam No. 16, on the Oklahoma portion
of the waterway. The tow haulage equipment is needed to make
transportation of barges more efficient and economical by allowing less
time for tows to pass through the various locks.
Arkansas River System Operations Feasibility Study, Arkansas and
Oklahoma.--We are especially pleased that the budget includes funds to
continue the Arkansas River Navigation Study, a feasibility study which
is examining opportunities to optimize the Arkansas River system. The
system of multipurpose lakes in Arkansas and Oklahoma on the Arkansas
River and its tributaries supports the McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River
Navigation System, which was opened for navigation to the Port of
Catoosa near Tulsa, Oklahoma, in 1970. The navigation system consists
of 445 miles of waterway that passes through the States of Oklahoma and
Arkansas. This study would optimize the reservoirs in Oklahoma and
Arkansas that provide flows into the river, with a view toward
improving the number of days per year that the navigation system would
accommodate tows. Phase II of this study will also examine the
feasibility of increasing the depth of the navigation channel to 12.
This will allow the shippers to move one-third more cargo per barge
drafting 11\1/2\ at near the current rate for 8\1/2\ draft barges.
This study could have significant impact on the economic development
opportunities in the States of Oklahoma, Arkansas and the surrounding
States. Due to the critical need for this study, we request funding of
$1.235 million, which is greater than shown in the budget, to complete
feasibility studies in fiscal year 2005.
The Power Plant at Webbers Falls Lock and Dam on the Arkansas River
has suffered from greatly reduced reliability due to turbine design
problems. Because this is a run-of-the-river facility with no storage,
energy spilled due to off-line units is energy that is lost forever. A
feasibility study recommending major rehabilitation of this unit has
been approved by the office of the Chief of Engineers.
Similar problems have been experienced at Ozark-Jeta Taylor Lock
and Dam on the Arkansas River in Arkansas. Congress approved a new
start and funding to begin the major rehabilitation of the Ozark
powerhouse in fiscal year 2003. The administration's fiscal year 2005
budget request includes $5 million in Construction General funding to
continue this major rehabilitation.
The turbines at the Ozark project are identical to the slant-shaft
turbines employed at Webbers Falls. The major rehabilitation plans for
both projects call for bidders to submit plans for new turbine designs,
with the two best bidders selected to proceed to model testing of their
designs before choosing the best and winning bid. By combining the
design selection for both projects into a single bid selection process
the Corps estimated that millions of dollars could be saved. To achieve
these savings, Congress would have to approve a new construction start
and initial funding for the major rehabilitation of the Webbers Falls
powerhouse. We respectfully urge the committee to approve the new start
and provide $4 million in initial Construction, General funding for the
appropriations bill. Please know that every dollar appropriated to this
project, plus interest, will be repaid to the U.S. Treasury through the
rates charged for the sale of this hydroelectricity.
Miami, Oklahoma and Vicinity Feasibility Study.--We request funding
of $750,000 to move into the feasibility stage for the vicinity in
Ottawa County including and surrounding Miami, Oklahoma in the Grand
(Neosho) Basin. Water resource planning-related concerns include
chronic flooding, ecosystem impairment, poor water quality, subsidence,
chat piles, mine shafts, health effects, and Native American issues.
The State of Oklahoma's desire is to address the watershed issues in a
holistic fashion and restore the watershed to acceptable levels. Study
alternatives could include structural and non-structural flood damage
measures, creation of riverine corridors for habitat and flood storage,
development of wetlands to improve aquatic habitat and other measures
to enhance the quality and availability of habitat and reduce flood
damages.
Oologah Lake Watershed Feasibility Study.--We request funding of
$326,000 which is $129,000 more than the President's budget request for
ongoing feasibility studies at Oologah Lake and in the upstream
watershed. The lake is an important water supply source for the City of
Tulsa and protection of the lake and maintaining and enhancing the
quality of the water is important for the economic development of the
City. Recent concerns have been expressed by the City of Tulsa and
others regarding potential water quality issues that impact water
users, as well as important aquatic and terrestrial habitat. Concerns
are related to sediment loading and turbidity, oilfield-related
contaminants and nutrient loading.
Illinois River Watershed Reconnaissance Study.--We request funding
in the amount of $100,000 to conduct a reconnaissance study of the
water resource problems of the Illinois River Basin. The Illinois River
watershed is experiencing continued water resource development needs
and is the focus of ongoing Corps and other agency investigations.
However, additional flows are sought downstream of the Lake Tenkiller
Dam and there are increasing watershed influences upstream of Lake
Tenkiller which impact on the quality of water available for fish and
wildlife, municipal and industrial water supply users, and recreation
users of the Lake Tenkiller and Illinois River waters.
Grand (Neosho) Basin Reconnaissance Study.--We request funding in
the amount of $225,000 to conduct a feasibility study of the water
resource problems in the Grand (Neosho) Basin in Oklahoma and Kansas.
There is a need for a basin-wide water resource planning effort in the
Grand-Neosho River basin, apart from the issues associated with Grand
Lake, Oklahoma. The reconnaissance study indicated that there is a
Federal interest in this project and the feasibility will focus on the
evaluation of institutional measures which could assist communities,
landowners, and other interests in northeastern Oklahoma and
southeastern Kansas in the development of non-structural measures to
reduce flood damages in the basin. The reconnaissance study was a
Congressional add new start, but no funding was put into the fiscal
year 2005 President's budget request to continue into the feasibility
stage.
Grand Lake Feasibility Study.--A need exists to evaluate water
resource problems in the Grand-Neosho River basin in Kansas and
Oklahoma to evaluate solutions to upstream flooding problems associated
with the adequacy of existing real estate easements necessary for flood
control operations of Grand Lake, Oklahoma. A study authorized by the
Water Resources Development Act of 1996 was completed in September of
1998 and determined that if the project were constructed based on
current criteria, additional easements would be required. Section 449
of WRDA 2000 directed the Secretary to evaluate backwater effects
specifically due to flood control operations on land around Grand Lake.
That study indicated that Federal actions have been a significant cause
of the backwater effects and according to WRDA 2000, the feasibility
study should be 100 percent federally funded. A Feasibility study is
necessary to determine the most cost-effective solution to the real
estate inadequacies. Changes in the operations of the project or other
upstream changes could have a significant impact on flood control,
hydropower and navigation operations in the Grand (Neosho) River system
and on the Arkansas River Basin system, as well. We urge you to provide
$450,000 to fund feasibility studies for this important project in
fiscal year 2004 and to direct the Corps of Engineers to execute the
study at full Federal expense. This project has been a Congressional
add for the past 2 years, but there are no funds in the fiscal year
2005 President's budget request to continue this project.
Tenkiller Dam Safety Project.--We are pleased that the President's
budget includes funds to advance work for Flood Control and other water
resource needs in Oklahoma. Of special interest to our committee is
funding for the Tenkiller Ferry Lakes Dam Safety Assurance Project in
Oklahoma. This project is slated to be complete in fiscal year 2006 and
continued funding is necessary for safety purposes and economic
efficiencies. We would like to see Tenkiller funded at the $4.4 million
level, which is the Corps' capability for fiscal year 2005.
Canton Dam Safety.--We request that funding in the amount of $5.0
million be provided to continue the Canton Lake Dam Safety Project. The
stability of the existing spillway requires restrictions on the flood
control pool. The flood pool can only be held to a 17-year flood event.
Installation of steel anchors is required to stabilize the existing
spillway so that the project can be operated as originally designed.
Funds were provided by Congress in the fiscal year 2004 Appropriations
Bill to work on this important project, but the administration has not
included any funds in the fiscal year 2005 President's budget.
Section 205.--Although the Small Flood Control Projects Program
addresses flood problems which generally impact smaller communities and
rural areas and would appear to benefit only those communities, the
impact of those projects on economic development crosses county,
regional and sometimes State boundaries. The communities served by the
program frequently do not have the funds or engineering expertise
necessary to provide adequate flood damage reduction measures for their
citizens. Continued flooding can have a devastating impact on community
development and regional economic stability. The program is extremely
beneficial and has been recognized nationwide as a vital part of
community development, so much so in fact that there is currently a
backlog of requests from communities who have requested assistance
under this program. There is limited funding available for these
projects and we urge this program be increased to an annual limit of
$65 million.
We also request your continued support of the Flood Plain
Management Services Program (Section 206 of the 1960 Flood Control Act)
which authorizes the Corps of Engineers to use its technical expertise
to provide guidance in flood plain management matters to all private,
local, State and Federal entities. The objective of the program is to
support comprehensive flood plain management planning. The program is
one of the most beneficial programs available for reducing flood losses
and provides assistance to officials from cities, counties, States and
Indian Tribes to ensure that new facilities are not built in areas
prone to floods. Assistance includes flood warning, flood proofing, and
other flood damage reduction measures, and critical flood plain
information is provided on a cost-reimbursable basis to home owners,
mortgage companies, realtors and others for use in flood plain
awareness and flood insurance requirements.
We also request your support of the Planning Assistance to States
Program (Section 22 of the 1974 Water Resources Development Act) which
authorizes the Corps of Engineers to use its technical expertise in
water and related land resource management to help States and Indian
Tribes solve their water resource problems. The program is used by many
States to support their State Water Plans. As natural resources
diminish, the need to manage those resources becomes more urgent. We
urge your continued support of this program as it supports States and
Native American Tribes in developing resource management plans which
will benefit citizens for years to come. The program is very valuable
and effective, matching Federal and non-Federal funds to provide cost-
effective engineering expertise and support to assist communities,
States and tribes in the development of plans for the management,
optimization and preservation of basin, watershed and ecosystem
resources. The Water Resources Development Act of 1996 increased the
annual program limit from $6 million to $10 million and we urge this
program be fully funded to the programmatic limit of $10 million.
We strongly urge the Appropriations Committee to raise the Corps of
Engineers' budget to $5 billion to help get delayed construction
projects back on schedule and to reduce the deferred maintenance
backlog which is out of control. This will help the Corps of Engineers
meet the obligations of the Federal Government to people of this great
country.
Concerning another related matter, we have deep concerns about the
attempt to re-authorize the Endangered Species Act without significant
beneficial reforms. If a bill is passed through without reforms, it
will be devastating to industry and the country as a whole. We strongly
urge you to take a hard look at any bill concerning this re-
authorization and insure that it contains reasonable and meaningful
reforms. We urge the re-authorization of the act with reforms at the
earliest possible time.
Mr. Chairman, we appreciate this opportunity to present our view on
these subjects.
______
Prepared Statement of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Development
Authority
Mr. Chairman, I am Donald G. Waldon, Administrator of the
Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Development Authority. I am honored to
submit the authority's recommendations to you and your committee
concerning fiscal year 2005 funding needs for the operation and
maintenance of the Tenn-Tom Waterway and the Tennessee River system as
well as construction of new locks at Kentucky and Chickamauga Dams.
This is the 44th consecutive year the waterway compact has provided its
recommendations to the U.S. Congress.
The Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway Development Authority is a Federal
interstate compact ratified in 1958 by the Congress to promote the
development of the Tenn-Tom and its economic and commerce potential. It
is comprised of the States of Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and
Tennessee.
We, like most other water resources development interests, are most
concerned if not alarmed about the Office of Management and Budget's
continued indifference to ports and waterways as a national budget
priority. The proposed budget for fiscal year 2005 for these and other
programs of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is no exception. While the
proposed budget adequately funds construction of some new locks it
woefully under funds others, such as Kentucky and Chickamauga Locks on
the Tennessee River. However, the proposed budget's most serious
deficiency is its inability to adequately fund the operation and
maintenance of completed projects. More Federal investments in the
Nation's infrastructure, including its ports and waterways, will help
stimulate our economy and create more job opportunities. Yet the
administration's budget if approved will result in further
deterioration of locks and other waterway structures, many that were
built over 50 years ago, resulting in more closures and disruption of
commercial shipments and less economic growth. Given the importance of
these projects for helping the Nation to achieve full economic
recovery, we recommend that the Congress increase the Corps' total
funding next year to $5.5 billion or about $600 million more than that
available this year.
TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL AND MS
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Fiscal Fiscal Year 2005
Year 2003 Year 2004 ---------------------------
Approp. Approp. Bud. Req. Recomm.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation & Maintenance..................................... 24.0 22.5 22.254 25.6
Wildlife Mitigation Payments To Alabama and Mississippi..... 2.0 1.5 2.0 2.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We greatly appreciate the support your committee and the Congress
have given to the Tenn-Tom in the past. The waterway saves shippers
some $90 million in transportation costs each year. It has helped
attract over $5 billion in new private investments since its
completion, creating over 50,000 new jobs in the waterway region. Its
attractive recreational facilities draw nearly 3 million visitors
annually. Your continued strong support is critically important in
fiscal year 2005 if the waterway is to continue to generate economic
benefits at this level.
The proposed budget will not provide sufficient funds for the Corps
to adequately maintain the navigation channel. Three locks are
scheduled for closure and repairs this fall that will cost over $1.5
million. With no increase in funding provided, this extraordinary
expense will preclude other important maintenance activities such as
dredging and resource management.
We are pleased that $2 million has been budgeted to reimburse the
States of Alabama and Mississippi to manage nearly 126,000 acres of
wildlife habitat that is part of the Tenn-Tom Wildlife Mitigation
Project. These funds are sufficient for the management of these lands.
However, no funds are available for the Corps to manage some 46,000
acres of other Federal lands that are an important part of the
mitigation project.
The $25.6 million recommended for the operation and maintenance of
the Tenn-Tom will ensure the waterway is adequately maintained during
2005 and generates its expected benefits. While there are other needs,
the recommended increase of $3,246,000 is important to keep the
waterway channel open to commercial navigation, the Corps' top priority
program as shown below:
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provide adequate capacity of upland disposal areas to 1.0
accept dredged materials..................................
Additional dredging needed to keep channel open to commerce 1.3
Determine measures to limit shoaling in Aberdeen Lake, the 0.5
waterway's most costly silting problem....................
Initiate corrective measures to eliminate a serious safety 0.3
problem at Bevill Lock and Dam............................
Eradicate noxious aquatic weeds in lakes and channels (the 0.146
public's No. 1 complaint about the waterway...............
------------
Total................................................ 3.246
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Corps of Engineers could efficiently use an additional $10
million to begin addressing some of the $12 million of urgently needed
but indefinitely deferred repairs to the waterway's facilities that
have accumulated due to of severe budget constraints since fiscal year
1997.
Tennessee River, TN, AL, MS, and KY
The administration's budget does not provide sufficient funds to
adequately maintain the commercial navigation features of the Tennessee
River system. Funds are not available to make scheduled repairs at most
all of the nine locks. Maintenance dredging needed at public ports at
Florence and Decatur, AL will be deferred as well as replacement of a
mobile crane needed at Nickajack Lock, TN.
We recommend that $21,449,000 or an increase of $6,239,000 be
appropriated to fund the above activities. This recommended increase
includes $350,000 and $200,000 to dredge the public ports at Florence
and Decatur, AL, respectively. The Tennessee River is one of the
busiest waterways in the Nation.
Kentucky Lock, KY
Completion of a new lock to replace the nearly 60-year-old,
outmoded lock at Kentucky Dam will eliminate one of the most costly
bottlenecks on the entire waterway system. A commercial tow now waits
an average of 4 hours to transit the lock. These delays continue to
worsen as commerce grows each year. We are very disappointed the
proposed budget effectively mothballs construction of this most
important waterway improvement. The proposed budget of $25,000,000 not
only precludes award of any new contracts it is $10,000,000 short of
that needed to reimburse contractors for work now underway. Such a
budget decision is unconscionable.
We recommend that $55,000,000 be appropriated to keep construction
of this high priority project on a more reasonable and efficient
schedule. This level of funding will maintain a schedule in fiscal year
2005 that will enable the lock to be completed in fiscal year 2013
compared to 2023 or 10 years later based on a schedule anticipated by
the administration budget. This is unacceptable, especially when the
commercial users are paying for one-half of the new lock's cost.
Chickamauga Lock, TN
We greatly appreciate the Congress authorizing construction of a
new lock to replace the old and deteriorating chamber at Chickamauga
Dam in last year's bill. The $5,400,000 appropriated this year will
permit the Corps of Engineers to initiate construction and continue the
detailed design needed for the new 110 600 lock. Regrettably, the
proposed budget does not provide any funds for construction in 2005,
effectively delaying start of construction until at least 2006. Unless
work begins soon, the new lock will not be available when the old
structure is taken out of operation during the next decade because of
safety concerns. This closure would land lock 175 miles of the
Tennessee River, crippling industries, including defense-related, and
other shippers, located in east Tennessee.
We respectfully urge the committee to provide $17,000,000 to
continue construction of this much needed lock replacement. It is also
recommended that $1,480,000 be provided to allow the Corps to continue
repairs to the existing lock to ensure its continued operation until
the new lock is completed.
Thank you again for allowing the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway
Development Authority to submit these recommendations to you for your
consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of Kansas City, Missouri
Mr. Chairman, the City of Kansas City, Missouri, welcomes this
opportunity to provide written testimony to the Subcommittee on Energy
and Water Development regarding appropriations for fiscal year 2005 and
requests that this written testimony be included in the formal hearing
record.
The City of Kansas City, Missouri, in cooperation with the Corps of
Engineers, presently have six major flood damage reduction projects
underway. All of these projects are essential to the sustainment and
revitalization of prominent and long-standing commercial, business and
industrial communities in this region, and when complete will provide
substantially increased levels of flood protection. Some of these
projects are located on urban streams subject to severe flash flooding,
which run along major roadways, resulting in an extremely hazardous
threat to public safety.
Blue River Channel, Kansas City, Missouri--$8,000,000; Continue
Construction
The Blue River Channel project, currently under construction,
represents our most pressing need and for fiscal year 2005 we are
requesting that this project be appropriated $8,000,000. This will
allow the Corps to complete work that is already under construction,
and to make some progress on the next phase of the Blue River project,
which includes a grade control structure. That structure is necessary
to drop the flow line of the existing channel bed to that of the newly
deepened channel downstream, which prevents the flow in the stream from
eroding the channel bed upstream.
The Blue River Channel project when complete will significantly
reduce the flood threat to inhabitants of the Blue Valley.
Additionally, the river winds through a long-standing business district
that, after much severe flooding, has now been partially abandoned. The
channel improvement will bring many of these sites out of the
floodplain and will reduce flooding depths by 6 to 8 feet. This will
serve as a means to help reclaim Brownfield sites in the valley for
redevelopment and help to rebuild a once thriving Blue Valley
community.
Turkey Creek Basin, Kansas and Missouri--$2,500,000; Continue
Construction
Another very important project in the Kansas City region is the
Turkey Creek Basin, Kansas and Missouri. As mentioned above this area
suffered a devastating flood in 1998, which is typical every 3 to 5
years. Providing flood protection for this highly traveled business
corridor has proven to be very complex and that problem had been
studied for nearly 35 years. Finally in 2003 the project received
reauthorization at a total cost of $74,000,000, with a defined cost
share of $46,000,000 Federal and $28,000,000 local. Major features of
the Federal project include channel widening, a levee, hillside
interceptors, and modifications to the Turkey Creek tunnel.
Funding is requested in the amount of $2,500,000 to continue
construction of a flood damage reduction project that will serve to
protect the community along Southwest Blvd. in the Kansas City
metropolitan area of both Kansas and Missouri. In the alternative, if
an amount less than that requested can be appropriated, language is
requested such that ``The non-Federal Interest shall receive credit
toward the non-Federal share of project costs for construction work
performed by the non-Federal interest before execution of the project
cooperation agreement if the Secretary finds that the work performed by
the non-Federal interest is integral to the project.''
This language will allow for the Unified Government of Kansas City,
Kansas and Wyandotte County, and the City of Kansas City, Missouri to
proceed with the Turkey Creek Tunnel modifications identified in the
Final Report of the Chief of Engineers. These modifications are
necessary to insure that the increased flow carried to the tunnel by
the widened channel upstream can be safely passed through the tunnel to
the Kansas River. This channel widening was designed by the Corps of
Engineers and included in the Chief's report, and is currently under
construction by the Kansas Department of Transportation.
Blue River Basin, Kansas City, Missouri--$4,000,000; Continue
Construction
The Blue River Basin, Kansas City, Missouri project, commonly known
as the Dodson Industrial District Levee, is also located along the Blue
River. Construction is currently underway on the floodwall portion and
associated work, which is scheduled to be complete in 2005. Funding is
required to pay for this work already under contract. The project
requires modification of two major 96-inch diameter sewer structures in
order for the levee-floodwall to function properly. The work on these
elements needs to proceed in such a manner to assure that these
facilities are protected during construction, are able to continue to
function properly, and are not unnecessarily exposed to damage during
an extended construction schedule.
The City has been working aggressively to honor our commitments to
this project, and supports it moving forward in the most expeditious
manner possible in order that this flood protection, which is essential
to our having safe emergency access to a large portion of the City
south of the Missouri River during flooding situations, can be
maintained via access from the newly completed midtown expressway known
as Bruce R. Watkins Drive. The City has programmed $5 million over 3
years to meet our local sponsor cost share. The project consists of a
$17 million levee that will protect $240 million in property investment
from the 500-year flood.
Kansas Citys, Kansas and Missouri--$650,000; Continue Feasibility Study
Study area encompasses two major rivers and seven levee units, and
has four local sponsors. The levees are located along the Missouri and
Kansas Rivers through the heart of the Kansas City metropolitan area,
and protect its most densely developed business regions from floods.
The 1993 flood came within inches of topping the Central Industrial
District Levee, evidencing a need to evaluate how the seven levee units
comprising the flood protection system for the Kansas City area
functions as a whole, and to determine inadequacies and inconsistencies
in the levels of protection. The units are Argentine, Armourdale, and
Fairfax-Jersey Creek, all in Kansas; Central Industrial District, in
Kansas and Missouri; and North Kansas City, Birmingham and East
Bottoms, all in Missouri. Construction of these levees began in the
1940's and was completed in 1980. The Feasibility Study began in
September 2000, with an estimated cost of $2,782,323 cost shared 50
percent Federal--50 percent local funds. Funding is requested to
continue the Feasibility Study to develop and study possible project
alternatives, perform environmental studies, and select the plan
recommended for construction. The 1970 Flood Control Act, Section 216,
provides a continuing authority to reexamine completed Federal
projects.
Brush Creek Basin, Kansas and Missouri--$200,000; Continue
Reconnaissance Study
Because this project provides the mechanism by which the region can
work cooperatively using a watershed based approach to achieve the
allied purposes of flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration and
other purposes, it is important that adequate funding be provided to
collect the relevant data, coordinate among the many stakeholders, and
establish cost sharing relationships needed to move forward. The City
of Kansas City, Missouri and Johnson County, Kansas have committed
significant local resources toward the completion of the flood
mitigation and stream restoration work along Brush Creek, and are
committed to continuing to support this effort and working together
with the Mid-America Regional Council, Corps of Engineers,
Environmental Protection Agency, Brush Creek Community Partners, and
other stakeholders to achieve the goals established and agreed upon as
part of the Brush Creek Basin Wide Study. Brush Creek is known as the
``Cultural Corridor'' in Kansas City and serves as a highly traveled
business, residential and recreational corridor. This study effort
aligns with the goals established by the residents, corporations,
cities and other stakeholders along the creek.
Swope Park Industrial Area, Kansas City, Missouri--$200,000; Continue
Design
Development of the 53-acre Industrial Park was substantially
completed prior to enactment of the Federal Flood Insurance Act, and
the entire area is now located within the 100-year floodplain as
currently mapped by FEMA, and is largely within the floodway. The Swope
Park Industrial Area has limited access, one-way in and out, with an
active railroad track crossing near the entrance to the Park, in any
given year there is a 1 in 5 chance that flooding will interrupt
roadway access to the Park, and an approximately 1 in 7 chance that
buildings will be flooded. Especially hazard flood conditions, and a
threat to public safety, exist as people and businesses must decide
whether to evacuate the Park during the initial stages of flooding, or
risk being stuck with no surface means of egress if the water continues
to rise.
Main Street Sewer Outfall/Riverfront Heritage Trail/Missouri River Bank
Stabilization--$7,000,000; Continue Construction
We are also seeking funding for these projects to provide a safe
and viable Kansas City Riverfront. This Missouri Riverfront project is
comprised of five components being accomplished through a coordinated
effort by public, private and non-profit organizations including Kansas
City River Trails, Inc., the Port Authority of Kansas City, United
States Corps of Engineers and the City of Kansas City, Missouri.
Funding to complete this essential link between development both East
and West of the project site is being sought from a variety of public
and private sources to create a revitalized riverfront.
The bank of the Missouri River collapsed in May of 2003 causing
significant damage to the Main Street Sewer Outfall that drains a large
portion of the downtown Kansas City basin. The City is in the process
of constructing repairs for the sewer outfall and some slope
stabilization. This East/West trail connector is a vital segment of the
Kansas City Riverfront Heritage Trail system within the Riverfront West
area, and when constructed it will complete a bi-State bicycle,
pedestrian and green space trail system stretching from the Richard L.
Berkley Riverfront Park and Isle of Capri Casino at the east to the
original settlement of the Town of Kansas and the Indian Cemetery in
Kansas City, Kansas at the west. The Trail includes a series of
interpretive artworks, kiosks and signs commemorating Lewis and Clark's
Corps of Discovery journey and Kansas City's relationship to its
rivers. The Habitat Restoration will be constructed by the U.S. Corps
of Engineers in corporation with the Port Authority of Kansas City
Missouri. Project estimates and funding availabilities are shown in the
table below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding
Project Component Estimate Available Funding Sought
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Main Street Sewer Outfall....................................... $3,500,000 $220,000 $3,280,000
Slope Stabilization............................................. 2,400,000 380,000 2,020,000
East-West Trail Connection...................................... 1,750,000 30,000 1,720,000
Interpretive Center............................................. 1,600,000 200,000 1,400,000
Habitat Restoration............................................. 2,500,000 500,000 2,000,000
-----------------------------------------------
Total..................................................... 11,750,000 1,330,000 10,420,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The City of Kansas City, Missouri appreciates the past assistance
we have received with local water resource projects. We are prepared to
provide our share of funding in the future, and respectfully request
that Federal funding adequate to keep these very important projects
moving toward the soonest possible completion be appropriated in the
upcoming year.
______
Prepared Statement of the Upper Mississippi River Basin Association
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's UMRBA
Request Recommendation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction General:
Upper Miss. River System 28.000 33.250
Environmental Mgt. Program.........
Major Rehabilitation of Locks and 13.600 13.600
Dams 19 and 24.....................
Major Rehabilitation of Locks and .............. 21.700
Dams 3, 11, and 27.................
Continuing Authorities (Section 13.500 25.000
1135)..............................
Continuing Authorities (Section 206) 10.000 25.000
Operation and Maintenance:
O&M of the Upper Mississippi 167.733 231.759
Navigation System..................
General Investigations:
Upper Mississippi and Illinois .............. 18.000
Waterway Navigation and Ecosystem
Improvements PED...................
Upper Mississippi River .994 1.400
Comprehensive Plan.................
Research and Development............ 20.800 20.800
Stream Gaging (U.S. Geological .600 .600
Survey)............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Upper Mississippi River Basin Association (UMRBA) is the
organization created in 1981 by the Governors of Illinois, Iowa,
Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin to serve as a forum for coordinating
river-related State programs and policies and for collaborating with
Federal agencies on regional issues. As such, the UMRBA works closely
with the Corps of Engineers on a variety of programs for which the
Corps has responsibility. Of particular interest to the basin States
are the following:
construction general
Environmental Management Program
For the past 17 years, the Upper Mississippi River System
Environmental Management Program (EMP) has been the premier program for
restoring the river's habitat and monitoring the river's ecological
health. As such, the EMP is key to achieving Congress' vision of the
Upper Mississippi as a ``nationally significant ecosystem and a
nationally significant commercial navigation system.'' Congress
reaffirmed its support for this program in the 1999 Water Resources
Development Act by reauthorizing the EMP as a continuing authority and
increasing the annual authorized appropriation to $33.52 million. The
UMRBA is pleased that the administration has requested $28 million for
the EMP in fiscal year 2005. The fact that the administration has
identified the EMP as one of eight Corps projects ``that are the
highest priorities in the Nation,'' is tribute to the EMP's success.
Yet annual appropriations for the EMP have fallen short of the
authorized funding levels for the past 8 years and the program is still
suffering from the dramatic 40 percent cut it suffered in fiscal year
2003. Thus, the UMRBA strongly urges Congress to appropriate full
funding of $33.52 million for the EMP in fiscal year 2005.
EMP habitat restoration projects include activities such as
building and stabilizing islands, controlling water levels and side
channel flows, constructing dikes, and dredging backwaters and side
channels. At the administration's funding level of $28 million,
approximately $17.7 million would be allocated to the planning, design,
and construction of such habitat projects. In particular, this level of
investment will support planning and design for 20 projects and
construction work on 18 projects, bringing construction to completion
on 5 of these projects. Approximately $8.7 million would be devoted to
the EMP Long Term Resource Monitoring program (LTRMP) under an EMP
budget of $28 million. This funding is critical to the future viability
of the EMP's monitoring component, which has suffered from funding
shortfalls in recent years. Data collection related to water quality,
sediment, fish, invertebrates, and vegetation has been reduced or
suspended; bathymetric surveys have been eliminated; laboratory
analysis has been cut back; data analyses and science planning has been
curtailed; and land cover mapping has been postponed. Planning is
currently underway to restructure and redesign the program to enhance
its ability to meet increasing demands for information with decreasing
resources. But it is essential that funding be increased in fiscal year
2005 to revive many of the essential functions that have been
eliminated or deferred.
Meeting the ecological restoration and monitoring needs on the
Upper Mississippi River with renewed commitment and enhanced investment
is critical. Within the next few months, the Corps is expected to
release the draft feasibility report from its Navigation Study on the
Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway System, including a
recommended plan for improving both the navigation infrastructure and
ecosystem. Yet, without a strong EMP program as one of the tools to
meet river environmental needs, it is unlikely that the plan can be
successfully implemented. The UMRBA thus strongly urges that the EMP be
fully funded at $33.52 million in fiscal year 2005.
Major Rehabilitation of Locks and Dams
Given that most of the locks and dams on the Upper Mississippi
River System are over 60 years old, they are in serious need of repair
and rehabilitation. For the past 18 years, the Corps has been
undertaking major rehabilitation of individual facilities throughout
the navigation system in an effort to extend their useful life. This
work is critical to ensuring the system's reliability and safety.
The UMRBA supports the Corps' fiscal year 2005 budget request for
major rehabilitation work at Lock and Dam 19 ($4.8 million) and Lock
and Dam 24 ($8.8 million). Lock and Dam 19, at Keokuk, Iowa, is in
particular need of rehabilitation given the deterioration of its gates,
resulting in dangerous conditions. Lock and Dam 24, located near
Clarksville, Missouri, is nearing completion of the first phase of its
$87 million rehabilitation. Lock wall concrete repairs are underway and
expected to be completed in fiscal year 2005. In addition, fiscal year
2005 funding will support continued dam tainter gate rehabilitation.
The UMRBA also supports funding for major rehabilitation of Lock
and Dam 3 ($5 million), Lock and Dam 11 ($10.9 million), and Locks 27
($5.8 million), none of which are currently funded in the
administration's fiscal year 2005 budget request. In the case of Lock
and Dam 11, the lack of funding is particularly problematic because
work is already underway. Continued funding is needed in fiscal year
2005 to proceed with bulkhead construction and installation and lock
repair. With regard to Lock and Dam 3, funds are needed in fiscal year
2005 to complete the reevaluation report and begin plans and
specifications for correcting safety problems at this facility. Lock
and Dam 3, near Red Wing, Minnesota is located on a bend in the river,
which causes an outdraft current that tends to sweep down-bound tows
toward the gated dam. A related problem is maintaining the structural
integrity of a set of three earthen embankments connecting the gated
dam to high ground on the Wisconsin side. Rehabilitation of Locks 27 is
also critical, given its location at a critical juncture in the inland
waterway system, through which traffic on the Mississippi, Illinois,
and Missouri Rivers passes. The rehabilitation plan calls for
rehabilitation of various structural, electrical, and mechanical
components of this structure, which is over 50 years old.
Continuing Authorities (Section 1135 and 206)
The Corps of Engineers' Section 1135 and Section 206 continuing
authorities provide an important tool for addressing ecosystem
restoration needs, particularly in riverine environments. The three
Corps Districts in the Upper Mississippi River Basin have undertaken
many such projects over the past few years. While some projects are on
the Mississippi River, others are located on tributaries, wetlands, and
watersheds throughout the basin. There are currently more projects than
can be supported with the limited funding proposed in fiscal year 2005.
While the Section 1135 and Section 206 programs are each authorized to
be funded at $25 million annually, the President's fiscal year 2005
budget requests only $13.5 million for Section 1135 and $10.0 million
for Section 206. Given that this relatively small amount is intended to
support projects nationwide, it is not surprising that many projects in
the 5 States of the Upper Mississippi River Basin remain unfunded. For
example, in the Rock Island District alone, there are 5 new and 15 on-
going Section 206 projects and 2 on-going Section 1135 projects that
could utilize funding in fiscal year 2005. The total costs of the
Section 206 projects in this one district far exceed the funding for
Section 206 nationwide. Thus, the UMRBA supports funding for both the
Section 1135 and Section 206 programs at their fully authorized amount
of $25 million.
operation and maintenance
Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of the Upper Mississippi River
Navigation System
The Corps of Engineers is responsible for operating and maintaining
the Upper Mississippi River System for navigation. This includes
channel maintenance dredging, placement and repair of channel training
structures, water level regulation, and the routine operation of 29
locks and dams on the Mississippi River and 7 locks and dams on the
Illinois River. The fiscal year 2005 budget totals approximately $169
million for O&M of this river system, which includes $111.410 million
for the Mississippi River between Minneapolis and the Missouri River,
$21.236 million for the Mississippi River between the Missouri River
and Ohio River, and $35.087 million for the Illinois Waterway.
These funds are critical to the Corps' ability to maintain a safe
and reliable commercial navigation system. In addition, these funds
support a variety of activities that ensure the navigation system is
maintained while protecting and enhancing the river's environmental
values. For example, O&M funds support innovative environmental
engineering techniques in the open river reaches such as bendway weirs,
chevrons, and notched dikes that maintain the navigation channel in an
environmentally sensitive manner. In addition, water level management
options for a number of pools in the impounded portion of the river are
being evaluated under the O&M program. Pool level management, such as
that being tested in Pool 8 and evaluated other upper river pools, is a
promising new approach for enhancing aquatic plant growth and
overwintering conditions for fish, without adversely affecting
navigation.
The UMRBA is pleased that the President's fiscal year 2005 funding
request for O&M of the Upper Mississippi River System is above fiscal
year 2004 appropriations for some of the river reaches. Unfortunately,
the request is well below what is needed. In particular, there is a
growing backlog of maintenance needs as a result of historically flat
line budgets. In addition, as a result of unusual funding constraints
in the St. Paul District in fiscal year 2004, that District is
deferring contractor payments and all new contract awards.
Unmet needs include such items as major maintenance at Lock and Dam
5, land acquisition for dredged material disposal sites, replacement of
dam gates and lift gates, repair of operating components, and lockwall
resurfacing.
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
Upper Mississippi River System O&M Accounts 2004 Fiscal Year 2005 Full
Appropriations 2005 Request Capability
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mississippi River Between MO River and Minneapolis:
St. Paul District (MVP)..................................... 36.056 51.030 61.340
Rock Island District (MVR).................................. 45.000 42.473 53.287
St. Louis District (MVS).................................... 18.000 17.907 25.916
Mississippi River Between Ohio and MO Rivers.................... 18.099 21.236 31.793
Illinois Waterway:
Rock Island District (MVR).................................. 25.726 33.273 57.274
St. Louis District (MVS).................................... 1.889 1.814 2.149
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The UMRBA supports increased funding for O&M of the Upper
Mississippi and Illinois River System to meet routine on-going
operations and maintenance needs, and to begin to address the growing
unfunded maintenance backlog. Full capability funding in fiscal year
2004 for all three Upper Mississippi River districts totals $231.7
million.
general investigations
Upper Mississippi River System Navigation and Ecosystem PED
The Upper Mississippi River and Illinois Waterway Navigation Study,
which began in 1993 is nearing completion. The draft feasibility report
is scheduled for release April 30, 2004 and the final Chief's Report is
expected in November 2004. Since the study was restructured in 2001, it
is designed to yield an integrated plan, incorporating both navigation
improvements and ecosystem restoration. It has also been a truly
collaborative process involving five Federal agencies, five States, and
representatives from a broad spectrum of stakeholder groups. The
recommendations resulting from this extraordinarily complex planning
process promise to be the most important investment for the future of
the Upper Mississippi River that this region has had in decades.
The President's fiscal year 2005 budget request includes no funding
for this critically important planning effort. While the feasibility
study phase will be essentially complete by fiscal year 2005, there
will be on-going planning and design needs. Thus, the UMRBA supports
funding of $18 million, which we understand is the Corps' capability,
to advance the planning and initiate design. Such funding would enable
significant progress to be made on both the navigation and ecosystem
improvements, including planning and design work for switch boats,
mooring cells, locks, system mitigation, and ecosystem restoration
projects.
Upper Mississippi River Comprehensive Plan (Flood Damage Reduction)
Section 459 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999
authorized the Corps to develop what is termed the ``Upper Mississippi
River Comprehensive Plan,'' the primary focus of which is systemic
flood damage reduction and flood protection. Since planning began in
December 2001, funding shortfalls have been significant and the study
has been suspended a number of times. In addition, only $944,000 has
been requested in fiscal year 2005. It is thus doubtful that the study
will be completed within the 3-year time frame Congress directed when
the study was first authorized in WRDA 1999, and later reaffirmed in
WRDA 2000.
Although the assessment of alternative plans is underway,
substantial work remains to be done, including completing that
alternatives evaluation and conducting public meetings. Of particular
interest to the States, is development and evaluation of an ``Emergency
Action Scenario'' that will help the Corps and State agencies
understand the implications of decisions they may be faced with making
when fighting a flood such as the one in 1993. Such ``what if''
analysis, in combination with the evaluation of structural and
nonstructural systemic flood damage reduction options, is critical.
Thus, the UMRBA supports funding of $1.4 million for the Upper
Mississippi River Comprehensive Plan in fiscal year 2005.
Research and Development
The President's fiscal year 2005 budget request for Research and
Development includes funding to support the Navigation Economic
Technologies (NETS) research program. NETS is working to develop a
standardized and defensible suite of economic tools to evaluate
navigation improvements. The goal is to develop simulation models and
data gathering techniques that are reasonably transparent and
computationally accurate, yield nationally consistent results, and are
acceptable to outside peer review. The need for such research has
become increasingly obvious over the past few years, as the Corps has
struggled to address the economic complexities and uncertainties
associated with navigation improvements on the Upper Mississippi and
Illinois Rivers. Significant advances in economic modeling have been
made as part of that feasibility study. Yet additional work is needed
to help inform future decisions. Thus, the UMRBA strongly supports
funding for the NETS program, which is programmed for $2.5 million in
fiscal year 2005 under the Corps' Research and Development budget.
Stream Gaging
The Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with the USGS, operates
approximately 150 stream gages in the Upper Mississippi River Basin. In
fiscal year 2004, the Corps' share of the cost of these gages is $1.946
million. Most of these stream gages are funded through the Corps' O&M
account for the specific projects to which the gages are related.
However, there are a number of gages that are not associated with a
particular project. Thus, UMRBA supports the $600,000 requested under
General Investigations to support the Corps' share of non-project USGS
stream gages, many of which are located in the five States of the Upper
Mississippi River Basin. In fiscal year 2004, approximately $108,000
was provided by these ``General Coverage Funds'' for gages in the St.
Paul and Rock Island Districts.
______
Prepared Statement of the Ventura Port District
The Ventura Port District respectfully requests that the Congress:
--Support the administration's request for $2,910,000 to be included
in the fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Bill for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
maintenance dredging of the Ventura Harbor Federal channel and
sand traps.
--Include $300,000 in the fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Bill to complete a cost shared
Feasibility Study to determine the advisability of modifying
the existing Federal navigation project at Ventura Harbor to
include a sand bypass system.
background
Ventura Harbor, homeport to 1,500 vessels, is located along the
Southern California coastline in the City of San Buenaventura,
approximately 60 miles northwest of the City of Los Angeles. The harbor
opened in 1963. Annual dredging of the harbor entrance area is usually
necessary in order to assure a navigationally adequate channel. In
1968, the 90th Congress made the harbor a Federal project and committed
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to provide for the maintenance of the
entrance structures and the dredging of the entrance channel and sand
traps.
The harbor presently generates more than $40 million in gross
receipts annually. That, of course, translates into thousands of both
direct and indirect jobs. A significant portion of those jobs are
associated with the commercial fishing industry (the harbor is
consistently amongst the top ten commercial fishing ports in the United
States), and with vessels serving the offshore oil industry.
Additionally, the headquarters for the Channel Islands National Park is
located within the harbor, and the commercial vessels transporting the
nearly 100,000 visitors per year to and from the Park islands offshore,
operate out of the harbor. All of the operations of the harbor,
particularly those related to commercial fishing, the support boats for
the oil industry, and the visitor transport vessels for the Channel
Islands National Park are highly dependent upon a navigationally
adequate entrance to the harbor.
operations & maintenance needs
Maintenance Dredging
It is estimated that $2,910,000 will be required to perform routine
maintenance dredging of the harbor's entrance channel and sand traps
during fiscal year 2005. This dredging work is absolutely essential to
the continued operation of the harbor.
study needs
It is estimated that $300,000 will be required during fiscal year
2005 to complete a cost shared Feasibility Study to determine the
advisability of modifying the existing Federal navigation project at
Ventura Harbor to include a sand bypass system. Given the continuing
need for maintenance dredging, it is appropriate to determine if a sand
bypass system or other measures can accomplish the maintenance of the
harbor in a manner that is more efficient and cost effective than the
current contract dredging approach.
______
Prepared Statement of the Port of Garibaldi
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is William
Schrieber. I am an elected Commissioner of the Port of Garibaldi,
Oregon, located on Tillamook Bay on the Oregon Coast. We are thankful
for the support provided by the committee for fiscal year 2002, 2003
and 2004, and we also appreciate the opportunity to present our views
on fiscal year 2005 appropriations issues.
appropriations request
The Port of Garibaldi requests a $2,600,000 appropriation for
operations and maintenance (O&M) of Tillamook Bay and Bar, Oregon.
These funds will allow the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps)
Portland District continue the protection, restoration and repair of
the Tillamook Bay North and South Jetties. Specifically, the funds will
allow the Corps to build a revetment near the North jetty root, and
perform additional restoration and repair work on the South jetty.
The Committee provided an additional $200,000 for a Major
Maintenance Report in fiscal year 2002, $300,000 for Plans and
Specifications in fiscal year 2003, and $300,000 to begin construction
of the revetment in fiscal year 2004. The final amount provided by
Congress for fiscal year 2004 was $400,000. These appropriations were
made above the administration's budget requests for the project. The
Major Maintenance Report was completed in December 2003. The total cost
to build the revetment and 100 ft. caps at the North and South Jetty
heads will be approximately $16,700,000. These have been identified by
the Portland District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as among the
minimum and necessary repairs to achieve a stable project. To undertake
all necessary repairs would cost approximately $41,300,000. The
administration did not request funding for this project for fiscal year
2005.
report on the tillamook bay jetty system
There are serious problems with both jetties. The Corps' ongoing
engineering analysis demonstrates that erosion on the north side of the
North Jetty continues at a highly accelerated rate. Frequently, the
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) pulls its crew members out of the tower located
near the root of the North Jetty because of the threat of a jetty
breach at that site during periods of high seas. Should the breach
occur, shellfish beds, a county park and a State highway would sustain
severe damage. The USCG has also determined that deterioration of the
South Jetty has created a dangerous threat to navigation safety.
A functional Tillamook Bay Jetty System is key to maintaining
navigation safety, protecting both public and private property and the
environment, and preserving the economic vitality of the Oregon Coast.
In December 2003, the Corps completed a Major Maintenance Report
for the Tillamook North and South Jetties. The following paragraphs are
included in the executive summary of the report.
``The north and south jetties at the entrance to Tillamook Bay have
experienced damage to both jetty heads, trunks, and north jetty root. A
recent apparent increase in the Pacific Ocean wave climate has exposed
both jetties to more extreme storm waves, especially the south jetty
which is more exposed to southwesterly storm events. In addition to the
increases concern regarding jetty stability, there is concern that
further recession of the jetty heads will contribute to already
hazardous navigation conditions over the ebb tital shoal or bar.
``Erosion of the shoreline along the north jetty is a major concern
in terms of a potential breach at the jetty root. The jetty root has a
smaller cross-section and the proximity of the deep channel (40 ft. in
depth) to this section of jetty is of increasing concern. The
increasingly severe shore erosion at the north jetty root appears to be
related to the north jetty head recession.
``The north jetty has lost 384 ft. of jetty from the seaward end of
its 5,700 ft. authorized length. The south jetty has lost 666 ft. from
the seaward end of its 8,025 ft. authorized length. By 2006, at
historical jetty head recession rates, the north jetty will be 480 ft.
shorter than the authorized length. The south jetty will be 890 ft.
shorter than the authorized length. The south jetty has never been
repaired since its construction in 1969 to 1979 (25 to 35 years). The
north jetty damage reach includes 1,050 ft. that has not been repaired
since construction in 1918 (86 years).''
Background.--Since settlement in the 1800's, Tillamook County's
primary industries have been dairy, water and timber oriented.
Tillamook Bay and the five rivers which feed it have historically
furnished an abundance of shellfish, salmon and other species of fresh-
water and ocean food fish. Over the past century the area has become
renowned as one of the West's premier sport fishing locations.
Tillamook County's economy has always depended on prime conditions
in Tillamook Bay, its estuary and watershed for cultivation and use of
these natural resources. However, human activities including forestry,
agriculture and urban development have adversely impacted the entire
Bay area by increasing erosion rates and landslide potential in the
forest slopes and significantly reducing wetland and riparian habitat.
All five rivers entering Tillamook Bay now exceed temperature and/or
bacteria standards established by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality. The installation of a north jetty on Tillamook
Bay begun in 1912 caused increased erosion of the Bay's westerly land
border, Bayocean Spit, on the ocean side. The Spit breached in 1950.
This allowed the Bay to fill with ocean sands on its southern and
western perimeters and caused a major reduction in shellfish habitat,
sport-fishing area, and an increase in the cross-section of the bar. A
south jetty begun in 1969 helped stabilize the Spit and created the
navigation channel presently in use.
economic characteristics
The following was also included in the Corps December 2003 Major
Maintenance Report.
``Entrance and Port Usage.--The Tillamook entrance is one of the
most heavily used on the Oregon Coast and recent surveys indicate than
the Port of Garibaldi is the third busiest recreational port in Oregon,
behind the Port of Brookings and the Port of Umpqua. Total visitation
to the Port of Garibaldi was 64,350 (Party Days) in 2002. Visitors in
the area spent $6,747,000 on trip related expenditures to the port.
Sixty-nine percent of this spending was captured by local economy
yielding $4,666,000 in direct sales to tourism related firms. These
sales generated $1,847,000 in direct personal income and supported 118
direct jobs. With multiplier effects, visitor spending resulted in
$6,446,000 total sales, $2,543,000 in total personal income, and
supported 143 jobs.
``Port Fleet Considerations.--Total number of boats associated with
the Port of Garibaldi was 619 in 2002. Boat owners in this area spent
$1,127,000 on boat related annual and fixed expenditures in the region.
Thirty-nine percent of this spending was captured by local economy
yielding $434,000 in direct sales to related industries. These sales
generated $168,000 in direct personal income and supported 08 direct
jobs. With multiplier effects, visitor spending resulted in $589,000
total sales, $223,000 in total personal income, and supported 11 jobs.
The Port of Garibaldi is also an active commercial fishing port.
Garibaldi's total landing volume and value in the year 2000 was 1.7
million pounds and $2.0 million. The share of landing volume for
groundfish was 16 percent. There were a total of 1,548 fishing trips
made by 92 different vessels in the year 2000. There were nine
different processors, buyers, restaurants, etc. issuing more than
$10,000 in fish tickets.
``Marine Facilities.--The Port of Garibaldi has over 300 slips
available, with 60 slips available for vessels over 40 feet in length.
The port also has 300 feet of dock available for transient vessels. The
Coast Guard Tillamook Bay Station reports search and rescue cases
annually. From 1995 to 2001, the station reported an average of 215
cases each year, with a high of 282 cases in 1999 and, a low of 152
cases in 2000.''
conclusion
On behalf of the Port of Garibaldi and Tillamook County, I thank
the committee for giving me this opportunity to provide testimony on
the Tillamook Bay Jetty System.
______
Prepared Statement of the Louisiana Governor's Task Force on Maritime
Industry
the lower mississippi river and connecting waterways and the j. bennett
johnston waterway
Mississippi River Ship Channel, Gulf to Baton Rouge, LA.--Recommend
the Corps be funded $537,000 (Construction General) to perform required
work on the saltwater intrusion Phase 1 mitigation plan and to prepare
a report on deepening the river to its authorized depth of 55-foot
depth.
Mississippi River, Baton Rouge to the Gulf--Maintenance Dredging.--
The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is $59,125,000 under O&M
General. Recommend that the Corps be funded $74,400,000 to construct
foreshore rock dike, repair South Pass jetties, and to repair Southwest
Pass pile dike and tie-in.
Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO), LA--Maintenance Dredging.--
The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is $13,004,000 under O&M
General. Recommend that the Corps be funded $38,400,000 for maintenance
dredging and bank stabilization.
Inner Harbor Navigation Canal (IHNC) Lock, LA.--The President's
Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is $10,000,000 in Construction General funds.
Recommend that the Corps be funded $24,000,000 to continue
construction, design and mitigation for the IHNC Lock replacement.
Mississippi River Outlets at Venice, LA.--The President's Fiscal
Year 2005 Budget is $424,000 under O&M General. Recommend that the
Corps be funded $3,700,000 to perform critical maintenance dredging and
to repair jetties.
Bayou Sorrel Lock, LA.--The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is
$550,000 under General Investigation Studies to advance pre-engineering
design for the replacement of Bayou Sorrel Lock on the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW), Morgan City-to-Port Allen alternate
route.
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway, LA and TX.--The President's Fiscal Year
2005 Budget is $17,476,000 under O&M General. Recommend that the Corps
be funded $27,300,000 to perform critical maintenance at the navigation
locks.
MRGO Reevaluation Study, LA.--The President's Fiscal Year 2005
Budget is $225,000 (General Investigation) to initiate an ecosystem
restoration study of the MRGO.
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to Shreveport,
LA.--The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is $4,000,000
(Construction General) and $10,600,000 (O&M General). Recommend that
the Corps be funded $20,000,000 (Construction General) and $18,000,000
(O&M, General) to initiate new work and complete work already underway.
As Chairman of the Louisiana Governors Task Force on Maritime
Industry, I hereby submit testimony to the Senate Subcommittee on
Energy and Water Development on behalf of the ports on the lower
Mississippi River and the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway and the maritime
interests related thereto of the State of Louisiana relative to
congressional appropriations for fiscal year 2005.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers reports that in 2002 a total of
421.1 million tons of foreign and domestic waterborne commerce moved
through the consolidated deepwater ports of Louisiana situated on the
lower Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and the Gulf of Mexico.
Deepening of this 232-mile stretch of the River to 45 feet has been a
major factor in tonnage growth at these ports. Due in large part to the
efforts of Congress and the New Orleans District of the Corps,
Louisiana's ports and the domestic markets they serve can compete more
productively and effectively in the global marketplace. Ninety-one
percent of America's foreign merchandise trade by volume (two-thirds by
value) moves in ships, and 20.5 percent of the Nation's foreign
waterborne commerce passes through Louisiana's ports. Given the role
foreign trade plays in sustaining our Nation's growth, maintaining the
levels of productivity and competitiveness of Louisiana's ports is
essential to our Nation's continued economic well-being.
In terms of transportation services and global access, Louisiana
ports enjoy a distinct competitive advantage. Hundreds of barge lines
accommodate America's waterborne commerce on the lower Mississippi
River. The high level of barge traffic on the river is indicated by the
passage of more than 293,000 barges through the Port of New Orleans
annually. In 2002, 1,967 ocean-going vessels operated by more than 100
steamship lines serving U.S. trade with more than 150 countries called
at the Port of New Orleans. The Port's trading partners include: Latin
America (40.5 percent); Asia (28.7 percent); Europe (20 percent);
Africa (9.4 percent) and North America (1.4 percent). During the same
year, 5,448 vessels called at Louisiana's lower Mississippi River
deepwater ports.
The foreign markets of Louisiana's lower Mississippi River ports
are worldwide; however, their primary domestic market is mid-America.
This heartland region currently produces 60 percent of the Nation's
agricultural products, one half of all of its manufactured goods and 90
percent of its machinery and transportation equipment.
The considerable transportation assets of Louisiana's lower
Mississippi River ports enable mid-America's farms and industries to
play a vital role in the international commerce of this Nation. In
2002, the region's ports and port facilities handled 227.5 million tons
of foreign waterborne commerce. Valued at $39.2 billion, this cargo
accounted for 18.1 percent of the Nation's international waterborne
trade and 27 percent of all U.S. exports. Bulk cargo, primarily
consisting of tremendous grain and animal feed exports and petroleum
imports, made up 88.3 percent of this volume. Approximately 50.2
million tons of grain from 17 States, representing 62.4 percent of all
U.S. grain exports, accessed the world market via the 10 grain
elevators and midstream transfer capabilities on the lower Mississippi
River. This same port complex received 91.2 million short tons of
petroleum and petroleum products, 15.9 percent of U.S. waterborne
imports of petroleum products.
In 2002, public and private facilities located within the
jurisdiction of the Board of Commissioners of the Port of New Orleans,
the fifth largest port in the United States, handled a total of 85
million tons of international and domestic cargo. International general
cargo totaled 9.6 million tons. Although statistically dwarfed by bulk
cargo volumes, the movement of general cargo is of special significance
to the local economy because it produces greater benefits. On a per ton
basis, general cargo generates spending within the community more than
three times higher than bulk cargo. Major general cargo commodities
handled at the Port include: iron and steel products; coffee; forest
products; copper; aluminum products; and natural rubber.
Fostering the continued growth of lower Mississippi River ports is
necessary to maintain the competitiveness of our Nation's exports in
the global marketplace and, consequently, the health of the Nation's
economy. Assuring deep-water access to ports has been a priority of our
trading partners around the world. Moreover, an evolving maritime
industry seeking greater economies of scale continues to support
construction of larger vessels with increased draft requirements.
Because it facilitated the provision of deepwater port access, passage
of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986, played a most
significant role in assuring the competitiveness of ports on the lower
Mississippi river and throughout the United States.
By December 1994, the Corps completed dredging of the 45-foot
channel from the Gulf of Mexico to Baton Rouge, LA (Mile 233 AHP).
Mitigation features associated with the first phase of the channel-
deepening project in the vicinity of Southwest Pass of the river,
accomplished in 1988, are nearing completion. We urge the continued
funding for this work in fiscal year 2005 to complete construction of
improvements to the Belle Chasse water treatment plant. This will
complete the approximate $15 million in payments to the State of
Louisiana for construction of a pipeline and pumping stations to
deliver potable fresh water to communities affected by saltwater
intrusion. We further urge that the Corps be provided funding to
proceed with design studies for Phase III, which will allow deepening
of the river to the 55-foot authorized depth.
Along with the Port of New Orleans, the Port of South Louisiana,
the Nation's largest port with 216.4 million tons of foreign and
domestic cargo in 2002, and the Port of Baton Rouge, the Nation's ninth
largest port with 60.6 million tons of foreign and domestic cargo in
2002, and other lower Mississippi River ports are dependent upon timely
and adequate dredging of Southwest Pass to provide deep draft access to
the Gulf of Mexico. The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is
$59,125,000 under O&M General. We, however, strongly recommend that the
Corps be funded $74,400,000 to repair and construct foreshore dikes,
lateral dikes and jetties.
Maintenance of adequate depths and channel widths in the
Mississippi River Gulf Outlet Channel (MRGO) is also of great concern.
This channel provides deep draft access to the Port of New Orleans
container and cold storage facilities and generates significant
economic impact for the region. In 2002, 374 general cargo vessels
calling on the Port's MRGO terminals accounted for 31.5 percent of the
general cargo tonnage handled over public facilities at the Port and 70
percent of Louisiana's containerized cargo.
Because of the MRGO's demonstrated vulnerability to coastal storm
activity, annual channel maintenance dredging and bank stabilization
are essential to assure unimpeded vessel operations. The President's
Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is $13,004,000 under O&M General. We, however,
strongly recommend that the Corps be funded $38,400,000 for maintenance
dredging and bank stabilization.
We recognize the need for the Corps to evaluate the feasibility of
continuing the maintenance of a deep draft channel in the MRGO because
of increased maintenance costs and environmental impacts. We strongly
recommend that the Corps complete the MRGO Reevaluation Study. It is
important to note that although the Port of New Orleans plans to
relocate much of its container terminal capacity to the Mississippi
River, a determination to discontinue maintenance of the MRGO's deep
draft channel must be preceded by completion of the IHNC Lock
replacement project to assure continued deep draft access to the many
businesses serviced by the MRGO.
The Inner Harbor Navigation Canal (IHNC) Lock is a critical link in
the U.S. Inland Waterway System as well as the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway (GIWW), and provides a connection between the Port of New
Orleans Mississippi River and IHNC terminals. In 1998, the Corps
approved a plan for replacement of this obsolete facility. The Corps
estimates that the lock replacement project will have a cost-benefit
ratio of 2.1 to 1 and will provide $110 million annually in
transportation cost savings. To minimize adverse impacts to adjacent
neighborhoods, the project includes a $37 million Community Impact
Mitigation Program. The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget of
$10,000,000 for the IHNC Lock Replacement will pay for engineering and
design work, construction, and the mitigation program, all on a delayed
basis. We, therefore, strongly recommend that the Corps be funded
$24,000,000 to advance engineering and design, levee contracts, and
mitigation measures.
Operation and maintenance of the Mississippi River Outlets at
Venice, LA are essential to providing safe offshore support access to
energy-related industries. In 2002, these channels accommodated cargo
movements exceeding 2.6 million tons. In addition to routine traffic,
shallow draft vessels use Baptiste Colette Bayou as an alternate route
between the MRGO, GIWW and the Mississippi River. The President's
Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is $424,000 under O&M General. We, however,
strongly recommend that the Corps be funded $3,700,000 to perform
critical maintenance dredging.
More than 72.4 million tons of cargo transverse the GIWW in the New
Orleans District annually. The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is
$17,476,000 under O&M General. We, however, strongly recommend that the
Corps be funded $27,300,000 to perform critical maintenance at the
navigation locks.
The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget for the Bayou Sorrel Lock,
LA project is $500,000 in GI funds. To assure the efficient flow of
commerce on the GIWW, we urge that the Corps be funded $500,000 to
advance the completion of the pre-engineering design for replacement of
the Bayou Sorrel Lock, Morgan City-to-Port Allen alternate route. We
further recommend that the Corps be funded $1,000,000 in GI funds to
advance the completion of the feasibility phase of the study to replace
Calcasieu Lock on the GIWW.
One additional project warrants consideration. The J. Bennett
Johnston Waterway, Mississippi River to Shreveport, LA Project provides
236 miles of navigation improvements, 225 miles of channel
stabilization works and various recreational facilities. Project
completion will stimulate economic growth along the Red River Basin and
increase cargo flows through the deep draft ports on the lower
Mississippi River. The President's Fiscal Year 2005 Budget is
$4,000,000 (Construction General) and $10,600,000 (O&M General). We,
however, strongly recommend that the Corps be funded $20,000,000
(Construction General) and $18,100,000 (O&M, General) to complete work
already underway.
The need and impetus to reduce the Federal budget is certainly
acknowledged; however, reduced funding on any of the above projects
will result in decreased maintenance levels that will escalate
deterioration and, ultimately, prevent them from functioning at their
full-authorized purpose. Reduction in the serviceability of these
projects will cause severe economic impacts not only to this region,
but also to the Nation as a whole that will far outweigh savings from
reduced maintenance expenditures. Therefore, we reiterate our strong
recommendation that the above projects be funded to their full
capability.
Supporting statements from Mr. Gary P. LaGrange, Executive Director
of the Port of New Orleans; Mr. Joseph Accardo, Jr., Executive Director
of the Port of South Louisiana; Mr. Roger Richard, Executive Director
of the Greater Baton Rouge Port Commission; Mr. Channing Hayden,
President of the Steamship Association of Louisiana; Capt. A. J. Gibbs,
President of the Crescent River Port Pilots Association and Capt.
Michael R. Lorino, Jr., President, Associated Bar Pilots are attached.
Please make these statements along with my statement part of the
record. Supplemental graphics relating to my statement have been
furnished separately for staff background use. Thank you for the
opportunity to comment to the subcommittee on these vital projects.
PRESIDENT'S BUDGET REQUEST & RECOMMENDED FUNDING LEVELS
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's Recommended
Project Budget Request Funding Levels
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mississippi River Ship Channel Gulf to .............. 537
Baton Rouge, LA (Construction General).
Mississippi River, Baton Rouge to the 59,125 74,400
Gulf, Maintenance Dredging &
Stabilization (O&M General)............
Mississippi River-Gulf Outlet (MR-GO), 13,004 38,400
LA (O&M General).......................
Inner Harbor Navigation Canal Lock, LA 10,000 24,000
(Construction General).................
Mississippi River Outlets at Venice, LA 424 3,700
(O&M General)..........................
Bayou Sorrel Lock, LA (GI Funds)........ 550 550
Gulf Intracoastal Waterway LA & TX (O&M 17,476 27,300
General)...............................
MRGO Reevaluation Study, LA (General 225 225
Investigation).........................
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway 4,000 20,000
(Construction General).................
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway (O&M 10,600 18,100
General)...............................
-------------------------------
TOTAL............................. 115,404 207,212
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the Port San Luis Harbor District
On December 22, 2003, a magnitude 6.5 earthquake jolted the central
California coast. The epicenter was about 40 miles northeast of the
Port San Luis Harbor federally-owned breakwater. This earthquake caused
significant damage to the structure, which prior to that date, had been
in good condition. Based on its preliminary survey, the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (USACE) estimated that repairs will cost $4 million. USACE
owns and is responsible for maintaining this breakwater. President Bush
declared our region a disaster area (DR 1505) on January 13, 2004;
however, FEMA does not provide financial assistance to other Federal
agencies.
history
Construction of a breakwater at Port San Luis was authorized by
Congress in 1888 and USACE began construction in 1893. The Federal
breakwater was completed in 1913. It was destroyed by severe storms in
1923, and redesigned and rebuilt to the current specifications in 1927.
USACE has repaired damages to the breakwater three times:
--In 1935 after storms from earlier years.
--In 1984 after severe 1982 El Nino storms that also sunk 27 vessels
and destroyed 2 piers.
--In 1992 after 1991 El Nino storms. (Port San Luis Harbor District
was the local sponsor and contributed in-kind services for
maintenance and repair.)
national significance
A small local government, Port San Luis Harbor District has limited
funds. We have made the breakwater repair project our highest priority
because of its significant regional, State, and national importance for
the following reasons.
--Port San Luis Harbor is the nearest safe harbor of refuge to Point
Conception, the ``Cape Horn of the Pacific.''
--Port San Luis Harbor is a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP),
Port of Entry station. A Port of Entry is a designated place
where a CBP officer is authorized to accept entries of
merchandise, collect duties, and enforce the various provisions
of the customs and navigation laws (19 CFR 101.1).
--Port San Luis Harbor is the closest port to the Diablo Canyon
Nuclear Power Plant. The land entrance to the power plant is at
Port San Luis; our Security personnel are on the frontline
monitoring threats to homeland security. The harbor is used to
receive and transport heavy equipment for the nuclear power
plant. Two 120-ton rotors are scheduled for delivery through
Port San Luis in 2006 and 2008. Calm water is essential to
offload this equipment. There is also the matter of
transferring spent nuclear fuel from the power plant to a
Federal depository sometime in the future. As currently
proposed by the Department of Energy (DOE), this high level
nuclear waste will either be barged out of Port San Luis or
shipped by road. Either way, without the breakwater, access to
the harbor by road or ship will be severely restricted.
--Port San Luis is home to the California Polytechnic State
University's Center for Coastal Marine Science (CCMS) Pier
located on the former Unocal Oil Pier. This Pier Structure is
valued at $23 million. Agencies currently providing funding to
the CCMS are: California Department of Health Services,
National Air Space Administration, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, National Science Foundation, Office
of Naval Research; Naval Surface Warfare Center, The National
Oceanographic Partnership Program, California Regional Water
Quality Control Board, National Estuary Program/EPA, and Unocal
Corporation.
--In 2000 the California legislature designated Port San Luis Harbor
one of several ports along the California coast as a harbor of
safe refuge. This legislation recognizes the critical role our
harbor plays in affording a safety zone for commercial and
industrial vessels transiting the California coast. U.S. Coast
Guard vessels, scientific research vessels, oil-industry
related vessels and other large vessels stop at the Port,
especially during storms, to find calm water protected by the
Federal breakwater.
--Port San Luis is one of the primary facilities on the central
California coast used by fiber optic cable ships to install and
repair transpacific fiber optic cables. Several cable landings
are in waters near the port and are serviced by large cable-
laying ships. This international communication support facility
(harbor) is critical to the national security and global
commerce. A safe harbor to resupply and moor cable-laying ships
and associated watercraft is critical.
--The Port is home to 240 commercial and recreational fishing vessels
that contribute to the economy and job markets in central
California. The supporting landside businesses are dependent on
the local fleet to generate jobs and revenue producing goods
and services--including ships chandleries, vessel haul-out and
repair facilities, fueling stations, seafood buying stations,
and ancillary services.
For these reasons, we request a congressional ``add'' of $4 million
to the fiscal year 2005 Budget to repair the earthquake damage to the
Federal breakwater.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coosa-Alabama River Improvement Association,
Inc.
Mr. Chairman and distinguished committee members, I request the
President's fiscal year 2005 Budget be adjusted to reflect
appropriations to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers civil works projects on
the Alabama River as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama-Coosa.................... $4,549,000 (add of $4,000,000).
Millers Ferry L&D................ 4,863,000 (add of $320,000).
Robert F. Henry L&D.............. 4,890,000 (add of $300,000).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I make these requests as President of an Association formed in 1890
to promote commercial navigation on the Coosa and Alabama Rivers. Our
members are the cities, counties, businesses, and individuals from
Rome, Georgia to Mobile, Alabama. We value our inland waterways and are
very distressed that the President's proposed cuts on our projects are
being done with no thought as to consequences to the citizens of this
river basin.
Alabama-Coosa.--The President's Budget proposal for fiscal year
2005 eliminates funding for dredging the Alabama River navigation
channel as well as for maintaining the lock at Claiborne Dam. Not
funding these projects will close the Alabama River navigation channel,
sever the only waterway link between the capital city of Montgomery and
the Port of Mobile, and isolate three-fourths of the river basin from
the Gulf of Mexico.
Severing the channel will have major negative economic effects in
central Alabama, an area bustling with expansion of new industries and
subsidiaries. Hyundai Motor Company located its first American-based
automobile manufacturing plant, a $1 billion investment, in the
Montgomery area because of the available infrastructure, including the
waterway. Hyundai has plans this calendar year and in 2005 to move
several pieces of outsized equipment, weighing up to 125,000 pounds
each and part of a $20 million stamping press, to its plant via the
Alabama River, the only transportation artery capable of safely moving
equipment of that size. The channel is essential to Hyundai operations.
The Gulf Logistics and Projects Company of Houston, Texas, which
will be a major transporter of raw materials to Hyundai, indicates that
closing the navigation channel will cause ``painful economic distress
if the barge delivery system is denied to foreign manufactures (sic)
trying to relocate their factories into the United States, near
Montgomery, Alabama . . . Without the Alabama River, quantity raw
materials movements may become too expensive and production be
curtailed.'' This is a strong statement from a Korean firm planning to
establish an office in Mobile just to support Hyundai, and I believe is
a compelling argument to keep the navigation channel fully operational.
Another major industry that will be hard hit is Alabama River Pulp
Company of Perdue Hill, Alabama, a $1.4 billion investment and one of
the largest paper manufacturing plants in the world. Alabama River Pulp
receives fuel oil via barge. If the channel closes, that fuel oil will
have to be trucked in at an additional annual cost of $1.5 million
while putting 2500 additional trucks of fuel oil on Alabama's highways.
Why would we want to do that?
Closing Claiborne Lock has other consequences for ARP, which is
located only about three miles downstream of Claiborne Dam and is
heavily reliant on predictable and controlled flows and river levels.
Not funding the lock operation means the personnel operating that lock
and who also control the dam flow control gates would be cut,
imperiling the flow control procedures on which ARP relies to provide
cooling water to its plant. ARP strongly objects to any cuts that
jeopardize that flow management.
Closing the channel is a direct threat to some sand and gravel
companies. Two companies that currently move approximately 100,000 tons
on the Alabama annually have the resources to move over 300,000 tons,
but are stymied because reduced dredging the past 2 years has allowed
the river to silt in, causing severe navigation safety problems. Couch
Ready Mix USA, which has a $5 million investment on the river near
Montgomery, has stated in writing that, if the channel were fully
maintained, it alone has an annual capacity of over 300,000 tons to
move on the river to the Gulf of Mexico.
One of the major benefits of barge transportation is its
contribution to traffic and pollution safety. A May 2001 Latin American
Trade and Transportation Study, sponsored by the Southeastern
Transportation Alliance, predicts that imports into the Gulf of Mexico
from Latin America will triple by 2020. It is reasonable to assume that
the Port of Mobile will get its fair share of that increased traffic,
much of which will be containers. Those commodities will have to move
out of Mobile by rail, road, or waterway. Rail is limited in its
capacity to absorb these increases. Truck congestion on the highway
system leading out of Mobile will be intolerable, as should be the
additional pollution. (Per ton-mile, barges emit only 10 percent of
emissions produced by trucks and 25 percent of that produced by rail.)
It makes sense, from economic, environmental, and safety views, to move
some of that cargo, including containers, onto the waterways, including
the Alabama River, an option not available if the waterway is closed.
The proposal to close Claiborne Lock alone has dire consequences
beyond the effect on commercial navigation. The Alabama River is the
only waterway connecting the capital city of Montgomery to the Gulf of
Mexico. Severing the channel will stop ever-increasing recreational
traffic from Montgomery to the Gulf. Eighty percent of the vessels
locking through Claiborne are recreational craft. There is a strong
move within the basin to develop a system of marinas to support
recreational vessels from bass boats to 80-foot cruisers. Wilcox
County, one of the least developed and highest unemployment (16.4
percent) counties in the State, is planning to construct a full-service
marina and lodging facility on the Alabama to attract and serve
recreational craft of all sizes, a facility that will provide jobs
Closing the navigation channel will kill that project as well as well
as projected revenue for this depressed area.
Millers Ferry Lock and Dam and Robert F. Henry Lock and Dam.--The
President's Budget also eliminates funding to maintain several of the
Corps' recreational areas along the Alabama River. Over 3 million
people visited these sites last year and spent over $60 million within
30 miles of the facilities, 66 percent of which was a direct input into
the local economy. With proposed cuts in maintenance of $320,000 at
Millers Ferry and $300,000 at Robert F. Henry, the Mobile District will
be forced to scale back maintenance at all sites, close three of the
six campgrounds 6 months out of the year, reassign park rangers, and
drop contracted maintenance.
Without maintenance, these facilities will deteriorate.
To``save''$620,000, the administration is willing to sacrifice a strong
economic multiplier in an economically-depressed area of the country.
This kind of ``saving'' doesn't make economic sense.
Attached is a list of businesses, individuals, and local and State
government agencies expressing concern about these proposed cuts in the
Alabama River civil works projects. To a person, these citizens view
the proposed cuts as ``devastating for industrial development in the
State of Alabama.'' Any ``savings'' from the proposed cuts will be a
Pyrrhic victory, dwarfed by staggering losses to the State of Alabama.
In summary, the President's Budget proposal for fiscal year 2005
will be a major economic blow to Central Alabama. For the appearance of
``savings'', the administration is willing to eliminate an important
transportation asset for the State of Alabama and put in jeopardy
businesses sorely needed in an economically depressed area with
unemployment up to 15 percent. I request funding be placed into the
fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Appropriations Act to allow the Corps
of Engineers to maintain the authorized navigation channel on the
Alabama River and to keep the recreation areas open year around for the
benefit of our citizens.
LETTERS SUPPORTING CARIA STATEMENT--MARCH, 2004
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Otha Lee Biggs.... Monroe County Monroeville, AL.
Commission.
The Honorable Jim Byard......... Mayor, City of Prattville, AL.
Prattville.
Mr. F. Slaton Crawford.......... Dir, Wilcox County Camden, AL.
C of C.
Mr. Elton N. Dean............... Montgomery County Montgomery, AL.
Commission.
Mr. Ken Fairly.................. Alabama River Pulp Monroeville, AL.
Company.
The Honorable Anne Farish....... Mayor, City of Monroeville, AL.
Monroeville.
Mr. Trey Glenn.................. Alabama Office of Montgomery, AL.
Water Resources.
The Honorable Sue Glidewell..... Mayor, City of Rainbow City, AL.
Rainbow City.
Mr. Lynn A. Gowan............... Montgomery County Montgomery, AL.
Commission.
Mr. Robert F. Henry, Jr......... Robert F. Henry Montgomery, AL.
Tile Co..
Mr. Slade Hooks, Jr............. Waterways Towing & Mobile, AL.
Offshore Svcs.
The Honorable John W. Jones, Jr. Dallas County Selma, AL.
Probate Judge.
Mr. Wm. F. Joseph, Jr........... Montgomery County Montgomery, AL.
Commission.
Captain Jeong Dae Kim........... Gulf Logistics & Houston, TX.
Projects.
Mr. James Lyons................. Alabama State Mobile, AL.
Docks.
Ms. Ellen McNair................ Montgomery Area C Montgomery, AL.
of C.
Mr. Donald L. Mims.............. Montgomery County Montgomery, AL.
Commission.
The Honorable James Perkins..... Mayor, City of Selma, AL.
Selma.
Mr. Phillip A. Sanguinetti...... The Anniston Star. Anniston, AL.
Mr. Steven D. Shaw.............. Couch Ready-Mix Dothan, AL.
USA.
Ms. Sandy Smith................. Monroeville Area C Monroeville, AL.
of C.
Mr. J. Craig Stepan............. Warrior & Gulf Mobile, AL.
Navigation.
Mrs. Anne Henry Tidmore......... .................. Montgomery, AL.
Mr. Wayne Vardaman.............. Selma & Dallas Selma, AL.
County Cntr. for
Co..
Mr. Jiles Williams, Jr.......... Montgomery County Montgomery, AL.
Commission.
Mr. Sam H. Wingard.............. Montgomery County Montgomery, AL.
Commission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, this statement is
prepared by James E. Wanamaker, Chief Engineer for the Board of
Mississippi Levee Commissioners, Greenville, Mississippi, and submitted
on behalf of the Board and the citizens of the Mississippi Levee
District. The Board of Mississippi Levee Commissioners is comprised of
seven elected commissioners representing the counties of Bolivar,
Issaquena, Sharkey, Washington, and parts of Humphreys and Warren
counties in the Lower Yazoo Basin in Mississippi. The Board of
Mississippi Levee Commissioners is charged with the responsibility of
providing protection to the Mississippi Delta from flooding of the
Mississippi River and maintaining major drainage outlets for removing
the flood waters from the area. These responsibilities are carried out
by providing the local sponsor requirements for the Congressionally
authorized projects in the Mississippi Levee District.
It is apparent that the administration loses sight of the fact that
the Mississippi River & Tributaries Project provides protection to the
Lower Mississippi Valley from flood waters generated across 41 percent
of the Continental United States. These flood waters flow from 31
States and 2 provinces of Canada and must pass through the Lower
Mississippi Valley on its way to the Gulf of Mexico. We will remind you
that the Mississippi River & Tributaries Project is one of, if not the
most cost effective project ever undertaken by the United States. The
foresight used by the Congress and their authorization of the many
features of this project is exemplary.
The many projects that are part of the Mississippi River &
Tributaries Project not only provides protection from flooding in the
area, but the award of construction contracts throughout the Valley
provides assistance to the overall economy to this area that is also
encompassed by the Delta Regional Authority. The employment of the
local workforce and purchases from local venders by the contractors
help stabilize the economy in one of the most impoverished areas of our
country. The Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association will be
submitting a general statement in support of an appropriation of $450
million for fiscal year 2005 for the Mississippi River & Tributaries
Project. This is the minimum amount that we consider necessary to allow
for an orderly completion for the remaining work in the Valley and to
provide for the operation and maintenance as required to prevent
further deterioration of the completed flood control and navigation
work.
Thanks to the additional funding over and above the
administration's budget that has been provided by the Congress over the
last several years, work on the Mainline Mississippi River Levee
Enlargement Project is continuing. This funding has resulted in having
7.6 miles of work completed and returned to the Levee Board for
maintenance, and 24.4 miles are currently under contract. Right of way
is being acquired on the next 3.4 miles with the contract being
scheduled for award in September of this year. This will result in over
half of the deficient 69 miles in our District being completed or under
contract. We are requesting $54.8 million for construction on the
Mainline Mississippi River Levees in the Mississippi Valley Division
which will allow the Vicksburg and Memphis districts to keep existing
contracts on schedule and award contracts to avoid any unnecessary
delays in completing this vital project. We are all well aware that the
Valley some day will have to endure a Project Flood, we just don't know
when. We must be prepared.
Three projects in Mississippi are on the list included in the
administration's budget targeted for cancellation by the Office of
Management and Budget. These are all projects authorized and funded so
wisely by the Congress. The administration's proposal includes language
to return unobligated funds to the Treasury. This action is especially
difficult to understand during a time when our Nation needs an economic
boost. All of these projects are encompassed in the footprint of the
Delta Regional Authority, an area recognized by the Congress as
requiring special economic assistance to keep pace with the rest of our
great Nation. We can not lose sight of the fact that all of these
projects are required to return more than a dollar in benefits for each
dollar spent. No project authorized and funded by the Congress should
be indiscriminately terminated without the benefit of having the
opportunity to complete with the study process and subsequent
construction after complying with the Corps Policy and Guidelines.
One of the projects on this list will provide benefits to parts of
six counties in the south part of the Mississippi Delta who continue to
patiently wait for the completion of the Yazoo Backwater Project. This
work authorized by the Congress to provide protection from higher
stages on the Mississippi River resulting from changes made to the
Mississippi River and Tributaries Project, must safely pass flood water
from 41 percent of the continental United States. Also, the same change
in the flow line of the Mississippi River that is requiring the
Enlargement of the Mainline Mississippi River Levee will also increase
stages in the South Delta. The Corps and EPA have made an extraordinary
effort to resolve differences in wetland impacts resulting from the
construction of the Corps recommended plan for this project. This plan
has received the support of all six county Boards of Supervisors in the
project area. We are requesting this project be funded by the Congress
in the amount of $12 million. These funds will allow the Corps to begin
acquisition of the reforestation easements and initiate the award of
the pump supply contract.
Another project on the administration's hit list is the Big
Sunflower River Maintenance Project. The first item of work has been
completed and right-of-way has been acquired for the next item of work.
Our request for $2.139 million will allow right-of-way acquisition to
continue and for the award of the first dredging contract. The
residents in South Washington County continue to suffer damages from
flooding while they continue to wait for this maintenance project to
reach their area.
The third project in Mississippi targeted by the administration for
cancellation is the Delta Headwaters Project, formerly the
Demonstration Erosion Control Project. Work carried out as part of this
project has proven effective in reducing sediments to downstream
channels. To discontinue this project will only increase sediment in
downstream channels, reducing the level of protection to the citizens
of the Delta and increasing required maintenance. We are requesting $25
million to continue this project.
The Upper Yazoo Project is critical to the Delta. The Corps of
Engineers operates 4 major flood control reservoirs on the bluff hills
overlooking the Mississippi Delta. These reservoirs hold back heavy
spring rains and must have adequate channel capacity to pass this
excess runoff during the summer and fall months. Without completion of
the Upper Yazoo Project, the Corps is forced to hold flood water from
the previous spring, thereby reducing the ability to provide protection
from the current year's flood water. The administration's budget of
$3.85 million will require the Vicksburg District to suspend
construction of three ongoing contracts. We urge the Congress to
provide additional funds to increase the budget amount to $20 million
allowing construction to continue and the award of additional channel
items that will extend construction upstream to Glendora, Mississippi.
Maintenance of completed works can not be over looked. The four
flood control reservoirs over looking the Delta have been in place for
50 years and have functioned as designed. Required maintenance must be
performed to avoid any possibility of failure during a flood event. The
recent dam failure in south Mississippi less than 2 weeks ago can only
magnify the need to adequately maintain our infrastructure. We are
asking for $12.9 million for Arkabutla Lake, $19.322 million for Sardis
Lake, $13.679 million for Enid Lake, and $10.101 million for Grenada
Lake. Additional funding will be used to replace rip rap at all 4
reservoirs, repair the spillways at Arkabutla and Sardis, and upgrade
other infrastructure around all the lakes.
We are requesting $14.915 million for Maintenance of the Mainline
Mississippi River Levees which will provide for repair of levee slides,
slope repair, and repair of the gravel maintenance roadway which is so
vital to access during high water.
Other Mississippi projects that require additional funding to keep
on schedule include:
[In thousands of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Big Sunflower River (Upper Steele Bayou)....................... 5,000
Yazoo Basin Reformulation Unit................................. 450
Yazoo Basin Main Stem.......................................... 25
Yazoo Backwater (Greentree Reservoirs)......................... 300
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have reviewed a great deal of information regarding the needs of
providing flood protection to our area. Another major feature of the
Mississippi River & Tributaries Project relates to navigation interest
along the Mississippi River. Several of our ports have been informed
that the President's budget does not include funding for Critical
Harbor Dredging necessary to keep these harbors opened for navigation.
Our port commissioners have been notified that lack of dredging will
cause these ports to be shut down and be a hazard to navigation. This
will impact the movement of over 4.5 million tons of cargo being
shipped on our waterways annually from these ports. This equates to an
additional 180,000 truck loads of products on our highways. It is
imperative that funding be made available for Critical Harbor Dredging
to allow continued operation of these facilities, which are key
features to the economic growth of the region.
As members of the Congress representing the citizens of our Nation
who live with the Mississippi River everyday, you clearly understand
both the benefits provided by this resource, and the destructive force
that must be controlled during a flood. On behalf of the Mississippi
Levee Board, I can not express enough, our appreciation for your
efforts in providing adequate funding over the last several years that
has allowed construction to continue on our much needed projects.
______
Prepared Statement of the Blue Valley Association
The Blue Valley Association has 164 members representing thousands
of employees in the Blue Valley industrial area. These high paying jobs
have been put at risk from past flooding in the valley. Since 1920 the
association has been dedicated to improving our industrial area and
maintaining jobs. Continued funding of the Blue River Project is
essential to this goal.
The project, which began in 1983, is located along the Blue River
from its mouth at the Missouri River continuing approximately 12 miles
upstream to 63rd Street, running through an industrial area of Kansas
City, which is a long-standing business district employing 12,000
people, and containing many residential neighborhoods.
The progress made to date has provided significant benefits to
those businesses downstream. But much work remains. Delays in funding
will increase the risk of flooding as rapid development of the
watershed in the State of Kansas increases the run off. Increased
flooding has forced many businesses to abandon the valley and relocate
to new ``Greenfields''. The project's completion date has already been
delayed from 1998 to 2008.
This is an economically sound project with a benefit to cost ratio
of 3 to 1. Therefore, we urge you to provide the $8,000,000 in funding
needed to continue this project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mo-Ark Association
Mr. Chairman, the Mo-Ark Association welcomes this opportunity to
provide written testimony to the Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development regarding appropriations for fiscal year 2005 and requests
that this written testimony be included in the formal hearing record.
The Mo-Ark Association is a long-standing organization that
promotes beneficial use of water and land related resources in the
Missouri and portions of the Arkansas River Basins, primarily within
the States of Kansas and Missouri. We have advocated for flood damage
reduction projects in our region since severe flooding ravaged the
Midwest in 1951.
The Mo-Ark Association requests the following General Investigation
and Construction General Funding for Corps of Engineers' Water Resource
projects underway in our region. Our fiscal year 2005 Federal
appropriations request for these projects is presented in the following
table, together with the activity to be performed with those funds by
the Corps of Engineers. The projects with the highest priority are
shown in cap type.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year
Project 2005 Activity
Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BLUE RIVER CHANNEL................. $8,000,000 CONTINUE CONSTRUCTION.
TURKEY CREEK BASIN................. 2,500,000 CONTINUE CONSTRUCTION.
Brush Creek Basin.................. 200,000 Complete Study Effort.
BLUE RIVER BASIN................... 4,000,000 CONTINUE CONSTRUCTION.
SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA......... 600,000 COMPLETE DESIGN.
Kansas Citys (7 Levees)............ 650,000 Continue Feasibility
Study.
Upper Turkey Creek................. 500,000 Continue Feasibility.
St. Joseph Levee................... 250,000 Complete Feasibility.
Topeka Levee....................... 100,000 Complete Feasibility.
Jefferson City Levee L-142......... 6,200,000 Begin Construction.
RIVERSIDE LEVEE L-385.............. 12,000,000 COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION.
Missouri River Mitigation.......... 20,000,000 Design & Construction.
Missouri River Bank Stabilization & 5,000,000 Rehabilitation &
Navigation Support. Construction.
MISSOURI RIVER CHANNEL DEGRADATION 500,000 BEGIN STUDY.
STUDY.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mo-Ark also requests that the several key programs which provide
Federal assistance for water related projects continue to be made
available to local communities and that they are supported with annual
appropriations. Among these: Small Flood Control Authority, Section 205
of the 1948 Flood Control Act as amended; Flood Plain Management
Services, Section 206 of the 1960 Flood Control Act; Planning
Assistance to States, Public Law 93-251; and Emergency Bank
Stabilization, Section 14 of the 1946 Flood Control Act as amended.
Communities in our region have made use of these programs in the past
and will continue to seek out beneficial uses for them in the future.
______
Prepared Statement of the Kansas City Industrial Council
The Kansas City Industrial Council (KCIC) supports the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers and local sponsor, Kansas City, Missouri, in the
completion of the Feasibility Report on the Swope Park Industrial Area.
We encourage the approval of this report as urgently as possible.
The safety of many lives is directly affected by the Blue River as
experienced in the May 15, 1990, flooding in the Swope Park Industrial
Park. The Feasibility Report accurately defines this unique area by
having only one way to enter and exit, land being surrounded by river
and railroad tracks. This report also accurately depicts that the
business owners and managers of Swope Park Industrial Park have
continued to maintain property and employment while keeping flood
protection the number one priority for employee safety.
______
Prepared Statement of DECO Companies, Inc.
DECO Companies, Inc. has 90 employees currently in the Blue River
Valley. Our affiliate companies have ownership of over a million square
feet of industrial space leased to small ``Started Businesses''. To
keep these businesses, valuable property and employees safe from floods
continued funding of the Blue River project is essential.
The project, which began in 1983, is located along the Blue River
from its mouth at the Missouri River continuing approximately 12 miles
upstream to 63rd Street, running through an industrial area of Kansas
City, which is a long-standing business district employing 12,000
people, and containing many residential neighborhoods.
The progress made to date has provided significant benefits to
those businesses downstream. But much work remains. Delays in funding
will increase the risk of flooding as rapid development of the
watershed in the State of Kansas increases the run off. Increased
flooding has forced many businesses to abandon the valley and relocate
to new ``Greenfields''. The project's completion date has already been
delayed from 1998 to 2008.
This is an economically sound project with a benefit to cost ratio
of 3 to 1. Therefore, we urge you to provide the $8,000,000 in funding
needed to continue this project.
______
Prepared Statement of Vance Brothers Inc.
On behalf of the 200 employees of Vance Brothers Inc., I am
requesting that you provide the funding necessary to continue the Blue
River Channel Project.
In 1993 and again in 1995 the water was so high that we had to
initiate our Emergency Flood Plan. Besides costing thousands of
dollars, it put employees out of work for several days.
Because of the residential and commercial development of the upper
Blue River basin in the State of Kansas, along with their paved parking
lots and new storm sewer systems, we had up to 8 feet of water in our
plant in 1990.
Increased flooding has forced many businesses to abandon the
valley. Delays in funding will increase the risk of flooding as rapid
development of the watershed in the State of Kansas increases the run
off. The project's completion date has already been delayed from 1998
to 2008.
This project will benefit the workers in our area creating good
paying jobs.
This is an economically sound project with a benefit to cost ratio
of 3 to 1. Therefore, we urge you to provide the $8,000,000 in funding
needed to continue this project.
______
Prepared Statement of Warehouse One, Inc.
On behalf of the 55 associates of Warehouse One, Inc., and the
thousands of other Kansas City workers and residents in the Blue
Valley, I am requesting that you provide the $8,000,000 in funding
necessary to continue the Blue River Channel Project.
The Blue River flows through the historical and industrial heart of
Kansas City with its lower stretch in the Enterprise Zone. Increased
flooding from upstream development has forced many businesses to
abandon the valley at a cost of thousands of jobs and lowered property
values. The Army Corps of Engineers' revised completion date has now
been extended from 1998 to 2008. This delay will only cause more
companies and residents to leave our neighborhoods.
In areas where the project has been completed, redevelopment is
significant. Hundreds of millions of dollars of public and private
money have been invested to reclaim abandoned properties providing
jobs, homes, and tax dollars.
The Blue River Channel Project, with a benefit to cost ratio of 3
to 1 has already proven to be economically sound. I urge you to provide
the $8,000,000 in funding to continue the project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Bi-State Turkey Creek Association
We received a NEW START APPROPRIATION in the Fiscal Year 2004
Appropriations Bill and construction is underway.
We MUST have funds to continue this project which affects hundreds
of privately held company and thousands of employees.
Major Interstate Highways 35 and 635 flood along with U.S. Highways
69 and 169. The Main Lines of the Burlington-Northern and Santa-Fe
railroads flood.
We request that $2,500,000 be appropriated for fiscal year 2005 for
continued construction.
______
Prepared Statement of the Livers Bronze Co.
Livers Bronze Co. moved into Swope Industrial in 1999. We purchased
two buildings that house our lifetime investments and the futures for
many families. Coming into this we needed FEMA flood insurance but also
knew there was a project under way to give us flood protection which at
some point would eliminate this costly insurance. We have an active
association and go to regular meetings with the U.S. Corps of Engineers
and our sponsor, Kansas City, MO. At this time we have completed both
Reconnaissance and Feasibility studies.
The Blue River has a history of flooding in Kansas City. Downstream
of 63rd Street the work has nearly been finished; the Bannister project
at 95th Street has completed and the Dodson project at 85th Street has
just started. This leaves the Swope project at 75th Street in between,
not started and could possibly put us at higher risk during high water
events. The Swope project is truly the last piece of the Blue River
puzzle with regard to the flood protection of industrial sites along
the Blue in Kansas City.
We request that the $600,000 be appropriated to complete the design
phase of the Blue River, Swope Industrial project. The ongoing expenses
and threats of future floods in our park are detrimental to the
different industries in our park. Without your help, our businesses and
the lives of our employees and associates will always have the threats
of flooding in our future. Please help us complete this last segment of
the Blue River project.
______
Prepared Statement of The Salvajor Company
The Swope Park Industrial Association member companies have
collectively worked for flood protection for many years, even prior to
our flooding in 1990. We have met many times with our sponsor, Kansas
City, MO, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and have completed both
Reconnaissance and Feasibility studies.
Our location is separate of the Blue River Channel project that is
from the mouth of the Blue River upstream to 63rd Street. As you know
there are two other projects on the Blue River, the completed Bannister
project at 95th Street and the newly under construction, Dodson project
at 85th Street. Our location on 75th Street is between Bannister/Dodson
and Blue River Channel projects. This location, between two active
projects, puts us at higher risk than any other industrial area on the
Blue River during high water events. Our project, when constructed,
will complete the protection of industrial sites on the Blue River--the
last piece of the puzzle.
Even though we continue to work for the protection of our employees
and the preservation of our business, we are now mostly concerned about
continued funding of our project. We are a small project, and the only
industrial area on the Blue River with the risk of not realizing
construction since our project is still in design phase, a phase that
is in most risk of not being funded for the upcoming year.
Without funding, Swope Park Industrial area companies will
definitely lose investments in property and jobs that were created here
long before we were designated flood plains. We realize we are only one
of many projects that need funding, but our project is unique in our
location, our size, and we are the key to completion of a great program
that has already shown positive results in retaining business and
reducing blight in the completed areas. We request that the $600,000 be
appropriated to complete the design phase of the Blue River; Swope Park
Industrial project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Clay and Bailey Manufacturing Company
On behalf of the 60 employees of Clay & Bailey Manufacturing
Company, I am requesting that you provide the $8,000,000 in funding
necessary to continue the Blue River Channel Project.
Our company, like many others in the valley, were ``high & dry'' in
the record floods of 1961 and 1977. However, because of the residential
and commercial development of the upper Blue River basin in the State
of Kansas, along with their paved parking lots and new storm sewer
systems, we had 5 feet of water in our plant in 1990. The $1.5 million
in damages almost closed us down.
The rainfall in 1990 was considerably less than in 1977, yet the
extent of the flooding throughout the lower valley was much more
severe. In 1993 and again in 1995 the water was so high that we had to
initiate our Emergency Flood Plan. This involves shutting down, raising
motors and moving material. Besides costing thousands of dollars, it
put employees out of work for several days.
The Blue River flows through the industrial heart of Kansas City
with most of the lower stretch in the Enterprise Zone. Increased
flooding over the years has forced many industries to abandon the
valley. The Army Corps of Engineers' new estimated completion date has
been extended from 1998 to 2008. The delay will cause more companies to
move out of the valley either because they see the risk as unacceptable
or they are washed away by a flood that should have been prevented.
Likewise redevelopment of abandoned properties continues to be delayed.
Meanwhile, remediation and redevelopment in the areas where the
project is complete has been tremendous. Hundreds of millions of
dollars of private money has already been expended to recover the
abandoned industrial properties providing jobs and tax dollars.
This is an economically sound project with a benefit to cost ratio
of 3 to 1. Again we urge you to provide the $8,000,000 in funding to
continue the project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Board of Levee Commissioners For the Yazoo-
Mississippi Delta
This statement, made on behalf of the citizens represented by the
Yazoo-Mississippi Delta Levee Board (YMD), is not only in support of
the funding requests contained herein, but also for the general funding
testimony offered for Fiscal 2005 by the Mississippi Valley Flood
Control Association. I would ask that this statement be made part of
the record.
The Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association is requesting of
Congress funding in the amount of $450 million for the Mississippi
River and Tributaries Project (MR&T), an amount based on the
association's professional assessment of the capabilities of the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Mississippi Valley Division.
While we recognize that this is a time when the Federal budget is
being inordinately strained by both a slowly recovering economy, the
continued hostilities in Iraq and the ongoing war against terrorism, we
also recognize both the Nation's economy and the lives and livelihoods
of its citizen's rests upon the continued provision of adequate flood
control for its heartland.
In the aftermath of the devastating and historic Great Flood of
1927, the Flood Control Act of 1928 established as national priority,
the development of a comprehensive flood control plan to reduce the
likelihood of such a horrific events ever happening again in the Lower
Mississippi Valley. As we look back, the MR&T has returned $284180
billion in benefits for the $11.90 billion invested--truly an American
public works success story.
However, much work remains uncompleted, and if the MR&T success
story is to continue, Congress must give it a higher priority than has
the administration in its budget. For the totality of the MR&T, the
president proposes only $270 million, an amount which we find
critically austere.
The YMD Levee Board urges the Congress to provide funding at a
level which will allow the MR&T to continue at a pace commensurate with
the national priority to protect people and property from the ravages
of flooding. We urge Congress to provide funding in the amount of $450
million so that this national promise can be kept.
A line item chart reflecting existing and needed funding levels for
MR&T projects in the Lower Mississippi Valley follows, with special
emphasis herein given to those projects most critical to our levee
district:
Mississippi River Levees.--Life as we know it simply could not
continue in the Lower Mississippi Valley without its levee system. The
need to keep our levee system strong and secure must be given a top
priority. The administration's budget earmarks only $7.665 million to
maintaining our levees and we ask Congress to allocate $14.915 million
for this critical need.
Upper Yazoo Projects (UYP).--The top priority for the YMD Levee
Board, the Upper Yazoo Projects, was conceived in 1936. The overall
project includes a system of flood control reservoirs which discharge
into a system of channels and levees intended to safely convey
headwater from the hills into the Mississippi River. Perhaps the least
contentious major flood control project in the country, the UYP is
progressing smoothly, with virtually no public opposition. However, the
proposed budget funds this project at only $3.850 million and we urge
Congress to fully fund at the capability of the Corps of Engineers--$20
million--so that it might progress and the following be accomplished:
--Complete Channel Item 5B;
--Complete Item 7A and 7B structures;
--Purchase project and mitigation lands;
--Continue Channel Items 6A and 6B and;
--Initiate bridge relocation.
Delta Headwaters Project.--Formerly known as the Demonstration
Erosion Control Project, this is a proven concept which works, and
should continue, yet is unfunded and would be phased out. We urge
Congress not to allow this. Vast amounts of sediments which would be
controlled by this project would in its absence end up within the
Coldwater/Tallahatchie/Yazoo river system. We urge Congress to
appropriate $25 million for this badly needed effort.
Yazoo Headwater Flood Control Reservoirs.--Four major flood control
reservoirs exist in Mississippi to control the release of headwater
into the Yazoo River system--Sardis, Arkabutla, Enid and Grenada. These
have prevented significant flood damages by allowing excess waters to
be released at controlled rates. All four are aging and require both
routine maintenance and upgrading and we ask that the Congress do so at
the following levels:
--Arkabutla--$12.9 million;
--Sardis--$19.322 million;
--Enid--$13.679 million;
--Grenada--$10.101 million.
Big Sunflower River.--We ask that Congress fund at the level of $5
million so that Item 66 A/B at Swan Lake Levee might be completed and
that, the purchase of mitigation lands mitigation and reforestation
might continue.
Big Sunflower River Maintenance Project.--We request Congress fund
at the level of $2.139 million so that Items 2 and 4 might be initiated
and design might continue.
Yazoo Backwater Pumps.--Of critical concern to South Delta
residents and our sister levee board, the Mississippi Levee Board; this
project would alleviate backwater flooding. We support that effort and
join in requesting funding at a level of $12 million so that planning
and acquisition may continue and a pump supply contract might be
initiated.
Yazoo Backwater.--We ask Congress to appropriate $300,000 to
continue pump operations at Greentree reservoirs and to appropriate
$926,000 to rehabilitate bulkheads and provide environmental
mitigation.
Main Stem.--We seek $3.966 million to rehabilitate and replace
drainage structures and we request $25,000 to monitor Sheley Bridge
bank stabilization.
Coldwater Basin.--We ask $750,000 so that a feasibility study might
continue.
Quiver River.--We seek $100,000 to continue a reconnaissance phase
of this effort.
Reformulation Unit.--We request $450,000 to complete reform of the
backwater unit and continue work in the tributaries phase of this
project.
Finally, in an overall statement on proposed Peer Review Policy
within the Corps of Engineers, we would prefer that any such reviews be
mandated by Congress to take place only during the study phase of
projects and not when actual work has begun.
______
Prepared Statement of the Green Brook Flood Control Commission
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Vernon A.
Noble, and I am the Chairman of the Green Brook Flood Control
Commission. I submit this testimony in support of the Raritan River
Basin--Green Brook Sub-Basin project, which we request be budgeted in
fiscal year 2005 for $10,000,000 in Construction General funds.
As you know from our previous testimony, a tremendous flood took
place in September of 1999. Extremely heavy rainfall occurred,
concentrated in the upper part of Raritan River Basin. As a result, the
Borough of Bound Brook, New Jersey, located at the confluence of the
Green Brook with the Raritan River, suffered catastrophic flooding.
Water levels in the Raritan River and the lower Green Brook reached
record levels.
There were tremendous monetary damages, and extensive and tragic
human suffering.
The flooding of September 1999 is not the first bad flood to have
struck this area. Records show that major floods have occurred here as
far back as 1903.
Disastrous flooding took place in the Green Brook Basin in the late
summer of 1971. That flood caused $304,000,000 in damages (April 1996
price level) and disrupted the lives of thousands of persons.
In the late summer of 1973, another very severe storm struck the
area, and again, thousands of persons were displaced from their homes.
$482,000,000 damages was done (April 1996 price level) and six persons
lost their lives.
The first actual construction of the Project began in late fiscal
year 2001, in which an old bridge over the Green Brook, connecting the
Boroughs of Bound Brook and Middlesex, was replaced with a new and
higher bridge. That work is now complete.
The second construction contract, known as Segment T, began in
2002, and is now nearing completion. This work will complete the
protection for the eastern portion of Bound Brook Borough.
The next following segment of the Project is planned for
construction to begin this year. This next construction, known as
Segment U, will begin the protection for the western portion of Bound
Brook Borough.
When Congress authorized the Project for construction, it did so
only for the lower and Stony Brook portions. This was the result of the
objections raised in 1997 by the Municipality of Berkeley Heights,
located in the highest elevation portion of the Green Brook Basin.
In 1998 a Task Force was formed to seek a new consensus for
protection of the upper portion of the Basin.
Following the recommendations of the Task Force, in calendar year
2003, Resolutions of Support for protection of the upper portion of the
Basin were adopted, along the lines of the recommendations of the Task
Force. These new Resolutions of Support for the protection of the upper
portion of the Basin, principally the Municipalities of Plainfield and
Scotch Plains, were adopted by those Municipalities, and by the two
affected Counties of Union and Somerset.
A final design for a new plan to protect these upper basin
Municipalities remains to be done. This work will involve a new effort
by the Corps of Engineers, and of course will require that the Corps of
Engineers enlist technical support for surveying, environmental
investigations, and design studies, by the placing of appropriate
contracts with qualified outside consulting engineering firms.
This work will require many months, and contracts for actual
construction of these protective measures for the upper portion of the
region are not likely to be ready until several more years. It is
understood that when these studies have been completed, it will be
necessary for Congress to specifically authorize the final design of
the recommended plan. That likely cannot happen until fiscal year 2006,
or later.
Meantime, it is essential that this preparatory work continue. And
it is thus essential that the Corps of Engineers be authorized and
allowed to place contracts for environmental and engineering studies in
order to develop an acceptable plan for the protection of the upper
portion of the Green Brook Basin.
It is understood that specific action by the Congress is required
at this time to authorize the Corps of Engineers to continue this work
in fiscal year 2005 and beyond. It is also understood that before final
design for protection of the upper portion of the Green Brook Basin can
proceed, it will be necessary that a Project Cooperation Agreement be
entered into between the Corps of Engineers and the State of New
Jersey. Presumably, this Project Cooperation Agreement will be similar
to the Agreement now in force between the Corps of Engineers and the
State of New Jersey, which was made for the lower and Stony Brook
portions of the Green Brook Basin.
Page one of the Syllabus contained in the approved Final General
Re-evaluation Report of May 1997 contains the following:
``Accordingly, this final document is considered a decision
document for construction of the lower and Stony Brook portions of the
Basin, with continued planning and engineering of the separable upper
portion of the Basin. The decision to construct the upper portion
features will be deferred until such time that evaluations of
additional information and views are completed and local interests have
the opportunity to review findings.''
To carry this work forward, it is essential that the Corps of
Engineers be authorized, within the funds appropriated to them in
fiscal year 2005, to place contracts for engineering and environmental
studies pertaining to the protection of the upper portion of the Basin.
It is to be noted that the Estimated Damages caused by the Flood of
1973, in the upper portion Municipalities only, reported in the final
GRR of May 1997, page 33, showed that Estimated Damages in Plainfield,
Scotch Plains and Watchung (the upper portion of the Basin) amounted to
an estimated $357 million.
We urge the members of Congress to direct the Corps of Engineers,
within the funds made available to them for fiscal year 2005, to
continue the necessary investigations and studies, and to authorize the
Corps of Engineers to place contracts for such investigations as may be
necessary, so that the preparatory work for the ultimate protection of
the people and property within the upper portion of the Basin can be
carried forward.
The Green Brook Flood Control Commission is made up of appointed
representatives from Middlesex, Somerset and Union Counties in New
Jersey, and from the 13 Municipalities within the Basin. This
represents a combined population of about one-quarter of a million
people.
The Members of the Commission are all volunteers, and for 33 years
have served, without pay, to advance the cause of flood protection for
the Basin. Throughout this time, the Corps of Engineers, New York
District, has kept us informed of the progress of their work, and a
representative from the Corps has been a regular part of our monthly
meetings.
We believe that it is clearly essential that the Green Brook Flood
Control Project be carried forward, and pursued vigorously, to achieve
protection at the earliest possible date. This Project is needed to
prevent loss of life and property, as well as the trauma caused every
time there is a heavy rain.
New Jersey has programmed budget money for its share of the Project
in fiscal year 2005.
We urgently request an appropriation for the Project in fiscal year
2005 of $10,000,000.
With your continued support, the Green Brook Flood Control
Commission is determined to see this Project through to completion.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, for your
vitally important past support for the Green Brook Flood Control
Project; and we thank you for the opportunity to submit this Testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Moss Landing Harbor District
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the
chairman and members of the Board of Harbor Commissioners, thank you
for the opportunity for me, Russell Jeffries, as President of the Board
of Harbor Commissioners of Moss Landing Harbor District in California
to submit prepared remarks to you for the record in support of the
fiscal year 2005 energy and water regular appropriations measure.
The commission recognizes and expresses its gratitude to our two
senators, the Honorable Dianne Feinstein, a valuable member of this
committee, and the Honorable Barbara Boxer for their continued
assistance and support on our behalf.
We express our profound appreciation to the subcommittee and full
committee for its inclusion of $600,000 in fiscal year 2004
appropriated funds for the preparation of a screening level Ecological
Risk Assessment under U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment
Station supervision. The assessment was recently critiqued by a
preeminent peer group of experts scholars representing a broad cross
section of professional disciplines.
This sets the stage--with the committee's support--for the
preparation of a first-ever Dredged Material Management Plan (DMMP) for
the Harbor District in order to plan for orderly maintenance dredging
of the Federal channel and local berths next year and over the next 20
or more years. This effort is supported by a working group organized
under national dredging team local planning guidance, including
representatives of the Federal, State and local agencies, and other
stakeholder and public interest groups with an interest in dredging
activities.
To put our needs in proper perspective, our geographical location
and marine ecosystem is unique in that the Harbor District is located
at the confluence of the Pajaro and Salinas rivers in between two
national treasures--the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and the
Elkhorn Slough National Estuarine Research Reserve--precluding most
potential upland disposal sites for contaminated dredged material. The
SF-12 aquatic disposal site is grandfathered for sanctuary purposes. It
is located 50 yards offshore at the apex of the Monterey Bay Submarine
Canyon which plunges to a depth of 8,000 feet in less than 1 mile.
Every year. Periodic deposition, erosion, and flushing cycles transport
thousands of tons of sedimentary material down the canyon like a
chute--so much so that our dredged material is a miniscule amount
measured against the total annual flushing event.
Periodic El Nino events deposit trace elements of DDT in our harbor
sediments traced to Salinas Valley Agriculture--America's Salad Bowl--
as a natural sink. With no realistic long term alternative--including
upland disposal--to continued use of our current disposal site, our
very livelihood as the largest fishing port on the central coast and
largest concentration of marine scientific research south of Seattle,
is at stake.
Of amounts previously appropriated, approximately $2.4 million has
been expended for maintenance dredging to date and $600,000 has been
expended to begin the ERA process. Most of that was transferred to the
Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station (WES) to prepare a
preliminary Ecological Risk Assessment (ERA). Previously appropriated
operations and maintenance funds have already been expended to
reimburse the San Francisco district for program management costs,
conduct of the required economic analysis (including a finding of a
very favorable current project benefit cost ratio of 1.7 to 1), DMMP
plan formulation and project scoping including alternative upland
disposal site analysis), and technical support to WES.
The most significant findings of the screening comparative ERA were
that in most cases the environmental impacts associated with periodic
maintenance dredging and disposal at the SF-12 site were less than the
no action alternative as periodic dredging removes the accumulation of
contaminated material in the first few centimeters thereby reducing its
bioavailability to benthic organisms at the base of the food web
thereby precluding its absorption in the lipid tissue of higher trophic
level organisms.
With the committee's support 2 years we completed a periodic
dredging cycle of the Federal channel work and the Inner Harbor using a
combination of beach replenishment and ocean disposal at the SF-12
historic disposal site for the first time in a decade. We anticipate
that next year we will finally returned to a normal 3-year maintenance
cycle of the Federal channel while local berth dredging of our all-
important commercial fishing and oceanographic vessel berths continues
on an annual basis.
During the next year we will be analyzing exiting data from a
variety of sources including USGS, Moss Landing Marine Laboratory, and
the Naval Post Graduate School among others filling in identified data
gaps in the screening ERA to drive the WES model, as necessary
completing complementary local site-specific scientific studies, and
integrating all those results into the DMMP process.
To this end we request the subcommittee's approval of $600,000 in
appropriations from the Operations and Maintenance General account in
fiscal year 2004 in order to complete the ecological risk assessment
and dredged material management plan so that the process is completed
and plan implemented prior to the next periodic maintenance event
scheduled to occur in fiscal year 2006.
With the assistance of the local scientific community, we are
fortunate to have as much as 3 years of scientific data in the form of
benthic community biomass and tissue sampling, and first-ever near-
shore state-of-the-art bathymetric survey of the disposal site and
Monterey Bay Canyon. These efforts should prove invaluable in measuring
before and after direct impacts of dredged material disposal at the
disposal site.
With the assistance of the San Francisco district, we were able to
take advantage of last year's dredging episode to do before and after
measurement of both sedimentary transport at the disposal site and to
measure any direct impacts on benthic communities--the source of any
bioaccumulation of contaminated sediments in trace amounts.
Despite the drastic differences between the use of the WES ERA
model adapted from aquatic Mississippi River application and our unique
submarine canyon ecosystem and volume of material, a tracer study using
European technology was synchronized with the last disposal event that
demonstrated the rapid dispersion of dredged material at the SF-12
site. We are confident that on the basis of our preliminary review--and
that of the peer group--of the screening level ERA supported by local
site specific analysis of data already collected and focused studies to
augment the WES risk assessment model, the end result will be a
document that will ultimately prove persuasive and compelling to the
greater scientific community, Federal and State regulatory agencies,
and an informed and involved public in our community.
We now know that there is a considerable body of unpublished
relevant data concerning the Monterey Bay Canyon and the impact, fate
and effect of sedimentary material transport in the hands of the local
scientific community that must be collected, catalogued, analyzed, and
used both as input data and for comparison with the WES model so that
each can operate as an invaluable countercheck on the output results of
the other in predicting and directly measuring the impacts of dredged
material disposal at our ocean disposal site.
Based upon our experience thus far, the funds expended completing
the DMMP/ERA process in developing a persuasive case to the various
constituencies and decision document supporting continued aquatic
disposal for all but a very small fraction of total dredged material in
exceptional circumstances over a 20 year span of the study will save
significant amounts of scarce Federal and local dollars in the future.
That said, we sincerely hope our experience in this effort will:
(1) produce both a useful and practical multidisciplinary decision
document for those agencies exercising regulatory or oversight
jurisdiction over dredging in both our and other settings; and
(2) serve as a model for collaborative effort in dredged material
disposal consensus decision-making in unique situations such as for
other Corps districts and local sponsors seeking to balance required
maintenance dredging to support navigation with the corresponding need
to protect environmentally sensitive areas, in this instance the unique
Monterey Submarine Canyon located at the heart of the Monterey Bay
Marine Sanctuary.
I am prepared to supplement my prepared remarks for the record in
response to any questions that the chair, subcommittee members, or
staff may wish to have me answer. Thank you Mr. Chairman and members of
the subcommittee. This concludes my prepared remarks.
______
Joint Prepared Statement of The Port Commerce Department, The Port
Authority of New York & New Jersey; New Jersey Maritime Resources,
Department of Transportation, State of New Jersey; Empire State
Development Corporation, State of New York; and New York City Economic
Development Corporation
On behalf of the Port of New York and New Jersey, we thank you for
your continued support of the Nation's navigation system. We appreciate
the consistent level of funding that the committee has provided this
bi-State gateway that we are preparing for tomorrow's commerce in
partnership with the Federal Government. We were very pleased that
Chairman David Hobson and Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen were able to visit
the port earlier this year. We would welcome all members of the
subcommittee to get a first-hand look at the harbor and its role in the
U.S. transportation system.
We are gratified that in the fiscal year 2005 budget the
administration maintains the deepening of the Port's main system of
channels as a priority. As such, we strongly endorse the President's
request for $103,000,000 for the NY & NJ Harbor Deepening Project. As
pleased as we are with that, we also share the concerns of many in the
national water resources sector that the overall civil works program is
shrinking. That is happening even as demand for navigation and other
water resource projects remains high. Our transportation and economic
systems will remain strong as long as the Nation's infrastructure is up
to the task and natural resources are in good condition. The long-term
capacity of the Corps of Engineers to help non-Federal governments
tackle infrastructure needs depends on strong funding.
Business in the Port of NY/NJ continues to increase at a strong
pace, lending credence to the government's view that investing in port
channels is good for the Nation. In 2003, our region's marine terminals
handled a record 4 million TEUs, an increase of roughly 300,000 TEUs
over 2002. More steamship lines are starting all-water service to the
East Coast to reduce costs and their reliance on ports of only one U.S.
coast. This continuing trend promises greater cargo throughput in the
years ahead. The Port and industry are preparing for the influx with a
$1.46 billion redevelopment program that includes underwater, terminal,
and access improvements. That public/private investment illustrates the
partnership between the Federal and non-Federal investors in the
Nation's economic future. The bi-State Port supports almost 40,000
terminal-based jobs and over 189,000 off-terminal positions, but the
benefits are not limited to our region. Nationwide, almost 186,000
additional jobs are supported by the Port. The Port directly serves the
Northeast and Midwest as well as most States in the continental United
States. The channel projects will improve transportation efficiency
that will benefit those markets and our national defense.
Crucial to the Port redevelopment program is the support of
Governor James McGreevey and Governor George Pataki. They made strong
commitments to investing Port Authority and other resources to make the
Port and regional freight transportation more efficient, and the Port's
natural resources healthier. We are proud of the support that
businesses, labor, local government and others, listed at the top of
this statement, have given to this most productive port on the Atlantic
Ocean.
Below are our comments on the fiscal year 2005 budget request. We
enthusiastically support the administration's request with respect to
the Harbor Deepening Project and respectfully request that the
subcommittee appropriate funds at higher levels for select projects as
noted and discussed below. Projects in bold lettering are requests
beyond the fiscal year 2005 budget levels.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget Port Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Construction: New York & New Jersey $103,000,000 $103,000,000
Harbor.................................
-------------------------------
Surveys (Studies):
Hudson-Raritan Estuary, NY & NJ..... 450,000 2,500,000
Hudson-Raritan Estuary, Lower 50,000 1,500,000
Passaic River, NJ..................
Hudson-Raritan Estuary, Gowanus 150,000 1,500,000
Canal, NY..........................
Hudson-Raritan Estuary, Meadowlands, 100,000 850,000
NJ.................................
-------------------------------
TOTAL............................. 750,000 6,350,000
-------------------------------
Operation and Maintenance:
Buttermilk Channel, NY.............. 1,030,000 1,030,000
East River, NY...................... 370,000 370,000
East Rockaway Inlet, NY............. 2,100,000 2,100,000
Flushing Bay & Creek, NY............ .............. 11,000,000
Hudson River Channel................ .............. 4,500,000
Jamaica Bay, NY..................... 2,200,000 2,200,000
New York Harbor, NY & NJ Drift 5,414,000 5,914,000
Removal............................
New York Harbor, NY................. 4,235,000 4,235,000
New York & New Jersey Channels...... 5,700,000 7,000,000
Newark Bay, Hackensack & Passaic 120,000 3,000,000
Rivers, NJ.........................
Project Condition Surveys, NJ....... 1,670,000 1,670,000
Project Condition Surveys, NY....... 1,075,000 1,075,000
Raritan River, NJ................... .............. 2,500,000
Westchester Creek, NY............... .............. 100,000
-------------------------------
TOTAL............................. 23,914,000 46,744,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
construction
New York and New Jersey Harbor
This project was authorized by Section 101(a)(2) of WRDA 2000
(Public Law 106-541). It includes deepening the Ambrose Channel from
deep water to the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge to 53 feet mlw, and
deepening the Anchorage Channel and those channels that lead to the
principal general cargo and breakbulk marine terminal areas to 50 feet
mlw. The Corps of Engineers and the intended project sponsor are
engaged in pre-construction engineering and design work to bring this
project into construction seamlessly as the Kill Van Kull and Newark
Bay deepening to 45 feet is concluded in late 2004. To facilitate
project transition, the intended project sponsor is completing a
construction contract to deepen to 50-feet portions of the Kill Van
Kull and Newark Bay channels as a complement to the Corps' 45-foot
project. These efforts and the overall commitment of the Port to the
projects are strong testimony to our desire to advance this project
with the Federal Government. We urge adoption of the budget request.
surveys (studies)
Hudson-Raritan Estuary Studies
These studies were authorized by House Committee Resolution dated
April 15, 1999, Docket Number 2596. Increases are requested for the
studies in order to achieve the completion schedules of 2005 for the
New York & New Jersey and Lower Passaic studies and 2004 for the
Gowanus study.
--New York & New Jersey.--The study purpose is to identify projects
to restore estuarine, wetland and adjacent upland buffer
habitat throughout the port region to the extent practicable
and in keeping with existing port and regional management
plans. The Corps and the Port Authority signed the Feasibility
Cost Sharing Agreement on July 12, 2001, and immediately began
the study. Natural resource areas, degraded as a result of
historic damage, need to be returned to their full potential.
The continued loss of wetlands, not only through development
but due to inexplicable causes, will require further analysis,
monitoring and restoration. One project that can move on a fast
track is Liberty State Park, where the State of New Jersey has
all of its required project funds on hand, ready to provide to
the Corps for construction. Given the past funding levels, the
Corps is unable to proceed both with the Liberty State Park and
the comprehensive regional study. We respectfully request that
the budget be augmented to $2,500,000 to allow the Corps to
keep its commitments to place the environment on an equal
footing with navigation improvements.
--Lower Passaic.--Local communities throughout the Passaic River
Basin requested a program of improvements to remediate and
restore the river. The river and adjacent shorelines have been
degraded by historic industrial/commercial activity and
associated impacts of urban development. The Corps initiated
the Reconnaissance Phase in January 2000 that recommended a
separate study for the tidal influence of the Lower Passaic
River. In June 2003, the Corps, in partnership with EPA and the
NJDOT/Office of Maritime Resources, completed a comprehensive
Project Management Plan (PMP) that integrates the work of all
three agencies into a single study to determine the best
approach. In the same month, the Corps signed the Feasibility
Cost-Sharing Agreement (FCSA) with the Office of Maritime
Resources and began the feasibility study. This project also
has been designated as a pilot project under the joint Corps-
EPA Urban Rivers Restoration Initiative. Despite the
outstanding coordination between the three agencies, Federal
funding is a concern. We are pleased that the non-Federal
matching funding will be available as the project requires. EPA
expects sufficient funding from PRPs to begin field
investigations by Fall 2004. As such, lack of Federal funding
will jeopardize the Corps' ability to participate in the joint
fieldwork envisioned in the PMP. For that reason, we request
that the budget be augmented to $1,500,000 for this study.
--Gowanus.--The feasibility study will assess the environmental
problems and potential solutions in the Gowanus Canal and Bay.
Restoration measures will assess hot spot clean-up of off-
channel contaminated sediments, contaminant reduction measures,
creation of wetlands, water quality improvements, and
alteration of hydrology/hydraulics to improve water movement
and quality. This has been designated as a pilot project under
the joint Corps-EPA Urban Rivers Restoration Initiative. A FCSA
was executed with the NYC Department of Environmental
Protection in March 2002. The City has committed its full share
to the project, and awaits the Federal match. In order to
continue the study restoration of this highly contaminated,
visible urban body of water (including benefits to human
health), we request that the budget be augmented to $1,500,000.
--Hackensack.--This study will look at the feasibility of restoring
wetlands in the Hackensack Meadowlands area and will assess
toxic waste remediation potential. The area's existing wildlife
habitat preserves are threatened by dwindling open marshes. The
local sponsor is the NJ Meadowlands Commission, which has
committed funding, and looks toward the Federal share. We
respectfully request that the budget be augmented to $850,000
for this study aimed at protecting marshes, tidal creeks and
open spaces.
operation and maintenance
Operation and maintenance projects are critical to the commerce,
navigation and security of the Port as well as the Nation's security.
If channels are not maintained to official depths and as needed by
today's commerce, the efficiency of the Federal system of channels is
lost and the risk of groundings increases. The Corps deepened the
Newark Bay channel that leads to the Port Newark/Elizabeth terminal
complex from 35 feet to 40 feet in 1995 as part of Phase 1 of the Kill
Van Kull-Newark Bay 45-foot deepening project. In fiscal year 2002,
Congress appropriated funds that enabled only partial maintenance of
that channel, leaving significant areas at shallow and potentially
unsafe depths. Unfortunately, the proposed budget would provide
insufficient funding to adequately maintain Federal channels in the
Port. The Port is one the Nation's busiest petroleum ports and the
Arthur Kill and Raritan River channels are critical to that trade.
Maintenance of the two channels is needed to support the industry,
which serves not only the greater New York metropolitan area but much
of the American northeast. Of course, maintenance also protects and
perpetuates the Federal infrastructure investment.
With the above concerns in mind, we think it is important to be on
the record as to how this part of the fiscal year 2005 budget is
insufficient to meet the practical needs of commerce. We respectfully
request that the budget be augmented by $22,830,000 to $46,744,000 for
Port channel operation and maintenance work. This also would enable the
Corps to address serious shoaling problems in industrial and commercial
portions of Flushing Creek, the Arthur Kill, the Hudson River Channel
and the Raritan River, and to maintain on-going activities and upgrade
the operational facilities at the Corps' Caven Point facility relative
to the important, ongoing New York Harbor Drift Removal efforts.
conclusion
The Port of New York & New Jersey continues to be a major gateway
for a substantial part of the country. Cargo volume has grown, even
while the economy struggles, and has been a source of increased jobs
and commercial investment. The civil works program in the Port, coupled
with public and private sector investments, has served well the
Nation's economic and security interests for the better part of two
centuries. The same is true in ports across the United States. We are
proud of that history and commit to continuing this productive
partnership with the Federal Government so that our region will serve
the Nation for centuries to come.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association
My name is M.V. Williams, I serve as President of the West
Tennessee Tributaries Association and submit this statement on behalf
of the Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association. It is my privilege
to serve as Chairman of the Executive Committee for the Association.
The Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association was first
organized in 1922 and played a very large role in gaining authorization
for the first major Federal water resources bill, the Flood Control Act
of 1928 that established the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project.
This statement is in support of additional funding for that project.
Today our Nation is faced with a war on terror and we are also
mindful of the fact that we must rectify an economic condition that
needs immediate attention. Even faced with those facts, we feel that we
are justified in urging additional appropriations for the Mississippi
River and Tributaries Project because the assets and resources of this
great Nation must not be neglected during these times. We know of no
other appropriation which contributes as much to national wealth and
resources as does flood control and navigation for the major rivers of
this country.
Millions of acres which were overflow lands decades ago are now
highly productive and contributing to our national wealth. These lands
by reason of their geographic location are the most fertile of the
Nation. They produce an abundance of food and fiber for the general
welfare and prosperity of the country. This is only possible because of
the coordinated work performed by the United States Corps of Engineers
and the local people.
The inland waterways of the Nation provide the cheapest and in some
cases the only method to move bulk commodities that are absolutely
essential to the general welfare and prosperity of the country. Moneys
appropriated by Congress for flood control and navigation has and will
augment our natural resources and improve our economic well-being. The
appropriations made by Congress for the Mississippi River and
Tributaries Project are investments in this Nation's future.
Since the productivity of the millions of acres of low lying lands
adjacent to the main stem of the Mississippi River are totally
dependent upon the integrity of the flood control works, any major slow
down in the completion of this work will represent economic
strangulation to this productive portion of our Nation.
If no funds are added to the President's budget request, the Corps
of Engineers will be forced to curtail operations of locks and some
harbors may be closed from lack of maintenance dredging. This will mean
the loss of jobs and possible closure of plants that have millions of
dollars invested in their facilities. Recreational areas will be forced
to close, disrupting the lives of millions of citizens from all walks
of life.
In addition to the problems with the inadequate funding in the
President's budget request, we also have a tremendous problem with the
fact that the Office of Management and Budget is attempting to dictate
policy matters by the use of the budget submission. The greatest damage
from this policy change would be to take the Congress out of its
historical role of legislating policy for the flood control and
navigation programs that have played a large part in making the United
States the greatest industrial and commercial nation on the globe--with
its resources, its wealth and productive capability that has saved the
world in war and sustained it through years of troubled peace.
The executive department is again attempting to supplant this
historical Congressional role and assume these policy making functions.
In past attempts, the Congress in its wisdom has soundly rejected these
attempts. We would urge this Congress to do the same.
In closing let me reemphasize that Federal works projects with
proven merit such as the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project
represent a sound Federal investment which has and will return to the
tax payers of this country generous dividends. Such Federal investments
contribute to the economic well being of the Nation by reducing
unemployment; adding to the stability and economic growth of
agriculture and industry; and providing a flood free environment for
the welfare of the people of the Mississippi River Valley.
For these and other reasons, we are firmly convinced that the
amount of appropriations required in fiscal year 2005 for the
Mississippi River and Tributaries Project is $450,000,000. An attached
sheet to this statement reflects our request in more detail.
Speaking for the entire Mississippi Valley Flood Control
Association, I wish to thank the subcommittee for the opportunity to
present this statement and special thanks for the actions that this
group has taken in the past to assist us with our problems and concerns
with water resources.
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL ASSOCIATION--FISCAL YEAR 2005 CIVIL
WORKS REQUESTED BUDGET--MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES PROJECT--
MAINTENANCE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's
Project Budget MVFCA Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wappapello Lake, MO..................... $4,046,000 $6,352,000
Mississippi River Levees................ 7,665,000 14,915,000
Dredging................................ 20,515,000 20,515,000
Revetment and Dikes..................... 48,760,000 48,760,000
Memphis Harbor, TN...................... 1,205,000 2,010,000
Helena Harbor, TN....................... 385,000 510,000
Greenville Harbor, MS................... 29,000 412,000
Vicksburg Harbor, MS.................... 32,000 345,000
St. Francis River & Tribs, AR........... 6,080,000 8,805,000
White River Backwater, AR............... 1,316,000 2,260,000
North Bank, Arkansas River, AR.......... 146,000 146,000
South Bank, Arkansas River, AR.......... 122,000 122,000
Boeuf & Tensas Rivers, LA............... 2,160,000 2,160,000
Red River Backwater, LA................. 3,083,000 7,390,000
Yazoo Basin, Sardis Lake, MS............ 7,046,000 19,322,000
Yazoo Basin, Arkabutla Lake, MS......... 5,710,000 12,900,000
Yazoo Basin, Enid Lake, MS.............. 4,954,000 13,679,000
Yazoo Basin, Grenada Lake, MS........... 5,553,000 10,101,000
Yazoo Basin, Greenwood, MS.............. 585,000 2,035,000
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo City, MS............. 729,000 729,000
Yazoo Basin, Main Stem, MS.............. 1,013,000 3,966,000
Yazoo Basin, Tributaries, MS............ 923,000 923,000
Yazoo Basin, Whittington Aux Channel, MS 400,000 400,000
Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower, MS.......... 139,000 2,139,000
Yazoo Basin, Yazoo Backwater, MS........ 440,000 926,000
Lower Red River, South Bank, LA......... 105,000 105,000
Bonnet Carre, LA........................ 2,310,000 3,100,000
Old River, LA........................... 7,350,000 29,900,000
Atchafalaya Basin, LA................... 13,000,000 25,000,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway, LA.......... 2,775,000 4,200,000
Baton Rouge Harbor Devil's Swamp, LA.... 14,000 300,000
Miss Delta Region, LA................... 588,000 588,000
Bayou Cocodrie & Tribs, LA.............. 65,000 65,000
Inspection of Completed Works........... 1,500,000 1,700,000
Mapping................................. 1,112,000 1,325,000
-------------------------------
Total MR&T Maintenance............ 151,855,000 248,105,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MISSISSIPPI VALLEY FLOOD CONTROL ASSOCIATION--FISCAL YEAR 2005 CIVIL
WORKS REQUESTED BUDGET--MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES APPROPRIATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
President's
Project and State Budget MVFCA Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surveys, Continuation of Planning and
Engineering & Advance Engineering &
Design:
Memphis Harbor, TN.................. .............. ..............
Germantown, TN...................... $27,000 $27,000
Millington, TN...................... 100,000 100,000
Fletcher Creek, TN.................. 93,000 93,000
Memphis Metro Storm Water .............. 100,000
Management, TN.....................
Bayou Meto, AR...................... .............. 2,447,000
Germantown, TN...................... .............. 200,000
Southeast Arkansas.................. .............. 600,000
Coldwater Basin Below Arkabutla 203,000 750,000
Lake, MS...........................
Quiver River, MS.................... .............. 100,000
Spring Bayou, LA.................... 500,000 600,000
Point Coupee to St. Mary Parish, LA. .............. 100,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway System, 100,000 100,000
LA*................................
Alexandria, LA to the Gulf of Mexico 435,000 435,000
Morganza, LA to the Gulf of Mexico.. 1,500,000 10,000,000
Donaldsonville, LA to the Gulf of 800,000 1,200,000
Mexico.............................
Tensas River, LA.................... .............. 500,000
Donaldsonville Port Development, LA. .............. 100,000
Collection & Study of Basic Data.... 700,000 700,000
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Surveys, Continuation of 4,458,000 18,152,000
Planning & Engineering & Advance
Engineering & Design.............
-------------------------------
Construction:
St. John's Bayou-New Madrid 8,300,000 8,300,000
Floodway, MO.......................
Eight Mile Creek, AR................ 1,357,000 3,293,000
Helena & Vicinity, AR............... .............. ..............
Grand Prairie Region, AR............ .............. 20,000,000
Bayou Meto, AR...................... .............. 18,000,000
West Tennessee Tributaries, TN...... .............. 700,000
Nonconnah Creek, TN................. 2,153,000 2,753,000
Wolf River, Memphis, TN............. .............. 2,400,000
August to Clarendon Levee, Lower .............. 2,000,000
White River, AR....................
St. Francis Basin, MO & AR.......... 3,000,000 9,500,000
Yazoo Basin, MS..................... 5,850,000 62,775,000
Atchafalaya Basin, LA............... 22,495,000 32,500,000
Atchafalaya Basin Floodway, LA...... 7,200,000 10,000,000
MS Delta Region, LA................. 1,800,000 4,700,000
Horn Lake Creek, MS................. .............. 203,000
MS & LA Estaurine Area, MS & LA..... .............. 50,000
Channel Improvements, IL, KY, MO, 36,882,000 44,082,000
AR, TN, MS & LA....................
Mississippi River Levees, IL, KY, 38,960,000 54,800,000
MO, AR, TN, MS & LA................
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Construction............ 127,997,000 276,056,000
Subtotal, Maintenance............. 151,855,000 248,105,000
-------------------------------
Subtotal, Mississippi River & 284,310,000 542,313,000
Tributaries......................
Less Reduction for Savings & -14,310,000 92,313,000
Slippage.........................
-------------------------------
Grand Total, Mississippi River & 270,000,000 450,000,000
Tributaries......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Prepared Statement of the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community and
the City of Mesa, Arizona
Chairman Domenici, Ranking Member Reid, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee, thank you for allowing us to testify on behalf of
the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community (SRPMIC) and the City of
Mesa in support of a fiscal year 2005 appropriation of $1.5 million for
the Va Shly'ay Akimel, Arizona, project of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. This project, intended to restore a degraded stretch of the
Salt River in central Arizona, is critically important to the tribe,
the City, and the region.
Mr. Chairman, because of this subcommittee's efforts, $800,000 was
appropriated for the feasibility phase of the Va Shly'ay Akimel project
in fiscal year 2004. We are extremely grateful for the subcommittee's
ongoing support of the project. We respectfully request your continued
support for this project in fiscal year 2005 with an appropriation of
$1.5 million, which will initiate the pre-construction engineering and
design portion (PED) of the project.
Like many projects of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Va Shly'ay
is drastically underfunded in the President's budget. Although the
budget does include $349,000 for the project in fiscal year 2004, the
Corps has a capability of $1.5 to initiate PED in the coming year. We
hope that the subcommittee will provide this level of funding in order
to contain costs and maintain an optimal project schedule.
SRPMIC and the City of Mesa fully recognize the importance of
restoring the Salt River's environmental integrity. As a consequence,
the tribe and City--the non-Federal sponsors of the project--remain
committed to discharging the requisite cost-sharing obligations
associated with the project. We would also note that, as far as we
know, this project is the only one in the Nation featuring a joint
cost-share agreement between an Indian tribe and a local community.
This makes it a unique project of the Corps of Engineers. We have every
reason to believe that this example of municipal-tribal cooperation
could serve as a model for future joint projects of tribal communities
and local governments.
In conclusion, it is critically important that this project remain
on an optimal schedule. The Corps has expressed a maximum capability of
$1.5 million to initiate PED on this project in fiscal year 2005. On
behalf of the SRPMIC and the City of Mesa, we ask that you fully fund
the Va Shly'ay Akimel project at $1.5 million in fiscal year 2005.
______
Prepared Statement of the Seminole Tribe of Florida
The Seminole Tribe of Florida is pleased to submit this statement
regarding the fiscal year 2005 budget for the Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps). The Tribe asks that Congress provide $27,000,000 in the Corps'
construction budget for critical projects in the South Florida
Ecosystem, as authorized in section 528 of the Water Resources
Development Act (WRDA) of 1996, and amended by section 208 of WRDA
1999. The critical projects program is tasked with completing ten
projects, one of which is complete, and the remaining nine either
completing planning and design or construction. The Seminole Tribe has
partnered with the Corps to design, build, and operate the critical
project on the Big Cypress Reservation, located in the western basins
of the Everglades, directly north of the Big Cypress National Preserve.
On January 7, 2000, the Tribe and the Corps signed a Project
Coordination Agreement for the Big Cypress Reservation's critical
project. The Tribe's critical project includes a complex water
conservation plan and a canal that transverses the Reservation. In
signing this Agreement, the Tribe, as the local sponsor, committed to
funding half of the cost of this approximately $50 million project. The
project is divided into two phases; construction of the first phase is
complete and planning and design on the second phase will be complete
in a few months, allowing construction to begin in fiscal year 2005.
The Seminole Tribe's project addresses the environmental
degradation wrought by decades of Federal flood control construction
and polluted urban and other agricultural runoff. The interrupted sheet
flow and hydroperiod have stressed native species and encouraged the
spread of exotic species. Nutrient-laden runoff has supported the rapid
spread of cattails, which choke out the periphyton algae mat and
sawgrass necessary for the success of the wet/dry cycle that supports
the wildlife of the Everglades. This is designed to mitigate the
degradation the ecosystem has suffered through decades of flood control
projects and urban and agricultural use and ultimately to restore the
Nation's largest wetlands to a healthy state.
The Seminole Tribe's critical project provides for the design and
construction of flood control, storage, and treatment facilities on the
western half of the Big Cypress reservation with other conveyance
facilities on the eastern side. The project elements include canal and
pump conveyance systems, including major canal bypass structures,
irrigation storage cells, and water quality polishing areas. This
project will enable the Tribe to meet targets for low phosphorus
concentrations, as well as to convey and store irrigation water and
improve flood control. It will also provide an important public
benefit: a new system to convey excess water from the western basins to
the Big Cypress National Preserve, where water is vitally needed for
rehydration and restoration of natural systems within the Preserve.
Improving the water quality of the basins feeding into the Big
Cypress National Preserve and the Everglades National Park is vital to
restoring the Everglades for future generations. Congress has
acknowledged this need through the passage of the last three Water
Resource Development Acts. This committee has consistently shown its
support through appropriating requested amounts over the last seven
fiscal years. By continuing to grant this appropriation request for
critical project funding, the Federal Government will take another
substantive step towards improving the quality of the surface water
that flows over the Big Cypress Reservation and on into the delicate
Everglades ecosystem. Such responsible action with regard to the Big
Cypress Reservation, which is Federal land held in trust for the Tribe,
will send a clear message that the Federal Government is committed to
Everglades restoration and the Tribe's stewardship of its land.
Completion of the critical project requires a substantial
commitment from the Tribe, including the dedication of over 2,400 acres
of land for water management improvements and meeting a 50/50 cost
share. The Tribe has completed the first phase of construction with the
main conveyance canal. As the Tribe moves forward with its contribution
to the restoration of the South Florida ecosystem, increasing Federal
financial assistance will be needed as well.
The Tribe has demonstrated its economic commitment to the
Everglades Restoration effort; the Tribe is asking the Federal
Government to also participate in that effort. This effort benefits not
just the Seminole Tribe, but all Floridians who depend on a reliable
supply of clean, fresh water flowing out of the Everglades, and all
Americans whose lives are enriched by this unique national treasure.
Thank you for the opportunity to present the request of the
Seminole Tribe of Florida. The Tribe will provide additional
information upon request.
______
Prepared Statement of Volusia County, Florida
On behalf of our citizens and fishermen, Volusia County, Florida
requests that the Energy & Water Subcommittee appropriate:
--$3,500,000 in fiscal year 2005 to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers'
(Corps) Construction account to fund an 1,000 foot seaward
extension of the South Jetty of the Ponce DeLeon Inlet. The
South Jetty seaward extension, along with the North Jetty
landward extension funded in fiscal years 1999, 2000, and 2002
and completed in June 2003, is essential for safe inlet
navigation and protection of the Federal investment in the
Inlet channel.
--$3,000,000 in fiscal year 2005 to the Corps' Operations and
Maintenance account to fund the removal of 300,000 cubic yards
of sand from the North Cut of the Ponce DeLeon Inlet to provide
for safe navigation until the South Jetty construction is
complete.
--$500,000 in fiscal year 2005 to the Corps' General Investigations
account to fund the feasibility study for the Volusia County
Shore Protection project for the shore protection of 49.5 miles
of Volusia County beaches.
A more detailed case history and description of the situation and
projects follow below.
ponce deleon inlet
Ponce DeLeon Inlet is located on the east coast of Florida, about
10 miles south of the City of Daytona Beach in Volusia County. The
Inlet is a natural harbor connecting the Atlantic Ocean with the
Halifax River and Indian Rivers and the Atlantic Intra-coastal Waterway
(AICW). Ponce DeLeon Inlet provides the sole ocean access to all of
Volusia County and is the only stabilized inlet on the east coast of
Florida between St. Augustine and Cape Canaveral, a distance of 112
miles. Fishing parties and shrimp and commercial fisherman bound for
New Smyrna Beach or Daytona Beach use the Inlet, as well as others
entering for anchorage. Nearby fisheries enhanced by the County's
artificial reef program attract both commercial and sport fisherman.
Head boat operators also provide trips to view marine life and space
shuttle launches from Cape Canaveral. In addition, U.S. Coast Guard
Lifeboat Station Ponce is located immediately inside Ponce de Leon
Inlet and provides navigation safety and security for boaters,
fisherman, divers and sailors from the entire east central Florida
region.
Unfortunately, the Inlet is highly unstable and, despite numerous
navigation projects, continues to threaten safe passage for the charter
boat operators and commercial fisherman who rely on the access it
provides for their livelihood. Recreational boaters and Coast Guard
operators are also at risk passing through this unstable inlet. The
shoaling of the channels in the Inlet so restricts dependable
navigation that the Coast Guard no longer marks the north channel in
order to discourage its use. The Coast Guard continues to move the
south and entrance channel markers and provides warnings that local
knowledge and extreme caution must be used in navigating the inlet.
More seriously, the Coast Guard search and rescue data for fiscal years
1981-1995 show that 20 deaths have resulted from vessels capsizing in
the Inlet, the direct result of the Inlet's instability. One hundred
forty seven vessels capsized and 496 vessels ran aground in the Inlet
during the same period.
The Federal interest in navigation through the Ponce DeLeon Inlet
dates back to 1884 and continues to the present. The existing
navigation project was authorized by the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1965. The construction authorized by that Act, including ocean jetties
on the north and south sides of the Inlet, was completed in July 1972.
It became evident soon after completion of the authorized project that
the project did not bring stability to the Inlet. A strong northeaster
in February 1973 created a breach between the western end of the North
Jetty and the sand spit the Jetty was connected to inside the Inlet.
The breach allowed schoaling to occur that was serious enough to close
boat yards and require almost $2 million worth of repairs, including
extending the western end of the North Jetty.
Under the existing maintenance agreement entered into upon
completion of the construction, the Corps periodically performs
maintenance on the Inlet. Maintenance projects have included several
dredging efforts, adding stone sections to the south side of the North
Jetty, extending the westward end of the North Jetty for the second
time, and closing the North Jetty weir. Prior to the North Jetty
project discussed below, the Corps' last maintenance was dredging,
completed on the entrance channel in January 1990.
In fiscal year 1998, the Corps received a $3,500,000 appropriation
for emergency maintenance on the North Jetty. Migration of the entrance
channel undermined the North Jetty, seriously threatening its
structural integrity. The fiscal year 1998 funds were used to construct
a granite rock scour apron for the 500 to 600 feet of where the Jetty
was undermined.
In fiscal year 1999, the Corps received $4,034,000 from the
Operations and Maintenance account to extend the North Jetty of the
Inlet landward by 800 feet. This maintenance project was completed in
July 2002 to prevent the erosion that will cause outflanking of the
North Jetty. Continued outflanking of the west end of the North Jetty
could create a new inlet for the Halifax and Indian Rivers resulting in
major changes to the Ponce DeLeon Inlet. The resultant shoaling of both
the north and south channels, as well as changes to the entrance
channel, would make passage through the inlet extremely dangerous and
unpredictable.
In fiscal year 2000, the Corps received $7,696,000 in their
Operations and Maintenance account for use in the Ponce DeLeon Inlet.
This appropriation provided funding to continue the North Jetty
project, funding for surveys designed to determine the scope of a new
maintenance contract for the Ponce De Leon Inlet, and funding for a
dredging project to address a minor maintenance issue under the
existing maintenance contract.
In fiscal year 2001, the Corps received $46,000 in their Operations
and Maintenance account for standard maintenance of the Ponce DeLeon
Inlet.
In fiscal year 2002, Congress appropriated $2.032 million to the
Corps' Operations and Maintenance account for completion of the North
Jetty construction. The Corps completed construction of this project in
July 2002.
In fiscal year 2003, Congress provided $1 million in the Corps'
Construction account for commencement of the South Jetty oceanward
extension, as authorized by WRDA 1999.
In fiscal year 2004, Congress provided $500,000 in the Corps'
Construction account for construction of the South Jetty oceanward
extension, as authorized by WRDA 1999.
For fiscal year 2005, Volusia County requests that the Corps
receive $3.5 million for the balance of the Federal share of
construction funds for the South Jetty oceanward extension. The project
manager expects the South Jetty to be constructed in one fiscal year.
The Corps anticipates that the construction of the Jetty extensions
will help stabilize the Inlet and reduce future maintenance costs. In
addition to creating a safer navigation environment, completion of the
South Jetty, to complement the North Jetty, will save future Federal
maintenance costs.
The Ponce DeLeon Inlet presents a serious engineering challenge,
the success of which is measured in terms of human life and vessel
damage. The existing project has failed to stabilize the Inlet.
Extending the North Jetty was the first step toward correcting the
failure and meeting the challenge. Full funding of the 1,000 foot
oceanward extension of the South Jetty is the next critical step toward
providing safe passage for the commercial and recreational boaters in
Volusia County.
State agencies, including the Florida Inland Navigation District
and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection agree and
therefore have committed to assisting the County in meeting the local
cost share. In addition, providing these funds at this time is likely
to prevent the need for a much more substantial maintenance project in
the near future.
In addition to the construction funding for the jetty projects to
protect the Ponce DeLeon Inlet, the County also requests $3,000,000 be
appropriated in the Corps' Operations and Maintenance account, for the
Corps to remove 300,000 cubic yards of sand from the North Cut of the
Ponce DeLeon Inlet. As discussed above, the North Jetty construction
was completed in July 2002 and the South Jetty construction will begin
this year. Maintenance dredging is needed until both jetties are
constructed.
Until both the North and South Jetty projects are operational, sand
continues to shoal in the navigation channels of the Ponce DeLeon
Inlet. The shoaling creates unsafe navigation conditions, thereby
impeding commercial and recreational traffic. Removing 300,000 cubic
feet of sand from the North Cut of the Inlet will greatly improve safe
navigation. Finally, this effort is supported locally, as evidenced by
the County's grant of $395,000 to the Corps for emergency dredging of
the North Cut in fiscal year 2003.
volusia county beach protection project
In August 1991, the Corps of Engineers completed a favorable
reconnaissance report for the shore protection study to address the
critical erosion along the County's 49.5 miles of ocean shoreline, as
authorized by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in
September 1988. The County declined to act as the non-Federal sponsor
for the feasibility study at that time. The Corps modified the 1991
reconnaissance study in 1994. As a result of heavy damage to the
County's shoreline sustained during the 1999 hurricane season, the
County recognized the critical need to address the growing impact of
the storm-induced erosion. The Corps will need to modify the earlier
studies. A new reconnaissance study for the Volusia County Shore
Protection project (formerly known as the Daytona Beach Shores project)
was authorized by a resolution adopted by the House Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee on February 16, 2000. In fiscal year 2003,
Congress provided the Corps with $100,000 to complete the
reconnaissance study. The Corps has completed the draft reconnaissance
study, which is currently undergoing final review and is expected to be
completed during fiscal year 2004. The draft reconnaissance study
recommends further action. A feasibility study is the next step.
The feasibility study will include, among other things, plan
formulation, surveys, geotechnical analysis, beach modeling, and
environmental analysis for Volusia County's 49.5 mile shoreline. The
Corps estimates the cost of the feasibility study to be $3 million and
expects to complete the study in 3 to 4 years. The cost share for the
feasibility study is 50 percent Federal and 50 percent non-Federal. In
fiscal year 2005, the Corps will spend $1 million for the Volusia
County Shore Protection Project, of which the Federal share is
$500,000.
While previous studies to address beach erosion were not acceptable
to the County as the local sponsor, the County seeks the Corps'
assistance now to address continuing erosion damage initiated during
the 1999 hurricane season. The County recognizes its dire need in
having its beaches renewed, preserved, and protected.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
______
Prepared Statement of the National Mining Association
The National Mining Association's (NMA) membership includes
companies engaged in the production of coal, metallic ores, nonmetallic
minerals, and in manufacturing mining machinery and equipment. The
transportation of coal and minerals to domestic and international
markets utilizes our Nation's inland waterways system, Great Lakes,
coastal shipping lanes, and harbors and shipping channels at deep draft
inland and coastal ports.
NMA believes that a strong transportation network comprised of our
highways, rails, inland waterways and ports is critical to the economic
growth, security and competitiveness of the United States. According to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce Statistics of
2002, approximately 2.34 billion tons of commerce moved in the U.S.
marine system (inland waterways, Great Lakes, coastal and deep-draft
ports). Of that total, approximately 1.02 billion tons were domestic
movements with coal comprising approximately 227 million tons or 22
percent of all commodities. Of the 227 million tons of coal, 175
million tons were carried on the inland and intracoastal waterways,
19.4 million tons on the Great Lakes and the remainder moved in
coastwise and intraport shipments. On the Ohio River system and its
tributaries, coal movements totaled 159 million tons or 56 percent of
all the traffic. Coal moved to power plants along the system and to
power plants in 8 States outside of the Ohio basin. In addition, 48.7
million tons of coal was exported in 2002.
Iron ore, phosphate rock, and other minerals also utilize the
inland waterways system. In 2002, 73.1 million tons of iron ore moved
on the system. Of the total, 52.4 million tons moved domestically with
46.8 million tons moved on the Great Lakes and 5.6 million tons on the
inland system. More than 6.2 million tons of phosphate rock moved on
the waterways system with 3.5 million tons by coastwise movements.
NMA is very concerned that the proposed fiscal year 2005 budget for
the Corps of Engineers does not provide sufficient funding to keep
critical navigation projects on schedule, allow for the start of new
projects, and address the maintenance backlog for existing navigation
projects. The 25,000 miles of waterways and harbor channels are a major
component of the transportation infrastructure system in the United
States. The Nation's waterways system is an efficient and timely method
to move commerce throughout the United States. It currently moves 2.4
billion tons of cargo annually.
Each year, barges on the waterways handle cargo equal to 40 million
trucks or 10 million railcars. Without the waterways system, the
Nation's already overcrowded and in some cases gridlocked highways,
would not be able to be used. In addition, there would be a significant
increase in air and noise pollution from the additional trucks on the
roads. A river barge with a 1,500-ton capacity can transport up to 58
large trucks or 15 large jumbo rail hopper cars worth of cargo. Barge
transport also saves shippers on average $11 per ton, compared to
shipping the same amount of cargo by truck or rail.
In addition, the waterways system is critical to our Nation's
national defense. Manufacturing and industrial facilities providing the
military with needed weapons and materials are located near the
Nation's water system. Many of our Nation's large commercial ports also
serve as the home to the U.S. Navy's fleets.
NMA is concerned that the full amount appropriated by Congress to a
specific project is not always what is actually available to a project
for a specified fiscal year. For example, in fiscal year 2004, the
Kentucky Lock was appropriated $29.9 million but the project actually
received $23.1 million for fiscal year 2004. Because of the reduced
funding levels, projects are taking longer and the benefits are being
lost to shippers and to the U.S. economy. NMA requests that projects
receive the full amount appropriated in a given fiscal year.
NMA continues to be very concerned with the surplus in the Inland
Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF). One-half of the lock and dam construction
and major rehabilitation funds come from the Inland Waterways Trust
Fund (IWTF), which receives 20 cents from a 24.3 cents per gallon tax
on the fuel used for inland waterways barge operations. The General
Treasury receives the remaining 4.3 cents. Commercial users are the
only beneficiaries of the inland waterways system who pay a fuel tax,
while beneficiaries who receive flood control, water supply,
recreational and other benefits do not contribute to the construction
or maintenance of the system providing these benefits. For the last 12
years, the Federal Government has not allocated sufficient funds to
these projects to keep up with revenues flowing into the IWTF. The
result as of September 30, 2001 is a Fund surplus of approximately $392
million according to The Bureau of Public Debt, U.S. Department of the
Treasury. A constraint on the funding for construction and
rehabilitation projects has not been the revenue collected from the
fuel tax but the limited level of funding appropriated from the IWTF.
It is time to seriously address the backlog and to appropriate funds to
finish the projects underway.
NMA reviewed the proposed fiscal year 2005 request for the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers and the Civil Works Program and has the
following general recommendations.
--A minimum of $5.5 billion should be appropriated in fiscal year
2005 for the Civil Works Program. This level balances the need
to address the significant project backlog and the capability
of the Corps with our Nation's needs for jobs, economic growth,
homeland security and national defense.
--A level of $150 million should be appropriated from the Inland
Waterways Trust Fund to be matched by an equal expenditure from
the general fund for the construction and major rehabilitation
of locks and dams on the inland waterways system. By
maintaining this level of appropriations for the next 10 years,
the surplus in the Trust Fund can be reduced to more
appropriate levels and timely completion of these required
navigation projects will accelerate the national economic
benefits from the projects and minimize cost increases.
--The fiscal year 2005 appropriations for the Corps' General
Investigations account should be increased to $200 million. The
proposed fiscal year 2005 level of $90.5 million will not
permit the Corps to undertake any new studies. These studies
are critical to ascertaining and developing future projects. It
takes time to complete these projects and while there are
issues related to new construction starts, projects should be
in the pipeline and ready should funds be available.
--The fiscal year 2005 proposed funding in the amount of $1.926
billion for the Corps' Operations and Maintenance functions
should be increased. At the beginning of fiscal year 2004, it
was estimated that critical maintenance backlog was $1.01
billion. This is a $127 million or 12.7 increase from the
previous year. It is anticipated the backlog will grow to $1.1
billion under the administration's fiscal year 2005 request.
This increase is of great concern given that the backlog was
approximately $200 million in fiscal year 1998. Currently, more
than half of the locks and dams on the system are 50 years
older or more. With the funding constraints for new
construction and rehabilitation projects, it is imperative that
existing locks and dams be maintained. Delaying necessary
maintenance impacts the ability to move commerce efficiently,
exasperates further deterioration and accelerates the need for
major rehabilitation and possibly at higher costs than
necessary.
The problems of an aging system were exemplified at Greenup Locks
and Dam when significant problems were encountered during ongoing
repairs to the gates on the main chamber. What began on September 8,
2004 as a scheduled 3-week outage lasted 54 days and cost the
navigation industry an estimated $14 million in lost revenue due to
significant delays. For Dayton Power and Light, the delays cost $7
million to find alternative rail transportation for its coal.
nma's fiscal year 2005 project appropriations levels needing additional
funds
Construction and Rehabilitation Projects
Olmsted Locks & Dam--Fiscal Year 2005 Request: $75 million,
Efficient Funding Level: $110 million
According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce
Statistics for 2001, more tonnage passes through this point than any
other place in the inland waterways system with 96.7 million tons
valued at $20 billion in 2001. Coal comprises 25 percent of the
tonnage, moving to more than 50 power plants on the Ohio River System
and 17 power plants in eight States on the Upper or Lower Mississippi
River. The total project cost is $1.40 billion with a balance of $800
million. The project is 6 years behind schedule with lost benefits of
$2.7 billion. If the project continues to be funded at constrained
levels and not at efficient funding levels, the project could be
delayed another 8 years with a total of loss of $7.2 billion in
navigation benefits.
McAlpine Locks--Fiscal Year 2005 Request: $58 million,
Efficient Funding Level: $120 million
According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce
Statistics for 2001, more than 55 million tons of commodities valued at
nearly $11.7 billion were shipped through the locks. With 20 million
tons, coal was the leading commodity comprising 37 percent of all
shipments. Thirteen million tons went to 30 power plants in 8 States.
The total project cost is $350 million with a balance of $241 million.
The project is 5 years behind schedule with lost benefits of $228
million. If the project continues to be funded at constrained levels,
it could be delayed another 5 years (2012) resulting in an additional
loss of $163 million in navigation benefits.
Locks & Dams 2, 3 and 4--Fiscal Year 2005 Request: $31
million, Efficient Funding Level: $60 million
According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce
Statistics for 2001, almost 22.2 million tons of commodities valued at
$1.7 billion where shipped through any or all of the locks. Coal
comprised 86 percent of the tonnage with 19.2 million tons of coal
moving through the locks. More than 7.2 million tons went to 23 power
plants in 7 States. The value of the coal was almost $1.6 billion. The
total cost is $750 million with a balance of $500 million. The project
is 9 years behind schedule resulting in $870 million in lost navigation
benefits. If the project continues to be funded at constrained levels,
the project could be further delayed to 2020 and a total of $1.2
billion in lost navigation benefits.
Marmet Locks & Dams--Fiscal Year 2005 Request: $50 million,
Efficient Funding Level: $75 million
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce Statistic for
2001 indicate 17.1 million tons of commodities valued at $802 million
were shipped through the locks. Coal shipments comprised 95 percent of
all shipments with 16.1 million tons moving through Marmet. The project
cost is $333 with a 2010 completion date (originally 2007). There is a
balance of $219 million. Marmet has already experienced a 2-year
completion delay and continued constrained funding levels, the project
could be delayed another 5 years at loss of $201 million in navigation
benefits.
Kentucky Lock--Fiscal Year 2005 Request: $25 million,
Efficient Funding Level: $55 million
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterborne Commerce Statistics for
2001 indicate 35 million tons of commodities valued at $6.2 billion
moved through the lock. Coal was the number one commodity with 12.6
million tons or 36 percent of all shipments. The value was almost $500
million. The coal moved to 9 power plants in the south including
several owned by the Tennessee Valley Authority. Total project cost is
$642 million. The project is already 5 years behind schedule. If the
project continues to be funded at constrained levels then the project
could be delayed until 2025 with $780 million in lost navigation
benefits.
Preconstruction Engineering and Design
J.T. Myers Locks & Dam--Fiscal Year 2005 Request: $700,000,
Efficient Funding Level: $2 million.
Surveys
Emsworth, Dashields & Montgomery Lock and Dams Fiscal Year 2005
Request: $3.1, Efficient Funding Level: $1.5 million.
conclusion
NMA is very concerned that the Nation's inland waterways system is
not receiving sufficient funds in the fiscal year 2005 budget to keep
critical navigation projects on schedule and to address the very large
maintenance backlog for existing navigation projects. As a country, we
cannot afford to neglect the continued improvement and maintenance of
our Federal navigation system. Failure to continue our investment and
commitment to all aspects of our marine system will have serious long-
term consequences for our Nation's economic health, safety and
security.
______
Prepared Statement of the Board of Commissioners of the Pontchartrain
Levee District
FLOOD CONTROL, NAVIGATION, HURRICANE PROTECTION AND WATER RESOURCE
PROJECTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Investigations:
Amite River & Tributaries Bayou Manchac, LA......... $800,000
West Shore, Lake Pontchartrain & Vicinity, LA, St. 400,000
John the Baptist Parish............................
General Construction:
Lake Pontchartrain & Vicinity, LA (Hurricane 22,000,000
Protection)........................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
comments on projects
Lake Pontchartrain & Vicinity, LA
Around Lake Pontchartrain there are several segments under
construction with this major title. All segments are nearing completion
except St. Charles Parish Hurricane Protection of which the local
sponsor is the Pontchartrain Levee District. The St. Charles project
has 10 miles of levee, 5 major floodgate structures and a construction
cost of $100 million. If Congress provides maximum funding capability
for 2004 and 2005, then the first lift levees would be complete and
much of the second lift and all structures can be completed. A closed
system would be complete, except for some second lift levees, by the
2005 hurricane season. Of the recommended appropriations requested
above for Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity, about $6,000,000 could be
scheduled for the St. Charles Parish segment. Any reduction in the
recommended budget would certainly reduce the amount that would be
assigned to St. Charles Parish and result in a disappointing slow down.
Non-Federal funds for participation are in place now.
West Shore, Lake Pontchartrain & Vicinity, LA, St. John the Baptist
Parish
This segment is currently under study with the Pontchartrain Levee
District acting as local sponsor. Preliminary indications are the
hurricane protection project will have 18 miles of levee and 3 drainage
pump stations. The Feasibility Study should be completed in fiscal year
2004. Protection will be provided from the west levee of the Bonnet
Carre Floodway westward to the LaPlace area, and will include
protection of portions of I-10, I-55 and U.S. 51, designated hurricane
evacuations routes for this area and the New Orleans Metropolitan area.
This intersection has been previously flooded from storm tides.
Amite River & Tributaries, Bayou Manchac, LA
This investigation is being made as a result of a number of homes
being flooded from rains produced by tropical storm Allison in late May
and early June 2001 along the Bayou Manchac Watershed. A few homes
remained flooded for as much as a month or more because of very slow
receding waters. A highly sensitive area of Spanish Lake and
surrounding swamp also remained flooded for an extensive period which
caused extensive ecosystem damages. The affected area covers portions
of Ascension, Iberville and East Baton Rouge parishes and all have
joined with the Pontchartrain Levee District to provide non-Federal
funding with the Levee District acting as local sponsor.
comments
The Pontchartrain Levee District has full realization of the
necessity of keeping these subcommittees advised of current and future
needs for Federal monetary support on vital items of the MR&T Flood
Control Project. Beginning in 1995 the subcommittees refused to give
audience to our pleadings. This year no oral testimony will be heard.
Again, this is a great travesty of justice. Such actions seriously
erode the partnership that has been built between Congress, the Corps
of Engineers and local sponsors. We trust this pattern will revert back
to the practice of hearing our delegation.
conclusion
The Board of Commissioners, Pontchartrain Levee District,
compliments the Subcommittees on Energy and Water Development for its
keen understanding of real needs for the MR&T Flood Control Project
along with hurricane protection and efficient, alert actions taken to
appropriate funds for the many complex requirements. We endorse
recommendations presented by the Association of Levee Boards of
Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development, Mississippi
Valley Flood Control Association and Red River Valley Association. The
Board of Commissioners desires our statement be made a part of the
record.
______
Prepared Statement of the Board of Commissioners of the Pontchartrain
Levee District
MISSISSIPPI RIVER & TRIBUTARIES PROJECT
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Recommended
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mississippi River & Tributaries: Flood Control Project.. $435,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
comments on projects
Mississippi River & Tributaries Flood Control Project
History.--The Mississippi River and Tributaries Project (MR&T) was
authorized following the Record Flood of 1927 that inundated some
26,000 square miles of the fertile and productive land in the Alluvial
Valley of the Mississippi River, left 700,000 people homeless, stopped
all East/West Commerce and adversely affected both the Economy and
Environment of the entire Nation.
The MR&T Project has prevented over $180 billion in flood damages
for an investment of less that $70 billion and in addition the Nation
derives about $900 million in Navigation Benefits each year due to the
MR&T.
The Project is not complete and we cannot pass another event as
great as the 1927 Flood safety to the Gulf, this is an Historical
Event--not the much greater Project Flood.
Levees.--The Mississippi River and Tributaries Flood Control
Project has been under construction as an authorized project for about
76 years, and yet there are a number of segments not yet complete.
Although most levees are complete to grade and section in south
Louisiana and extensive reach from the Old River Control Structure in
lower Concordia Parish upstream to the Lake Providence area is still
below grade. Should these levees be overtopped during a major flood,
those people in south Louisiana know full well those flood waters are
going to head southward. Other items not yet complete are slope
protection and crown surfacing. It is recommended that a minimum of
$50,645,000 be appropriated for Mississippi River Levees.
Channel.--The second item of indispensable importance to the
Pontchartrain Levee District and the State of Louisiana is Channel
Improvements. Main line levees must be protected from caving banks
throughout this lower river reach where extremely narrow battures are
the last line of defense against levee crevasses and failures. If
caving banks are not controlled the only answer is ``setback''. Simply
stated there is no room remaining for levee setbacks in the
Pontchartrain Levee District. Revetment construction must be annually
funded to prevent levee failures, land losses and relocations. This
item also benefits the 55-foot depth navigation channel. The
Pontchartrain Levee District recommends at least $44,017,000 be
appropriated for fiscal year 2004 for Mississippi River Channel
Improvements.
Total Appropriation Request for MR&T.--The $435 million we are
requesting for fiscal year 2004 appropriations for the MR&T Project is
the minimum amount we consider necessary to continue with vital on-
going construction work and to do the barest amount of maintenance work
that is required to prevent further deterioration of the Federal
investment already made to our Flood Control and Navigation Work and to
continue to work of restoring and protecting our natural environmental
including providing for adequate water supply. The total appropriation
we are requesting is attached.
Opposition.--We strongly oppose the administration's recommendation
in its fiscal year 2004 budget submission to use funds from the INLAND
WATERWAYS TRUST FUND to pay for a part of the Operations and
Maintenance Cost of the Inland Waterways. The Trust Fund was
established in 1978 to make available monies for Construction and
Rehabilitation for navigation on the Inland and Coastal Waterways, not
for Operations and Maintenance. If Congress allows this recommendation
the Trust Fund would be drained in a short period of time and the 50
percent share to pay for Construction for Navigation would not be
available unless the tax on fuel used by tow-boats was raised, some day
doubled, which would make it extremely difficult for barge operators to
continue their operations and making it more expensive for farmers to
get their products to market and for the public to realize savings in
transportation cost for bulk commodities such as fuel, oil, gasoline
and other items shipped by barge.
We are also strongly opposed to any action that would transfer all
or any part of the U.S. Army, Corps of Engineers Civil Works mission to
other agencies or department of the Federal Government. It has been
reported that the administration would desire to transfer the Corps
NAVIGATION program to the Department of Transportation, FLOOD CONTROL
AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION to the Department of the Interior, and
the REGULATORY PROGRAMS to EPA. The U.S., Army, Corps of Engineers has
rendered extremely valuable services to this Nation since 1802 (over
200 years). The Corps has created an Inland Waterways System that is
the envy of the rest of the world. This commercial transportation
system is critical to the Nation's economy and environmental well-being
and part of this system is used to deploy military equipment in support
of the war on terrorism. The Corps has also been in the forefront to
provide Flood Control and Environmental Restoration Projects, they have
also supported our troops in every armed conflict this Nation has
engaged in. It would be a serious mistake of Nation-wide impact to
spread the functions of the Corps into several parts and across the
Federal bureaucracy. This Nation would lose a wonderful asset that we
have enjoyed for many, many years.
We are strongly opposed to any proposal to ``out-source'' or
contract-out any of the present positions in the Corps of Engineers'
Civil Works function. The Secretary of the Army has proposed that 90
percent of all Corps of Engineers' positions be contracted out, this
would eliminate approximately 32,000 current employees and make it
almost impossible to continue with our work.
Comments
The Pontchartrain Levee District has full realization of the
necessity of keeping these subcommittees advised of current and future
needs for Federal monetary support on vital items of the MR&T Flood
Control Project. Beginning in 1995 the subcommittees refused to give
audience to the Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association. This year
no oral testimony will be heard. Again, this is a great travesty of
justice. Such actions seriously erode the partnership that has been
built between Congress, the Corps of Engineers and local sponsors.
We trust that this pattern will revert back to the 63 year practice
of hearing our delegation.
Conclusion
The Board of Commissioners, Pontchartrain Levee District,
compliments the Subcommittees on Energy and Water Development for its
keen understanding of real needs for the MR&T Flood Control Project
along with Hurricane Protection and efficient, alert actions taken to
appropriate funds for the many complex requirements. We endorse
recommendations presented by the Association of Levee Boards of
Louisiana, Department of Transportation and Development, Mississippi
Valley Flood Control Association and Red River Valley Association. The
Board of Commissioners desires our statement be made a part of the
record.
______
Prepared Statement of the Red River Valley Association
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Wayne Dowd, and
pleased to represent the Red River Valley Association as its President.
Our organization was founded in 1925 with the express purpose of
uniting the Citizens of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas to
develop the land and water resources of the Red River Basin.
The Resolutions contained herein were adopted by the Association
during its 79th Annual Meeting in Bossier City, Louisiana on February
19, 2004, and represent the combined concerns of the citizens of the
Red River Basin area as they pertain to the goals of the Association.
The President's budget included $4.215 billion for civil works
programs, which is $700 million (14.3 percent) less than what the Corps
expended in fiscal year 2004 ($4.905 million). Again, the Corps took
the biggest reduction than any of the other major Federal agencies.
This does not come close to the real needs of our Nation. A more
realistic funding level to meet the requirements for continuing the
existing needs of the civil works programs is $5.5 billion in fiscal
year 2005. The traditional programs, inland waterways and flood
protection remain at the low, unacceptable level as in past years.
These projects are the backbone to our Nation's infrastructure for
waterways, flood control and water supply. We remind you that civil
works projects are a true ``jobs program'' in that 100 percent of
project construction is contracted to the private sector, as is much of
the architect and engineer work. Not only do these funds provide jobs,
but provide economic development opportunities for our communities to
grow and prosper.
We are very concerned with the way in which the administration has
determined what they term ``low use waterways''. Included in the fiscal
year 2005 Civil Works Budget, published February 2004, is a table
indicating ``net benefits/current costs'' and ``remaining benefits/
remaining costs''. The J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, LA is shown at the
bottom of the table with an unfavorable ratio. Nowhere in the document
do they explain the criteria used for these ratios. This is the
criterion used to justify the priorities to fund waterway projects and
we do not agree with it.
If they are using ``ton-miles'', as we suspect, this is just a
small factor of determining the success of a waterway. Ton-miles is
simply the tons moved the length of the waterway. It does not give
credit to the waterway for the miles moved to the final destination,
for outbound cargo, or origin, for inbound cargo. Just using tonnage
moved on a waterway neglects the main benefit that justified the
project, transportation cost savings. Currently there is no analysis to
consider ``water compelled rates'' (competition with rail). We know
that there are industries not using our waterway because the rail rates
dropped, to match the waterborne rates, the same year our waterway
became operational. If our waterway were discontinued the rail rates
would increase. Many industries have experienced great transportation
savings without using the waterway.
The main problem is that there is no post-project evaluation for
navigation projects. We support the development of such an evaluation
and volunteer our waterway and our efforts to develop one. We request
that both Houses of Congress direct that this be accomplished. The
Corps of Engineers should take the lead to develop a true evaluation
that considers all benefits of a waterway. We also believe any
evaluation adopted must have input from and be validated by the
administration, Congress and industry.
The current criteria used to prioritize funding for projects, both
Construction General and Operations and Maintenance, is incomplete and
inaccurate. Too much money has been expended to use an evaluation that
is unfair and disregards the true benefits realized from these waterway
projects.
We do not support any efforts to increase the benefit to cost ratio
for projects above 1.0 and we do not support increasing the local
sponsor's cost sharing requirements. This is not ``Corps reform,'' it
is an initiative to eliminate the civil works program. We do support
true reform that would make civil works projects less expensive and
faster to complete. Corps reform should make the Corps of Engineers
more efficient, less expensive and faster in the execution of civil
works studies and completion of projects, not eliminate the program.
I would now like to comment on our specific requests for the future
economic well being of the citizens residing in the four-State Red
River Basin regions.
Navigation.--The J. Bennett Johnston Waterway is living up to the
expectations of the benefits projected. We are extremely proud of our
public ports, municipalities and State agencies that have created this
success. The four public ports had a 20 percent increase in tonnage
from calendar year 2002 to calendar year 2003. New opportunities were
announced in calendar year 2003 at each of the ports, which will
further increase annual tonnage. You are reminded that the Waterway is
not complete, 6 percent remains to be constructed, $118 million. We
appreciate Congress's appropriation level in fiscal year 2004 of $10.4
million, however, the President's fiscal year 2005 budget drastically
cuts that to $4 million, which is unacceptable. There is a capability
for $20 million of work, but we realistically must have a minimum of
$10-15 million to keep the project moving toward completion.
The RRVA formed a Navigation Committee for industry, the Corps of
Engineers and Coast Guard to partner in making our Waterway a success.
In calendar year 2003 we succeeded in getting electronic charts
completed and they are now in use. Permanent channel markers have also
been completed. Both of these initiatives will provide additional aids
to navigation necessary to insure safe and efficient navigation,
especially during high water events, when commercial operations have
ceased in past years.
Now that the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway is reliable year round we
must address efficiency. Presently a 9-foot draft is authorized for the
J. Bennett Johnston Waterway. Our Waterway feeds into the Mississippi
River, Atchafalaya River and Gulf Inter-coastal Canal, which are all
authorized at a 12-foot draft. A 12-foot draft would allow an
additional one-third cargo capacity, per barge, which will greatly
increase the efficiency of our Waterway and reduce transportation
rates. This one action would have the greatest, positive impact to
reduce rates to a competitive level that would bring more industries to
use waterborne transportation. We request that the Corps conduct a
reconnaissance study, to evaluate this proposal, at a cost of $100,000.
The feasibility study to continue navigation from Shreveport-
Bossier City, Louisiana into the State of Arkansas will be completed in
calendar year 2004. We appreciate that Congress appropriated adequate
funding to complete this study. There is great optimism that the study
will recommend a favorable project. This region of SW Arkansas and NE
Texas continues to suffer major unemployment and this navigation
project, although not the total solution, will help revitalize the
economy. We request funding $400,000 to initiate planning, engineering
and design, PED.
Bank Stabilization.--One of the most important, continuing
programs, on the Red River is bank stabilization in Arkansas and North
Louisiana. We must stop the loss of valuable farmland that erodes down
the river and interferes with the navigation channel. In addition to
the loss of farmland is the threat to public utilities such as roads,
electric power lines and bridges; as well as increased dredging cost in
the navigable waterway. These bank stabilization projects are
compatible with subsequent navigation and we urge that they be
continued in those locations designated by the Corps of Engineers to be
the areas of highest priority. We appreciated the Congressional funding
in fiscal year 2004 and request you fund this project at a level of $10
million in fiscal year 2005.
Flood Control.--You will recall that in 1990 major areas of
northeast Texas, Southwest Arkansas and the entire length of the Red
River in Louisiana were ravaged by the worst flooding to hit the region
since 1945 and 1957. More than 700,000 acres were flooded with total
damages estimated at $20.4 million. However, it could have been much
worse. The Corps of Engineers estimates that without the flood control
measure authorized by Congress over the past several decades an
additional 1.3 million acres would have been flooded with an estimated
$330 million in additional flood damage to agriculture and urban
developments.
We continue to consider flood control a major objective and request
you continue funding the levee rehabilitation projects ongoing in
Arkansas. Five of eleven levee sections have been completed and brought
to Federal standards. Appropriations of $4 million will construct two
more levee sections in Lafayette County, AR.
The levees in Louisiana have been incorporated into the Federal
system; however, they do not meet current safety standards. These
levees do not have a gravel surface roadway, threatening their
integrity during times of flooding. It is essential for personnel to
traverse the levees during a flood to inspect them for problems.
Without the gravel surface the vehicles used cause rutting which can
create conditions for the levees to fail. A gravel surface will insure
inspection personnel can check the levees during the saturated
conditions of a flood. Funding has been appropriated and approximately
50 miles of levees in the Natchitoches Levee District will be completed
this year. We request $2 million to continue this important project in
other parishes.
Clean Water.--Nearly 3,500 tons of natural salts, primarily sodium
chloride, enter the upper reaches of the Red River each day, rendering
downstream waters unusable for most purposes. The Truscott Brine Lake
project, which is located on the South Fork of the Wichita River in
King and Knox Counties, Texas became operational in 1987. An
independent panel of experts found that the project not only continues
to perform beyond design expectations in providing cleaner water, but
also has an exceptionally favorable cost benefit ratio. In fiscal year
1995 $16 million dollars was appropriated by the administration, to
accelerate engineering design, real estate acquisition and initiate
construction of the Crowell Brine Dam, Area VII and Area IX.
Due to a conflict over environmental issues, raised by the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, completion of the SFEIS was delayed pending
further study to determine the extent of possible impacts to fish and
wildlife, their habitats and biological communities along the Red River
and Lake Texoma. In an effort to resolve these issues and insure that
no harmful impact to the environment or ecosystems would result, a
comprehensive environmental and ecological monitoring program was
implemented. It evaluates the actual impacts of reducing chloride
concentrations within the Red River watershed. This base line data is
crucial to understanding the ecosystem of the Red River basin west of
Lake Texoma and funding for this must continue.
The Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), in October 1998,
agreed to support a re-evaluation of the Wichita River Basin tributary
of the project. The re-evaluation report will be completed in fiscal
year 2004. Completion of this project will reclaim Lake Kemp as a
usable water source for the City of Wichita Falls and the region. This
project will provide improved water quality throughout the four States
of the Red River providing the opportunity to use surface water and
reduce dependency on ground water. We request appropriations of
$2,500,000 to continue this important environmental monitoring and to
complete plans and specifications of the Wichita River control
features.
Water Supply.--Northwest Texas has been overrun with non-native
species of brush and mesquite. It now dominates millions of acres of
rangelands and has negatively impacted water runoff. Studies have
indicated that brush management could increase runoff by as much as 30
percent to 40 percent. This would be of great value in opportunities
for more surface water use and less dependency on ground water. Other
benefits include an ecological diversity of plant and animal species,
range fire control and cattle production. A $100,000 reconnaissance
study would determine if there is a Federal interest and what magnitude
these benefits would be.
Lake Kemp, just west of Wichita Falls, TX, is a water supply for
the needs of this region. Due to siltation the available storage of
water has been impacted. A $750,000 reallocation study is requested to
determine water distribution needs and raising the conservation pool.
$375,000 is requested in fiscal year 2005 to initiate this 2-year
study.
Operation & Maintenance.--We appreciate the support of your
subcommittee to support navigation to Shreveport/Bossier City, which is
now providing a catalyst to our industrial base, creating jobs and
providing economic growth. We request that O&M funding levels remain at
the expressed Corps capability to maintain a safe, reliable and
efficient transportation system.
Our major project for O&M is the J. Bennett Johnston Waterway. From
this project four public ports and three private terminals have been
established. The tonnage at the public ports increased by 20 percent
from calendar year 2002 to calendar year 2003. Even though we continue
to show growth the administration continues to reduce our O&M budget
and not include maintenance dredging. Without dredging the Waterway
would effectively close down terminating our ports and terminal. The
President's budget included $10,600,000; however, a minimum of
$14,000,000 is required to address our annual dredging needs and
operational costs for the five locks and dams.
Full O&M capability levels are not only important for our Waterway
project but for all our Corps projects and flood control lakes. The
backlog of critical maintenance only becomes worse and more expensive
with time. We urge you to appropriate funding to address this serious
issue at the expressed full Corps capability. The ``Summary of Fiscal
Year 2004 Requests'', following this testimony, lists our major O&M
projects and the level needed to address this issue.
We are sincerely grateful to you for the past support you have
provided our various projects. We hope that we can count on you again
to fund our needs and complete the projects started that will help us
diversify our economy and create the jobs so badly needed by our
citizens. We have included a summary of our requests for easy
reference.
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony and project
details of the Red River Valley Association on behalf of the
industries, organizations, municipalities and citizens we represent
throughout the four-State Red River Valley Region. We believe that any
Federal monies spent on civil work projects are truly investments in
our future and will return several times the original investment in
benefits that will accrue back to the Federal Government.
Grant Disclosure.--The Red River Valley Association has not
received any Federal grant, sub grant or contract during the current
fiscal year or either of the 2 previous fiscal years.
______
Prepared Statement of the Crescent City Harbor District
The Crescent City Harbor District is requesting $3 million in
funding in the fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Development
appropriations bill. These funds are needed for maintenance dredging of
our harbor and for completing our Dredging Materials Management Plan.
Dredging funds are critical for the future of our harbor. Crescent
City has long been a key port for the landing of Pink shrimp, Dungeness
crab, and groundfish. In 2001, commercial landings exceeded $6 million.
In 2002, even with reduced fishing opportunities, our fleets landed
over five and $500,000 worth of seafood. The most recent Dungeness crab
season, from December 2003 until the present, very likely set a record
for production and value. Although some groundfish and Salmon species
are at relatively low levels, many others are abundant. We look forward
to harvesting the sustainable yield of our natural resources once the
weaker stocks are rebuilt. But we must dredge the harbor now to take
advantage of these future opportunities.
Over the years our community has made a substantial investment in
the harbor. Our major dock is called ``Citizens Dock'' because it was
built entirely by local volunteers in 1950. Since then, we have built a
modern boat basin, fish processing plants, and a superb vessel repair
facility. Our harbor is the safest, most convenient harbor in Northern
California for both recreational and commercial fishermen. But the
economic viability of these facilities depends on dredging the harbor.
Currently we are in the midst of developing a master plan that will
help identify and then implement new opportunities to diversify the
economic base of our harbor. Both the City of Crescent City and the
County of Del Norte are actively supporting our master plan efforts. We
hope to identify several opportunities that will expand and revitalize
our struggling local economy. But the success of our planning process
depends on dredging the harbor.
All our efforts, investments, and plans will come to nothing if we
cannot dredge our harbor. We look forward to working together to ensure
that dredging funds are in place in next year's appropriations cycle so
that our harbor can remain a key part of the economy of Del Norte
County and Northern California.
______
Letter From the Arizona Power Authority
Phoenix, Arizona, March 23, 2004.
Senate Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development,
126 Dirksen Senate Office Bldg., Washington, DC 20510.
Re: Increased security costs at Reclamation, Corps of Engineers and
Western Area Power Administration facilities
Dear Chairman Domenici and Ranking Member Reid: Enclosed please
find a copy of a resolution passed by the Arizona Power Authority
Commission at its March meeting urging that increased costs for
security at Hoover Dam and similar Federal projects be made non-
reimbursable. Would you please enter this letter and the attached
resolution in the record of your proceedings.
Sincerely,
Joseph W. Mulholland,
Executive Director.
arizona power authority resolution no. 04-2
security costs at hoover dam and other federal power facilities
Hoover Dam, one of the most famous structures in the world, is one
of a number of Federal dams that were developed to provide benefits to
millions of citizens in the Western United States, including flood
control, irrigation, municipal and industrial water supplies,
hydropower generation, recreation and environmental benefits.
Ensuring the safety and security of Hoover Dam and other similar
Federal projects is of vital importance to all of the citizens of the
United States.
The Arizona Power Authority and other State agencies and consumer-
owned electric utilities already shoulder the majority of the
reimbursable cost of these facilities, including subsidizing irrigation
features, environmental programs, and repayment of the Federal debt
associated with construction, operation, maintenance and replacements.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the Commissioners of the Arizona Power Authority call upon the
Federal Government to ensure that all costs associated with the safety
and security of Hoover Dam and similar Federal facilities in the
aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, be treated as
nonreimbursable and that payment of such costs be funded through
Federal appropriations as a national obligation.
UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED by the Arizona Power Authority Commission this
sixteenth day of March 2004.
______
Prepared Statement of the St. Francis Levee District of Arkansas
executive summary
The Mississippi Valley Flood Control Association Fiscal Year 2005
Civil Works Budget, Mississippi River and Tributaries Appropriations--
Requesting Appropriations of $9,500,000 for Construction and $8,805,000
for Maintenance and Operation in the St. Francis Basin Project and a
total of $450,000,000 for the Mississippi River and Tributaries
Project.
background information
My name is Rob Rash, and my home is in Marion, Arkansas, located on
the West side of the Mississippi River and in the St. Francis Basin. I
am the Chief Engineer of the St. Francis Levee District of Arkansas.
Our District is the local cooperation organization for the Mississippi
River and Tributaries Project and the St. Francis Basin Project in
Northeast Arkansas. Our District is responsible for the operation and
maintenance of 160 miles of Mississippi River Levee and 75 miles of St.
Francis River Tributary Levee in Northeast Arkansas.
The St. Francis Basin is comprised of an area of approximately
7,550 square miles in Southeast Missouri and Northeast Arkansas. The
basin extends from the foot of Commerce Hills near Cape Girardeau,
Missouri to the mouth of the St. Francis River, 7 miles above Helena,
Arkansas, a total distance of 235 miles. It is bordered on the east by
the Mississippi River and on the West by the uplands of Bloomfield and
Crowley's Ridge, having a maximum width of 53 miles. The Mississippi
River and Tributaries Project and the St. Francis Basin Project provide
critical flood protection to over 2,500 square miles in Northeast
Arkansas alone. This basin's flood control system is the very lifeblood
of our livelihood and prosperity. Our resources and infrastructure are
allowing the St. Francis Basin and the Lower Mississippi Valley to
develop into a major commercial and industrial area for this great
Nation. The basin is quickly becoming a major steel and energy
production area. The agriculture industry in Northeast Arkansas and the
Lower Mississippi Valley continues to play an integral role in
providing food and clothing for this Nation. This has all been made
possible because Congress has long recognized that flood control in the
Lower Mississippi Valley is a matter of national interest and security
and has authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to implement a
flood control system in the Lower Mississippi Valley that is the envy
of the civilized world. With the support of Congress over the years, we
have continued to develop our flood control system in the Lower
Mississippi Valley through the Mississippi River and Tributaries
Project and for that we are extremely grateful.
Although, at the current level of project completion, there are
areas in the Lower Mississippi Valley that are subject to major
flooding on the Mississippi River. The level of funding that has been
included in the President's Budget for the overall Mississippi River
and Tributaries Project is not sufficient to adequately fund and
maintain this project. The level of funding will require the citizens
of the Lower Mississippi Valley to live needlessly in the threat of
major flood devastation for the next 30 years. Timely project
completion is of paramount importance to the citizens of the Lower
Mississippi. Ten and Fifteen Mile Bayou improvements are just one of
many construction projects necessary for flood relief in the St.
Francis Basin. Ten and Fifteen Mile Bayou improvements were
reauthorized by Congress through the Flood Control Act of 1928, as
amended. Section 104 of the Consolidated Appropriation Act of 2001
modified the St. Francis Basin to expand the project boundaries to
include Ten and Fifteen Mile Bayous and shall not be considered
separable elements. Total project length of 38 miles includes Ten and
Fifteen Mile Bayou, Ditch No. 15 and the 10 Mile Diversion Ditch that
provide flood control for West Memphis and Vicinity. Without additional
funds, construction would be delayed and West Memphis and Vicinity will
continue to experience record flooding as seen December 17, 2001. West
Memphis and Vicinity would experience immediate flood relief when the
first item of construction is completed.
u.s. army corps of engineers
We are strongly opposed to any action that would transfer any part
or the entire U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works mission to any
other agency or department of the Federal Government. This agency has
completed and overseen the Civil Works mission since its inception and
has done quite well. Very few of our other governmental bodies can
report and show a return of the taxpayer's investment as the Corps of
Engineers can and has been doing for many years. It has been reported
this administration desires to transfer the Corps Civil Works program
to the Department of Transportation, the Flood Control and
Environmental Restoration to the Department of Interior and the
Regulatory Program to the Environmental Protection Agency. The U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers has rendered extremely valuable services for
this Nation for many years. The Corps has created an inland waterways
system that is the envy of the rest of the world. Our Nation's
commercial transportation system is critical to the Nation's economy
and the environmental well being and part of this system is used to
transport military equipment in support of the war on terrorism. The
Corps has also been in the forefront to provide flood control and
environmental restoration projects and have supported our troops at
every armed conflict this Nation has engaged in. In our opinion, it
will be a serious mistake and have a negative Nation-wide impact to
spread the functions of the Corps into several parts across a Federal
bureaucracy. This Nation would lose a wonderful asset and one we have
enjoyed for over 200 years.
proposed funding
We support the amount of $450,000,000 requested by the Mississippi
Valley Flood Control Association for use in the overall Mississippi
River and Tributaries Project. This is the minimum amount that the
Executive Committee of the Association feels is necessary to maintain a
reasonable time line for completion of the overall Mississippi River
and Tributaries Project. Also, the amounts that have been included in
the President's Budget for the St. Francis Basin Project; construction,
operation and maintenance have not been sufficient to fund critical
projects. These declined amounts have resulted in a significant backlog
of work within the St. Francis Basin. Therefore, our District is
requesting additional capabilities of $9,500,000 for the St. Francis
Basin Project construction funds and $8,805,000 for the St. Francis
Basin operation and maintenance funds. The amounts requested for the
St. Francis Basin Project are a part of the total amounts requested for
the Mississippi River and Tributary Appropriations of the Civil Works
Budget.
summation
As your subcommittee reviews the Civil Works Budget of Fiscal Year
2005 Appropriations for the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project,
please consider the significance of this project to the Mississippi
Valley and the Nation's economy and infrastructure. As always, I feel
the subcommittee will give due regard to the needs of the Mississippi
River Valley as it considers appropriations for the Mississippi River
and Tributaries Project. I would like to sincerely thank the
subcommittee for its past and continued support of the Mississippi
River and Tributaries Project.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
I am writing on behalf of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, to
request funding for three critical projects in the fiscal year 2005
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill. These three projects
are:
--$7 million for the Virginia Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane
Protection Project under the Construction account of the Army
Corps of Engineers.
--$5.5 million for the City's Beach Renourishment for Sandbridge
Beach under the Construction account of the Army Corps of
Engineers.
--$1.25 million for the maintenance of Rudee Inlet under the
Operation and Maintenance account of the Army Corps of
Engineers.
virginia beach erosion control and hurricane protection project
Funding for this project was originally authorized under the Water
Resources Development Act of 1992, and a Public Cooperation Agreement
was reached and signed between the City and the Army Corps of Engineers
in August 1993. The Water Resources Development Act of 1992 authorized
$112 million for Virginia Beach Erosion Control and Hurricane
Protection project for the City.
To date, the Federal Government has invested over $80 million for
this project, matched by over $40 million in City funds. The results of
the investment are a magnificent beach and seawall system, providing
flood damage protection for the City's tourism industry infrastructure,
which is important for the economic vitality of the City. The resulting
beach is a showpiece for the region.
The project has proven it works, most recently after Hurricane
Isabel. The 100-year hurricane event protection level in this project
did indeed protect the whole commercial beach area with no sustainable
damage. If this project had not been in place there would have been
huge losses.
The Federal Government has a long-term (50-year) commitment with
the City to maintain this project. However, in the President's Fiscal
Year 2005 Budget no funding was included. The Federal and City
government have spent too much money to build this project to let it
all go to waste by not renourishing the beach with sand for protection.
It is important to maintain this project, both to protect the
investments already made and to minimize damages from future storm
events.
beach renourishment for sandbridge beach
The Sandbridge Beach Replenishment project was created after
decades of flood damage from storm events. Once the beach was
replenished, flooding due to storms significantly decreased. The most
recent example of the project's benefit is the reduced damage from
Hurricane Isabel. Our request of $5,500,000 is needed to honor the
previous Federal commitments for the programmed maintenance of these
projects.
The Sandbridge project was first approved by the Army Corps of
Engineers and the North Atlantic Division of the Corps and subsequently
authorized by Congress as a part of the Water Resources Development Act
of 1992. The initial Public Cooperation Agreement was executed on
February 3, 1998.
When the beach was first replenished in 1998, the City funded 100
percent of the total cost ($8.1 million). In 2002, the City covered 35
percent of the cost while the Federal Government covered the remaining
65 percent (total of $12 million). To date, the total amount of money
invested (including City funds and funds from the Federal Government)
is almost $20 million.
As with the Hurricane Protection Project, the President's Fiscal
Year 2005 Budget did not include funding for the Sandbridge Beach
project. It is imperative that the City be able to maintain this
project in order to protect the large number of family homes and rental
properties in the area and minimize overall damages from future storm
events. Today, only due to past efforts, Sandbridge is a vital and
vibrant public beach.
rudee inlet
Rudee Inlet, which was authorized under the Water Resources and
Development Act of 1992, is a vital commercial and recreational
resource to the City. But its special significance from a Federal
standpoint is that it is used by the U.S. Navy Special Operations for
training and equipment testing. The Army Corps of Engineers has been
maintaining Rudee Inlet since 1991.
Over the years there has been funding included in the President's
budget for Rudee Inlet, however there was no funding included in the
President's fiscal year 2005 budget. It is important to ensure that the
inlet receives proper funding because failure to continue the
maintenance on Rudee Inlet would negatively impact the City and the
U.S. Navy special operations.
It is vital to the City of Virginia Beach that the Federal
Government maintain funding for these projects. All businesses located
in the City, including hotels and restaurants, along with recreational
activities, military operations, and tourism would be negatively
impacted without the proper maintenance of these projects.
I appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter.
______
Prepared Statement of the Santa Clara Valley Water District
south san francisco bay shoreline study
Background.--Congressional passage of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1976, originally authorized the San Francisco Bay
Shoreline Study, and Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) was
one of the project sponsors. In 1990, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) concluded that levee failure potential was low because the
existing non-Federal, non-engineered levees, which were routinely
maintained by Leslie Salt Company (subsequently Cargill Salt) to
protect their industrial interests, had historically withstood
overtopping without failure. As a result, the project was suspended
until adequate economic benefits could be demonstrated.
Since the project's suspension in 1990, many changes have occurred
in the South Bay. The State and Federal acquisition of approximately
15,000 acres of South Bay salt ponds was completed in early March 2003.
The proposed restoration of these ponds to tidal marsh will
significantly alter the hydrologic regime and levee maintenance
activities, which were assumed to be constant in the Corps' 1990 study.
In addition to the proposed restoration project, considerable
development has occurred in the project area. Many major corporations
are now located within Silicon Valley's Golden Triangle, lying within
and adjacent to the tidal flood zone. Damages from a 1 percent high
tide are anticipated to far exceed the $34.5 million estimated in 1981,
disrupting business operations, infrastructure, and residences. Also,
historical land subsidence of up to 6 feet near Alviso, as well as the
structural uncertainty of existing salt pond levees, increases the
potential for tidal flooding in Santa Clara County.
In July 2002, Congress authorized a review of the Final 1992 Letter
Report for the San Francisco Bay Shoreline Study. The final fiscal year
2004 appropriation for the Corps included funding for a new start
Reconnaissance Study.
Project Synopsis.--At present, large areas of Santa Clara, Alameda
and San Mateo Counties would be impacted by flooding during a 1 percent
high tide. The proposed restoration of the South San Francisco Bay salt
ponds will result in the largest restored wetland on the West Coast of
the United States, and also significantly alter the hydrologic regime
adjacent to South Bay urban areas. The success of the proposed
restoration is therefore dependent upon adequate tidal flood
protection, and so this project provides an opportunity for multi-
objective watershed planning in partnership with the California Coastal
Conservancy, the lead agency on the restoration project. Project
objectives include: restoration and enhancement of a diverse array of
habitats, especially several special status species; tidal flood
protection; and provision of wildlife-oriented public access.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$100,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2004 to conduct a Reconnaissance Study.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Request.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $500,000 for
the South San Francisco Bay Shoreline Study to initiate a Feasibility
Study to evaluate integrated flood protection and environmental
restoration.
thompson creek restoration project
Background.--Thompson Creek, a tributary of Coyote Creek, flows
through the City of San Jose, California. Historically, the creek was a
naturally-meandering stream and a component of the Coyote Creek
watershed. The watershed had extensive riparian and oak woodland
habitat along numerous tributary stream corridors and upland savanna.
Currently, these habitat types are restricted to thin sparse pockets in
the Thompson Creek restoration project area.
Significant urban development over the last 20 years has modified
the runoff characteristics of the stream resulting in significant
degradation of the riparian habitat and stream channel. The existing
habitats along Thompson Creek, riparian forest stands, are threatened
by a bank destabilization and lowering of the water table. Recent large
storm events (1995, 1997, and 1998) and the subsequent wet years in
conjunction with rapid development in the upper watershed have resulted
in a succession of high runoff events leading to rapid erosion.
The upstream project limits start at Aborn Road and the downstream
project limit is Quimby Road where Thompson creek has been modified as
a flood Protection project. The project distance is approximately 1
mile.
Status.--In February 2000, the Santa Clara Valley Water District
(District) initiated discussions with U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) for a study under the Corps' Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration Program. Based on the project merits, the Corps began
preparation of a Preliminary Restoration Plan (PRP) and subsequent
Project Management Plan (PMP). Approval of the PRP will lead to the
development of a Detailed Project Report (DPR). The DPR will provide
the information necessary to develop plans and specifications for the
construction of the restoration project.
PROJECT TIMELINE
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request Federal assistance under Sec. 206 Feb. 2002
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program.
Initiate Study............................. Jan. 2003
Public Scoping Meeting and Local Sept. 2004
Involvement.
Final Detailed Project Report to South May 2006
Pacific Division of Corps.
Initiate Plans and Specifications.......... July 2006
Project Cooperation Agreement signed....... Dec. 2006
Certification of Real Estate............... Mar. 2007
Advertise Construction Contract............ May 2007
Complete Plans and Specifications.......... July 2007
Award Construction Contract................ July 2007
Construction Start......................... Sept. 2007
Complete Physical Construction............. Dec. 2008
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$100,000 earmark was received in the
fiscal year 2004 Section 206 appropriation to complete the PRP.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an earmark of $300,000 within the
Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program.
pajaro river watershed study
Background.--Pajaro River flows into the Pacific Ocean at Monterey
Bay, about 75 miles south of San Francisco. The drainage area
encompasses 1,300 square miles in Santa Clara, San Benito, Monterey,
and Santa Cruz counties. Potential flood damage reduction solutions
will require cooperation between four counties and four water/flood
management districts. There is critical habitat for endangered wildlife
and fisheries throughout the basin. Six separate flood events have
occurred on the Pajaro River in the past half century. Severe property
damage in Monterey and Santa Cruz counties resulted from floods in
1995, 1997, and 1998. Recent flood events have resulted in litigation
claims for damages approaching $50 million. $20 million in U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (Corps) flood fight funds have been expended in
recent years.
Status.--Two separate Corps activities are taking place in the
watershed. The first activity is a Corps reconnaissance study
authorized by a House Resolution in May 1996 to address the need for
flood protection and water quality improvements, ecosystem restoration,
and other related issues. The second activity is a General Revaluation
Report initiated in response to claims by Santa Cruz and Monterey
Counties that the 13 mile levee project constructed in 1949 through
agricultural areas and the city of Watsonville is deficient. The
reconnaissance study on the entire watershed was completed by the San
Francisco District of the Corps in fiscal year 2002. The decision to
continue onto a cost-shared feasibility study is currently delayed
pending the Corps resolution of the flooding problems on the lower
Pajaro River (Murphy's Crossing to the Ocean) and defining feasibility
study goals that meet the interests of all Authority members.
Local Flood Prevention Authority.--Legislation passed by the State
of California (Assembly Bill 807) in 1999 titled ``The Pajaro River
Watershed Flood Prevention Authority Act'' mandated that a Flood
Prevention Authority be formed by June 30, 2000. The purpose of the
Flood Prevention Authority is ``to provide the leadership necessary to
. . . ensure the human, economic, and environmental resources of the
watershed are preserved, protected, and enhanced in terms of watershed
management and flood protection.'' The Flood Prevention Authority was
formed in July 2000 and consists of representatives from the Counties
of Monterey, San Benito, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz, Zone 7 Flood
Control District, Monterey County Water Resources Agency, San Benito
County Water District, and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. The
Flood Prevention Authority Board sent a letter of intent to cost share
a feasibility study of the Pajaro River Watershed to the Corps in
September 2001.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$100,000 was authorized in fiscal year
2004 for the Pajaro Watershed Feasibility Study.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $100,000 in
fiscal year 2005 for the Pajaro River Watershed Study.
upper guadalupe river project
Background.--The Guadalupe River is one of two major waterways
flowing through a highly urbanized area of Santa Clara County,
California, the heart of Silicon Valley. Historically, the river has
flooded the central district and southern areas of San Jose. According
to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 1998 feasibility study, severe
flooding would result from a 100-year flooding event and potentially
cause $280 million in damages.
The probability of a large flood occurring before implementation of
flood prevention measures is high. The upper Guadalupe River overflowed
in March 1982, January 1983, February 1986, January 1995, March 1995,
and February 1998, causing damage to several residences and businesses
in the Alma Avenue and Willow Street areas. The 1995 floods in January
and March, as well as in February 1998, closed Highway 87 and the
parallel light-rail line, a major commute artery.
Project Synopsis.--In 1971, the Santa Clara Valley Water District
(District) requested the Corps to reactivate an earlier study of
Guadalupe River. From 1971 to 1980, the Corps established the economic
feasibility and Federal interest in the Guadalupe River only between
Interstate 880 and Interstate 280. Following the 1982 and 1983 floods,
the District requested that the Corps reopen its study of the upper
Guadalupe River upstream of Interstate 280. The Corps completed a
reconnaissance study in November 1989, which established an
economically justifiable solution for flood protection in this reach.
The report recommended proceeding to the feasibility study phase, which
began in 1990. In January 1997, the Corps determined that the National
Economic Development (NED) Plan would be a 2 percent or 50-year level
of flood protection rather than the 1 percent or 100-year level. The
District strongly emphasized overriding the NED Plan determination,
providing compelling reasons for using the higher 1 percent or 100-year
level of protection. In 1998, the Acting Secretary of the Army did not
concur to change the basis of cost sharing from the 50-year NED Plan to
the locally preferred 100-year plan, resulting in a project that will
provide less flood protection, and therefore, be unable to reduce flood
insurance requirements and reimbursements, as well as eliminate
recreational benefits and increase environmental impacts. Based on
Congressional delegation requests, the Assistant Secretary of the Army
directed the Corps to revise the Chief's Report to reflect more
significant Federal responsibility. The Corps feasibility study
determined the cost of the locally preferred 100-year plan is $153
million and the Corps NED 50-year plan is $98 million. The District has
requested that the costs of providing 50-year and 100-year flood
protection be analyzed again during the preconstruction engineering
design phase. In a memorandum for the Assistant Secretary of the Army,
dated October 12, 2000, Major General Hans A. Van Winkle, Deputy
Commander for Civil Works, made a similar recommendation.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$150,000 was authorized in fiscal year
2004 for the Upper Guadalupe River Project to continue preconstruction
engineering and design.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $3.5 million
in fiscal year 2005 for the Upper Guadalupe River Flood Protection
Project.
llagas creek project
Background.--The Llagas Creek Watershed is located in southern
Santa Clara County, California, serving the communities of Gilroy,
Morgan Hill and San Martin. Historically, Llagas Creek has flooded in
1937, 1955, 1958, 1962, 1963, 1969, 1982, 1986, 1996, 1997, 1998, and
2002. The 1997, 1998, and 2002 floods damaged many homes, businesses,
and a recreational vehicle park located in areas of Morgan Hill and San
Martin. These are areas where flood protection is proposed. Overall,
the proposed project will protect the floodplain from a 1 percent flood
affecting more than 1,100 residential buildings, 500 commercial
buildings, and 1,300 acres of agricultural land.
Project Synopsis.--Under authority of the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 566), the Natural Resources
Conservation Service completed an economic feasibility study in 1982
for constructing flood damage reduction facilities on Llagas Creek. The
Natural Resources Conservation Service completed construction of the
last segment of the channel for Lower Llagas Creek in 1994, providing
protection to the project area in Gilroy. The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) is currently updating the 1982 environmental
assessment work and the engineering design for the project areas in
Morgan Hill and San Martin. The engineering design is being updated to
protect and improve creek water quality and to preserve and enhance the
creek's habitat, fish, and wildlife while satisfying current
environmental and regulatory requirement. Significant issues include
the presence of additional endangered species including the red-legged
frog and steelhead, listing of the area as probable critical habitat
for steelhead, and more extensive riparian habitat than were considered
in 1982. Project economics are currently being updated as directed by
Corps Headquarters to determine continued project economic viability.
Until 1996, the Llagas Creek Project was funded through the
traditional Public Law 566 Federal project funding agreement with the
Natural Resources Conservation Service paying for channel improvements
and the District paying local costs including utility relocation,
bridge construction, and right of way acquisition. Due to the steady
decrease in annual appropriations for the Public Law 566 construction
program since 1990, the Llagas Creek Project has not received adequate
funding from U.S. Department of Agriculture to complete the Public Law
566 project. To remedy this situation, the District worked with
congressional representatives to transfer the construction authority
from the Department of Agriculture to the Corps under the Water
Resources Development Act of 1999 (Section 501). Since the transfer of
responsibility to the Corps, the District has been working the Corps to
complete the project.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$250,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2004 for the Llagas Creek Flood Protection Project for planning and
design.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--Based upon the high risk
of flood damage from Llagas Creek, it is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $1.35
million in fiscal year 2005 for planning, design, and environmental
updates for the Llagas Creek Project.
coyote creek watershed study
Background.--Coyote Creek drains Santa Clara County's largest
watershed, an area of more than 320 square miles encompassing most of
the eastern foothills, the City of Milpitas, and portions of the Cities
of San Jose and Morgan Hill. It flows northward from Anderson Reservoir
through more than 40 miles of rural and heavily urbanized areas and
empties into south San Francisco Bay.
Prior to construction of Coyote and Anderson Reservoirs, flooding
occurred in 1903, 1906, 1909, 1911, 1917, 1922, 1923, 1926, 1927, 1930
and 1931. Since 1950, the operation of the reservoirs has reduced the
magnitude of flooding, although flooding is still a threat and did
cause damages in 1982, 1983, 1986, 1995, and 1997. Significant areas of
older homes in downtown San Jose and some major transportation
corridors remain susceptible to extensive flooding. The Federally-
supported lower Coyote Creek Project (San Francisco Bay to Montague
Expressway), which was completed in 1996, protected homes and
businesses from storms which generated record runoff in the northern
parts of San Jose and Milpitas.
The proposed Reconnaissance Study would evaluate the reaches
upstream of the completed Federal flood protection works on lower
Coyote Creek.
Objective of Study.--The objectives of the Reconnaissance Study are
to investigate flood damages within the Coyote Creek Watershed; to
identify potential alternatives for alleviating those damages which
also minimize impacts on fishery and wildlife resources, provide
opportunities for ecosystem restoration, provide for recreational
opportunities; and to determine whether there is a Federal interest to
proceed into the Feasibility Study Phase.
Study Authorization.--In May 2002, the House of Representatives
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure passed a resolution
directing the Corps to ``. . . review the report of the Chief of
Engineers on Coyote and Berryessa Creeks . . . and other pertinent
reports, to determine whether modifications of the recommendations
contained therein are advisable in the interest of flood damage
reduction, environmental restoration and protection, water conservation
and supply, recreation, and other allied purposes . . .''.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--No Federal funding was received in
fiscal year 2004.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $100,000 to
initiate a multi-purpose Reconnaissance Study within the Coyote Creek
Watershed.
upper penitencia creek flood protection project
Background.--The Upper Penitencia Creek Watershed is located in
northeast Santa Clara County, California, near the southern end of the
San Francisco Bay. In the last two decades, the creek has flooded in
1980, 1982, 1983, 1986, 1995, and 1998. The January 1995 flood damaged
a commercial nursery, a condominium complex, and a business park. The
February 1998 flood also damaged many homes, businesses, and surface
streets.
The proposed project on Upper Penitencia Creek, from the Coyote
Creek confluence to Dorel Drive, will protect portions of the cities of
San Jose and Milpitas. The floodplain is completely urbanized;
undeveloped land is limited to a few scattered agricultural parcels and
a corridor along Upper Penitencia Creek. Based on the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers' (Corps) 1995 reconnaissance report, 4,300 buildings in
the cities of San Jose and Milpitas are located in the flood prone
area, 1,900 of which will have water entering the first floor. The
estimated damages from a 1 percent or 100-year flood exceed $121
million.
Study Synopsis.--Under authority of the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act (Public Law 83-566), the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) completed
an economic feasibility study (watershed plan) for constructing flood
damage reduction facilities on Upper Penitencia Creek. Following the
1990 U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Bill, the Natural Resources
Conservation Service watershed plan stalled due to the very high ratio
of potential urban development flood damage compared to agricultural
damage in the project area.
In January 1993 the Santa Clara Valley Water District (District)
requested the Corps proceed with a reconnaissance study in the 1994
fiscal year while the Natural Resources Conservation Service plan was
on hold. Funds were appropriated by Congress for fiscal year 1995 and
the Corps started the reconnaissance study in October 1994. The
reconnaissance report was completed in July 1995, with the
recommendation to proceed with the feasibility study phase. The
feasibility study, initiated in February 1998, is currently scheduled
for completion in 2005.
Advance Construction.--To accelerate project implementation, the
District submitted a Section 104 application to the Corps for advance
approval to construct a portion of the project. Approval of the Section
104 application was awarded in December 2000. The advance construction
is for a 2,600-foot-long section of bypass channel between Coyote Creek
and King Road. However, due to funding constraints at the District and
concerns raised by regulatory agencies, the design was stopped and
turned over to the Corps to complete.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$460,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2004 for the Upper Penitencia Creek Flood Protection Project for
project investigation.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--Based upon the high risk
of flood damage from Upper Penitencia Creek and the need to proceed
with the feasibility study, it is requested that the congressional
committee support an appropriation add-on of $535,000 million, in
addition to the $46,000 in the administration's fiscal year 2005
budget, for a total of $600,000 for the Upper Penitencia Creek Flood
Protection Project.
coyote/berryessa creek project
berryessa creek project element
Background.--The Berryessa Creek Watershed is located in northeast
Santa Clara County, California, near the southern end of the San
Francisco Bay. A major tributary of Coyote Creek, Berryessa Creek
drains 22 square miles in the City of Milpitas and a portion of San
Jose.
On average, Berryessa Creek floods once every 4 years. The most
recent flood in 1998 resulted in significant damage to homes and
automobiles. The proposed project on Berryessa Creek, from Calaveras
Boulevard to upstream of Old Piedmont Road, will protect portions of
the Cities of San Jose and Milpitas. The flood plain is largely
urbanized with a mix of residential and commercial development. Based
on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) 1993 draft General Design
Memorandum, a 1 percent or 100-year flood could potentially result in
damages of $52 million with depths of up to 3 feet.
Study Synopsis.--In January 1981, the Santa Clara Valley Water
District (District) applied for Federal assistance for flood protection
projects under Section 205 of the 1948 Flood Control Act. The Water
Resources Development Act of 1990 authorized construction on the
Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project as part of a combined Coyote/
Berryessa Creek Project to protect portions of the Cities of Milpitas
and San Jose.
The Coyote Creek element of the project was completed in 1996. The
Berryessa Creek Project element proposed in the Corps' 1987 feasibility
report consisted primarily of a trapezoidal concrete lining. This was
not acceptable to the local community. The Corps and the District are
currently preparing a General Reevaluation Report which involves
reformulating a project which is more acceptable to the local community
and more environmentally sensitive. Project features will include
setback levees and floodwalls to preserve sensitive areas (minimizing
the use of concrete), appropriate aquatic and riparian habitat
restoration and fish passage, and sediment control structures to limit
turbidity and protect water quality. The project will also accommodate
the City of Milpitas' adopted trail master plan. Estimated total costs
of the General Reevaluation Report work are $3.8 million, and should be
completed in the summer of 2005.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$250,000 was appropriated in fiscal year
2004 for the Coyote/Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project to
continue the General Reevaluation Report and environmental documents
update.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--Based on the continuing
threat of significant flood damage from Berryessa Creek and the need to
continue with the General Reevaluation Report, it is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $750,000 for
the Berryessa Creek Flood Protection Project element of the Coyote/
Berryessa Creek Project.
san francisquito creek watershed project
Background.--The San Francisquito Creek watershed comprises 45
square miles and 70 miles of creek system. The creek mainstem flows
through five cities and two counties, from Searsville Lake, belonging
to Stanford University, to the San Francisco Bay at the boundary of
East Palo Alto and Palo Alto. Here it forms the boundary between Santa
Clara and San Mateo counties, California and separates the cities of
Palo Alto from East Palo Alto and Menlo Park. The upper watershed
tributaries are within the boundaries of Portola Valley and Woodside
townships. The creek flows through residential and commercial
properties, a biological preserve, and Stanford University campus. It
interfaces with regional and State transportation systems by flowing
under two freeways and the regional commuter rail system. The local
communities have formed a Joint Powers Authority in 1999 to
cooperatively manage flood and restoration efforts. San Francisquito
Creek is one of the last natural continuous riparian corridors on the
San Francisco Peninsula and home to one of the last remaining viable
steelhead trout runs. It is a highly valued resource by all
communities. The riparian habitat and urban setting offer unique
opportunities for a multi-objective project addressing flood
protection, habitat, water quality, and recreation.
Flooding History.--The creeks mainstem has a flooding frequency of
approximately once in 11 years. It is estimated that over $155 million
in damages could occur in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties from a 1
percent flood, affecting 4,850 home and businesses. Significant areas
of Palo Alto flooded in December 1955, inundating about 1,200 acres of
commercial and residential property and about 70 acres of agricultural
land. April 1958 storms caused a levee failure downstream of Highway
101, flooding Palo Alto Airport, the city landfill, and the golf course
up to 4 feet deep. Overflow in 1982 caused extensive damage to private
and public property. The flood of record occurred on February 3, 1998,
when overflow from numerous locations caused severe, record
consequences with more than $28 million in damages. More than 1,100
homes were flooded in Palo Alto, 500 people were evacuated in East Palo
Alto, and the major commute and transportation artery, Highway 101, was
closed.
Status.--Active citizenry are anxious to avoid a repeat of February
1998 flood. Numerous watershed based studies have been conducted by the
Corps, the Santa Clara Valley Water District, Stanford University, and
the San Mateo County Flood Control District. Grassroots, consensus-
based organization, called the San Francisquito Watershed Council, has
united stakeholders including local and State agencies, citizens, flood
victims, developers, and environmental activists for over 10 years. The
San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority was formed in 1999 to
coordinate creek activities with five member agencies and two associate
members. The Authority Board has agreed to be the local sponsor for a
Corps project and received congressional authorization for a Corps
reconnaissance study in May 2002.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$100,000 was appropriated to San
Francisquito Creek in fiscal year 2004 to conduct a Watershed
Reconnaissance Study.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $200,000 in
fiscal year 2005 budget to initiate a Feasibility Study for the San
Francisquito Creek Watershed.
guadalupe river project
Background.--The Guadalupe River is a major waterway flowing
through a highly developed area of San Jose, in Santa Clara County,
California. A major flood would damage homes and businesses in the
heart of Silicon Valley. Historically, the river has flooded downtown
San Jose and the community of Alviso. According to the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers (Corps) 2000 Final General Reevaluation & Environmental
Report for Proposed Project Modifications, estimated damages from a 1
percent flood in the urban center of San Jose are over $576 million.
The Guadalupe River overflowed in February 1986, January 1995, and
March 1995, damaging homes and businesses in the St. John and Pleasant
Street areas of downtown San Jose. In March 1995, heavy rains resulted
in breakouts along the river that flooded approximately 300 homes and
business.
Project Synopsis.--In 1971, the local community requested that the
Corps reactivate its earlier study. Since 1972, substantial technical
and financial assistance have been provided by the local community
through the Santa Clara Valley Water District in an effort to
accelerate the project's completion. To date, more than $85.8 million
in local funds have been spent on planning, design, land purchases, and
construction in the Corps' project reach.
The Guadalupe River Project received authorization for construction
under the Water Resources Development Act of 1986; the General Design
Memorandum was completed in 1992, the local cooperative agreement was
executed in March 1992, the General Design Memorandum was revised in
1993, construction of the first phase of the project was completed in
August 1994, construction of the second phase was completed in August
1996. Project construction was temporarily halted due to environmental
concerns.
To achieve a successful, long-term resolution to the issues of
flood protection, environmental mitigation, avoidance of environmental
effects, and project monitoring and maintenance costs, a multi-agency
``Guadalupe Flood Control Project Collaborative'' was created in 1997.
A key outcome of the collaborative process was the signing of the
Dispute Resolution Memorandum in 1998, which modified the project to
resolve major mitigation issues and allowed the project to proceed.
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act of 2002 was signed into
law on November 12, 2001. This authorized the Modified Guadalupe River
Project at a total cost of $226,800,000. Construction of the last phase
of flood protection is scheduled for completion by December 2004 and is
dependent on timely Federal funding and continuing successful
mitigation issue resolution. The overall construction of the project
including the river park and the recreation elements is scheduled for
completion in 2006.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--$14 million was authorized in fiscal
year 2004 to continue Guadalupe River Project construction.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $6 million,
in addition to the $6 million in the administration's fiscal year 2005
budget, for a total of $12 million to continue construction of the
final phase of the Guadalupe River Flood Protection Project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project: Construction $5,000,000
General................................................
San Jacinto & Santa Margarita River Watersheds Special 1,000,000
Area Management Plan (SAMP): General Investigations....
Santa Ana River--Mainstem: Construction General......... 58,060,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
murrieta creek flood control project
Murrieta Creek poses a severe flood threat to the cities of
Murrieta and Temecula. Over $12 million in damages was experienced in
the two cities as a result of Murrieta Creek flooding in 1993. The 1997
Energy and Water Appropriations Act dedicated $100,000 to conducting a
Reconnaissance Study of watershed management in the Santa Margarita
Watershed ``including flood control, environmental restoration,
stormwater retention, water conservation and supply, and related
purposes''. The study effort was initiated in April 1997 and completed
the following December. The Reconnaissance Study identified a Federal
interest in flood control on the Murrieta sub-basin, and recommended
moving forward with a detailed feasibility study for a flood control
project on Murrieta Creek.
Efforts on the Feasibility Study began in April 1998 and were
completed in September 2000. The Feasibility Study Report recommends
the implementation of Alternative 6, the Locally Preferred Plan (LPP)
for flood control, environmental restoration and recreation. The LPP is
endorsed by the Cities of Temecula and Murrieta and by the community as
a whole.
H.R. 5483, the Energy and Water Appropriations Act of 2000 included
specific language authorizing the Corps to construct ``the locally
preferred plan for flood control, environmental restoration and
recreation described as Alternative 6, based on the Murrieta Creek
Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement dated September
2000.''
After finalizing the necessary cost sharing agreement in February
2001, the Corps initiated the detailed engineering design necessary to
develop construction plans and specifications for a Murrieta Creek
Project utilizing a fiscal year 2001 appropriation of $750,000. The
project received an additional appropriation of $1,000,000 for
engineering design efforts in fiscal year 2002. Those funds were
utilized to develop design-level topographic mapping for the entire 7-
mile long project, to complete all necessary geotechnical work, and to
begin the preparation of construction drawings for the initial phases
of construction.
The Murrieta Creek Flood Control Project is being designed and will
be constructed in four distinct phases. Phases 1 and 2 include channel
improvements through the city of Temecula. Phase 3 involves the
construction of a 240-acre detention basin, including the 160-acre
restoration site and over 50 acres of recreational facilities. Phase 4
of the project will include channel improvements through the city of
Murrieta. Equestrian, bicycle and hiking trails as well as a continuous
habitat corridor for wildlife are components of this and every phase of
the project.
The Omnibus Appropriations Bill for fiscal year 2003 provided $1
million for a new construction start for this critical public safety
project. Construction activities on Phase 1 of the project commenced in
the Fall of 2003 and the Groundbreaking Ceremony was held on November
12, 2003. The appropriations for fiscal year 2004 allowed the Corps to
continue construction on Phase 1 and initiate its engineering design
work for Phase 2 of the project. Phase 2 traverses the area of Temecula
hardest hit with damages from the severe flooding of 1993. The Corps
anticipates having a Phase 2 construction contract ready to award in
the summer of 2005. The District, therefore, respectfully requests the
committee's support of a $5 million appropriation in fiscal year 2005
so that the Corps may complete construction on Phase 1, complete the
design work for Phase 2 and initiate construction on Phase 2 of the
long awaited Murrieta Creek Flood Control, Environmental Restoration
and Recreation Project.
san jacinto & santa margarita river watersheds special area management
plan
The County of Riverside recognizes the interdependence between the
region's future transportation, habitat, open space and land-use/
housing needs. In 1999, work was initiated on Riverside County's
Integrated Project (RCIP) to determine how best to balance these
factors. The plan will create regional conservation and development
reserves that will protect entire communities of native plants and
animals while streamlining the process for compatible economic
development in other areas. The major elements of the plan include
water resource identification, multi-species planning, land use and
transportation.
In order to achieve a balance between aquatic resource protection
and economic development, the Corps is developing a Special Area
Management Plan (SAMP) for both the San Jacinto and Santa Margarita
Watersheds. This comprehensive planning effort will be used to assist
Federal, State and local agencies with their decision making and
permitting authority to protect, restore and enhance aquatic resources
while accommodating various types of development activities. The Santa
Margarita and San Jacinto watersheds include such resources as
woodlands, wetlands, freshwater marshes, vernal pools, streams, lakes
and rivers.
The final product of the SAMP will be the establishment of an
abbreviated or expedited regulatory permitting process by the Corps
under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. The Corps' effort includes
facilitating meetings between all potential watershed partners, and the
integration of the joint study effort with the planning and multiple
species habitat conservation efforts of the balance of the RCIP
project.
The $500,000 Federal appropriation received for fiscal year 2001
allowed the Corps to initiate work on this 3-year, $5.5 million SAMP
effort. The $2 million appropriation received in fiscal year 2002
allowed the Corps to make significant progress on a ``landscape level
aquatic resource delineation'', and to initiate a functional assessment
to determine the value of waters and wetlands. The $1 million
appropriation received for fiscal year 2003 allowed the Corps to
complete their wetlands delineation effort. The $200,000 appropriations
received for fiscal year 2004 allowed for some of the management of the
preparation of the NEPA document to continue.
Further funding is now needed to continue the SAMP effort. We,
therefore, respectfully request that the committee support a combined
$1,000,000 appropriation of Federal funding for fiscal year 2005 for
the Corps to continue its work on the Special Area Management Plan for
the San Jacinto and Santa Margarita River Watersheds.
santa ana river--mainstem
The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662)
authorized the Santa Ana River--All River project that includes
improvements and various mitigation features as set forth in the Chief
of Engineers' Report to the Secretary of the Army. The Boards of
Supervisors of Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties continue
to support this critical project as stated in past resolutions to
Congress.
The three local sponsors and the Corps signed the Local Cooperation
Agreement (LCA) in December 1989. The first of five construction
contracts started on the Seven Oaks Dam feature in the spring of 1990
and the dam was officially completed on November 15, 1999. A dedication
ceremony was held on January 7, 2000. Significant construction has been
completed on the lower Santa Ana River Channel and on the San Timoteo
Creek Channel. Construction activities on Oak Street Drain and the Mill
Creek Levee have been completed. Seven Oaks Dam was turned over to the
Local Sponsors for operation and maintenance on October 1, 2002.
For fiscal year 2005, an appropriation of $4.46 million is
necessary to initiate construction activities on several features
within ``Reach 9'' of the Santa Ana River immediately downstream of
Prado Dam. This segment of the Santa Ana River project is the last to
receive flood protection improvements. The streambed existing today in
a relatively natural state would receive only localized levee and slope
revetment treatment to protect existing development along its southerly
bank.
The removal of accumulated sediment within an already completed
section of the Santa Ana River Channel near its outlet to the Pacific
Ocean will necessitate a fiscal year 2005 appropriation of $4.3
million. This dredging work is necessary before project turnover to the
Local Sponsors for operation and maintenance.
Construction activities on the last remaining phase of San Timoteo
Creek Channel, a Mainstem feature located within San Bernardino County,
would be completed given a final $5 million appropriation.
An appropriation of $7.0 million is being requested to fund the
required mitigation for the operation and maintenance of the Seven Oaks
Dam project.
The Prado Dam feature of the Santa Ana River Mainstem project is in
need of several major upgrades in order that it mitigate the potential
impacts of a 100-year storm. All of the engineering work necessary to
redesign the dam is now complete. In fiscal year 2003, the Corps was
able to award a construction contract to begin modifications to the dam
embankment and outlet works. An fiscal year 2005 appropriation of $37.3
million would allow the Corps to continue with the construction of
improvements to Prado Dam's outlet works and embankment, and would fund
all necessary environmental mitigation measures.
We, therefore, respectfully request that the committee support an
overall $58,060,000 appropriation of Federal funding for fiscal year
2005 for the Santa Ana River Mainstem project including Prado Dam.
______
Prepared Statement of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
Project.--Standing Rock MRI and Irrigation Systems, Garrison
Diversion Unit (Public Law 99-294).
Agency.--Corps of Engineers, Missouri Basin Pick Sloan, OMR.
fiscal year 2005 budget request
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe requests $6,500,000 in the Corps of
Engineers' budget for fiscal year 2005 for the Missouri Basin Pick
Sloan Project from the operation, maintenance and replacement (OMR)
account to reconstruct three intakes made inoperable by siltation
caused by the operation of water levels in Lake Oahe in the months
August through December 2003 as set out below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cannonball Irrigation Intake............................ $2,000,000
Fort Yates Irrigation Intake............................ 1,500,000
Fort Yates Municipal and Industrial Intake.............. 3,000,000
---------------
Total............................................. 6,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
background
The construction and operation of Garrison and Oahe dams, principle
components of the Missouri River Pick Sloan Program, by the Corps of
Engineers has caused considerable damage to the Standing Rock Sioux
Tribe of the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, North and South Dakota.
The following activities have caused the siltation of three major
intakes owned and operated by the Tribe for irrigation and domestic
water use and threatens proposed downstream intakes:
--The construction of Garrison Dam, upstream from Lake Oahe, has
caused the erosion of the bed and banks of the free flowing
Missouri River between Garrison Dam and Bismarck;
--The construction of Oahe Dam and the filling of Lake Oahe has
caused the deposition of sediment eroded from the bed and banks
of the Missouri River between Garrison Dam and Bismarck at the
upper end of Lake Oahe. This deposition has been estimated by
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation at 14,600 acre feet annually
(equivalent to 560,000 acre of deposition over the past 40
years);
--Lowering the Lake Oahe water levels to historic minimums in fall
2003 caused the transport of sediments deposited in the upper
end of Lake Oahe to more downstream locations in Lake Oahe
within the Standing Rock Indian Reservation and inundated the
Cannonball irrigation intake and the Fort Yates municipal,
rural and industrial water intake, the principle source of
domestic water supply for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, The
Fort Yates irrigation intake was likewise stranded in fall
2003;
--The Cannonball irrigation intake was inundated with 11 feet of
sediment between August and December 2003, and the Fort Yates
municipal, rural and industrial water intake was rendered
unusable by the deposition of sediment creating a water supply
emergency for 10,000 members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.
The Corps of Engineers was fully knowledgeable with respect to the
erosion of the bed and bank of the Missouri River between Garrison Dam
and Bismarck and the subsequent deposition of sediments on the Standing
Rock Indian Reservation in the upper end of Lake Oahe as evidenced by
the following documents, among others:
--Alfred S. Harrison and Warren J. Mellema, May 1984, Aggradation and
Degradation Aspects of the Missouri River Mainstem Dams, MRD
Sediment Series, Number 34, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha
District.
--Corps of Engineers, December 1983, Deposition at the Heads of
Reservoirs, MRD Sediment Series, Number 31, Omaha District.
--Sedimentation and Channel Stabilization Section, November 1999,
Sedimentation Impacts in the Cheyenne River Arm--Lake Oahe,
Phase II, Projected to 2058, MRR Sediment Memorandum, 20, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District.
--U.S. Geological Survey, 1995, Transport and Sources of Sediment in
the Missouri River between Garrison Dam and the Headwaters of
Lake Oahe, North Dakota, May 1988 through April 1991 Water-
Resources Investigations Report 95-4087.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, pursuant to the Treaties of 1851 and
1868 possesses prior and superior rights to the use of water in the
Missouri River, its tributaries and its aquifers for present and future
purposes and has exercised those water rights for the present
development of irrigation and domestic water supply by the construction
of intakes on the Missouri River where the natural channel of the river
crosses the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, which intakes are
submerged at the upper end of Lake Oahe.
depletion of tribes' funds appropriated pursuant to public law 99-294,
as amended
The Standing Rock MRI project funds (Public Law 99-294) have been
depleted to make interim, emergency corrections to restore the drinking
water supply for the Tribal membership and other residents served in
Fort Yates, Cannonball, Porcupine and intermediate rural areas.
Questions also arise with respect to the viability of the new
irrigation intake in the Kenel area where the next phase of the Public
Law 99-294 irrigation project is to be implemented. It is not known how
long an intake as far south as Kenel will be viable because the rate of
progress of sediment movement from the upper to middle segments of Lake
Oahe is not known. Kenel has been under consideration as a possible
site for long-term MRI intake, but this option must be reevaluated
after better information is in hand to determine if the migration of
sediment will reach Kenel in the near term.
The cost of a long-term solution is not yet known. Far more
information is needed on the phenomenon of sediment movement in Lake
Oahe before a permanent location and elevation for a new intake can be
established. Sound cost estimates can be prepared thereafter.
The Cannonball Irrigation Unit was to begin operation in spring
2004. It appears the Tribe will not be able to meet those expectations
because 11 feet of silt now resides atop that intake. Funds for
corrective measures at this site in fiscal year 2004 will further
deplete the irrigation authority of Public Law 99-294 intended for
development of additional parts of the 2,380 authorized acres.
standing rock sediment analysis in lake oahe
When Garrison Dam closed in 1955, a streamflow of 10,000 cubic feet
per second (cfs) produced a water level elevation in the Missouri River
downstream from the dam of approximately 1,676 feet above mean sea
level. In 1990 a streamflow of 10,000 cfs produced a water level
elevation in the Missouri River of approximately 1,668 feet, a decline
in water level elevation of 8 feet. The reason for the decline in water
level elevation for the same flow rate of 10,000 cfs was the excavation
of the bed of the River below the dam. (See Figure 1 from the Corps of
Engineers). With entrapment of all incoming sediment in the reservoir
upstream from the dam, releases from the dam are free of sediment and
have the capability to capture material from the bed and banks of the
downstream river channel. Over a long period of time (1955 to 2003)
this predictable activity has lowered the bed of the Missouri River and
eroded the banks.
When Oahe Dam closed and began filling in 1962, material excavated
from the Missouri River below Garrison Dam was deposited by the slowing
velocity of the River as it entered the upper end of the Oahe pool.
Over a 30-year period an unknown volume and tonnage of sediment was
excavated upstream and deposited downstream from Bismarck. (See Figure
2 from USGS with independent modifications to show zones of excavation
and deposition upstream and downstream from Bismarck, respectively.)
The following statement confirms that Bismarck is near the transition
between upstream excavation or ``degradation'' and downstream
deposition or ``aggradation'' of the channel.
``. . . there have been no marked changes in stage at this station
[Bismarck] except for discharges of 30,000 cfs or greater, which have
exhibited a slight upward trend . . . a study completed by the Corps
[of Engineers] in 1985 `Oahe-Bismarck Area Studies' indicated that
aggradation has reduced the size of the channel in the study area,
resulting in higher stages for the same discharge. The study concluded
that for discharges of 50,000 to over 100,000 cfs, the stages have
increased by 1 to 2 feet in the study area. It was also estimated that
future aggradation will further increase stages for those discharges by
an additional 0.8 to 1.4 feet.'' (U.S. Geological Survey, 1995,
Transport and Sources of Sediment in the Missouri River Between
Garrison Dam and the Headwaters of Lake Oahe, North Dakota, May 1988
through April 1991, Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4087).
During the drought of the last few years, including 2003, water
levels in Lake Oahe fell from average elevations of 1,605 feet to
historic minimums. Only in year 1990 had water levels reached as low
(1,582 feet) as in 2003. In 2002, water levels in the October through
December time frame reached averages of 1,584 feet. In November 2003,
water levels reached as low as 1,576 feet, the lowest on record.
Sufficient information is not in hand (but should be available) to
determine the elevation of the bed of the Missouri River before
sediment began to accumulate in the upper end of Lake Oahe. When the
intake for the Cannonball Irrigation Project was constructed in the
late 1990's, the intake was placed underwater in the former channel of
the Missouri River (the lowest point at that River-mile). The top of
the intake screen was at 1,573 feet. Similarly, the intake for the
Standing Rock MRI Project was reportedly constructed in the former
channel of the River at a known elevation not available at the time of
this writing.
Sediment moved downstream in fall 2003 as the reservoir levels in
Lake Oahe were lowered and the Missouri River was required to flow
across areas normally inundated and filled with sediment over the past
40 years. In this zone at the upper end of the lowered Lake Oahe, the
Missouri River eroded artificially deposited sediments and moved them
further downstream in the Reservoir. This caused the failure of the
intake for the Tribe's MRI Project and deposited as much as 11 feet of
sediment in the former Missouri River channel at the Cannonball intake
site. Sediment has reached elevation 1,584 feet or 11 feet above the
bottom of 1,573 feet measured at the irrigation intake in August 2003.
Elements of the phenomenon reported here have been studied by
agencies of the United States, including the U.S. Geological Survey and
the Corps of Engineers. It is believed that the Corps of Engineers knew
or should have known that the lowering of water levels in Lake Oahe
would cause the redistribution of sediments from the upper end of the
Reservoir, where they knew sediments were deposited, to further
downstream locations. At a minimum, the Tribe should have been notified
in advance of the risk to its intakes as the Corps began its operations
in the critical October to December period. Reasonable management of
reservoir levels may have avoided the exigent conditions that existed
for the Tribe in December and the considerable expense to redesign,
reconstruct and relocate both MRI and irrigation intakes due to the
releases from Garrison and management of water levels in Lake Oahe.
When the emergency occurred, the Corps of Engineers increased releases
from Garrison Dam from approximately 13,000 cfs (River stage at 4.2
feet) to 18,000 cfs (River stage at 6.2 feet), the most marked change
in releases during the October to December 2003 time frame. (See Figure
3 from USGS).
Long-term solutions for the Tribe require collection of information
not in the Tribe's hands and revision of the procedures for Garrison
releases and management of Lake Oahe during drought conditions.
Specifically, a sediment survey in the upper reaches of Lake Oahe is
needed to document the current position of sediment deposits. Analysis
is needed to determine where those deposits will move in the future and
how the Tribe can locate and build dependable intakes. This problem
affects at least two existing irrigation intakes (Cannonball and Fort
Yates) and the MRI intake. The future irrigation intake at Kenel is
also subject to an unknown level of risk. New operating procedures are
needed that raised the minimum operating water levels. A diking system
may be needed to contain upstream sediment.
The Corps of Engineers is the responsible Federal agency that
constructed and operated the Federal facilities causing the degradation
of the bed of the Missouri River, the aggradation of the upper end of
Lake Oahe, and the redistribution of sediments in the upper end of Lake
Oahe to the destruction of the Tribe's intakes in fall 2003.
Legislation is be needed to authorize the appropriation of funds to
reconstruct new intakes of the Tribe in a manner to insure their
dependability. Appropriate investigations will be needed of the
baseline sediment conditions and the probable future redistribution in
advance of permanent reconstruction. Mitigation measures and changes in
the Master Manual are needed, including diking and new minimum
operating water levels.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Morro Bay
During World War II the Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) designed and
constructed a new harbor entrance at Morro Bay with two rock
breakwaters. Since the initial construction, over 60 years ago, the
Federal Government has maintained the harbor entrance, breakwaters and
navigational channels. In fiscal year 1995 the ACOE completed the Morro
Bay Harbor entrance improvement project to improve safety for
commercial fishing and coastal navigation.
The City of Morro Bay contributed almost $1,000,000 in local cost
share to the ACOE Entrance Improvement Project. Since 1995 the Federal
Government has funded maintenance dredging of Morro Bay Harbor every
year. The most cost-effective manner to conduct this dredging has been
using the ACOE dredge Yaquina every year in the Entrance Area due to
rapid shoaling in that area, and scheduling a larger project to
maintain the Morro and Navy Navigation channels every 3 to 4 years as
those channels accumulate sediment at a slower rate.
Below is a summary of dredging history for the federally designated
navigation channels in Morro Bay.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Area Dredged Cubic Yardage
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997 Outer Entrance 63,009.00
1998 Entrance, Main, Navy, Morro & Sand Trap 579,692.00
1998 Entrance, Main 115,388.00
1999 Entrance & Transitional Channel 134,234.00
2000 Entrance & Transitional Channel 236,883.00
2001 Entrance & Transitional Channel 180,467.00
2002 Entrance, Navy, Morro & Sand Trap 868,483.10
2003 Entrance & Transitional Channel 170,817.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morro Bay Harbor is the only all-weather harbor of refuge between
Santa Barbara and Monterey on the West Coast. Our Harbor directly
supports almost 250 home-ported fishing vessels and marine dependent
businesses. We provide critical maritime facilities for both
recreational and commercial interests. Businesses that depend on the
harbor generate $50,000,000 annually and employ over 700 people. The
United States Coast Guard (USCG) maintains a 32 person National
Security Base and Search and Rescue Station at Morro Bay Harbor to
provide the Coast Guard services for the entire Central California
Coast, including port safety coverage for the Diablo Canyon Nuclear
Power Plant and Vandenberg Air Force Base.
In 2000 the California legislature designated Morro Bay and several
other small ports along the California coast as ``Harbors of Safe
Refuge''. This legislation recognizes the critical role many small
harbors play in affording a safety zone for commercial and recreational
vessels transiting the California coast.
Exposure to the open ocean and strong winter currents carrying
sediment into the harbor create the need for a routine maintenance
schedule to insure that the harbor entrance and federally designated
navigation channels remain safe and navigable. The Morro Bay National
Estuary Program recognizes the need to maintain the navigational
channels in the harbor both for the viability of the commercial fishing
industry and to maintain adequate tidal exchange for the health of the
Morro Bay Estuary. It is imperative that the federally constructed
navigation channels, entrance area and protective jetties be maintained
to insure safe commerce and navigation on a 300-mile stretch of the
California Coast and to maintain a safe port for the Coast Guard to
operate from. Without continued Federal maintenance, all of the past
local and Federal investment will be lost.
Last year the budget included $1.4 million for dredging of the
navigational channels including the Entrance Channel, the Navy Channel
and the Morro Channel. This year the proposed budget eliminates all
funding for the Morro Bay navigation channel maintenance dredging.
The Army Corps of Engineers has the capability to execute $4.11
million in maintenance dredging operations for fiscal year 2005. The
entrance area has shoaled significantly since the last dredge cycle and
will require dredging next year to sustain safe navigation in our area.
We respectfully request that your distinguished subcommittee include
$4.11 million in dredging funds for Morro Bay Harbor to keep our harbor
open and safe in all conditions and to provide a safe base of
operations for the United States Coast Guard.
In addition to being homeport to over 250 commercial fishing
vessels, Morro Bay Harbor is part of the federally designated National
Estuary Program. The Morro Bay Estuary was the subject of an ACOE
reconnaissance study (funded by Congress in 1998) of potential projects
to restore sensitive habitat through improving tidal circulation and
decreasing sedimentation. The County of San Luis Obispo and the Bay
Foundation are acting as local sponsors for the Feasibility Phase. We
support the funding of $250,000 to continue work on the feasibility
study for the Morro Bay Habitat Restoration project in fiscal year
2005.
Thank you for your actions and support, and for the opportunity to
present these requests to your subcommittee on behalf of the citizens
of the City of Morro Bay.
______
Prepared Statement of the Port of Sacramento, California
The Port of Sacramento requests a fiscal year 2005 appropriation of
$8.5 million for the continued deepening of the Sacramento River Deep
Water Ship Channel.
After a hiatus in construction, the Port has been actively working
with the San Francisco District Corps of Engineers to reinvigorate this
important project. The fiscal year 2005 appropriation will complete a
Limited Re-Evaluation Report and provide funding to continue the
deepening of the Ship Channel from 30 to 35. This 5 additional feet
will greatly expand the accessability of the Port of Sacramento to the
world fleet which will allow better service to existing customers and
will improve the of diversify cargoes and customers, both which
increase the revenues at the Port.
This project is vital to the economic future of the Port of
Sacramento, which has provided international waterborne cargo services
in the Greater Sacramento region for 40 years. In the future,
California will also ``re-discover'' that its ports, and particularly
its inland Ports, are an environmentally friendly alternative to the
burgeoning highway traffic. ``Short sea shipping'' is concept in
waterborne transportation that is increasing in application in Europe
as a means to reduce highway congestion.
We would greatly appreciate your support of our appropriation
request.
______
Prepared Statement of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission
army corps of engineers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Middle Potomac River Study.............................. $200,000
Patuxent River Watershed Study.......................... 200,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
washington suburban sanitary commission
The Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (Commission or WSSC),
established in 1918, is a public, bi-county agency providing water and
wastewater services to Montgomery and Prince George's Counties in the
Washington Capital region. WSSC is governed by six Commissioners with
equal representation from each county and has developed its systems to
the point where it is a national leader in the water and sewerage
industry. The Commission is the among the ten largest water and
wastewater utilities in the country, serving approximately 1.6 million
people in a 1,000 square mile service area. In addition, the Commission
provides services to 26 key Federal installations and facilities in the
Washington area, including such important military facilities as
Andrews Air Force Base; the National Imagery and Mapping Agency; the
National Naval Medical Center; the Naval Surface Warfare Center; the
U.S. Army Research Center. Numerous other State and local security-
related installations and offices also receive service from the
Commission.
Water treatment and distribution facilities operated by the
Commission include three water supply reservoirs; two water filtration
plants; 14 water pumping stations; 5,100 miles of water mains; and 54
treated-water storage facilities. Water production at Commission
facilities is 166 million gallons per day. In terms of wastewater
facilities, the Commission operates six wastewater treatment plants; 41
wastewater pumping stations; and approximately 4,900 miles of sewer
mains.
middle potomac river study
The Commission is committed to ensuring that the residents of the
Montgomery and Prince George's Counties continue to have a clean, safe
supply of drinking water. Consistent with that commitment is the need
to improve that quality of the environment in the regions river basins
and increase the ability to store water to meet increasing demand,
particularly in times of drought.
The Corps of Engineers' Baltimore District (District) has recently
completed a reconnaissance study of the water resources needs of the
Middle Potomac River Watershed. The District found that there is a
Federal interest in pursuing further study opportunities within the
Middle Potomac study area and recommended that the study continue into
the feasibility phase to begin the planning process for the restoration
of the Middle Potomac Watershed. One of the objectives identified for
the feasibility phase was further study of the status of the region's
water resources as they relate to water supply needs. One of the
specific recommendations for further study is an effort to identify
stresses on the Middle Potomac Watershed ecosystem at varying levels of
water flows and the development of sustainable watershed management
plans and planning tools. The Corps specifically mentioned WSSC as a
potential non-Federal sponsor for this study. The Commission believes
that such an effort, including an analysis of opportunities for
additional water supply storage in the basin, is critical to the long-
term health of the region. The Corps has estimated that the total cost
of this feasibility study is $3 million and the Commission supports an
initial request of $200,000 in fiscal year 2005 to begin conducting
this study.
patuxent river watershed study
The Commission owns and operates the Triadelphia and Rocky Gorge
Reservoirs on the Patuxent River. Together these reservoirs hold 14
billion gallons of drinking water serving 700,000 people in Montgomery,
Howard, and Prince Georges Counties in Maryland. Maintaining and
improving the quality of the water in these reservoirs is a major
objective of the Commission. The current buffer zones around these two
reservoirs are relatively narrow. Expanding and restoring the habitat
of these buffer zones would help ensure the long-term quality of the
water in the reservoirs and also provide environmental benefits to the
entire Patuxent River Basin. Improving the quality of the water in the
Patuxent River would also prove beneficial to efforts to restore the
health of the Chesapeake Bay.
In July of 1995, the Corps of Engineers completed the ``Patuxent
River Water Resources Reconnaissance Study'', which was authorized by
House Committee on Public Works and Transportation Resolution dated
September 28, 1994. The purpose of the study was to develop a watershed
plan for managing the water and related land resources of the Patuxent
River watershed. The watershed plan that was developed addresses multi-
purpose environmental solutions for the improvement of riparian,
wetland, and aquatic habitat, improvements to water quality, recreation
development and flood damage reduction measures. Among the actions
recommended for implementation were riparian buffer projects and
streambank protection and restoration projects. Such activities would
reduce sedimentation and the runoff of pollutants.
The Commission believes that more detailed study of the areas
around the Triadelphia and Rocky Gorge Reservoirs would be consistent
with the watershed plan developed as part of the Patuxent River Water
Resources Reconnaissance Study and could lead to environmental
restoration activities that would prove beneficial to the entire
region, including Chesapeake Bay. Therefore, the Commission supports a
request of $200,000 to conduct a feasibility study.
______
Prepared Statement of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of
Greater Chicago
On behalf of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater
Chicago (District), I want to thank the subcommittee for this
opportunity to present our priorities for fiscal year 2005 and, at the
same time, express our appreciation for your support of the District's
projects in the years past. The District is the local sponsor for three
Corps of Engineers priority projects of the Chicagoland Underflow Plan:
the O'Hare, McCook and Thornton Reservoirs. We are requesting the
subcommittee's full support for McCook and Thornton Reservoirs, as the
O'Hare Reservoir has been completed. Specifically, we request the
subcommittee to include a total of $43,300,000 in construction funding
for the McCook and Thornton Reservoir projects in the bill. The
following text outlines these projects and the need for the requested
funding.
the chicagoland underflow plan
The Chicagoland Underflow Plan (CUP) consists of three reservoirs:
the O'Hare, McCook and Thornton Reservoirs. These reservoirs are a part
of the Tunnel and Reservoir Plan (TARP). The O'Hare Reservoir Project
was fully authorized for construction in the Water Resources
Development Act of 1986 (Public Law 99-662) and completed by the Corps
in fiscal year 1999. This reservoir is connected to the existing O'Hare
segment of the TARP. Adopted in 1972, TARP was the result of a multi-
agency effort, which included officials of the State of Illinois,
County of Cook, City of Chicago, and the District.
TARP was designed to address the overwhelming water pollution and
flooding problems of the Chicagoland combined sewer areas. These
problems stem from the fact that the capacity of the area's waterways
has been overburdened over the years and has become woefully inadequate
in both hydraulic and assimilative capacities. These waterways are no
longer able to carry away the combined sewer overflow (CSO) discharges
nor are they able to assimilate the pollution associated with these
discharges. Severe basement flooding and polluted waterways are the
inevitable result. More critically, larger storms generate back flows
to Lake Michigan and pollute water supply for the six-county area. We
point with pride to the fact that TARP was found to be the most cost-
effective and socially and environmentally acceptable way for reducing
these flooding and water pollution problems. Experience to date has
reinforced such findings with respect to economics and efficiency.
The TARP plan calls for the construction of the new ``underground
rivers'' beneath the area's waterways. The ``underground rivers'' are
tunnels up to 35 feet in diameter and 350 feet below the surface. To
provide an outlet for these tunnels, reservoirs will be constructed at
the end of the tunnel systems. Approximately 101.5 miles of tunnels,
constructed at a total cost of $2.2 billion, are operational. The final
7.9 miles of tunnels, costing $168 million, are under construction. The
tunnels capture the majority of the pollution load by capturing all of
the small storms and the first flush of the large storms. The completed
O'Hare CUP Reservoir provides 350 million gallons of storage. This
Reservoir has a service area of 11.2 square miles and provides flood
relief to 21,535 homes in Arlington Heights, Des Plaines and Mount
Prospect. In its first 6 years of operation, O'Hare CUP Reservoir has
taken water in 18 storm events, and yielded $62.8 million in flood
damage reduction benefits, which exceeds its $44.5 million construction
costs. The Thornton and McCook Reservoirs are currently under
construction, but until they are completed significant areas will
remain unprotected. Without these outlets, the local drainage has
nowhere to go when large storms hit the area.
Since its inception, TARP has not only abated flooding and
pollution in the Chicagoland area, but has helped to preserve the
integrity of Lake Michigan. In the years prior to TARP, a major storm
in the area would cause local sewers and interceptors to surcharge
resulting in CSO spills into the Chicagoland waterways and during major
storms into Lake Michigan, the source of drinking water for the region.
Since these waterways have a limited capacity, major storms have caused
them to reach dangerously high levels resulting in massive sewer
backups into basements and causing multi-million dollar damage to
property.
Since implementation of TARP, 741 billion gallons of CSOs have been
captured by TARP, that otherwise would have reached waterways. Area
waterways are once again abundant with many species of aquatic life and
the riverfront has been reclaimed as a natural resource for recreation
and development. Closure of Lake Michigan beaches due to pollution has
become a rarity. The elimination of CSOs will reduce the quantity of
discretionary dilution water needed to keep the area waterways fresh.
This water can be used instead for increasing the drinking water
allocation for communities in Cook, Lake, Will and DuPage counties that
are now on a waiting list to receive such water. Specifically, since
1977, these counties received an additional 162 million gallons of Lake
Michigan water per day, partially as a result of the reduction in the
District's discretionary diversion since 1980. Additional allotments of
Lake Michigan water will be made to these communities, as more water
becomes available from reduced discretionary diversion.
With new allocations of lake water, more than 20 communities that
previously did not get lake water are in the process of building, or
have already built, water mains to accommodate their new source of
drinking water. The new source of drinking water will be a substitute
for the poorer quality well water previously used by these communities.
Partly due to TARP, it is estimated by IDOT that between 1981 and 2020,
283 million gallons per day of Lake Michigan water would be added to
domestic consumption. This translates into approximately 2 million
additional people that would be able to enjoy Lake Michigan water. This
new source of water supply will not only benefit its immediate
receivers but will also result in an economic stimulus to the entire
Chicagoland area by providing a reliable source of good quality water
supply.
the mccook and thornton reservoirs
The McCook and Thornton Reservoirs of the Chicagoland Underflow
Plan (CUP) were fully authorized for construction in the Water
Resources Development Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-676). These CUP
reservoirs, as previously discussed, are a part of TARP, a flood
protection plan that is designed to reduce basement flooding due to
combined sewer back-ups and inadequate hydraulic capacity of the urban
waterways.
These reservoirs will provide a storage capacity of 18 billion
gallons and will provide annual benefits of $115 million. The total
potential annual benefits of these projects are approximately twice as
much as their total annual cost. The District, as the local sponsor,
has acquired the land necessary for these projects, and will meet its
cost sharing obligations under Public Law 99-662.
These projects are a very sound investment with a high rate of
return. They will enhance the quality of life, safety and the peace of
mind of the residents of this region. The State of Illinois has
endorsed these projects and has urged their implementation. In
professional circles, these projects are hailed for their
farsightedness, innovation, and benefits.
Based on two successive Presidentially-declared flood disasters in
our area in 1986 and again in 1987, and dramatic flooding in the last
several years, we believe the probability of this type of flood
emergency occurring before implementation of the critical flood
prevention measure is quite high. As the public agency for the greater
Chicagoland area responsible for water pollution control, and as our
past sponsorship for flood control projects, we have an obligation to
protect the health and safety of our citizens. We are asking your
support in helping us achieve this necessary and important goal of
construction completion.
We appreciate that the subcommittee has included critical levels of
funds for these important projects. We were delighted to see the
$19,500,000 in construction funds for the McCook and Thornton
Reservoirs included in the Fiscal Year 2004 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act. In addition, an additional $1,000,000
was included in the Fiscal Year 2004 Consolidated Appropriations bill.
However, it is important that we receive a total of $43,300,000 in
construction funds in fiscal year 2005 to maintain the schedule of
these critical projects. This funding is critical to continue the
construction of the McCook Reservoir on schedule, in particular, to
complete construction of the grout curtain, distribution tunnels, and
pumps and motors and to accelerate the design of the Thornton
Reservoir. The community has waited long enough for protection and we
need these funds now to move the project in construction. We
respectfully request your consideration of our request.
summary
Our most significant recent flooding occurred on February 20, 1997,
when almost 4 inches of rain fell on the greater Chicagoland area. Due
to the frozen ground, almost all of the rainfall entered our combined
sewers, causing sewerage back-ups throughout the area. When the
existing TARP tunnels filled with approximately 1.2 billion gallons of
sewage and runoff, the only remaining outlets for the sewers were our
waterways. Between 9:00 p.m. and 3:00 a.m., the Chicago and Calumet
Rivers rose 6 feet. For the first time since 1981 we had to open the
locks at all three of the waterway control points; these include
Wilmette, downtown Chicago, and Calumet. Approximately 4.2 billion
gallons of combined sewage and stormwater had to be released directly
into Lake Michigan.
Given our large regional jurisdiction and the severity of flooding
in our area, the Corps was compelled to develop a plan that would
complete TARP and be large enough to accommodate the area we serve.
With a combined sewer area of 375 square miles, consisting of the city
of Chicago and 51 contiguous suburbs, there are 1,443,000 structures
within our jurisdiction, which are subject to flooding. The annual
damages sustained exceed $150 million. If TARP, including the CUP
Reservoirs were in place, these damages could be eliminated. We must
consider the safety and peace of mind of the 2 million people who are
affected as well as the disaster relief funds that will be saved when
these projects are in place. As the public agency in the greater
Chicagoland area responsible for water pollution control, and as the
regional sponsor for flood control, we have an obligation to protect
the health and safety of our citizens. We are asking your support in
helping us achieve this necessary and important goal. It is absolutely
critical that the Corps' work, which has been proceeding for a number
of years, now proceeds on schedule through construction.
Therefore, we urgently request that a total of $43,300,000 in
construction funds be made available in the Fiscal Year 2005 Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act to continue construction of the
McCook and Thornton Reservoir Projects.
Again, we thank the subcommittee for its support of this important
project over the years, and we thank you in advance for your
consideration of our request this year.
______
Prepared Statement of the Napa County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District
summary recommendations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding
Project request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Napa River Flood Control: Construction.................. $20,000,000
Napa Valley Watershed Management: Feasibility Study..... 200,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
napa river flood control project
Background
The project is located in the city and county of Napa, California.
The population in the city of Napa, approximately, 67,000 in 1994, is
expected to exceed 77,000 this year. Excluding public facilities, the
present value of damageable property within the project flood plain is
well over $500 million. The Napa River Basin, comprising 426 square
miles, ranging from tidal marshes to mountainous terrain, is subject to
severe winter storms and frequent flooding. In the lower reaches of the
river, flood conditions are aggravated by high tides and local runoff.
Floods in the Napa area have occurred in 1955, 1958, 1963, 1965, 1986
(flood of record), 1995, and 1997. In 1998, the river rose just above
flood stage on three occasions, but subsided before major property
damage occurred. In December of 2002, flooding occurred from the Napa
Creek at the transition to the Napa River, resulting in damage to
numerous residents and several businesses.
Since 1962, 27 major floods have struck the Valley region, exacting
a heavy toll in loss of life and property. The flood on 1986, for
example, killed three people and caused more than $100 million in
damage. Damages throughout Napa County totaled about $85 million from
the January and March 1995 floods. The floods resulted in 27 businesses
and 843 residences damaged countrywide. Almost all of the damages from
the 1986, 1995, and 1997 floods were within the project area. Congress
has authorized a flood control project since 1944, but due to expense,
lack of public consensus on the design and concern about environment
impacts, a project had never been realized. In mid-1995, Federal and
State resource agencies reviewed the plan and gave notice to the Corps
that this plan had significant regulatory hurdles to face.
Approved Plan--Project Overview
In an effort to identify a meaningful and successful plan, a new
approach emerged that looked at flood control from a broader, more
comprehensive perspective. Citizens for Napa River Flood Management was
formed, bringing together a diverse group of local engineers,
architects, aquatic ecologists, business and agricultural leasers,
environmentalists, government officials, homeowners and renters and
numerous community organizations.
Through a series of public meetings and intensive debate over every
aspect of Napa's flooding problems, the Citizens for Napa River Flood
Management crafted a flood management plan offering a range of benefits
for the entire Napa region. The Corps of Engineers served as a partner
and a resource for the group, helping to evaluate their approach to
flood management. The final plan produced by the Citizens for Napa
River Flood Management was successfully evaluated through the research,
experience and state-of-the-art simulation tools developed by the Corps
and numerous international experts in the field of hydrology and other
related disciplines. The success of this collaboration serves as a
model for the Nation.
Acknowledging the river's natural state, the project utilizes a set
of living river strategies that minimize the disruption and alteration
of the river habitat, and maximizes the opportunities for environmental
restoration and enhancement throughout the watershed.
The Corps has developed the revised plan, which provides 100-year
protection, with the assistance of the community and its consultants
into the Supplemental General Design Memorandum (SGDM) and its
accompanying draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact
Report (SEIS/EIR). Construction of the project began 3 years ago. The
coalition plan now memorialized in the Corps final documents includes
the following engineered components: lowering of old dikes, marsh plain
and flood plain terraces, oxbow dry bypass, Napa Creek flood plain
terrace, upstream and downstream dry culverts along Napa Creek, new
dikes, levees and flood walls, bank stabilization, pump stations and
detention facilities, and bridge replacements. The benefits of the plan
include reducing or elimination of loss of life, property damage,
cleanup costs, community disruption due to unemployment and lost
business revenue, and the need for flood insurance. In fact, the
project has created an economic renaissance in Napa with new
investment, schools and housing coming into a livable community on a
living river. As a key feature, the plan will improve water quality,
create urban wetlands and enhance wildlife habitats.
The plan will protect over 7,000 people and over 3,000 residential/
commercial units from the 100-year flood event on the Napa River and
its main tributary, the Napa Creek, and the project has a positive
benefit-to-cost ratio under the Corps calculation. One billion dollars
in damages will be saved over the useful life of the project. The Napa
County Flood Control District is meeting its local cost-sharing
responsibilities for the project. A countywide sales tax, along with a
number of other funding options, was approved 4 years ago by a two-
thirds majority of the county's voters for the local share. Napa is
California's highest repetitive loss community. This plan is
demonstrative of the disaster resistant community initiative, as well,
as the sustainable development initiatives of FEMA and EPA.
Project Synopsis
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding
The Fiscal Year 2004 Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Act included $10,000,000 to continue construction of the project. In
addition, the Fiscal Year 2004 Consolidated Appropriations bill
included $2,750,000 for the project. The funding was sought for
demolition of buildings and fixtures on 24 parcels that have been
acquired by the non-Federal sponsor, relocation of the Napa Valley Wine
Train rail line for an approximate 3-mile distance, as well as
relocation of the facilities serving this public utility, removal of
190,000 cubic yards of soil which was contaminated by petroleum
products, construction of marsh and flood plain terraces for an
approximate 1.5-mile distance. Included in this amount is the
reimbursement to the non-Federal sponsor for expenditures in excess of
45 percent of the total project costs to date. The local sponsor has
expended $110 million, as compared to Federal sponsor expenditures to
date of approximately $35 million.
Necessary Fiscal Year 2005 Funding
Funding for the Napa River Project during 2005 in the amount of
$20,000,000 is needed to continue construction of the project. These
funds will be used to accomplish the following tasks:
--Complete HTRW remediation along the east side of the river for
additional 2 miles involving removal of an additional 200,000
cubic yards of contaminated soil;
--Initiate and complete the Contract 1B excavation work in Kennedy
Park;
--Initiate Contract 2East excavation work on the east side of river
from Imola to the Bypass;
--Construct two railroad bridges, one over the bypass and one over
the Napa River and relocate approximately 3,100 feet of
railroad track replacement;
--Continue engineering and design on future contracts;
--Accomplish Construction Management on contract underway;
--Initiate reimbursement of local sponsor with funds not required for
the above.
Included in this amount is the reimbursement to the non-Federal
sponsor for expenditures in excess of 74 percent of the total project
costs to date. By the end of June, 2003 the non-Federal sponsor will
have expended $110 million. By the end of June, 2004 the non-Federal
sponsor will have spent $130,000,000.
napa valley watershed management
Background
The Napa Valley watershed faces many challenges and stresses to its
environmental health and flood management abilities. From a healthy
river point of view, the Napa River has been on a recovery path since
its low point in the 1960's, when the last of the native salmon were
taken from the system by severe water pollution and habitat
destruction. Steelhead trout have survived as a remnant population of
200 that is presently in need of higher quality and more extensive
spawning areas for recovery to a significant population. Beginning
populations of fall run Chinook salmon have taken up residence in the
watershed in those few areas available for spawning. While the chemical
and wastewater pollution of earlier years has been effectively dealt
with, excess sediment is still a critical stress on the salmon
population, as it is to the spawning and rearing areas of the river in
the estuarine zone upstream of San Pablo Bay, populated by delta smelt,
splittail, green sturgeon and striped bass.
The U.S. EPA and Region II Water Quality Control Board have
prioritized the River as an impaired water body because of the sediment
production. The excess sediment generated in the watershed suffocates
spawning areas, reduces the stream's flood-carrying ability, fills deep
pools, increases turbidity in the stream and estuary, carries with it
nutrients that bring significant algae blooms during the summer and
fall, and changes the morphological balance of the streams and river
toward more unstable conditions.
In order to address issues such as encroachment of the river and
loss of wetlands and to develop local tools for improving natural
resource management, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, San Francisco
District (Corps) and the Napa County Flood Control and Water
Conservation District (NCFCWCD) is currently developing a Napa Valley
Watershed Management Plan (WMP) which identifies problems and
opportunities for implementing environmentally and economically
beneficial restoration in the Napa Valley watershed providing ecosystem
benefits, such as flood reduction, erosion control, sedimentation
management, and pollution abatement. The plan, which the District is
requesting funds for, would include the identification, review,
refinement, and prioritization of restoration and flood protection
opportunities with an emphasis on restoration of the watershed's
ecosystem (e.g.: important plant communities, healthy fish and wildlife
populations, rare and endangered habitats and species and wildlife and
riparian habitats).
The goal is to complete the WMP by providing technical, planning,
and design assistance to the non-Federal interests for carrying out
watershed management, restoration and development on the Napa River and
its tributaries from Soscol Ridge, located approximately 5 miles south
of the city of Napa, to Mt. St. Helena, the northern-most reach of the
Napa River watershed, California. A management program incorporating
flood protection and environmental restoration would be developed as a
result of the watershed plan.
To address the above mentioned and other local, regional, and
national watershed concerns, the Napa County Board of Supervisors
appointed a Napa County Watershed Task Force (WTF) to identify
community based and supported solutions. The WTF submitted their
recommendation for further action to the Napa County Board of
Supervisors.
The Corps and the NCFCWCD developed the Napa Valley Watershed
Project Management Plan with input from the Napa County Planning
Department (NCPD), Napa County Up-Valley Cities, Napa County Watershed
Task Force (WTF), Napa County Resource Conservation District (RCD),
Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the San Francisco Estuary
Institute (SFEI), and other regional and local stakeholders.
In an effort to identify problems and opportunities for
implementing beneficial restoration in the Napa Valley Watershed, the
Napa County Flood Control District is requesting the Napa Valley
Watershed Management Study be continued by the Corps of Engineers. The
authority for this study is the Northern California Streams Study
Authority stemming from the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1962, Public Law
87-874. Specifically, the Napa County Flood Control District is working
closely with the Corps in the feasibility report to examine the
watershed management needs, including flood control, environmental
restoration, erosion control, storm water retention, storm water runoff
management, water conservation and supply, wetlands restoration,
sediment management and pollution abatement in the Napa Valley,
including the communities of Napa, Yountville, St. Helena, Calistoga
and the unincorporated areas of Napa County.
Project Synopsis
Fiscal Year 2004 Budget Funding
The fiscal year 2004 Energy and Water Development Appropriations
Act included $200,000 to continue the Napa Valley Watershed Management
Study. Funds are being used for data evaluation and outreach and to
create a data monitoring framework for the watershed. This framework,
known as the Watershed Information Center (WIC), will serve as a
coordinating body and data-monitoring framework for the watershed. The
WIC will serve as a library for existing biological and physical data
on the watershed. It can serve as a forum for the multiple agencies,
academic researcher and non-profit organizations engaged in monitoring
in the watershed.
Necessary Fiscal Year 2005 Funding
Funding for the Napa Valley Watershed Management Study during
fiscal year 2005 in the amount of $200,000 is needed to continue work
on the Napa Valley Watershed Resource Analysis & Report. The purpose of
this work is to provide a foundation assessment for resource allocation
that improves the habitat and water quality in the Napa River
watershed. This program was begun in fiscal year 2004. Prior year
activities have included aerial photography/mapping of the watershed.
This work has been successfully completed and is in use by Napa County,
its residents, resource groups and interested parties. It provides a
Geographical Information System (GIS) base for the management of
watershed information. Also previous watershed funding has developed an
internet based information system, the Watershed Information Center
(WIC). This web based communication allows the resources of watershed
studies to be available to all interested persons. The system has been
developed and is currently being put online for general use. These
first activities of the Napa Valley Watershed Management Study are
cornerstones of future watershed planning and enhancement.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of St. Helena, California
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
St. Helena NAPA River Restoration Project: (Section 206 $800,000
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program).................
York Creek Dam Removal and Restoration Project: (Section 800,000
206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program).............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
city of st. helena
The City of St. Helena is located in the center of the wine growing
Napa Valley, 65 miles north of San Francisco. The area was settled in
1834 as part of General Vallejo's land grant. The City of St. Helena
was incorporated as a City on March 24, 1876 and reincorporated on May
14, 1889.
The City from its inception has served as a rural agricultural
center. Over the years, with the growth and development of the wine
industry, the City has become an important business and banking center
for the wine industry. The City also receives many tourists as a result
of the wine industry. While, the main goal of the City is to maintain a
small-town atmosphere and to provide quality services to its citizens,
this is becoming increasingly difficult. Regulatory, administrative and
resource requirements placed on the City through the listing of
threatened and endangered species under the Endangered Species Act on
the Napa River, as well as significant Clean Water Act requirements
require the City with a small population base to face significant
financial costs.
The City of St. Helena is a General Law City and operates under the
Council-City Manager form of government. The City Council is the
governing body and has the power to make and enforce all laws and set
policy related to municipal affairs. The official population of the
City of St. Helena as of January 1, 2002 is 6,041. St. Helena is a full
service City and encompasses an area of 4 square miles. Because of its
size and its rural nature, St. Helena has serious infrastructure, as
well as, flood protection and environmental needs that far exceed its
financial capabilities.
The Napa River flows along the north boundary of the City of St.
Helena in northern Napa County. The overall Napa River Watershed
historically supported a dense riparian forest and significant wetland
habitat. Over the last 200 years, approximately 6,500 acres of valley
floor wetlands have been filled in and 45,700 acres of overall
watershed have been converted to urban and agricultural uses. This
degradation of natural habitats has had a significant effect on water
quality, vegetation and wildlife, and aquatic resources within the Napa
River Watershed.
Surface water quality of the Napa River is dependent upon the time
of year, runoff from York and Sulphur Creeks, and urban area
discharges. During the winter months when streamflow is high,
pollutants are diluted; however, sedimentation and turbidity is high as
well. During the summer months when streamflow is low, pollutants are
concentrated and oxygen levels are low, thereby decreasing water
quality. Agricultural runoff adds pesticides, fertilizer residue, and
sometimes sediment. Discharges from urban areas can include
contaminated stormwater runoff and treated city wastewater. The Napa
River has been placed on the Clean Water Act 303(d) List and TMDL
Priority Schedule due to unacceptable levels of bacteria,
sedimentation, and nutrients. It is against this backdrop that the City
of St. Helena faces its biggest challenges.
st. helena napa river restoration project
The Napa River and its riparian corridor are considered Critical
Habitat for Steelhead and Salmon Recovery. The Steelhead is one of 6
federally listed threatened and endangered species within the Napa
River and its adjoining corridor which requires attention. Current
conditions are such that natural habitats and geomorphic processes of
the Napa River are highly confined with sediment transport and
geomorphic work occurring in a limited area of the streambed and
channel banks. Napa River's habitat for the steelhead is limited in its
ability to provide prime spawning habitat. Limitations include: (1)
urbanization removing significant amounts of shading and cover
vegetation within and adjacent to the river; and (2) a detrimental lack
of pool habitat. Encroachment and channelization of Napa River have
degraded riparian habitat for rearing, resident, and migratory fish and
wildlife. The lack of riparian cover, increasing water temperature and
sedimentation in the river, has resulted in poor water quality. These
changes have reduced the project area's ability to support the re-
establishment of listed species.
In an effort to address these Federal environmental issues, the St.
Helena Napa River Restoration Project, a Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration Project, was identified in the Napa Valley Watershed
Management Feasibility Study in April of 2001 as a specific opportunity
for restoration. The project would restore approximately 3 miles (20
acres) of riparian habitat and improve the migratory capacity of
federally listed threatened and endangered species, providing greater
access to rearing, resident and migratory habitats in the 80-square-
mile watershed above the project area.
The project will interface with and complement the City of St.
Helena's multiple objective flood project, the St. Helena Flood
Protection and Flood Corridor Restoration Project, which will provide
flood damage reduction through restoration and re-establishment of the
natural floodplain along the project reach, setting back levees and the
re-creation and restoration of a natural floodway providing high value
riparian forest.
This Section 206 project is necessary to ensure and improve the
viability of Federal and State listed species by providing rearing,
resident and migratory habitat in the project's 3-mile stream corridor.
The project will also work to improve area habitat to benefit the
migration of steelhead to high value fisheries habitat in upper
watershed channel reaches. In an effort to build on recent geomorphic
and riparian studies on the Napa River, the Corps will use these
efforts from Swanson Hydrology and Geomorphology and Stillwater Science
to secure baseline information for this project.
The City of St. Helena respectfully requests the committee's
support for $800,000 for completing the Detailed Project Report and
initiating plans and specifications for the St. Helena Napa River
Restoration Project under the Corps' Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem
Restoration Program.
york creek dam removal and restoration project
York Creek originates from the Coast Range on the western side of
the Napa Valley Watershed at an elevation of approximately 1,800 feet
and flows through a narrow canyon before joining the Napa River
northeast of St. Helena. York Creek Dam on York Creek has been
identified as a significant obstacle to passage for federally listed
Steelhead in the Central California Coast. In fact, it has been
determined that York Creek Dam is a complete barrier to upstream fish
migration. In addition, since the City of St. Helena has owned York
Creek Dam, there have been a number of silt discharges from the dam
into York Creek that have caused fish kills.
Under the Corps of Engineers' Section 206 Authority, a study is
underway to remove the dam structure and to restore the creek in an
effort to improve fish passage and ecological stream function for this
Napa River tributary. Alternatives to be investigated and pursued
include complete removal of York Creek Dam, appurtenances and
accumulated sediment, re-grading and restoring the creek through the
reservoir area. Rather than merely removing the dam and accumulated
sediments, alternatives under consideration would use a portion of the
material to re-grade the reservoir area to simulate the configuration
of the undisturbed creek channel upstream. Material could also be used
to fill in and bury the spillway and to fill in the scour hole
immediately downstream of the spillway. Use of material on site will
greatly reduce hauling and disposal costs, as well as recreating a more
natural creek channel through the project area.
The revegetation plan for the site following removal of the earthen
dam will restore a self-sustaining native plant community that is
sufficiently established to exclude nonnative invasive plants.
Revegetation will replace vegetation that is removed due to
construction and stabilize sediments in the stream channel riparian
corridor and upper bank slopes. The species composition of the
revegetated site will be designed to match that of (relatively)
undisturbed sites both above and below the project site. In terms of
expected outcomes for the project, the removal of York Creek Dam will
open an additional 2 miles of steelhead habitat upstream of the dam,
and the channel restoration will reestablish natural channel geomorphic
processes and restore riparian vegetation.
The City of St. Helena respectfully requests the committee's
support for $800,000 in appropriations under the Corps of Engineers'
Section 206 Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Program, so that the efforts
to allow the continuation of the Detailed Project Report can stay on
schedule for the York Creek Dam Removal and Restoration Project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Calaveras County Water District
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Project Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALAVERAS COUNTY WATERSHEDS STUDY....................... $1,500,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
calaveras county water district
Calaveras County (County) is located in the central Sierra Nevada
foothills about 25 miles east of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
(Delta). Ground elevations within the County increase from 200 feet
above mean sea level near the northwest part of the County to 8,170
feet near Alpine County. It is a predominately rural county with a
relatively sparse but rapidly developing population and limited
agricultural and industrial development. Calaveras County is located
within the watersheds of the Mokelumne, Calaveras, and Stanislaus
Rivers. All three rivers flow west, through San Joaquin County into the
Delta. Most of the County is underlain by the igneous and metamorphic
rocks of the Sierra Nevada. Alluvial deposits of the Central Valley,
which overlie the westward plunging Sierra Nevada, are present along an
80 square-mile area located along the western edge of the county and
are part of the Eastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Basin (ESJCGB).
This on-going Calaveras County Watersheds Study under the authority of
the Corps of Engineers' Sacramento and San Joaquin Comprehensive Basin
Study is focused on the western part of Calaveras County.
In the fall of 1946, the Calaveras County Water District (CCWD) was
organized under the laws of the State of California as a public agency
for the purpose of developing and administering the water resources in
Calaveras County. Therefore, CCWD is governed by the California
Constitution and the California Government and Water Codes. CCWD is not
a part of, or under the control of, the County of Calaveras. CCWD was
formed to preserve and develop water resources and to provide water and
wastewater service to the citizens of Calaveras County.
Under State law, CCWD, through its Board of Directors, has general
powers over the use of water within its boundaries. These powers
include, but are not limited to: the right of eminent domain, authority
to acquire, control, distribute, store, spread, sink, treat, purify,
reclaim, process and salvage any water for beneficial use, to provide
sewer service, to sell treated or untreated water, to acquire or
construct hydroelectric facilities and sell the power and energy
produced to public agencies or public utilities engaged in the
distribution of power, to contract with the United States, other
political subdivisions, public utilities, or other persons, and subject
to the California State Constitution, levy taxes and improvements.
calaveras county watersheds study--under the authority of the
sacramento and san joaquin comprehensive basin study
Project Need
The Calaveras County Watersheds Study CCWD is being pursued through
the Corps of Engineers' program under the authority of the Sacramento
and San Joaquin Comprehensive Basin Study and includes a review of
project needs and opportunities within the Mokelumne River, Calaveras
River and Stanislaus River Watersheds.
CCWD is responsible for developing and administering the water
resources of Calaveras County. Historically, a significant portion of
the water needs of Calaveras County have been met mostly with surface
water from the Mokelumne, Calaveras or Stanislaus Rivers. One of the
overriding themes of the watershed study is to identify and maximize
the use of District surface water resources on the Mokelumne, Calaveras
and Stanislaus Rivers in conjunction with the groundwater supply to
improve supply reliability.
Historically, groundwater has been used only to meet demands of
scattered single family homes. This study area, which is part of the
Eastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Basin (ESJCGB), has been
identified by the State of California as being in a state of overdraft.
The California Department of Water Resources water level data for wells
near the Calaveras-San Joaquin County line, have recorded water level
declines ranging from 0.6 to 1.5 feet per year over the last 40 years.
Without programs to mitigate the groundwater overdraft, groundwater
levels will continue to decline in the groundwater basin.
In an effort to gain better understanding of the condition of the
water sources, and issues and opportunities including flooding and the
use of return flows, water supply and conjunctive use, as well as, the
surrounding environment, the comprehensive watershed approach is being
pursued.
While this is a watershed study, the approach is to focus in on the
CCWD's stated priority areas to develop project resolutions. The first
three critical project areas to be studied include the following:
Cosgrove Creek, Wallace Lake Estates and the Burson area.
Cosgrove Creek
Cosgrove Creek is an intermittent stream within the Calaveras River
watershed. The creek enters the lower Calaveras River downstream from
the spillway of New Hogan Lake. During average precipitation years,
stream flow is present from late fall through early to mid-summer.
Cosgrove is approximately 9.8 miles long and has a drainage area of
21 square miles. The upper two-thirds of the Cosgrove Creek watershed
is used for grazing and the lower third has been subject to urban
development. A portion of this lower reach, which passes through the
adjacent communities of Valley Springs, La Contenta and Rancho
Calaveras, has experienced many incidents of flooding and resulting
damage to residential properties.
The objective of this effort is to produce a feasibility study on
project alternatives for diverting Cosgrove Creek during peak flow
periods to provide for flood protection while putting the diverted
water to beneficial use. The solution will be a unique multiple purpose
project in that it would both divert flood flows and put the yield to
beneficial use for higher community needs such as creating wetlands and
environmental restoration, and developing complementary recreational
uses, such as ball fields and hiking or equestrian trails.
Wallace Lake Estates
Wallace Lake is located near the western edge of Calaveras County,
just north of Highway 26. The lake is part of the Wallace Lake Estates
subdivision.
Wallace Lake is also situated between East Bay Municipal Utility
District's (EBMUD's) Camanche Reservoir and Mokelumne aqueduct.
Qualitative observations have noted that, after filling, lake volume
appears to diminish far more rapidly than would be expected. The
Wallace Lake Community Services District would like to maintain the
lake at full capacity all year. It is reported that pumping well water
into the lake does not maintain desired levels. This has led to
speculation regarding the possibility that, if the lake is percolating
into the local groundwater table, this could be an attribute that could
intentionally be put to use to facilitate groundwater recharge and
development of a conjunctive use project.
The primary focus of this study is to assess both the local
hydrogeological conditions with respect to using the lake for
groundwater recharge and the means of transporting Mokelumne River
water to the lake.
The objective of this investigation is to produce an assessment and
feasibility study as a basis for developing project alternatives for
bringing Mokelumne water to Wallace Lake and the viability of utilizing
the lake for the purpose of demonstrating a groundwater infiltration
gallery, as well as environmental restoration.
Burson Area
Most of the area within Calaveras County north of Highway 12 and
south of the Mokelumne River, including the Burson area, is currently
wholly dependent upon groundwater and has experienced critical water
shortages for the last 20 years. Issues include low volume or no water
at all in some wells and degradation of water quality involving taste,
smell and chemical contamination. The problems have continued to
worsen.
One possible alternative project solution is conjunctive use of
Mokelumne River water to recharge the groundwater basin with high
quality surface water. (It appears unlikely that use of Wallace Lake
for recharge purposes will assist this particular area of need.)
A second alternative is to investigate the possible presence of and
potential use for high yielding zones, including an ancient underground
river within the defined aquifer area, that could be tapped without
detrimentally impacting existing users. These project alternatives
would include an environmental restoration component. The objective of
this investigation is to produce an assessment and feasibility study as
a basis for developing a drinking water system for the Burson area of
Calaveras County.
CCWD is working closely with the Sacramento Corps District in the
development of a Feasibility Cost Sharing Agreement in order for the
Calaveras County Watersheds Study to advance and for these projects to
proceed. In an effort for the feasibility study to move towards project
formulation, CCWD is seeking $1.5 million for the Calaveras County
Watersheds Study, as a separately identified effort under the authority
of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Comprehensive Basin Study, in the
Fiscal Year 2005 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill.
______
Prepared Statement of Cameron County, Texas
We express full support of the inclusion in the fiscal year 2005
budget for the full capability of the USACE for $831,000.
history and background
On September 15, 2001, a tugboat and several barges struck the
Queen Isabella Causeway on the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway at the mouth
of the Brownsville Ship Channel east of Port Isabel. The accident took
the lives of eight people.
A January 1997 Reconnaissance Report of the Gulf Intracoastal
Waterway-Corpus Christi Bay to Port Isabel, Texas (Section 216), was
conducted by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The study was
initiated to determine the Federal interest in rerouting the GIWW. The
information available at the time indicated a less than favorable
benefit to cost ratio for the proposed realignment. Since the September
15 incident, the Corps, Cameron County officials, and a number of local
entities and residents of the County have reopened discussion of the
rerouting of the GIWW. The Corps of Engineers agrees that new facts
regarding the safety of the current alignment warrants a revisiting of
the issue to determine the viability of rerouting the channel in a
direct line from the point where the waterway crosses underneath the
causeway to the point where it reaches the Brazos Santiago Pass and the
Brownsville Ship Channel. The route in question is the exact one
traveled by the tugboat and barges that struck the bridge on September
15, killing eight people. The tugboat captain failed to negotiate the
sharp turn after it passed through the Long Island Swing Bridge. This
particular turn is one of the most dangerous on the entire waterway.
project description
The reconnaissance study would allow the Corps to reopen the
examination of the rerouting of the GIWW on the basis of safety. The
measure would seek to eliminate safety hazards to Port Isabel and Long
Island residents created by barges that move large quantities of fuel
and other potentially dangerous explosive chemicals through the
existing route under the Queen Isabella Causeway. The overall goal of
the study would be to enhance safety and transportation efficiency on
this busy Texas waterway by removing the treacherous turn tug and barge
operators are forced to make as they navigate the passage through the
Long Island Swing Bridge. In addition to the hazardous curve, the
winding and congested course taken by the waterway through the City of
Port Isabel adds needless distance and time to the transportation of
goods to and from Cameron County ports. These costs are borne not only
by commercial operators using the waterway, but also by consumers and
businesses all across Texas and the Nation. The rerouting would also
seek to correct the adverse impact of waterway traffic on Cameron
County residents. Apart from the obvious potential for damage to the
Queen Isabella Causeway, adverse impacts are created by waterway
traffic in the form of traffic delays associated with the Long Island
Swing Bridge and the transportation of hazardous materials within
several hundred feet of densely populated areas in Port Isabel and Long
Island. Currently, a 1950's era swing bridge that floats in the
waterway channel connects Long Island and the City of Port Isabel. As
waterborne traffic approaches the bridge, cables are used to swing it
from the center of the channel and then swing it back into place. This
costly and time-consuming process, which frequently backs up traffic
into the downtown business district of Port Isabel, is estimated to
drain hundreds of dollars a year from the economy of this economically
distressed area. More serious problems are created when the heavily
used cables or winch motors on the swing bridge fail, leaving the
bridge stuck in an open or closed position. Equipment failures often
cause delays for several days and leave Long Island residents cut-off
from vehicle access or the ports of Port Isabel and Brownsville cut-off
from in-bound and out-bound barge traffic. During these times, supplies
of vital commodities are halted all across the Rio Grande Valley as
stocks dwindle and produce and finished goods begin to pile up.
impact of the gulf intracoastal waterway
The Gulf Intracoastal Waterway is an integral part of the inland
transportation system of the United States. Stretching across more than
1,300 coastal miles of the Gulf of Mexico, this man-made, shallow-draft
canal moves a large variety and great number of vessels and cargoes.
The 426 miles of the waterway running through Texas makes it possible
to supply both domestic and foreign markets with chemicals, petroleum
and other essential goods. Barge traffic is essential to many of the
port economies from Texas to Great Lakes ports, indeed, throughout the
entire GIWW. Some ports feel their future strategic plans are closely
linked to the efficient operation of the GIWW. This is true for ports
that rely almost entirely on barge traffic as well as ports that
function primarily as recreational facilities. Most of the cargo moved
along Texas waterways is petroleum and petroleum products. The GIWW is
well suited for the movement of such cargo, and, therefore, has allowed
many of the smaller, shallow-draft facilities to engage in both
interstate and international trade. Commercial fishing access via the
GIWW has had a significant impact on these port economies as well.
conclusion
A 1995 Lyndon Baines Johnson School of Public Affairs report
entitled ``The Texas Seaport and Inland Waterway System'' warned of
concern with the safe operation of barges on the GIWW citing, ``a
serious accident perhaps involving a collision between two barges
carrying hazardous materials could force closure of the waterway''. No
one could foresee the terrible accident that occurred on September 15.
The lives of eight people came to an end and the lives of their loved
ones was irrevocably changed forever. This important waterway must be
improved to prevent another tragedy. The $831,000 that must be added to
the fiscal year 2005 appropriations bill will allow the Corps of
Engineers to continue to study a preferred plan to remedy this
dangerous situation. The government has already invested $400,000 to
move this project forward. Cameron County, the users of the GIWW, and
the residents of the area respectfully requests the addition of this
much-needed appropriation.
______
Prepared Statement of the Brazos River Harbor Navigation District
We express full support of the inclusion in the fiscal year 2005
budget for the full capability of the USACE of $700,000.
President's budget included $300,000.
Additional funds needed for fiscal year 2005 $400,000.
history and background
Port Freeport is an autonomous governmental entity authorized by an
act of the Texas Legislature in 1925. It is a deep-draft port, located
on Texas' central Gulf Coast, approximately 60 miles southwest of
Houston, and is an important Brazos River Navigation District
component. The port elevation is 3 to 12 feet above sea level. Port
Freeport is governed by a board of six commissioners elected by the
voters of the Navigation District of Brazoria County, which currently
encompasses 85 percent of the county. Port Freeport land and operations
currently include 186 acres of developed land and 7,723 acres of
undeveloped land, 5 operating berths, a 45-inch deep Freeport Harbor
Channel and a 70-foot deep sink hole. Future expansion includes
building a 1,300-acre multi-modal facility, cruise terminal and
container terminal. Port Freeport is conveniently accessible by rail,
waterway and highway routes. There is direct access to the Gulf
Intracoastal Waterway, Brazos River Diversion Channel, and, State
Highways 36 and 288. Located just 3 miles from deep water, Port
Freeport is one of the most accessible ports on the Gulf Coast.
project description
The fiscal year 2002 Energy and Water appropriations signed into
law included a $100,000 appropriation to allow the United States Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) to conduct a reconnaissance study to
determine the Federal interest in an improvement project for Freeport
Harbor, Texas. The USACE, in cooperation with the Brazos River Harbor
Navigation District as the local sponsor, has completed that study. The
report indicates that ``transportation savings in the form of National
Economic Development Benefits (NED) appear to substantially exceed the
cost of project implementation'', thus confirming ``a strong Federal
interest in conducting the feasibility study of navigation improvements
at Freeport Harbor''. In fact, the Corps anticipates a benefit to cost
ratio of the project to be at an impressive more than 20 to 1 benefit
to cost. The fiscal year 2003 budget fully funded the Corps capability
of $500,000 to begin the feasibility study. The fiscal year 2004 budget
included $250,000 with an additional $250,000 reprogrammed by the USACE
to continue the feasibility study without delay.
Port Freeport has the opportunity to solidify significant new
business for Texas with this improvement project. In addition, the
improvement to the environment by taking a huge number of trucks off of
the road, transporting goods more economically and environmentally
sensitive by waterborne commerce is infinitely important to the
community, the State, and the Nation. Moreover, the enhanced safety of
a wider channel cannot be overstated.
economic impact of port freeport
Port Freeport is sixteenth in foreign tonnage in the United States
and twenty-fourth in total tonnage. The port handled over 25 million
tons of cargo in 2003 and an additional 75,000 T.E.U.'s of
containerized cargo. It is responsible for augmenting the Nation's
economy by $7.06 billion annually and generating 30,000 jobs. Its chief
import commodities are bananas, fresh fruit and aggregate while top
export commodities are rice and chemicals. The port's growth has been
staggering in the past decade, becoming one of the fastest growing
ports on the Gulf Coast. Port Freeport's economic impact and its future
growth is justification for its budding partnership with the Federal
Government in this critical improvement project.
defense support of our nation
Port Freeport is a strategic port in times of National Defense of
our Nation. It houses a critically important petroleum oil reserve--
Bryan Mound. It also is the only port in Texas that is being considered
by the United States Navy and General Dynamics as the site for the
building of Amphibious Assault Vehicles. Its close proximity to State
Highways 36 and 288 make it a convenient deployment port for Fort Hood.
In these unusual times, it is important to note the importance of our
ports in the defense of our Nation and to address the need to keep our
Federal waterways open to deep-draft navigation.
community and industry support
This proposed improvement project has wide community and industry
support. The safer transit and volume increase capability is an
appealing and exciting prospect for the users of Freeport Harbor and
Stauffer Channel. The anticipated more than 20 to 1 benefit to cost
ratio that was indicated from the Corps of Engineers reconnaissance
study firmly solidified the Federal interest.
what we need from the subcommittee in fiscal year 2005
The administration's budget included $300,000 for the continuation
of the feasibility study, which will be conducted at a 50/50 Federal
Government/local sponsor share. The Corps had indicated a capability
for fiscal year 2005 of $700,000 to continue the feasibility study and
keep this project on an optimal and most cost-efficient time frame for
the Federal Government and the local sponsor. We respectfully request
the additional $400,000 for fiscal year 2005. Most Corps projects
indicate a 10 to 1 and below benefit to cost ratio. This project
estimates nearly twice that benefit to cost ratio and deserves to be
tagged a ``priority project''.
______
Prepared Statement of the Chambers County-Cedar Bayou Navigation
District
We express full support of the inclusion of the full capability of
the USACE for fiscal year 2005 to complete PED for the project to
deepen and widen Cedar Bayou, Texas.
President's Budget Included $135,000.
Additional Funds Needed in Fiscal Year 2005 $311,000.
history and background
The Rivers and Harbor Act of 1890 originally authorized navigation
improvements to Cedar Bayou. The project was reauthorized in 1930 to
provide a 10 ft. deep and 100 ft. wide channel from the Houston Ship
Channel to a point on Cedar Bayou 11 miles above the mouth of the
bayou. In 1931, a portion of the channel was constructed from the
Houston Ship Channel to a point about 0.8 miles above the mouth of
Cedar Bayou, approximately 3.5 miles in length. A study of the project
in 1971 determined that an extension of the channel to project Mile 3
would have a favorable benefit-to-cost ratio. This portion of the
channel was realigned from mile 0.1 to mile 0.8 and extended from mile
0.8 to Mile 3 in 1975. In October 1985, the portion of the original
navigation project from project Mile 3 to 11 was deauthorized due to
the lack of a local sponsor. In 1989, the Corps of Engineers, Galveston
District completed a Reconnaissance Report dated June 1989, which
recommended a 12 ft. by 125 ft. channel from the Houston Ship Channel
Mile 3 to Cedar Bayou Mile 11 at the State Highway 146 Bridge. The
Texas Legislature created the Chambers County-Cedar Bayou Navigation
District in 1997 as an entity to improve the navigability of Cedar
Bayou.
The district was created to accomplish the purpose of Section 59,
Article XVI, of the Texas Constitution and has all the rights, powers,
privileges and authority applicable to Districts created under Chapters
60, 62, and 63 of the Water Code--Public Entity. The Chambers County-
Cedar Bayou Navigation District then became the local sponsor for the
Cedar Bayou Channel.
project description and reauthorization
Cedar Bayou is a small coastal stream, which originates in Liberty
County, Texas, and meanders through the urban area near the eastern
portion of the City of Baytown, Texas, before entering Galveston Bay.
The bayou forms the boundary between Harris County on the west and
Chambers County on the east. The project was authorized in Section 349
of the Water Resources Development Act 2000, which authorized a
navigation improvement of 12 feet deep by 125 feet wide from mile 2.5
to mile 11 on Cedar Bayou.
justification and industry support
First and foremost, the channel must be improved for safety. The
channel is the home to a busy barge industry. The most cost-efficient
and safe method of conveyance is barge transportation. Water
transportation offers considerable cost savings compared to other
freight modes (rail is nearly twice as costly and truck nearly four
times higher). In addition, the movement of cargo by barge is
environmentally friendly. Barges have enormous carrying capacity while
consuming less energy, due to the fact that a large number of barges
can move together in a single tow, controlled by only one power unit.
The result takes a significant number of trucks off of Texas highways.
The reduction of air emissions by the movement of cargo on barges is a
significant factor as communities struggle with compliance with the
Clean Air Act.
Several navigation-dependent industries and commercial enterprises
have been established along the commercially navigable portions of
Cedar Bayou. Several industries have docks on at the mile markers that
would be affected by this much-needed improvement. These industries
include: Reliant Energy, Bayer Corporation, Koppel Steel, CEMEX, US
Filter Recovery Services and Dorsett Brothers Concrete, to name a few.
project costs and benefits
Congress appropriated $100,000 in fiscal year 2001 for the Corps of
Engineers to conduct the feasibility study to determine the Federal
interest in this improvement project. The study indicated a benefit to
cost ratio of the project of 2.8 to 1. The estimated total cost of the
project is $16.8 million with a Federal share estimated at $11.9
million and the non-Federal sponsor share of approximately $4.9
million. Total annual benefits are estimated to be $4.8 million, with a
net benefit of $3 million. Congress appropriated $400,000 each in
fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003 and $374,000 in fiscal year 2004
to support the feasibility study. This project is environmentally sound
and economically justified. We would appreciate the subcommittee's
support of the required add of the $311,000 appropriation needed by the
Corps of Engineers to complete the plans and specifications of the
project so that it can move forward at an optimum construction
schedule. The users of the channel deserve to have the benefits of a
safer, most cost-effective Federal waterway.
______
Prepared Statement of The Nature Conservancy
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate this
opportunity to present The Nature Conservancy's recommendations for the
Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation's fiscal 2005
appropriations. We understand and appreciate that the subcommittee's
ability to fund programs within its jurisdiction is limited by the
tight budget situation but appreciate your consideration of these
important programs.
The Nature Conservancy is an international, non-profit organization
dedicated to the conservation of biological diversity. Our mission is
to preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent
the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they
need to survive. The Conservancy has more than 1,000,000 individual
members and 1,900 corporate associates. We have programs in all 50
States and in 27 foreign countries. We have protected more than 15
million acres in the United States and approximately 102 million acres
with local partner organizations worldwide. The Conservancy owns and
manages 1,400 preserves throughout the United States--the largest
private system of nature sanctuaries in the world. Sound science and
strong partnerships with public and private landowners to achieve
tangible and lasting results characterize our conservation programs.
The Conservancy urges the subcommittee to support the following
appropriation levels in the fiscal 2005 Energy and Water Development
Appropriation bill:
construction general priorities
Section 1135: Project Modification for the Improvement of the
Environment.--The Section 1135 Program authorizes the Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) to restore areas damaged by existing Corps projects.
This program permits modification of existing dams and flood control
projects to increase habitat for fish and wildlife without interrupting
a project's original purpose. The Conservancy is the non-Federal cost
share partner on nine Section 1135 projects including Spunky Bottoms, a
floodplain restoration/reconnection project on the Illinois River, for
which we seek an earmark in the amount of $200,000 in fiscal 2005. This
program is in extremely high demand and severely oversubscribed in
fiscal 2004 with millions of dollars of requests beyond what was
appropriated. This financial shortfall has stopped many projects. The
Conservancy strongly encourages full funding of $25 million for the
Section 1135 program in fiscal 2005, an increase over the President's
$13.5 million request.
Section 206: Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration.--Section 206 is a newer
Corps program that authorizes the Corps to restore aquatic habitat
regardless of past activities. The Conservancy is the non-Federal cost-
share partner on four Section 206 projects. These projects restore
important fish and wildlife habitats, including a $5 million project at
Mad Island in Texas, and a $1.4 million riparian habitat restoration
project at Bootheel Creek in Florida. This program is in extremely high
demand and severely oversubscribed in fiscal 2004 with millions of
dollars of requests beyond what was appropriated. This financial
shortfall has stopped many projects. The Conservancy strongly
encourages full funding of $25 million for this valuable program in
fiscal 2005, an increase over the President's $10 million request.
Upper Mississippi River System Environmental Management Program.--
The Environmental Management Program (EMP) is an important Corps
program that constructs habitat restoration projects and conducts long-
term resource monitoring of the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers.
The EMP operates as a unique Federal-State partnership affecting five
States (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin). The EMP
was reauthorized in WRDA 1999 with an increased authorization in the
amount of $33.2 million. The Conservancy supports full funding of $33.2
million for fiscal 2005, an increase over the President's $28 million
request.
Estuary Habitat Restoration Program.--The Estuary Habitat
Restoration Program was established with the intent to restore 1
million acres of estuary habitat by 2010. This multi-agency program
will promote projects that result in healthy ecosystems that support
wildlife, fish and shellfish, improve surface and groundwater quality,
quantity, and flood control; and provide outdoor recreation. The
Conservancy supports $10 million in fiscal 2005. This program was not
included in the President's budget.
Florida Keys Water Quality Program.--The Florida Keys Water Quality
Program is a unique restoration program designed to protect the Florida
Keys' fragile marine and coral ecosystem. This nationally significant
marine ecosystem is being impacted by excessive nutrients due to storm
and waste water pollution. This program is cost shared with State and
local interests to repair and improve the storm and wastewater
treatment facilities on the Florida Keys to reduce the harmful levels
of nutrient pollution. The Nature Conservancy, and its partners the
State of Florida, Florida Keys Aqueduct Authority, Monroe County, City
of Islamorada, City of Layton, City of Key Colony Beach, City of
Marathon, and City of Key West, support $30 million for fiscal 2005.
This program was not included in the President's budget.
Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation.--Created in WRDA 1986,
the Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Mitigation Project is designed to
reverse the negative environmental impacts of lower river
channelization and bank stabilization through land acquisition from
willing sellers. The Mitigation Project allows the Corps to restore
chutes, side channels, and other off-channel floodplain habitat for
river wildlife. The Conservancy supports the President's $69 million
request for fiscal 2005.
general investigation priorities
Middle Potomac River Watershed Study.--The preliminary Middle
Potomac Watershed Section 905(b) analysis identified 14 feasibility
studies to address flood control needs and environmental restoration
opportunities within the Middle Potomac Watershed. The study team
identified three study goals for the development of project management
plans: (1) to conserve, restore, and revitalize the Potomac River
basin; (2) to develop sustainable watershed management plans; and (3)
to cooperate with and support public and private entities in developing
watershed management plans. The Conservancy supports $1 million in
fiscal 2005 to continue the development of these plans. This study was
not included in the President's budget.
Savannah Basin Comprehensive Water Resources Study.--The Savannah
Basin Comprehensive Water Resources Study will enable the Corps and
other partners to gain a better understanding of the influence of
hydrologic processes such as timing, duration, frequency, magnitude,
and rate of change of river flows on the river's ecology. The Nature
Conservancy, under a cooperative agreement funded by the Corps and its
cost share partners Georgia and South Carolina, developed a set of
ecosystem flow recommendations for the Savannah River Basin. A test
release of the new flow recommendation was conducted March 15-18, 2004.
The Conservancy supports $436,000 in fiscal 2005, an increase over the
President's $250,000 request.
regulatory program priorities
Southern California Special Area Management Plan (SAMP).--For the
past 4 years, the Army Corps has been working with three Southern
California counties to develop region-wide Special Area Management
Plans that identify, delineate and plan for the conservation of
wetlands within their jurisdictions. These SAMPs are a critical part of
the regional effort to protect significant natural resources and to
plan for continued economic growth in Southern California. They are
emerging as an important planning tool that addresses streamlining of
Federal wetlands regulations while promoting more effective wetlands
conservation and providing long-term certainty for economic interests
in the region. The Southern California SAMP process is being evaluated
as a model for wetlands planning in other areas. The Conservancy
supports a $2 million earmark within the Corps' regulatory program for
fiscal 2005.
bureau of reclamation priorities
Recovery Implementation Program for Colorado Endangered Fish
Species.--The Recovery Program is in its fourteenth year of working for
the recovery of endangered fish species in the Upper Colorado River
Basin. The Recovery Program serves as a model of successful cooperation
between three States (Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming), Federal agencies,
water development interests, power users and the environmental
community in the recovery of four endangered fish species. The
Conservancy supports $4 million in fiscal 2005 for the Bureau of
Reclamation's portion of this multiagency program.
Thank you for the opportunity to present The Nature Conservancy's
comments on the Energy and Water Appropriations bill. We recognize that
you receive many worthy requests for funding each year and appreciate
your consideration of these requests and the generous support you have
shown for these and other conservation programs in the past. If you
have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
______
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Reclamation
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Board of California
Your support and leadership are needed in securing adequate fiscal
year 2004 funding for the Department of the Interior with respect to
the Federal/State Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program.
Congress has designated the Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Reclamation (Reclamation) to be the lead agency for salinity control in
the Colorado River Basin. This successful and cost effective program is
carried out pursuant to the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act
and the Clean Water Act. California's Colorado River water users are
presently suffering economic damages in the hundreds of million of
dollars per year due to the river's salinity.
The Colorado River Board of California (Colorado River Board) is
the State agency charged with protecting California's interests and
rights in the water and power resources of the Colorado River System.
In this capacity, California along with the other six Basin States
through the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum), the
interstate organization responsible for coordinating the Basin States'
salinity control efforts, established numeric criteria in June 1975,
for salinity concentrations in the River. These criteria were
established to lessen the future damages in the Lower Basin States, as
well as, assist the United States in delivering water of adequate
quality to Mexico in accordance with Minute 242 of the International
Boundary and Water Commission. The goal of the Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Program is to offset the effects of water resource
development in the Colorado River Basin after 1972 rather than to
reduce the salinity of the River below levels that were caused by
natural variations in river flows or human activities prior to 1972. To
maintain these levels, the salinity control program must remove
1,800,000 tons of salt loading from the River by the year 2020. In the
Forum's last report entitled 2002 Review, Water Quality Standards for
Salinity, Colorado River System (2002 Review) released in October 2002,
the Forum found that additional salinity control measures that remove
salt from the River in the order of 1,000,000 tons are needed to meet
the implementation plan. The plan for water quality control of the
River has been adopted by the States and approved by the Environmental
Protection Agency. To date, Reclamation has been successful in
implementing projects for preventing salt from entering the River
system; however, many more potential projects for salt reduction have
been identified that can be controlled with Reclamation's Basin-wide
Salinity Control Program. The Forum has presented testimony to Congress
in which it has stated that the rate of implementation of the program
beyond that which has been funded in the past is necessary.
In 2000, Congress reviewed the salinity control program as
authorized in 1995. Following hearings, and with the administration's
support, the Congress passed legislation that increased the ceiling
authorization for this program by $100 million. Reclamation has
received proposals to move the program ahead and the seven Basin States
have agreed to up-front cost sharing on an annual basis, which adds 43
cents for every Federal dollar appropriated.
In previous years, the President has supported, and Congress has
funded the Bureau of Reclamation's Basinwide Salinity Control Program
at about $12 million. The Forum has indicated that the President's
request for funding for fiscal year 2005 in the amount of $9,064,000 is
inappropriately low. The Forum has requested a total of $17.5 million
for fiscal year 2005 to implement the needed and authorized program.
The Colorado River Board supports the Forum's recommendation and
believes that failure to appropriate these funds may result in
significant economic damages in the United States and Mexico. Water
quality commitments to downstream U.S. and Mexican users must be
honored while the Basin States continue to develop their Compact
apportioned waters from the Colorado River. For every 30 mg/l increase
in salinity concentration in the River, there is $75 million in
additional damages in the United States.
Based upon past appropriations, implementation of salinity control
measures has fallen behind the needed pace to prevent salinity
concentration levels from exceeding the numeric criteria adopted by the
Forum and approved by the EPA. The seven Colorado River Basin States
have carefully evaluated the Federal funding needs of the program and
have concluded that an adequate budget is needed for the plan of
implementation to maintain the salinity standards for the River. With
the newly authorized USDA EQIP program, more on-farm funds are
available and adequate funds for Reclamation are needed to maximize
Reclamation's effectiveness. The Forum, at its meeting in San Diego,
California, in October 2002, recommended a funding level of $17,500,000
for Reclamation's Basinwide Salinity Control Program to continue
implementation of needed projects and begin to reduce the ``backlog''
of projects.
In addition, the Colorado River Board recognizes that the Federal
Government has made significant commitments to the Republic of Mexico
and to the seven Colorado River Basin States with regard to the
delivery of quality water to Mexico. In order for those commitments to
be honored, it is essential that in fiscal year 2005 and in future
fiscal years, that Congress provide funds to the Bureau of Reclamation
for the continued operation of completed projects.
The Colorado River is, and will continue to be, a major and vital
water resource to the 17 million residents of southern California.
Preservation of its water quality through an effective salinity control
program will avoid the additional economic damages to users in
California.
The Colorado River Board greatly appreciates your support of the
Federal/State Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Program and again
asks for your assistance and leadership in securing adequate funding
for this program.
______
Prepared Statement of the Department of Natural Resources, State of
Utah
As the Governor of Utah's representative on Colorado River Issues
and the senior Utah member of the Colorado River Salinity Control
Forum, I wish to convey Utah's support for funding the Salinity Title
II Program, authorized in 1995 (Public Law 104-20) at the level of
$17,500,000 for 2005 for the United States Bureau of Reclamation (BOR).
In addition, Utah requests funds be provided the BOR for General
Investigations and the Operation and Maintenance of salinity facilities
at sufficient funding levels to meet the objectives of the Salinity
Control Act as amended.
This vital program has been a mainstay in improving water use
efficiency in the Colorado River Basin of Utah. During the past 5 years
of drought, the facilities funded by the BOR program have been a
significant reason for agriculture in the Uinta and Price/San Raphael
basins maintaining productivity and stimulating these rural economies.
In addition, the Salinity Control Program helped to meet the
salinity related water quality standards for the Colorado River and
U.S. treaty obligation with Mexico. This important program helps meet
national and international obligations and needs to be funded at the
$17,500,000 level with additional funds for investigations and
operation and maintenance.
Thank you.
______
Prepared Statement of the Irrigation & Electrical Districts'
Association of Arizona
We are pleased to present this written testimony on behalf of our
25 members and associate members which serve water and power from the
Colorado River and other sources to rural and urban Arizona
communities, farms and businesses. Our comments are directed to the
budgets of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) and the Western
Area Power Administration (Western), whose budget requests we generally
support with certain specific reservations, which we will note.
bureau of reclamation
We do not support the proposed Reclamation budget as to four
specific items: Security Costs, Animas-La Plata, Yuma Desalter, and
Central Arizona Project Tucson Reliability Division.
Security Costs.--We oppose the shift of approximately $12 million
for guards and surveillance to reimbursable status. Congress has
approved this post-9/11 expense increase as non-reimbursable for the
last 2 years. This change unfairly saddles local power and water users
in some projects with the costs of this national obligation. If the
Homeland Security budget can provide in excess of $3 billion (fiscal
year 2004) for the Nation's airports, surely the West's premier
Reclamation dams deserve the same treatment. We endorse and support the
testimony of the Colorado River Energy Distributors' Association
(CREDA) on this subject.
Animas-La Plata.--This project requires some $10 million for
electric transmission system construction. We join CREDA in requesting
that this amount not be imposed on Colorado River Storage Project power
contractors whose customers will derive no benefit from this facility.
Forcing them to pay for this non-irrigation use facility will
constitute a serious departure from over 100 years of Reclamation law.
Yuma Desalter and Tucson Reliability Division.--We support the
testimony of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD)
generally, and specifically on these subjects. Without the Desalter,
Central Arizona's 4.5 million people will continue to be penalized some
100,000 acre-feet per year of water supply due to the Central Arizona
Project's junior status as a Colorado River water user. Additionally,
Reclamation needs to request Tucson Reliability Division funds only
after consultation with CAWCD and not jeopardize its pending lawsuit
settlement and the associated Gila River Indian Settlement.
western area power administration
Our comments on Western's budget will track the order in which the
subjects appear in Western's budget justification document.
Use of Receipts.--We oppose Use of Receipts authority for Western
at this time. Western has offered no check and balance proposal to
substitute for reduced Congressional oversight. Retail competition in
the West is problematic, to say the least, and the bare notice and
comment Western rate process has never generated effective cost
control. Moreover, Western believes it has the authority to require
advance funding in its contracts (Federal Register 5/5/03). If true,
contract renewals and amendments will gradually shift Western totally
off-budget.
Security Costs.--Western's $1.4 million in security costs should be
non-reimbursable for the same reasons that Reclamation's should be. As
a dichotomy of a former uniform Reclamation program, Western's role is
tied to Reclamation's. It is hard to believe that over 17,000 miles of
Federal transmission system do not rise in importance to a national
obligation, given the essential place this system occupies in 15
Western States.
Quartzsite Line Relocation.--We oppose this expenditure at this
time. There is no electrical need for this action. Alternative routes
are still being negotiated with the Bureau of Land Management and the
necessary environmental clearance processes haven't even started. The
encroachments have existed for many years without incident. This
project should be postponed until Western identifies an electrical
need, a negotiated route, and a true cost estimate based on that route.
Transmission Lines.--The Black Point Mesa--Blythe No. 1 request may
be insufficient since the Fish and Wildlife Service is insisting that
Western purchase land for the Desert Tortoise in southeastern
California because Western wants to replace aging wood poles (a routine
operation and maintenance function) in an area that is not critical
habitat for this species.
South of Phoenix.--We vigorously support work programmed for
substations in this portion of Western's Parker-Davis Project
transmission system. The area in question is growing like Topsy and
Western's integrated facilities are aged and undersized. Congress has
earmarked funds for this work for the last 3 years.
Davis-Mead, Davis-Topock.--We would oppose the addition of any
reimbursable construction funding for this line replacement using the
3M aluminum matrix composite conductor. Adding this cost would more
than double Western's rehabilitation and construction budget. We
anticipate a request for this expenditure. If done as a non-
reimbursable experiment, we would not object. We note, however, that
replacing one line yields little extra capacity since reliability
standards require the new line to carry no more power than the second
adjacent line could absorb in a first line outage.
Purchase Power and Wheeling.--Once again, Western proposes chopping
funding for this vital activity even though Congress has repeatedly
provided the funding. The scoring problem has been fixed. There is no
sound policy reason for not funding this activity. The position that
somehow small public power, Indian and other customers can magically
find over $200 million to borrow and/or advance fund this critical
firming program is absurd. Most of Western's customers are small and
resource limited. Western can't be allowed to summarily abandon them to
their fate.
Thank you for the opportunity to present our views. Please feel
free to get in touch with us if we can be of any further service,
answer any questions, or supply additional detail on our comments.
______
Prepared Statement of the Garrison Diversion Conservancy District
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Dave Koland;
I serve as the manager of the Garrison Diversion Conservancy District.
The mission of the District is to provide a reliable, high quality and
affordable water supply to the areas of need in North Dakota. Over 77
percent of our State residents live within the boundaries of the
District. I would like to comment on the impact the President's fiscal
year 2005 budget request for the Garrison Diversion Unit has on the
effort to provide reliable, high quality and affordable water supplies
to the citizens of North Dakota.
The President's fiscal year 2005 budget request was pitifully
inadequate in meeting the commitments the Federal Government has made
to North Dakota. In return for accepting a permanent flood on 500,000
acres of prime North Dakota river valley the Federal Government
promised the State and tribes that they would be compensated as the
dams were built. The dams were completed 50 years ago and still we wait
for the promised compensation. At the rate of payment the President's
budget proposes the Federal Government will not even be able to stay
current with the indexing applied by law on their commitment to North
Dakota.
The MR&I program was started in 1986 after the Garrison Diversion
Unit was reformulated from a million-acre irrigation project into a
multipurpose project with emphasis on the development and delivery of
municipal and rural water supplies. The State-wide MR&I program has
focused on providing grant funds for water systems that provide water
service to previously unserved areas of the State. The State has
followed a policy of developing a network of regional water systems
throughout the State. Every rural water system that has been built in
North Dakota is still operating. They are providing safe, clean water
to their members, reducing their debt, putting money in reserve,
complying with every State and Federal regulation, and doing so with a
stable, prudent rate structure.
north dakota's success story
More importantly, people are living on farmsteads with a rural
water connection, while farmsteads without decent water stand empty.
For instance, Sheridan County lost 20.4 percent of its population
between 1990 and 2000, yet the rural water system serving that county
hardly lost a connection. Good water does make a difference as to where
people choose to live. Rural communities offer the experiences and
lifestyle many people seek to raise their family.
The key to providing water to small communities and rural areas has
been the Grant and Loan program of Rural Development and the MR&I
program jointly operated by the Garrison Diversion Conservancy District
and the State Water Commission. Without the assistance of these two
grant programs, the exodus from the rural areas would have been a
stampede.
Rural water systems are being constructed using a unique blend of
local expertise, State financing, rural development loans, MR&I grant
funds to provide an affordable rate structure, and the expertise of the
Bureau of Reclamation to deal with design and environmental issues. The
projects are successful because they are driven by a local need to
solve a water quantity or quality problem. The solution to the local
problem is devised by the community being affected by the problem. The
early, local buy-in helps propel the project through the tortuous pre-
construction stages.
The MR&I program has been so successful and so important to North
Dakota that the North Dakota Legislature loaned the program $15 million
to help deal with the severe lag time that has developed in the Federal
appropriations process.
The desperate need for clean, safe water is evidenced by the
willingness of North Dakota's rural residents to pay water rates well
above the rates EPA considers affordable. The EPA Economic Guidance
Workbook states that rates greater than 1.5 percent of the median
household income (MHI) are not only unaffordable, but also ``may be
unreasonable''.
The average monthly cost on a rural water system for 6,000 gallons
of water is currently $48.97. The water rates in rural North Dakota
would soar to astronomical levels without the 75 percent grant dollars
in the MR&I program. For instance, current rates would have to average
a truly unaffordable $134.19/month or a whopping 3.8 percent of the
MHI. Rates would have ranged as high as $190.80/month or a prohibitive
5.3 percent of MHI without the assistance of the MR&I program.
The people waiting for water in our rural communities are willing
to pay far more than what many consider an affordable, or even
reasonable, price for clean, safe water.
environmental laws
The Bureau of Reclamation plays a vital role by ensuring compliance
with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), providing
system design oversight and dealing with international issues. Such is
the case with the Northwest Area Water Supply Project (NAWS). Canada
and the province of Manitoba have filed a lawsuit protesting the very
thorough Final Environmental Assessment and the subsequent Finding of
No Significant Impact on the NAWS project.
One reason for the success of the North Dakota program is the
reliance on local control. Decision-making is accomplished at the
lowest level possible. The decision on who the system can afford to
provide service to and the rate structure is made by a local board of
directors composed of members who will be served by the water system.
Volunteer involvement and low administrative costs are hallmarks of the
program. Engineering services are typically provided by local firms
that have experience in designing and constructing systems in North
Dakota.
Across North Dakota, we have seen the impact of providing high
quality water to rural areas and witnessed the dramatic change in small
communities. Homes once occupied by aging widows are soon rented or
sold to young adults, while houses and farmsteads without rural water
stand empty.
Good drinking water is just a dream in many rural North Dakota
communities. Turning on the tap each morning brings brown, smelly water
instead of the clear, fresh water a majority of people in North Dakota
enjoy.
The opportunity to have an impact in rural North Dakota is now. If
we do nothing, it is easy to predict what will occur in rural North
Dakota. We only need to look at counties without good water.
It is in the best interest of North Dakota and the 150+ local
communities not yet served by a regional system that we build every
piece of rural infrastructure that is feasible. We must continue to
build on what has proven so successful in the past.
Providing a reliable source of good, clean water in rural areas has
worked to stabilize the rural economy in North Dakota. The combination
of leveraging Rural Development loan funds with MR&I grant dollars has
provided a cost efficient, long-term solution to the rural communities
in North Dakota.
If we act now, we can make a difference in rural North Dakota.
Providing for healthy, vibrant rural communities is good for North
Dakota and good for our Nation. We know from past experience that
providing good water for rural communities is one sure way of helping
people change the future.
Indeed the MR&I program in North Dakota would serve as an
outstanding example of a successful program that could be implemented
in other States.
discussion of overall bureau of reclamation budget
It is important to recognize that the fiscal year 2005 budget
submission of $828.5 million for the Bureau of Reclamation's Water and
Related Resources program is $57.5 million better than their request
for fiscal year 2004. It is $171.5 million less than has been called
for by the ``Invest in the West'' Coalition, a coalition of nine
western water organizations that are involved in the full array of
western water issues.
The ``Invest in the West'' goal, one with which I agree, is to
raise the Bureau's Water and Related Resources Budget to $1 billion by
the end of fiscal year 2005. This is simply a goal to restore the
budget to previous levels. The erosion of the Bureau's budget during
the 1990's has created problems across the west for virtually all of
its constituents.
budget impacts on garrison diversion unit
At this point, I would like to shift to the particulars of the
budget as it impacts the Garrison Diversion program and some specific
projects within the State of North Dakota. Let me begin by reviewing
the various elements within the current budget request and then discuss
the impacts that the current level of funding will have on the current
program.
Attachment 1 shows the funding history over the last 8 years for
the Garrison Diversion Unit. The average is approximately $26.6
million. The President's budget request for fiscal year 2005 is $22.1
million. A continuation of that trend is a formula for disaster. The
President's budget request does not even maintain the historic funding
level and ignores the needs of the current programs and does not keep
up with the price increases expected in the major programs as delays
occur. Fortunately, Congress saw fit to provide that the unexpended
authorization ceilings would be indexed annually to adjust for
inflation in the construction industry. The proposed allocation to the
indexed programs in the President's budget is $6.9 million. If a modest
2 percent inflation factor is assumed, the increase will be $8 million
for MR&I and $2 million for the Red River Valley phase. Simply put,
with the current request, we will lose ground on the completion of
these projects.
This year, the District is asking the Congress to appropriate a
total of $77.3 million for the Project. Attachment 2 is a breakdown of
the elements in the District's request. To discuss this in more detail,
I must first explain that the Garrison budget consists of several
different program items. For ease of discussion, I would like to
simplify the breakdown into three major categories. The first I would
call the base operations portion of the budget request. Attachment 3
contains a breakdown of the elements in that portion of the budget.
This amount is nominally $22 million annually when you include
underfinancing. However, as more Indian MR&I projects are completed,
the operation and maintenance costs for these projects will increase
and create a need that will need to be addressed.
The second element of the budget is the MR&I portion. This consists
of both Indian and non-Indian funding. The Dakota Water Resources Act
contains an additional $200 million authorization for each of these
programs. It is our intent that each program reaches the conclusion of
the funding authorization at the same time. We believe this is only
fair.
The MR&I program consists of a number of medium-sized projects that
are independent of one another. They generally run in the $20 million
category. Some are, of course, smaller and others somewhat larger, but
one that is considerably larger is the Northwest Area Water Supply
Project (NAWS). The first phase of that project is under construction.
The optimum construction schedule for completion of the first phase has
been determined to be 5 years. The total cost of the first phase is $66
million. At a 65 percent cost share, the Federal funding needed to
support that program is $43 million. On the average, the annual funding
for that project alone is over $8 million. Four other projects have
been approved for future funding and numerous projects on the
reservations are ready to begin construction. These requests will all
compete with one another. It will be a delicate challenge to balance
these projects. Nevertheless, we believe that once a project is
started, it needs to be pursued vigorously to completion. If it is not,
we simply run the cost up and increase the risk of incompatibility
among the working parts.
An example of the former would be the certain impact of the
increased cost of construction over time through inflation but also by
protracting the engineering and administration costs and ``interest-
during-construction'' costs.
The third element of the budget is the Red River Valley Water
Supply Project (RRV) construction phase. The Dakota Water Resources Act
authorized $200 million for the construction of facilities to meet the
water quality and quantity needs of the Red River Valley communities.
It is my belief that the final plans and authorizations, if necessary,
should be expected in approximately 5 years. This will create an
immediate need for greater construction funding.
This major project, once started, should be pursued vigorously to
completion. The reasons are the same as for the NAWS project and relate
to good engineering construction management. Although difficult to
predict at this time, it is reasonable to plan that the RRV project
features, once started, should be completed in approximately 7 years.
This creates a need for an additional $25 million. Fortunately, it
appears the RRV project start will probably follow the completion of
the NAWS first phase.
Using these two projects as examples frames the argument for a
steadily increasing budget. First, to accelerate the MR&I program in
early years to assure the timely completion of the NAWS project and
then to ready the budget for a smaller MR&I allocation when the RRV
project construction begins.
Attachment 4 illustrates the level of funding for the two major
items, MR&I and RRV. It is quickly apparent that if a straight-line
appropriation is used for each, a funding spike will occur in the sixth
year. That is when an additional $25 million will suddenly be needed
for the RRV program. It is simply good management to blend these needs
to avoid drastic hills and valleys in the budget requests. By
accelerating the construction of NAWS and other projects which are
ready for construction during the early years, some of the pressure
will be off when the RRV project construction funding is needed. A
smoother, more efficient construction program over time will be the
result.
Attachment 5 shows such a program. It begins with a $77.3 million
budget this year and gradually builds over time to over $140 million
when the RRV construction could be in full swing (fiscal year 2010).
Mr. Chairman, this is why we believe it is important that the budget
resolution recognize that a robust increase in the budget allocation is
needed for the Bureau of Reclamation. We hope this testimony will serve
as at least one example of why we fully support the efforts of the
``Invest in the West'' campaign to increase the overall allocation by
$171.4 million in fiscal year 2005 to a total of $1 billion.
The Bureau of Reclamation, Rural Development, Garrison Diversion
Conservancy District, State Water Commission and local rural water
districts have formed a formidable alliance to deal with the lack of a
high quality, reliable water source throughout much of North Dakota.
This cost-effective partnership of local control, State-wide guidance
and Federal support have combined to provide safe, clean, potable water
to hundreds of communities and thousands of homes across North Dakota.
attachment 1
attachment 2.--garrison diversion unit (gdu) justification for $77.3
million appropriation fiscal year 2005
North Dakota's Municipal, Rural and Industrial (MR&I) water program
funds construction projects State-wide under the joint administration
of the Garrison Diversion Conservancy District (GDCD) and the State
Water Commission (SWC).
Northwest Area Water Supply Project (NAWS) is under construction
after 15 years of study and diplomatic delay. Construction costs are
estimated to be $81 million.
Designs are based on a 5-year construction period; thus, over $16
million is needed for NAWS alone. Indian MR&I programs are also under
construction. Tribal and State leaders have agreed to split the Indian
and non-Indian MR&I allocation on a 50/50 basis.
Williston Water Treatment Plant, Williams Rural Water and Tribal
MR&I programs are under construction.
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation and Maintenance of Indian MR&I Systems plus 3.4
Jamestown Dam...............................................
Breakdown of $73.9 million Construction Request:
Operation and Maintenance of existing GDU system......... 5.0
Wildlife Mitigation & Natural Resources Trust............ 6.0
Red River Valley Special Studies and EIS................. 2.6
Indian and non-Indian MR&I............................... 50.0
Indian Irrigation........................................ 2.7
Recreation............................................... 0.6
Under financing 10 percent............................... 7.0
----------
Total for Construction................................. 73.9
----------
Grand Total............................................ 77.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
attachment 3.--elements of the base operations portion of the garrison
diversion unit budget fiscal year 2005
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operation and Maintenance of Indian MR&I systems and 3.4
Jamestown Dam...............................................
Operation and Maintenance of Existing GDU facilities......... 5.0
Wildlife Mitigation & Natural Resources Trust................ 6.0
Red River Valley Special Studies and EIS..................... 2.6
Indian Irrigation............................................ 2.7
Recreation................................................... 0.6
Under financing at 10 percent................................ 2.0
----------
Total.................................................. 22.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
attachment 4
attachment 5
______
Prepared Statement of the Provo River Water Users Association
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Duchesne County Water Conservancy District
I am writing to request your support for an appropriation in fiscal
year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget
line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado River Region. The President's
recommended budget for fiscal year 2005 includes this line-item amount.
Of these funds, I respectfully request the designation of $4,008,000
for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $691,000
for the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program and
$535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management and Development, consistent
with the President's budget request. The requested fiscal year 2005
appropriation will allow construction of fish passage, floodplain
restoration activities, screening of existing diversion canals,
propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and non-native fish
management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District
I am writing to request your support for an appropriation in fiscal
year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget
line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado River Region. The President's
recommended budget for fiscal year 2005 includes this line-item amount.
Of these funds, I respectfully request the designation of $4,008,000
for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $691,000
for the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program and
$535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management and Development, consistent
with the President's budget request. The requested fiscal year 2005
appropriation will allow construction of fish passage, floodplain
restoration activities, screening of existing diversion canals,
propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and non-native fish
management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Colorado Springs Utilities
I am writing to request your support for an appropriation in fiscal
year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget
line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado River Region. The President's
recommended budget for fiscal year 2005 includes this line-item amount.
Of these funds, I respectfully request the designation of $4,008,000
for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $691,000
for the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program and
$535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management and Development, consistent
with the President's budget request. The requested fiscal year 2005
appropriation will allow construction of fish passage, floodplain
restoration activities, screening of existing diversion canals,
propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and non-native fish
management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Dolores Water Conservancy District
I am writing to request your support for an appropriation in fiscal
year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget
line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado River Region. The President's
recommended budget for fiscal year 2005 includes this line-item amount.
Of these funds, I respectfully request the designation of $4,008,000
for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $691,000
for the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program and
$535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management and Development, consistent
with the President's budget request. The requested fiscal year 2005
appropriation will allow construction of fish passage, floodplain
restoration activities, screening of existing diversion canals,
propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and non-native fish
management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Perkins County Rural Water System, Inc.
Perkins County Rural Water System, Inc. respectfully submits this
written testimony to the Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and
Water Development for appropriations of $5.0 million for fiscal year
2005. This project was authorized under Public Law 106-136.
Perkins County Rural Water System, (PCRWS) has the approval of the
Office of Management and Budget and the Bureau of Reclamation to
proceed with construction in 2004. We have been appropriated $7.6
million in years 2002 and 2003. We were appropriated $1.0 million in
2004. The administration has approved us in the budget for $500,000 for
fiscal year 2005. We would not be able to keep our construction on
schedule if we are appropriated this amount of money. Cost share for
the system is 75 percent Federal, 15 percent local and 10 percent
State. The State of South Dakota has offered to loan PCRWS the local
share for 40 years at 3 percent interest to keep costs down to the
customer.
Breakdown for the project for 2005 is as follows:
2005 BUDGET
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income:
Bureau of Reclamation............................... $5,000,000
State of South Dakota............................... 1,250,000
Misc................................................ 75,000
---------------
Total............................................. 6,325,000
===============
Expense:
Mainline to Bison................................... 1,300,000
Mainline to Lemmon.................................. 1,200,000
North Dakota State Water Comm....................... 1,000,000
Reservoir........................................... 500,000
Lemmon Rural Pipe................................... 280,000
Bison & Prairie City Rural.......................... 1,500,000
Administration, Engineering......................... 545,000
---------------
Total............................................. 6,325,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCRWS will need $5.0 million for each of the next 3 years to
complete our project on time. This consists of 550 miles of various
size pipes ranging from 8 inches to 1.5 inches, one pump station
capable of moving 800 gallons per minute, a 1.0 million gallon tank and
telemetry to operate the whole system from one localized location.
The quality of water in Northwest South Dakota is the main concern
for the health and well being of the people. Although the water
typically meets primary standards established by the USEPA, most of the
chemicals in the water are exceedingly high by the State of South
Dakota standards. Water quality and quantity in Perkins County has been
a plague for the county over many years. Droughts, both long and short
term, are a fact of life for the people in this area. Being able to
obtain quality water during these periods and having a backup system
for other times would make life a lot easier for those in the rural
area. Due to the isolation from major water supplies, this may be our
only chance to obtain water at an affordable cost.
On the behalf of the Board of Directors of PCRWS and the people of
Perkins County, South Dakota, thank you for allowing us to enter this
testimony in the subcommittee's report.
______
Prepared Statement of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Four Corners Power Plant
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Public Service Company of New Mexico
I am writing to request your support for an appropriation in fiscal
year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget
line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado River Region. The President's
recommended budget for fiscal year 2005 includes this line-item amount.
Of these funds, I respectfully request the designation of $4,008,000
for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $691,000
for the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program and
$535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management and Development, consistent
with the President's budget request. The requested fiscal year 2005
appropriation will allow construction of fish passage, floodplain
restoration activities, screening of existing diversion canals,
propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and non-native fish
management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Grand Valley Water Users Association
I am writing to request your support for an appropriation in fiscal
year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget
line item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation
Program'' for the Upper Colorado River Region. The President's
recommended budget for fiscal year 2005 includes this line-item amount.
Of these funds, I respectfully request the designation of $4,008,000
for the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $691,000
for the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program and
$535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management and Development, consistent
with the President's budget request. The requested fiscal year 2005
appropriation will allow construction of fish passage, floodplain
restoration activities, screening of existing diversion canals,
propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and non-native fish
management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum's Recommendation:
--Title II Program Authorized in 1995 (Public Law 104-20)--
$17,500,000.
--General Investigation Funds--Adequate Funding.
--Operation and Maintenance--Adequate Funding.
This testimony is in support of funding for the Title II Colorado
River Basin Salinity Control Program (Program). Congress has designated
the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), to
be the lead agency for salinity control in the Colorado River Basin.
This role and the authorized program were refined and confirmed by the
Congress when Public Law 104-20 was enacted. A total of $17,500,000 is
requested for fiscal year 2005 to implement the needed and authorized
program. Failure to appropriate these funds will result in significant
economic damage in the United States and Mexico.
In previous years, the President has supported, and Congress has
funded, a program at about $12 million. In recent years, the
President's requests have dropped and this year's request, in the
judgment of the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum (Forum), is
inappropriately low. This year's administration request is for
$9,064,000. Water quality commitments to downstream U.S. and Mexican
water users must be honored while the Basin States continue to develop
their Compact apportioned waters of the Colorado River. Concentrations
of salts in the river cause hundreds of millions of dollars in damage
in the United States and result in poorer quality water being delivered
by the United States to Mexico. For every 30 mg/l increase in salinity
concentrations, there is $75 million in additional damages in the
United States. The Forum, therefore, believes implementation of the
Program needs to be accelerated to a level beyond that requested by the
President.
The Program, authorized by the Congress in 1995, has proven to be
very successful and very cost effective. Proposals from the public and
private sector to implement salinity control strategies have far
exceeded the available funding and Reclamation has a backlog of
proposals. Reclamation continues to select the best and most cost-
effective proposals. Funds are available for the Colorado River Basin
States' cost sharing for the level of Federal funding requested by the
Forum. Water quality improvements accomplished under Title II of the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act (Act) also benefit the
quality of water delivered to Mexico. Although the United States has
always met the commitments of the International Boundary & Water
Commission's (Commission) Minute 242 to Mexico with respect to water
quality, the United States Section of the Commission is currently
addressing Mexico's request for better water quality at the
International Boundary.
Some of the most cost effective salinity control opportunities
occur when the USBR can improve irrigation delivery systems at the same
time that the USDA's program is working with landowners (irrigators) to
improve the on-farm irrigation systems. Through the newly authorized
USDA EQIP, adequate on-farm funds appear to be available and adequate
USBR funds are needed to maximize the effectiveness of the effort.
overview
In 2000, Congress reviewed the Program as authorized in 1995.
Following hearings, and with administration support, the Congress
passed legislation that increased the ceiling authorized by this
program by $100 million. Reclamation has received cost-effective
proposals to move the Program ahead and the Basin States have funds
available to cost-share up-front.
The Program was authorized by Congress in 1974. The Title I portion
of the Act responded to commitments that the United States made,
through Minute 242, to Mexico concerning the quality of water being
delivered to Mexico below Imperial Dam. Title II of the Act established
a program to respond to salinity control needs of Colorado River water
users in the United States and to comply with the mandates of the then
newly legislated Clean Water Act. Initially, the Secretary of the
Interior and Reclamation were given the lead Federal role by the
Congress. This testimony is in support of adequate funding for the
Title II program.
After a decade of investigative and implementation efforts, the
Basin States concluded that the Act needed to be amended. Congress
revised the Act in 1984. That revision, while leaving implementation of
the salinity control policy with the Secretary of the Interior, also
gave new salinity control responsibilities to the Department of
Agriculture and to the Bureau of Land Management. Congress has charged
the administration with implementing the most cost-effective program
practicable (measured in dollars per ton of salt removed). The Basin
States are strongly supportive of that concept as the Basin States cost
share 30 percent of Federal expenditures up-front for the Program, in
addition to proceeding to implement their own salinity control efforts
in the Colorado River Basin.
The Forum is composed of gubernatorial appointees from Arizona,
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. The Forum
has become the seven-State coordinating body for interfacing with
Federal agencies and Congress to support the implementation of the
Program necessary to control the salinity of the river system. In close
cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and under
requirements of the Clean Water Act, every 3 years the Forum prepares a
formal report analyzing the salinity of the Colorado River, anticipated
future salinity, and the program necessary to keep the salinities under
control.
In setting water quality standards for the Colorado River system,
the salinity levels measured at Imperial, and below Parker and Hoover
Dams in 1972 have been identified as the numeric criteria. The plan
necessary for controlling salinity and to reduce downstream damages has
been captioned the ``plan of implementation.'' The 2002 Review of water
quality standards includes an updated plan of implementation. The level
of appropriation requested in this testimony is in keeping with the
agreed upon plan. If adequate funds are not appropriated, State and
Federal agencies involved are in agreement that damage from the higher
salt levels in the water will be more widespread in the United States,
as well as in Mexico, and will be very significant.
Although the Program thus far has been able to implement salinity
control measures that comply with the approved plan, recent drought
years have caused salinity levels to rise in the river. Predictions are
that this will be the trend for the next several years. This places an
added urgency for the acceleration of the implementation of the
Program.
justification
The $17,500,000 requested by the Forum on behalf of the seven
Colorado River Basin States is the level of funding necessary to
proceed with Reclamation's portion of the plan of implementation. In
July of 1995, Congress amended the Act. The amended Act gives
Reclamation new latitude and flexibility in seeking the most cost-
effective salinity control opportunities, and it provides for
utilization of proposals from project proponents, as well as more
involvement from the private as well as the public sector. The result
is that salt loading is being prevented at costs often less than half
the cost under the previous Program. Congress recommitted its support
to the revised program when it enacted Public Law 106-459. The Basin
States' cost sharing up-front adds 43 cents for every Federal dollar
appropriated. The federally chartered Colorado River Basin Salinity
Control Advisory Council, created by the Congress in the Act, has met
and formally supports the requested level of funding. The Basin States
urge the subcommittee to support the funding as set forth in this
testimony.
additional support of funding
In addition to the funding identified above for the implementation
of the most recently authorized program, the Forum urges the Congress
to appropriate necessary funds needed to continue to maintain and
operate salinity control facilities as they are completed and placed
into long-term operation. Reclamation has completed the Paradox Valley
unit which involves the collection of brines in the Paradox Valley of
Colorado and the injection of those brines into a deep aquifer through
an injection well. The continued operation of this project and other
completed projects will be funded through Operation and Maintenance
funds.
In addition, the Forum supports necessary funding to allow for
continued general investigation of the Program. It is important that
Reclamation have planning staff in place, properly funded, so that the
progress of the Program can be analyzed, coordination between various
Federal and State agencies can be accomplished, and future projects and
opportunities to control salinity can be properly planned to maintain
the water quality standards for salinity so that the Basin States can
continue to develop their Compact-apportioned waters of the Colorado
River.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mni Wiconi Project
fiscal year 2005 construction budget request
The Mni Wiconi Project beneficiaries (as listed below) respectfully
request appropriations and can demonstrate capability for construction
in fiscal year 2005 in the amount of $39,317,000 as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System:
Core Facilities (Pipelines and Pumping Stations).... $8,128,000
Distribution System on Pine Ridge................... 10,224,000
West River/Lyman-Jones Rural Water System............... 11,020,000
Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System........................ 7,325,000
Lower Brule Sioux Rural Water System.................... 2,620,000
---------------
Total Mni Wiconi Project.......................... 39,317,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The project sponsors were provided by the 107th Congress (Public
Law 107-367) with all the authority necessary to finish this project at
the level of development originally intended on a schedule through
fiscal year 2008. Completion of the project is now clearly achievable
as shown in the table below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal Required (October 2003 Dollars)........... $409,523,000
Estimated Federal Spent Through Fiscal Year 2004........ $278,110,000
Percent Spent........................................... 67.9
Amount Remaining........................................ $131,413,000
Years to Completion..................................... 4
Average Required for Fiscal Year 2008 Finish............ $32,853,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The administration's budget for this project in fiscal year 2005
($18.2 million for construction) is a disappointment for a second year
in a row. The amount requested by the administration falls far short of
the average amount needed to complete the project in fiscal year 2008.
The needs and merits of this project are considerable as described in
section 3.
The project's operation, maintenance and replacement request from
the sponsors is in addition to the construction request and is
presented in section 8.
osrwss core pipeline to reach pine ridge indian reservation in fiscal
year 2005
OGLALA SIOUX WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM CORE REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Core:
Stamford to Kadoka:
Reservoir to Kadoka Pipeline.................... $1,036,000
Pump Station, 2 Reservoirs...................... 2,111,000
Kadoka to White River Pipeline...................... 2,587,000
North Core:
WTP toward Hayes Pipeline........................... 2,394,000
---------------
Total............................................. 8,128,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and parts of West River/Lyman-
Jones remain without points of interconnection to the OSRWSS core. The
requested funding level for the OSRWSS core of $8.128 million will
complete the project from Stamford to the northeast corner of the Pine
Ridge Indian Reservation where, in combination with the western part of
West River/Lyman-Jones, the remaining 50 percent of the design
population resides. Funds will also be used by the Oglala Sioux Tribe
to build the North Core westerly toward Hayes in the West River Lyman
Jones service area with the intent to complete the OSRWSS North Core
and all other core facilities in fiscal year 2007. Two additional years
of funding will be required to complete the OSRWSS North Core system to
serve the Reservation.
The 2000 census confirms that the Oglala Sioux population on Pine
Ridge is growing at a rate of 27 percent per decade or 1\1/2\ times
greater than projected from the 1990 census. Delivery of Missouri River
water to this area is urgently needed.
All proposed OSRWSS construction activity will build pipelines that
will provide Missouri River water immediately to beneficiaries. In many
cases, construction of interconnecting pipelines by other sponsors is
ongoing, and fiscal year 2005 funds are required to complete projects
that will connect with the OSRWSS core and begin others.
Funding for OSRWSS core and distribution facilities is necessary to
bring economic development to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation,
designated as one of five national rural empowerment zones by the
previous administration. The designation serves to underscore the level
of need. Economic development is largely dependent on the timely
completion of a water system, which depends on appropriations for this
project.
Finally, the subcommittee is respectfully requested to take notice
of the fact that fiscal year 2005 will significantly advance
construction of facilities that continues our progress toward the end
of the project. The subcommittee's past support has brought the project
to the point that the end can be seen. Key to the conclusion of the
project in fiscal year 2008 is the completion of the OSRWSS core to the
Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. Toward this end, funds are included in
the fiscal year 2005 budget to build the connecting pipelines between
the northeast corner of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and the
central portion of the Reservation near Kyle. Rosebud is similarly
engaged in the construction of major connecting pipelines that will
deliver water southerly to the central portions of the Rosebud Indian
Reservation and to service areas for West River/Lyman-Jones.
unique needs of this project
This project covers much of the area of western South Dakota that
was formerly the Great Sioux Reservation established by the Treaty of
1868. Since the separation of the Reservation in 1889 into smaller more
isolated reservations, including Pine Ridge, Rosebud and Lower Brule,
tensions between the Indian population and the non-Indian settlers on
former Great Sioux lands have been high with little easing by
successive generations. The Mni Wiconi Project is perhaps the most
significant opportunity in more than a century to bring the sharply
diverse cultures of the two societies together for a common good. Much
progress has been made due to the good faith and genuine efforts of
both the Indian and non-Indian sponsors. The project is an historic
basis for renewed hope and dignity among the Indian people. It is a
basis for substantive improvement in relationships.
Each year our testimony addresses the fact that the project
beneficiaries, particularly the three Indian Reservations, have the
lowest income levels in the Nation. The health risks to our people from
drinking unsafe water are compounded by reductions in health programs.
We respectfully submit that our project is unique and that no other
project in the Nation has greater human needs. Poverty in our service
areas is consistently deeper than elsewhere in the Nation. Health
effects of water borne diseases are consistently more prevalent than
elsewhere in the Nation, due in part to (1) lack of adequate water in
the home and (2) poor water quality where water is available. Higher
incidences of impetigo, gastroenteritis, shigellosis, scabies and
hepatitis-A are well documented on the Indian reservations of the Mni
Wiconi Project area. At the beginning of the third millennium one
cannot find a region in our Nation in which social and economic
conditions are as deplorable. These circumstances are summarized in
Table 1. Mni Wiconi builds the dignity of many, not only through
improvement of drinking water, but also through direct employment and
increased earnings during planning, construction, operation and
maintenance and from economic enterprises supplied with project water.
We urge the subcommittee to address the need for creating jobs and
improving the quality of life on the Pine Ridge and other Indian
reservations of the project area.
TABLE 1.--PROFILE OF SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS: 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income Percent
2000 Percent -------------------------------- Families Percent
Indian Reservation/State Population Change Median Below Unemployment
From 1990 Per Capita Household Poverty
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pine Ridge Indian 15,521 27.07 $6,143 $20,569 46.3 16.9
Reservation................
Rosebud Indian Reservation.. 10,469 7.97 $7,279 $19,046 45.9 20.1
Lower Brule Indian 1,353 20.48 $7,020 $21,146 45.3 28.1
Reservation................
Star of South Dakota........ 754,844 8.45 $17,562 $35,282 9.3 3.0
Nation...................... 281,421,906 13.15 $21,587 $41,994 9.2 3.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Employment and earnings among the Indian people of the project area
are expected to positively impact the high costs of health-care borne
by the United States and the Tribes. Our data suggest clear
relationships between income levels and Federal costs for heart
disease, cancer and diabetes. During the life of the Mni Wiconi
Project, mortality rates among the Indian people in the project area
for the three diseases mentioned will cost the United States and the
Tribes more than $1 billion beyond the level incurred for these
diseases among comparable populations in the non-Indian community
within the project area. While this project alone will not raise income
levels to a point where the excessive rates of heart disease, cancer
and diabetes are significantly diminished, the employment and earnings
stemming from the project will, nevertheless, reduce mortality rates
and costs of these diseases. Please note that between 1990 and 2000 per
capita income on Pine Ridge increased from $3,591 to $6,143, and median
household income increased from $11,260 to $20,569, due in large part
to this project, albeit not sufficient to bring a larger percentage of
families out of poverty (Table 1).
Financial support for the Indian membership has already been
subjected to drastic cuts in funding programs through the Bureau of
Indian Affairs. This project is a source of strong hope that helps off-
set the loss of employment and income in other programs and provide for
an improvement in health and welfare. Tribal leaders have seen that
Welfare Reform legislation and other budget cuts Nation-wide have
created a crisis for tribal government because tribal members have
moved back to the reservations in order to survive. Economic conditions
have resulted in accelerated population growth on the reservations.
The Mni Wiconi Project Act declares that the United States will
work with us under the circumstances:
``. . . the United States has a trust responsibility to ensure that
adequate and safe water supplies are available to meet the economic,
environmental, water supply and public health needs of the Pine Ridge,
Rosebud and Lower Brule Indian Reservations . . .''.
Indian support for this project has not come easily because the
historical experience of broken commitments to the Indian people by the
Federal Government is difficult to overcome. The argument was that
there is no reason to trust and that the Sioux Tribes are being used to
build the non-Indian segments of the project and the Indian segments
would linger to completion. These arguments have been overcome by
better planning, an amended authorization and hard fought agreements
among the parties. The subcommittee is respectfully requested to take
the steps necessary the complete the critical elements of the project
proposed for fiscal year 2004.
The following sections describe the construction activity in each
of the rural water systems.
oglala sioux rural water supply system--distribution
OGLALA SIOUX WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
West Boundary Supply.................................... $506,000
Manderson Loop.......................................... 1,454,000
Rockyford to Redshirt................................... 179,000
White River to HWY 73/44 Junction:
Pump Station, Service Lines and Reservoirs.......... 3,127,000
HWY 73/44 Junction to Kyle.............................. 4,923,000
Indefinite Quantities................................... 35,000
---------------
Total............................................. 10,224,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the conclusion of projects under construction in fiscal year
2002, the Oglala Sioux Tribe completed all facilities that can be
supported from local groundwater. The Tribe, representing more than 40
percent of the project population will rely on the OSRWSS core to
convey Missouri River water to and throughout the Reservation. Much
pipeline has been constructed, primarily between Kyle, Wounded Knee and
Red Shirt and between Pine Ridge Village and the communities of Oglala
and Slim Buttes. Additional construction of the Manderson Loop is
proposed in fiscal year 2005.
Of particular importance to the Oglala Sioux Tribe is the
continuation of the main transmission system from the northeast corner
(Highway 73/44 junction) of the Reservation to Kyle in the central part
of the Reservation. The transmission line is needed to interconnect the
OSRWSS core system with the distribution system within the Reservation
in order to deliver Missouri River water to the populous portions of
the Reservation. This critical segment of the project can be continued
in fiscal year 2005 to coincide with the westward construction of the
OSRWSS core to the northeast corner of the Reservation (see section 2).
It will require funds in fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2007 to
complete. This component of the Oglala system has been deferred for
several years due to inadequate funding. The component is urgently
needed for the OSRWSS core system to be utilized on the Pine Ridge
Indian Reservation.
west river/lyman-jones rural water system--distribution
WR/LJ RURAL WATER SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mellette East........................................... $533,000
Moenville............................................... 9,566,000
Quinn Town Distribution................................. 176,000
Vivian Town............................................. 441,000
Indefinite Quantities................................... 304,000
---------------
Total............................................. 11,020,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continued drought conditions in the project area have created
serious health and economic hardships for WR/LJ members waiting to
receive Mni Wiconi water service. A survey of members attending the WR/
LJ annual meeting on October 8, 2003 in Midland revealed that, of those
members not receiving project water, 67 percent were hauling water for
domestic use and 45 percent were hauling water for livestock. Their
current source of water, highly mineralized wells and dried up dams,
present a serious health hazard and unaffordable increases in
production costs due to the time and cost of hauling water.
The requested appropriation is directed to serving members between
Ft. Pierre and Philip. The highest priority is completion of the
Moenville project. Houston Rose, prior to his death, pioneered initial
efforts to bring quality water to this WR/LJ service area closest to
the Mni Wiconi water treatment plant. The economy of the area he
represented is based on livestock operations that are dependent on
quality water supplies.
WR/LJ is now the water service provider in the towns of Quinn and
Vivian, however, the existing distribution piping is over 50 years old
and is a very high priority for replacement. Funding is also requested
for the construction of pumping station and reservoirs required to
deliver the full design capability of the pipelines under construction.
As a testimony to public recognition of the advantages of quality water
and the reliability of the system WR/LJ continues to add users within
those areas previously constructed. These additions are being financed
by member contributions as part of the statutory non-Federal matching
requirement.
The Mni Wiconi project, due to continued Congressional support, has
progressed to where the project beneficiaries can look forward to its
timely completion and receive the intended project benefits. We
sincerely appreciate your support.
rosebud rural water system (sicangu mni wiconi)
ROSEBUD SIOUX RURAL WATER SYSTEM REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hidden Timber........................................... $1,317,000
Rosebud Improvements.................................... 737,000
Rural Antelope.......................................... 866,000
Okreek.................................................. 2,030,000
Mission Northwest....................................... 447,000
Livestock Water......................................... 1,271,000
Service Connections..................................... 657,000
---------------
Total............................................. 7,325,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2005 efforts build upon the successes of the past 2
years. The Rosebud Core pipeline will begin providing water from the
OSRWSS at Murdo to Rosebud and WR/LJ water users in Mellette County. As
a result, the limited supply of high quality ground water available
from the Rosebud wellfield can be used as a source of supply for
northeast Todd County.
The Rosebud Sioux Tribes efforts in fiscal year 2005 focus on
connecting additional homes to new and existing pipelines. The Antelope
to Okreek Pipeline, completed in late 2003, provides a supply of high
quality ground water to the rural Antelope, northwest Mission, Hidden
Timber and Okreek project areas. In this portion of northern Todd
County, the Oglala Aquifer is not present and ground water is of poor
quality and limited quantity where available. Private and community
wells have failed in the area and while the Antelope to Okreek Pipeline
solved the problem for the community of Okreek, many rural residents
are anxiously waiting for water.
The problems are exacerbated in the Hidden Timber area. Where
ground water occurs, nitrate concentrations are frequently in excess of
the Safe Drinking Water Act primary standard. The high nitrate
concentrations pose an acute threat to the unborn and young children.
The major features of the proposed fiscal year 2005 work plan focus
on distribution and service lines for this area. Proposed projects for
this area include Rural Antelope, Mission Northwest, Okreek and Hidden
Timber. It is envisioned that both private contractors and the tribal
construction program would be responsible for construction.
The other major project proposed for fiscal year 2005 address
improvements needed in the community of Rosebud. In fiscal year 2004,
the Tribe will be connecting the lower older part of Rosebud to the
rural water system. While this will improve the quality and reliability
of supply, improvements are needed to ensure water reaches the users.
In several areas, older cast iron pipe has corroded and needs to be
replaced. In other areas, older asbestos concrete pipe is still in use
and felt to be a health threat. The focus of the work in Rosebud in
fiscal year 2005 is to provide a reliable source of high quality water
to all service connections.
The Tribe will also expand its service line program. The focus of
this effort is new homes and homes that have been constructed since
transmission or distribution lines have been installed. It is also
proposed to start developing livestock watering facilities. The Tribe
has not constructed any of these facilities to date with Mni Wiconi
funding and the realty of prolonged drought is having an affect on
historic livestock watering sources of supply. A reliable source of
water for livestock is necessary to maintain one of the more viable
components of the reservation economy.
The total amount requested for the Sicangu Mni Wiconi in fiscal
year 2005 is $7,325,000.
lower brule rural water system--distribution
The Lower Brule Rural Water System (LBRWS) has gained the support
of the other sponsors to complete its share of the project with funds
appropriated in fiscal year 2005 budget, based on an appropriation of
funds for the project in the range generally received. This support is
not only a benefit for LBRWS and its users but to the project as a
whole. By funding LBRWS in this manner, a savings of approximately $1.5
million will be experienced by the project.
With the funds received in fiscal year 2004, LBRWS will complete
the design, cultural resource evaluation and the securing of easements
for the remaining service areas and installing mainlines and service
lines required to provide water to all of the homes on the Lower Brule
Indian Reservation. The fiscal year 2004 funds will also allow LBRWS to
begin installing water lines to pasture taps. Since the area has
experienced 2 years of drought conditions, many of the dams are dry.
The provision of water will allow some pastures to be utilized that
would have otherwise been of no benefit to the ranchers.
The fiscal year 2005 funds will allow the completion of the
installation of pasture taps and a new 400,000 gallon elevated water
tank in Lower Brule. The existing tank is in a location where the
slides (soil movement) have occurred. As a result, the stability of the
tank's foundation is in question.
operation, maintenance and replacement budget
The sponsors have and will continue to work with Reclamation to
ensure that their budgets are adequate to properly operate, maintain
and replace (OMR) their respective portions of the overall system. The
sponsors will also continue to manage OMR expenses in a manner ensuring
that the limited funds can best be balanced between construction and
OMR. In fiscal year 2003, the approved budget for OMR was $8.228
million, which was adequate. Funding was not adequate in fiscal year
2004 at the $6.254 level and will not be adequate at the same leveling
the administration's proposed fiscal year 2005 budget of $6.254 million
for OMR.
The project has been making significant progress especially over
the last 2 years with the initiation of operation of the OSRWSS Water
Treatment Plant near Ft. Pierre and the installation of a significant
quantity of pipeline. The result is the need for sufficient funds to
properly operate and maintain the functioning system throughout the
project. As a result, the OMR budget must continue to be adequate to
keep pace with the portion of the system that is placed in operation.
In addition to ongoing operation and maintenance activities, water
conservation is an integral part of the OMR of the project. Water
conservation not only provides immediate savings from reduced water use
and production, it also extends the useful life and capacity of the
system. Proposed funding is not adequate to perform water conservation
functions.
______
Prepared Statement of the City of Watsonville, California and Pajaro
Valley Water Management Agency
On behalf of the City of Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley Water
Management Agency (PVWMA), we are submitting this testimony in support
of Federal funding for the Watsonville Area Water Recycling Project.
The project has been targeted to receive $2.0 million as part of the
fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2004 Energy and Water appropriations
bills through the Bureau of Reclamation's Title XVI program. This year,
we respectfully request your support for the inclusion of $6.3 million
in the Bureau of Reclamation's Title XVI program in the fiscal year
2005 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill.
The City of Watsonville and the PVWMA continue to make great
progress on the project. We are working diligently with the Bureau of
Reclamation to develop solutions to the seawater intrusion problem
affecting the water supply of our agricultural and urban water users.
We need not convince you of the vital nature of this project that will
protect the Pajaro Valley's fresh water supply from continued
degradation.
To address the water resource needs of our area, PVWMA is
implementing the Revised Basin Management Plan Project (project).
Capital costs of the project are estimated at $165 million, of which
$80 million is eligible for Federal cost sharing under the Title XVI
program (in 2006 dollars). The Watsonville Water Area Recycling Project
components that have qualified for funding through the Title XVI
program include:
--Recycled Water Treatment Facility;
--Distribution System; and
--Salinity Control Pipeline.
The next several years will be critical for the project and we
anticipate that all construction will be completed by fiscal year 2007.
Certification of the Watsonville Water Area Recycling Project
Feasibility Study is pending a Record of Decision on the Basin
Management Plan Environmental Impact Statement, which is expected by
May 2004.
The following table summarizes projected expenditures for design
and construction of the Title XVI eligible project components.
[In millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected
Expenditures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2004........................................ 9.8
Fiscal year 2005........................................ 25.3
Fiscal year 2006........................................ 31.3
Fiscal year 2007........................................ 13.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We continue to be concerned by the administration's lack of support
for Title XVI projects including the Watsonville Area Water Recycling
Project. The Bureau's fiscal year 2005 budget recently submitted to
Congress includes no funding for our project. In fact, the Bureau
failed to budget for 12 of the 18 eligible projects while requesting
over $1.5 million for itself to administer the program. We strongly
believe that the Title XVI program in general and the Watsonville Area
Water Recycling Project specifically offer effective solutions to the
water supply crisis in our State. Indeed, without the Title XVI
program, water recycling in our area might not be feasible and would
force increased reliance on an already oversubscribed Central Valley
Project. We question the wisdom of reducing the Bureau's participation
in Title XVI and ask that you work with your colleagues in support of
the program as well as funding for the Watsonville Area Water Recycling
Project.
We are excited to report that the project is moving ahead on
schedule. Approximately $18 million of project components have been
constructed through fiscal year 2003. The accelerated construction of
these project components allows PVWMA to deliver water early and
demonstrate continued progress. In fiscal year 2004, we initiated work
on the final design of the distribution system, the recycled water
facilities, blending facilities and water wells, and salinity control
pipeline. The design for each component will be completed in early
fiscal year 2005 and construction of the projects will commence
immediately thereafter.
Please feel free to contact PVWMA's Washington Representative or us
if you have any questions or require additional information.
______
Prepared Statement of the Lewis and Clark Rural Water System
background
The Lewis and Clark Rural Water System is requesting $35 million
through the Bureau of Reclamation in Federal funding for continuing
construction activities in 2005. These funds will be used for
construction, acquisition of easements and property, engineering, and
associated legal and professional costs. The project has completed
required planning and environmental reviews, and major construction
will begin this year. The $17 million secured in fiscal year 2004 will
enable Lewis and Clark to install the first segments of the raw water
pipeline, provide emergency water connections for communities in Iowa,
and various other interconnections throughout the water system. The
three member-states and the local project sponsors have also
contributed much to this project, with roughly $11 million in local
funds to be made available in fiscal year 2005.
The President's budget requests $17.5 million for Lewis and Clark,
which reflects a commitment he made to the project last summer. While
this request is a welcome starting point, $35 million is necessary to
fully-fund the project this year to ensure construction activities will
continue in 2005. Even though we are in the early stages of
construction, it is important to keep the project on schedule in order
to provide this much-needed water source to area communities as soon as
possible.
The Lewis and Clark Rural Water System Act became law in July 2000
(Public Law 106-246). When complete, the project will provide safe,
reliable drinking water to approximately 200,000 people in South
Dakota, Minnesota, and Iowa. Lewis and Clark represents a unique
regional approach by three States to address common problems with area
water resources in a more effective and cost-efficient way than each
State could do alone. Regional water problems include shallow wells and
aquifers prone to contamination, compliance with new Federal drinking
water standards, and increasing water demand due to population growth
and economic expansion.
The Lewis and Clark project will utilize an aquifer adjacent to the
Missouri River near Vermillion, South Dakota, and will distribute water
to member communities in an area of approximately 5,000 square miles,
roughly the size of Connecticut. When complete, the drinking water will
pass through a well system, a water treatment plant, and a non-looped
distribution system. The system also will include water storage tanks
that will provide approximately a 1-day supply. The project will
require an estimated 10 to 12 years to complete.
plans for construction in 2004 and 2005
Lewis and Clark developed a schedule for construction and related
services to be performed during the next 2 years. The following work is
anticipated in fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2005, subject to the
availability of funding.
Projects Planned for Fiscal Year 2004
Raw Water Pipeline--Segment 1.--This project has been awarded to
Winter Brothers Underground for $1,850,000. Construction will begin in
May and will be completed by the end of September.
Raw Water Pipeline--Segments 2 and 3.--This project is currently in
the final design phase. Permit applications and easements are currently
being processed. It is anticipated this project would be awarded to a
contractor in the early summer and construction start in late summer/
early fall 2004.
Site J Production Pump Test Well.--Lewis & Clark currently plans to
drill another test production well south and west of Vermillion. The
well will be a +/-105 deep vertical well and will be sized to be an
actual production well for the project. The construction period will be
from August 15 through November 15.
Treated Water Pipeline--SD Segment 1.--The Treated Water Pipeline
Segment 1 will involve construction of a pipeline from west of Sioux
Falls to Tea, South Dakota. The project will include construction of
the main 48" treated water transmission pipeline for the Lewis & Clark
System. Lewis & Clark plans to bid and award this project in September
2004.
Treated Water Pipeline--IA Segment 1 (Iowa Emergency Connection).--
The first phase of the Iowa Emergency Connection will involve a
pipeline from the Sioux Center water treatment plant to Hull, Iowa. The
project will include construction of the main treated water
transmission pipeline for the Lewis & Clark System and service
connection lines for Sioux Center and Hull. Lewis & Clark plans to bid
and award this project in September 2004 or 2005, depending upon
funding levels.
Water Treatment Plant Pre-design.--This task includes a preliminary
design and evaluation of the treatment plant. The goal is to complete
the pre-design and provide drawings, draft specifications and technical
memoranda for a Value Engineering review in early 2005.
Projects Planned for Fiscal Year 2005
Fiscal year 2005 activities will include a continuation of the
projects listed above for 2004, plus the following additional system
components:
Treated Water Pipeline--SD Segment 2.--The second phase of the
treated water pipeline construction in South Dakota would include
construction of the main 48" pipeline from Tea south to Lennox. Part or
all of this segment may be included in the 2004 construction if delays
are experienced elsewhere in the project. Lewis & Clark would bid and
award this project in the summer of 2005.
Treated Water Pipeline--SD Segment 3.--The third phase of the
treated water pipeline construction in South Dakota would be a
continuation of the main 48" pipeline south from Lennox to Highway 18.
Lewis & Clark would bid and award this project in the summer of 2005.
(Under Consideration) Treated Water Pipeline--SD Segment 4 (portion
of Parker service line).--This phase would include a portion of the
service line to Parker, South Dakota. Initial construction of this line
would be constructed to the turnout for South Lincoln RWS. If pursued,
Lewis & Clark would bid and award this project in the summer of 2005.
(Under Consideration) Treated Water Pipeline--SD Segment 5 (South
Dakota Emergency Connection).--The South Dakota Emergency Connection
may include construction of a pipeline from the east side of Sioux
Falls to connect to Lincoln County Rural Water System. The project
would include construction of the main treated water transmission
pipeline for the Lewis & Clark System. This part of the emergency
connection will permit temporary transmission of water from Minnehaha
Community Water Corporation (MCWC) to the Lincoln County RWS.
Additional water could be provided to Tea, Lincoln County RWS and
Harrisburg. If pursued, Lewis & Clark would bid and award this project
in the summer of 2005.
(Under Consideration) Treated Water Pipeline--IA Segments 2 (Iowa
Emergency Connection).--The next phase of the Iowa Emergency Connection
may include building a short section of Lewis & Clark pipeline to
connect Sheldon, Iowa to a temporary source of water. If pursued, Lewis
& Clark plans to bid and award this project in the summer of 2005.
Treated Water Pipeline--MN Segment 1 (Minnesota Emergency
Connection).--The Minnesota Emergency Connection will involve
construction of a pipeline from Magnolia to east of Adrian, Minnesota.
The project will include construction of the main treated water
transmission pipeline for the Lewis & Clark System. The emergency
connection will pump water from Rock County RWS to Lincoln-Pipestone
RWS and other Minnesota water systems under future contracts. Lewis &
Clark plans to bid and award this project in the summer of 2005 or
2006, depending on funding levels.
Water Treatment Plant Design.--The Value Engineering (VE) review
will be performed in early 2005. The design team will proceed with
design of the water treatment plant incorporating the results and
recommendations from the VE review.
______
Prepared Statement of the Mid-Dakota Rural Water System
fiscal year 2005 funding request
The Mid-Dakota Project is requesting an appropriations of $17.015
million provided through the Bureau of Reclamation's project
construction program for fiscal year 2005. As with our past submissions
to this subcommittee, Mid-Dakota's fiscal year 2005 request is based on
a detailed analysis of our ability to proceed with construction during
the fiscal year. In all previous years, Mid-Dakota has fully obligated
its appropriated funds, including Federal, State, and local, and could
have obligated significantly more were they available.
An appropriation of $17.015 million for fiscal year 2005 will
complete the Federal Government's funding obligation for the initial
construction of the authorized Project. It is with pleasure that Mid-
Dakota agrees with President Bush's $17.015 million request for Mid-
Dakota in fiscal year 2005.
tentative fiscal year 2005 construction schedule \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Project features listed in table are subject to rescheduling
based upon funding provided and readiness to proceed and other factors.
Actual construction activities, therefore, may not coincide exactly
with schedule presented here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed construction would provide service to an estimated
1,500 more people than are currently receiving or scheduled to receive
Project drinking water.
MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER SYSTEM STATEMENT OF CAPABILITIES FISCAL YEAR 2005 (OCTOBER 2004 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2005)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection--Percent Engin. and
Construction of Const. Legal Subtotals
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source and Intake (Percent) .............. 12 2 ..............
Expansion $80,000 $57,600 $9,600 $547,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotals $480,000 $7,600 $9,600 $547,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Water Treatment (Percent) .............. 12 2 ..............
Expansion $710,000 $445,200 $74,200 $4,229,400
VFD IEEE comp. $250,000 $30,000 $5,000 $285,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotals $3,960,000 $475,200 $79,200 $4,514,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Main Trans. Pipe (Percent) .............. 8 2 ..............
Expansion--BPS $2,175,000 $174,000 $43,500 $2,392,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotals $2,175,000 $174,000 $43,500 $2,392,500
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dist. Pipeline (Percent) .............. 6 6 ..............
Wolsey (4-3P (2)) $2,610,000 $156,600 $156,600 $2,923,200
Pearl Creek $1,815,000 $108,900 $108,900 $2,032,800
Staum Dam $1,450,000 $87,000 $87,000 $1,624,000
Redfield East $415,000 $24,900 $24,900 $464,800
Vaults and stations $280,000 $16,800 $16,800 $313,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotals $6,570,000 $394,200 $394,200 $7,358,400
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Water Storage (Percent) .............. 12 6 ..............
Canning Tank $1,120,000 $134,400 $67,200 $1,321,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotals $1,120,000 $134,400 $67,200 $1,321,600
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SCADA and Controls (Percent) .............. 8 8 ..............
Controls & SCADA $295,000 $23,600 $23,600 $342,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotals $295,000 $23,600 $23,600 $342,200
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL $4,600,000 $1,259,000 $617,300 $16,476,300
Administration as a Percent of .............. 1.5 .............. $219,000
Construction
Bur. of Rec. as a Percent of .............. 3.0 .............. $438,000
Construction
Contingencies as a percent of .............. 10.0 .............. $1,460,000
Construction
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION .............. ................... .............. $18,593,300
CAPABILITIES--FISCAL YEAR 2005
WETLAND COMPONENT REQUEST--FISCAL .............. ................... .............. $317,000
YEAR 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL FISCAL YEAR 2005 .............. ................... .............. $18,910,300
CAPABILITIES--FISCAL YEAR 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total capabilities are greater than the amount remaining in
authorized funds. If a funding shortfall is realized, Mid-Dakota will
examine its options for funding the shortfall when the amount is known.
impacts of fiscal year 2005 award
The most obvious impact of any significant reduction from Mid-
Dakota's request will be the delay of construction of one or more
Project components. The $17.015 million will allow for the completion
of the Mid-Dakota Project as it is currently authorized. The requested
appropriation will provide the necessary funds to proceed with
construction of multiple contracts summarized earlier in this
testimony.
history of project funding
The Project was authorized by Congress and signed into law by
President George H.W. Bush in October 1992. The Federal authorization
for the project totaled $100 million (1989 dollars) in a combination of
Federal grant and loan funds (grant funds may not exceed 85 percent of
Federal contribution). The State authorization was for $8.4 million
(1989 dollars). A breakdown of Project cost ceilings are as follows:
PROJECT COST CEILINGS (FISCAL YEAR 2004)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Ceiling......................................... $140,279,000
State Ceiling........................................... 9,670,000
---------------
Subtotal Rural Water System....................... 149,949,000
Wetland Enhancement Component........................... 2,756,000
---------------
Total Project Cost Ceiling........................ 152,705,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total authorized indexed cost of the project is approximately
$152.705 million (fiscal year 2005 figures were not available at the
time of writing this testimony). All Federal funding considered, the
Government has provided 89 percent of its commitment ($126.726 \2\
million of $143.035 million) to provide construction funding for the
Project. When considering the Federal and State combined awards, the
project is approximately 89 percent complete, in terms of financial
commitments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Includes $15.0 million appropriated in fiscal year 2004, but
does not include Agency ``underfinancing'' or 2005 Indexing.
SUMMARIZATION OF FEDERAL FUNDING
[In millions of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total
Mid- Pres. Conf. Bureau Additional Fed.
Fed. Fiscal year Dakota Budg. House Senate Enacted Award Funds Funds
Request Levels Levels Provided
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1994........................................................... 7.991 ......... ......... 2.000 2.000 1.500 .......... 1.500
1995........................................................... 22.367 ......... ......... 8.000 4.000 3.600 .......... 3.600
1996........................................................... 23.394 2.500 12.500 10.500 11.500 10.902 2.323 13.225
1997........................................................... 29.686 2.500 11.500 12.500 10.000 9.400 1.500 10.900
1998........................................................... 29.836 10.000 12.000 13.000 13.000 12.221 1.000 13.221
1999........................................................... 32.150 10.000 10.000 20.000 15.000 14.100 2.000 16.100
2000........................................................... 28.800 5.000 15.000 7.000 14.000 12.859 1.000 13.859
2001........................................................... 24.000 6.040 11.040 6.040 10.040 9.398 .......... 9.398
2002........................................................... 30.684 10.040 15.040 15.540 15.040 13.611 0.861 14.472
2003........................................................... 29.360 10.040 17.040 17.900 17.900 16.129 0.800 16.929
2004........................................................... 23.869 2.040 12.040 15.040 15.040 13.522 .......... 13.522
2005........................................................... 17.015 17.015 ......... ......... ......... ......... .......... .........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals \1\............................................... ......... 75.175 116.16 127.52 127.52 117.242 9.484 126.726
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes Congressional appropriations for the operation and maintenance of the ``Wetland Enhancement'' Component of the Project.
Additionally, the State of South Dakota has contributed $9.67
million in grants to the Mid-Dakota Project, in previous years. The
State of South Dakota completed its initial authorized financial
obligation to the Mid-Dakota Project in the 1998 Legislative Session.
construction in progress
Mid-Dakota began construction in September of 1994, with the
construction of its Water Intake and Pump Station. Since that eventful
day of first construction start, we have bid, awarded, and completed 23
project components and are into construction on eight other major
Project components. The following table provides a synopsis of each
major construction contract:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contract Amount Percent
Contract with Change Work Complete to Dollars Contract Completion Date
Orders Date Comp.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1-1, Intake Station................... $3,944,961.74 $3,944,961.74 100 02/28/97
1-1A, Intake Rip-Rap.................. $87,178.75 $87,178.75 100 05/02/98
1-1B, Intake Road..................... $26,187.50 $26,187.50 100 10/01/99
2-1, Water Treat. Plant............... $10,242,564.00 $10,242,564.00 100 04/28/98
2-1A, WTP Controls.................... $14,628.98 $14,628.98 100 08/03/00
O&M Center Paving..................... $58,473.87 $58,473.87 100 06/13/00
3-1A, Raw Water Pipe.................. $1,719,251.30 $1,719,251.30 100 03/29/96
3-1B, Main Trans. Pipe................ $7,022,055.73 $7,022,055.73 100 12/21/97
3-1C, Main Trans. Pipe................ $4,793,104.90 $4,793,104.90 100 11/10/97
3-1D, CP System....................... $214,651.00 $214,651.00 100 11/01/00
3-2A, Main Trans. Pipe................ $3,155,454.93 $3,155,454.93 100 12/03/99
3-2B, Main Trans. Pipe................ $3,356,564.67 $3,356,564.67 100 12/09/99
3-3A, Main Trans. Pipe................ $2,383,513.37 $2,383,513.37 100 11/01/02
3-3B, Main Trans. Pipe................ $3,881,892.39 $3,871,671.00 99 11/13/03
3-3C, Main Trans. Pipe................ $2,630,672.25 $2,601,234.00 99 11/13/03
4-1A/B (1-5) Dist. Pipe............... $10,572,231.62 $10,572,231.62 100 10/20/97 \1\
11/15/97 \1\
11/15/98
05/30/99
4-1A/B (6) Dist. Pipe................. $9,027,572.49 $9,027,572.49 100 10/22/99 \1\
12/03/00
4-2 (1) Dist. Pipe.................... $4,707,394.81 $4,707,394.81 100 11/10/00
4-2 (2) Dist. Pipe.................... $3,000,176.49 $3,000,176.49 100 11/13/00
4-2 (4-5) Dist. Pipe.................. $5,134,974.43 $5,134,974.43 100 10/31/01
4-2A (4) Dist. Pipe................... $1,191,329.30 $1,191,329.30 100 10/31/01
07/01/02
4-2AP (2-3) Dist. Pipe................ $11,435,814.24 $11,114,781.91 97 11/17/02
12/31/03
4-2AV (2-3) Dist. Pipe................ $686,749.00 $686,749.00 100 11/01/03
5-1, Highmore Tank.................... $1,433,000.00 $1,433,000.00 100 10/20/97
5-1A (1) Onida Tank................... $397,688.00 $397,688.00 100 06/30/99
5-1A(2--4) Oko. Agar Getty. Tanks..... $1,526,453.00 $1,526,453.00 100 09/18/00
5-2 (1) Mac's Corner Tank............. $561,100.69 $561,100.69 100 10/16/00
5-2 (2-3) Rezac Lake & Collins Slough $911,720.00 $911,720.00 100 09/01/01
Tanks.
5-2A (1-3) Ames & Wess. Springs Tanks. $868,490.00 $868,490.00 100 09/01/02
09/01/03
5-2A (2) Cottonwood Lake Tank......... $695,862.98 $695,862.98 100 09/01/02
5-3 Wolsey Tank....................... $2,021,414.00 $1,281,594.00 63 11/01/04
6-1 SCADA System...................... $888,260.50 $837,680.72 94 12/01/03
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL........................... $98,591,386.93 $97,440,295.18
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Intermediate completion date.
closing
Mid-Dakota is very aware of the tough funding decisions that face
the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee and we do not envy the
difficult job that lies ahead. We strongly urge, the subcommittee to
look closely at the Mid-Dakota Project and recognize the dire need that
exists. Consider the exceptionally high level of local and State
support. And finally consider the fact that fully funding the fiscal
year 2005 appropriation request as submitted by the President and by
Mid-Dakota will fully fund the initial authorized components of the
Mid-Dakota Project.
Again, we thank the subcommittee for its strong support, both past
and present.
______
Prepared Statement of the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission
summary
This statement is submitted in support of appropriations for the
Colorado River Basin salinity control program of the Department of the
Interior's Bureau of Reclamation. Congress designated the Bureau of
Reclamation to be the lead agency for salinity control in the Colorado
River Basin by the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974.
Public Law 104-20 reconfirmed the Bureau of Reclamation's role. A total
of $17.5 million is requested for fiscal year 2005 to implement the
authorized salinity control program of the Bureau of Reclamation. The
President's appropriation request is inadequate because studies have
shown that the implementation of the salinity control program has
fallen behind the pace needed to control salinity. An appropriation of
$17.5 million for Reclamation's salinity control program is necessary
to protect water quality standards for salinity and to prevent
unnecessary levels of economic damage from increased salinity levels in
water delivered to the Lower Basin States and Mexico.
statement
The water quality standards for salinity of the Colorado River must
be protected while the Basin States continue to develop their compact
apportioned waters of the river. Studies have shown that the
implementation of the salinity control program has fallen below the
threshold necessary to prevent future exceedence of the numeric
criteria of the water quality standards for salinity in the Lower Basin
of the Colorado River. The salinity standards for the Colorado River
have been adopted by the seven Basin States and approved by EPA. While
currently the standards have not been exceeded, salinity control
projects must be brought on-line in a timely and cost-effective manner
to prevent future effects that would cause the numeric criteria to be
exceeded.
The Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act was authorized by
Congress and signed into law in 1974. The seven Colorado River Basin
States, in response to the Clean Water Act of 1972, had formed the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum, a body comprised of
gubernatorial representatives from the seven States. The Forum was
created to provide for interstate cooperation in response to the Clean
Water Act, and to provide the States with information necessary to
comply with Sections 303(a) and (b) of the Act. The Forum has become
the primary means for the Basin States to coordinate with Federal
agencies and Congress to support the implementation of the salinity
control program for the Colorado River Basin.
Bureau of Reclamation studies show that damages from the Colorado
River to United States water users are about $300,000,000 per year.
Damages are estimated at $75,000,000 per year for every additional
increase of 30 milligrams per liter in salinity of the Colorado River.
Control of salinity is necessary for the Colorado River Basin States,
including New Mexico, to continue to develop their compact-apportioned
waters of the Colorado River.
It is essential that appropriations for the funding of the salinity
control program be timely in order to comply with the water quality
standards for salinity to prevent unnecessary economic damages in the
United States, and to protect the quality of the water that the United
States is obligated to deliver to Mexico. An appropriation of only the
amount specified in the President's budget request is inadequate to
protect the quality of water in the Colorado River and prevent
unnecessary salinity damages in the States of the Lower Colorado River
Basin. Studies have shown that the implementation of the salinity
control program has fallen behind the pace needed to control salinity.
Although the United States has always met the water quality standard
for salinity of water delivered to Mexico under Minute No. 242 of the
International Boundary and Water Commission, the United States through
the U.S. Section of IBWC is currently addressing a request by Mexico
for better quality water.
Congress amended the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act in
July 1995 (Public Law 104-20). The salinity control program authorized
by Congress by the amendment has proven to be very cost-effective, and
the Basin States are standing ready with up-front cost sharing.
Proposals from public and private sector entities in response to the
Bureau of Reclamation's advertisement have far exceeded available
funding. Basin States cost sharing funds are available for the $17.5
million appropriation request for fiscal year 2005. The Basin States
cost sharing adds 43 cents for each Federal dollar appropriated.
Public Law 106-459 gave the Bureau of Reclamation additional
spending authority for the salinity control program. With the
additional authority in place and significant cost sharing by the Basin
States, it is essential that the salinity control program be funded at
the level requested by the Forum and Basin States to protect the water
quality of the Colorado River.
Maintenance and operation of the Bureau of Reclamation's salinity
control projects and investigations to identify new cost-effective
salinity control projects are necessary for the success of the salinity
control program. Investigation of new opportunities for salinity
control are critical as the Basin States continue to develop and use
their compact-apportioned waters of the Colorado River. The water
quality standards for salinity and the United States water quality
requirements pursuant to treaty obligations with Mexico are dependent
on timely implementation of salinity control projects, adequate funding
to maintain and operate existing projects, and investigations to
determine new cost-effective projects.
I urge the Congress to appropriate $17.5 million to the Bureau of
Reclamation for the Colorado River Basin salinity control program,
adequate funding for operation and maintenance of existing projects and
adequate funding for general investigations to identify new salinity
control opportunities. Also, I fully support testimony by the Forum's
Executive Director, Jack Barnett, in request of this appropriation, and
the recommendation of an appropriation of the same amount by the
federally chartered Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Advisory
Council.
______
Letter From the State Engineer's Office, Wyoming
Cheyenne, Wyoming, May 18, 2004.
The Honorable Pete V. Domenici,
Chairman,
The Honorable Harry Reid,
Ranking Member,
Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, Committee on Appropriations,
United States Senate, 127 Dirksen Senate Office Building,
Washington, DC 20510.
Dear Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid: This letter is sent in
support of fiscal year 2003 funding for the Bureau of Reclamation's
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project--Title II Program. Thank
you in advance for inclusion of this letter in the formal hearing
record concerning fiscal year 2005 appropriations.
The Colorado River provides municipal and industrial water for 27
million people and irrigation water to nearly 4 million acres of land
in the United States. The River is also the water source for some 2.3
million people and 500,000 acres in Mexico. Limitations on users'
abilities to make the greatest use of that water supply due to the
River's high concentration of total dissolved solids (hereafter
referred to as the salinity of the water) are a major concern in both
the United States and Mexico. Salinity in the water source especially
affects agricultural, municipal, and industrial water users. While
economic detriments and damages in Mexico are unquantified, the Bureau
of Reclamation presently estimates salinity-related damages in the
United States to amount to $330 million per year. The River's high salt
content is in almost equal part due to naturally occurring geologic
features that include subsurface salt formations and discharging saline
springs; and the resultant concentrating effects of our users man's
storage, use and reuse of the waters of the River system. Over-
application of irrigation water by agriculture is a large contributor
of salt to the Colorado River as irrigation water moves below the crop
root zone, seeps through saline soils and then returns to the river
system.
The 1944 Mexico Treaty obligates the United States to provide 1.5
million acre-feet of water to Mexico, but does not address quality.
Mexico filed a formal protest in the 1960's when the salinity levels of
water being delivered pursuant to the Treaty increased sharply. Several
minutes, including Minute 242 to the Treaty, were negotiated to address
the water quality concerns voiced by Mexico. Minute 242 requires the
average annual salinity of the Colorado River water delivered to Mexico
upstream of Mexico's principal diversion dam (Morelos Dam) can be no
more than 115 parts per million (PPM), plus or minus 30 PPM higher than
the average salinity of the water arriving at Imperial Dam, the
lowermost point of major water diversion in the United States.
The Environmental Protection Agency's interpretation of the 1972
amendments to the Clean Water Act required the seven Basin States to
adopt water quality standards for salinity levels in the Colorado
River. In light of the EPA's regulation to require water quality
standards for salinity in the Basin, the Governors of Arizona,
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming created the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Forum as an interstate
coordination mechanism in 1973. To address these international and
regionally important salinity problems, the Congress enacted the
Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act of 1974. Title I addressed
the United States' obligations to Mexico to control the River's
salinity to ensure the United States' water deliveries to Mexico are
within the specified salinity concentration range. Title II of the Act
authorized control measures upstream of Imperial Dam and directed the
Secretary of the Interior to construct several salinity control
projects, most of which are located in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.
Title II of the Act was again amended in 1995 and 2000 to direct the
Bureau of Reclamation to conduct a basin-wide salinity control program.
This program awards grants to non-Federal entities, on a competitive-
bid basis, which initiate and carry out salinity control projects. The
basin-wide program has demonstrated significantly improved cost-
effectiveness, as computed on $1 per ton of salt basis, as compared to
the prior Reclamation-initiated projects. The Forum was heavily
involved in the development of the 1974 Act and its subsequent
amendments, and continues to actively oversee the Federal agencies'
salinity control program efforts.
During the past 31 years, the seven State Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Forum has actively assisted the Federal agencies,
including the Bureau of Reclamation, in implementing this unique and
important program. At its October 2003 meeting, the Forum recommended
that the Bureau of Reclamation seek to have appropriated and should
expend for Colorado River Basin salinity control the sum of $17,500,000
in fiscal year 2005. We strongly believe these efforts constitute one
of the most successful Federal/State cooperative non-point source
pollution control programs in the United States.
The State of Wyoming greatly appreciates the subcommittee's support
of the Colorado River Salinity Control Program in past years. We
suggest this important basin-wide water quality improvement program
merits continued funding and support by your subcommittee.
With best regards,
John W. Shields,
Interstate Streams Engineer, for
Patrick T. Tyrrell,
Wyoming State Engineer, Wyoming Member, Colorado River Basin
Salinity Control Forum.
______
Prepared Statement of the State of Wyoming
I write to request your support for an appropriation in fiscal year
2005 of $5,234,000 to the Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line
item entitled ``Endangered Species Recovery Implementation Program''
for the Upper Colorado Region. The President's recommended budget for
fiscal year 2005 includes this line-item amount. The funding
designation we seek is as follows: $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado
River Endangered Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River
Basin Recovery Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and
Wildlife Management and Development.
These highly successful, cooperative programs are ongoing
partnerships among the States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and
Wyoming, Indian tribes, Federal agencies and water, power and
environmental interests. The programs' objectives are to recover
endangered fish species while water development proceeds in compliance
with the Endangered Species Act. The programs reflect a prudent
approach to providing endangered species conservation and recovery
within the framework of the Act, while concurrently resolving critical
conflicts between endangered species recovery and the development and
use of Compact-apportioned water resources in the Upper Colorado River
Basin region of the Intermountain West.
The requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow
construction of fish passage structures at the Grand Valley Project and
Price-Stubb diversion dams on the Colorado River near Grand Junction,
Colorado. Fish passage will provide access to an additional 50 miles of
historic habitat upstream of these dams. Floodplain restoration
activities will continue at high-priority sites and is especially
important for the survival of the razorback sucker species. Screening
of existing diversion canals, needed to prevent endangered fish from
being drawn out of the river and into canal and power plant intake
structures, will proceed at the Redlands Water and Power Company and
Bureau of Reclamation-constructed Grand Valley Project facilities. The
requested funding for the San Juan River Recovery Program will be used
for program management, propagation facilities, stocking efforts, non-
native management efforts and construction of a fish screen in the
Hogback Irrigation Project canal. Additional hatchery facilities,
restoring floodplain habitat and fish passage, regulating and supplying
instream habitat flows, installing diversion canal screens and
controlling non-native fish populations are key components of the
capital construction efforts ongoing in both programs.
Substantial non-Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the four
States, power users, and water users in support of these recovery
programs. Public Law 106-392, as amended by Public Law 107-375,
authorizes the Federal Government to provide up to $46 million of cost
sharing for these two ongoing recovery programs' remaining capital
construction projects. The four participating states are contributing
$17 million and $17 million is being contributed from revenues derived
from the sale of Colorado River Storage Project (CRSP) hydroelectric
power. These facts demonstrate the strong commitment and effective
partnerships that are present in both of these successful programs.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. On
behalf of the citizens of Wyoming, I thank you for that support and
request the subcommittee's assistance for fiscal year 2005 funding to
ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial participation
in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Central Arizona Water Conservation District
(CAWCD)
Mr. Chairman, the Central Arizona Water Conservation District
(CAWCD) is pleased to offer the following testimony regarding the
fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Development appropriations request by
the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Lower Colorado Region.
The Central Arizona Project or ``CAP'' was authorized by the 90th
Congress of the United States under the Colorado River Basin Project
Act of 1968. The CAP is a multi-purpose water resource development
project designed to deliver the remainder of Arizona's entitlement of
Colorado River water into the central and southern portions of the
State for municipal and industrial, agricultural, and Indian uses.
CAWCD was created in 1971 as the local governmental entity responsible
for contracting with the United States to repay the reimbursable
construction costs of the CAP and, subsequently to operate and maintain
the completed project. Its service area is comprised of Maricopa, Pima,
and Pinal counties. CAWCD is a tax-levying public improvement district,
a political subdivision, and a municipal corporation, and represents
roughly 80 percent of the water users and taxpayers of the State of
Arizona. CAWCD is governed by a 15-member Board of Directors elected
from the three counties it serves. CAWCD's Board members are public
officers who serve without pay.
Project repayment is provided for through a Master Repayment
Contract between CAWCD and the United States. Project repayment began
in 1994. To date, CAWCD has repaid $740 million of CAP construction
costs to the United States.
central arizona project
In its fiscal year 2005 budget request, Reclamation seeks
$34,087,000 for the CAP. Of this amount, $21,358,000 is requested for
the continuation of construction of water distribution systems for
various Indian water users. CAWCD supports full funding for this
important program.
Reclamation is also requesting $1,849,000 to continue tendon
repairs to the Centennial, Jackrabbit, and Hassayampa siphons.
Completing the tendon repairs to these siphons is critical to the long
term reliability of the CAP water delivery system; therefore, CAWCD
strongly supports this appropriation request.
An amount of $6,692,000 is earmarked to fund activities associated
with implementation of a 1994 biological opinion of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (FWS) pertaining to delivery of CAP water to the Gila
River Basin and for native fish activities on the Santa Cruz River.
$1,951,000 and $28,000, respectively, are requested to complete
environmental activities at Modified Roosevelt Dam and to complete a
reservoir limnology follow-up study at Lake Pleasant. CAWCD supports
these budget requests.
Reclamation is requesting $959,000 to begin land acquisition and
right-of-way activities, and to continue coordination and design
elements for the water supply reliability features of the Tucson
Reliability Division, also known as Tucson Terminal Storage. A
stipulation that settles a 1995 lawsuit between CAWCD and Reclamation
over CAP costs requires Reclamation to consult with CAWCD before
proceeding with the development of these features because of their
potential impact on CAWCD's repayment obligation for CAP. Reclamation
has not consulted with CAWCD, the city of Tucson, or other Tucson area
customers about these activities. Until such consultation occurs, CAWCD
opposes any funding for land acquisition and right of way activities
for the Tucson Reliability Division.
colorado river basin salinity control project--title i
In its fiscal year 2005 budget request, Reclamation is requesting
$10,869,000 under the Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project--
Title I. This program supports maintenance of the Yuma Desalting Plant
(YDP), maintaining the U.S. Bypass Drain and the Mexico Bypass Drain,
and ensuring that Mexican Treaty salinity requirements are met.
Currently, the YDP is not operational. Instead, Reclamation is allowing
all Wellton-Mohawk drainage water (over 100,000 acre-feet per year) to
bypass the YDP and flow to the Santa Clara Slough in Mexico. These
flows are not accounted for as deliveries to Mexico under the 1944
Mexican Treaty and represent a significant depletion of the Colorado
River water currently in storage. Continuing this practice will
eventually reduce the amount of water available to the Central Arizona
Project, the lowest priority water user in the Colorado River basin,
and increase the risk of future shortages. The Colorado River system is
now in its fifth consecutive year of below normal runoff, and water
levels in Lake Powell and Lake Mead are at their lowest levels in over
30 years. In fact, water year 2002 was the lowest runoff year in
recorded history on the Colorado River. Reclamation's operation of the
YDP would conserve an additional 100,000 acre-feet per year of Colorado
River water for use by the lower basin States. This amount is roughly
equal to the City of Phoenix's annual subcontract entitlement to CAP
water.
The House of Representatives Report accompanying the fiscal year
1995 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill directed
Reclamation to maintain the YDP so as to be capable of operating at
one-third capacity with a 1-year notice of funding. Conference Report
108-357 that accompanied the fiscal year 2004 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act directed the Bureau of Reclamation to
expedite its modifications to the YDP to enable state of the art
operation and to accelerate permitting and environmental compliance
activities. A report to the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations was due within 180 days. Reclamation indicates that this
report is currently being prepared.
Reclamation's fiscal year 2005 budget justification documents again
provide no indication that it has any intention of actually operating
the YDP. The budget request for fiscal year 2005 is $381,000 less than
Reclamation's fiscal year 2004 budget request. Of this amount, $781,000
is requested for Title I research technology to ``. . . promote less
expensive operation of the YDP and exploration of new technology to
keep the YDP viable as a tool to address future water resource needs.''
According to Reclamation's budget justification documents, research
advancements have already realized a cumulative savings of $10,000,000
in full plant operating expenses. This is an interesting statement in
light of the fact that the plant is not being operated. It is also
interesting to note that while Reclamation estimates $24 million per
year would be needed to operate the plant, it is requesting about $10
million in order not to operate it. The $781,000 should be redirected
toward activities necessary to make the YDP operational.
Reclamation is requesting $1,780,000 for continuing data gathering
and analysis regarding the salinity of flows arriving at Imperial Dam
and flows going into Mexico as well as work associated with minimizing
Wellton-Mohawk drainage flows. Work also includes operation of sludge
disposal equipment and activities required to purify feed water to the
plant. CAWCD understands that most of this work is necessary, but not
directly related to YDP operations. However, since the YDP is not
operational, it is not clear what is being done for sludge disposal and
feed water purification. If this is pretreatment for water treated at
the research facility that is already included in the $781,000
previously mentioned, then that portion of the $1,780,000 requested
should be redirected to YDP rehabilitation.
Reclamation is requesting $5,771,000 for continuing efforts to
ensure the Yuma Desalting Plant can operate to meet Mexican Treaty
requirements. This is $147,000 more than Reclamation's fiscal year 2004
budget request for this same line item. Work includes long-term
maintenance of Yuma Desalting Plant infrastructure and facilities,
maintenance of sections of the Bypass Drain, Protective and Regulatory
Pumping Unit and mitigation features. Reclamation's narrative does not
provide enough information to determine how much of this total amount
is needed for features other than YDP; however, past spending reports,
prepared by Reclamation, indicate about 50 percent or $2.9 million
might be available for necessary maintenance and rehabilitation to
restore operational capability at YDP.
Reclamation is requesting $483,000 to continue a long-term program
to bank water and/or pursue short-term agricultural water right leases
to offset the need to operate the plant. This is $2,759,000 less than
Reclamation's fiscal year 2004 budget request for the same line item.
There is no possibility for a program to bank water in 2005. Any plans
for water right leases/land fallowing will require several million
dollars. Reclamation also notes these funds would complete the
permitting and environmental compliance process for YDP operations.
CAWCD supports this request only to the extent needed to complete the
actions, documentation and permits necessary to operate YDP.
Reclamation has included a line item in its appropriations request
for $2,054,000 for replacement of high pressure reverse osmosis pumps
to correct corrosion problems and to continue to improve plant
readiness and correct design deficiencies. CAWCD supports Reclamation's
efforts to repair any design deficiencies. We encourage Reclamation to
ensure that they have a comprehensive plan in place.
Using the information provided in Reclamation's appropriation
request, it appears that of the $10,869,000 requested about $6,735,000
could be used for rehabilitation and modernization of the YDP with a
goal of one-third operational capability by the end of 2006. That
presumes Reclamation will spend $2 to $3 million of 2004 appropriations
on such activities and that the budget will remain relatively level in
2006.
CAWCD requests that language be included in the fiscal year 2005
Energy and Water Appropriations bill directing Reclamation to take the
necessary steps to bring the Yuma Desalting Plant into operation at no
less than one-third capacity by the end of fiscal year 2006. CAWCD
believes Reclamation's budget is sufficient to accomplish this goal.
colorado front work and levee system
Reclamation is requesting $3,647,000 for the Colorado River Front
Work and Levee System. This project regulates, stabilizes, and
maintains the river channel and includes the existing offstream storage
feature, Senator Wash Dam. This budget request also includes continuing
work to plan and design additional offstream storage on the All
American Canal. CAWCD supports the budget request for these activities.
endangered species conservation/recovery project
Reclamation is requesting $1,298,000 for its ongoing Endangered
Species Conservation/Recovery Project. This program provides for the
development and implementation of projects for the stewardship of
endangered, threatened, proposed, and candidate species that are
resident or migratory to habitats within the lower Colorado Region.
These activities are complementary to the Lower Colorado River Multi-
Species Conservation Program (MSCP). CAWCD supports this request.
lower colorado river operations program
In its fiscal year 2005 budget request, Reclamation seeks
$15,322,000 for its Lower Colorado River Operations Program. This
program provides for Reclamation to continue its activities as the
``water master'' on the lower Colorado River and provides Reclamation's
funding for the lower Colorado River Multi-Species Conservation Program
(MSCP). $2,018,000 is for administration of the Colorado River and
$3,177,000 is for water contract administration and decree accounting.
Under Fish and Wildlife Management and Development, $9,027,000 is
requested, of which $6,234,000 is earmarked for the MSCP. It is
anticipated that a similar amount will be contributed by non-Federal
parties. In addition, $1,184,000 is requested for Southwestern Willow
Flycatcher and Yuma Clapper Rail Protection, $1,199,000 is for
Razorback and Bonytail Chub protection, $410,000 for riparian
restoration and research, $150,000 for NEPA compliance activities.
The MSCP is a cost-shared program among Federal and non-Federal
interests to develop a long-term plan to conserve endangered species
and their habitat along the lower Colorado River from Lake Mead to
Mexico. CAWCD is one of the cost-sharing partners. Development of this
program will provide habitat for hundreds of threatened and endangered
species and, at the same time, allow current water and power operations
to continue.
CAWCD supports Reclamation's budget request for the Lower Colorado
River Operations Program. The increased funding level is necessary to
support the MSCP effort as well as environmental measures necessary to
fully implement the interim surplus criteria for the lower Colorado
River. These are critical programs upon which lower Colorado River
water and power users depend.
CAWCD welcomes this opportunity to share its views with the
committee, and would be pleased to respond to any questions or
observations occasioned by this written testimony.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Water Conservation District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes and
Dry Prairie Rural Water
fiscal year 2005 budget request
The Fort Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes and Dry Prairie Rural
Water respectfully request fiscal year 2005 appropriations for the
Bureau of Reclamation from the Subcommittee on Energy and Water
Development. Funds will be used to construct critical elements of the
Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System, Montana (Public Law 106-382,
October 27, 2000). The amount requested is $25,000,000, based on
capability to spend the requested funds as set out below:
FISCAL YEAR 2005 WORK PLAN--FORT PECK RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM
(PUBLIC LAW 106-382)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Funding Costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations Requested............... $25,000,000
Estimated Rescission and Underfinancing (2,545,000)
@ 10.18%..............................
-----------------
Available Federal Funds.......... 22,455,000
=================
Fort Peck Tribes:
Federal Funds...................... 15,911,000
Work Plan:
Design and Reclamation ............... $1,136,000
Oversight.....................
Missouri River Water Treat ............... 14,775,000
Plant.........................
---------------
............... 15,911,000
===============
Dry Prairie:
Federal Funds...................... 6,544,000
Non-Federal Funds.................. 2,067,000
-----------------
Total............................ 8,611,000
=================
Work Plan:
Design and Reclamation ............... 609,000
Oversight.....................
Complete Culbertson to Medicine ............... 331,000
Lake Pipeline.................
Dane Valley and E. Med. Lake ............... 7,671,000
Pipelines.....................
---------------
............... 8,611,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sponsor Tribes and Dry Prairie greatly appreciate the previous
appropriations from the subcommittee that have permitted building the
Missouri River intake, the critical water source, and the first phase
of the Culbertson to Medicine Lake Pipeline Project.
The request is less than the average annual appropriations needed
to complete the project in fiscal year 2012, as provided by the
authorizing legislation:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal Funds Authorized (October 2003 Dollars)... $207,333,000
Federal Funds Expended Through Fiscal Year 2004......... $1,804,000
Percent Complete........................................ 0.87
Amount Remaining........................................ $205,529,000
Average Required for Fiscal Year 2012 Finish (Public Law $25,691,000
106-382)...............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
proposed activities
This project, which includes all of the Fort Peck Indian
Reservation in Montana and the Dry Prairie portion of the project
outside the Reservation, was authorized by Public Law 106-382 in
October 27, 2000. The request for fiscal year 2005 will continue the
construction of the Missouri River water treatment plant, which will
require fiscal year 2006 funds in the estimated amount of $5 million
for completion. The request will also complete the Culbertson to
Medicine Lake Project, which was initiated in fiscal year 2003, and
advance the construction of the Dane Valley/Bainville/East Medicine
Lake Projects.
The project also has the capability beyond the amount requested,
based on current status of design, to build the first portion of the
pipeline leaving the water treatment plant at a cost of $10 million.
The pipeline section will be east of the water treatment plant and will
serve the community of Poplar, headquarters community for the
Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes. Construction is scheduled to start in
fiscal year 2006. This will also provide a source of water for a
section of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation contaminated by oil
drilling operations and the subject of EPA orders to the responsible
non-Tribal oil company. The oil company will provide the distribution
system necessary to mitigate the problems and the Assiniboine and Sioux
Rural Water System will provide the interconnecting pipeline without
duplicating any facilities identified in the Final Engineering Report.
This is an exigent circumstance that will be corrected by the project
in fiscal year 2006. No funds are requested for fiscal year 2005 for
this project even though design will be complete.
The Dry Prairie rural water system will finish the facilities
necessary to bring water supplies from an existing treatment plant on
the Missouri River at Culbertson to Medicine Lake where the existing
water treatment is inoperable. The system to be completed in fiscal
year 2005 will also provide the capability to connect Bainville, Dane
Valley and East Medicine Lake residents. The latter project will rely
on fiscal year 2005 and fiscal year 2006 funds to mitigate costs of
hauling water so prevalent there. The budget request is consistent with
the Master Plan as approved by the Bureau of Reclamation.
project status and completion
The Final Engineering Report (FER), water conservation plan and
Finding of No Significant Impact were completed in fiscal year 2002.
Congressional review of the project ended in August 2003, and
construction began immediately. The Missouri River intake and the
Culbertson to Medicine Lake pipeline projects are under construction
and are scheduled for completion in October 2004.
Design of the water treatment plant is now well advanced. The
design of the lagoons at the water treatment plant and the site
landscaping will be completed in third-quarter fiscal year 2004, and
construction of these preliminary facilities will begin in late fiscal
year 2004. The main facility will begin construction in fiscal year
2005 at a cost of $20 million.
Design of the Poplar to Big Muddy pipeline is well advanced and can
be completed to utilize first quarter fiscal year 2005 funds, but the
appropriation requirements to undertake this pipeline construction in
combination with the water treatment plant are considered too great to
include in the funding request. Therefore, construction of this
pipeline will depend on the availability of funds not currently
identified in fiscal year 2006 or fiscal year 2007. The discussion of
this pipeline is intended to demonstrate the capability of the project
to use funds prior to fiscal year 2007 if funding were available.
Similarly, the design of the branch pipelines that will serve rural
residents between Culbertson and Medicine Lake is well ahead of
funding. There is more capability to use funds than will be available
in either fiscal year 2004 or fiscal year 2005.
The project master plan is provided for review on the following
page.
local project support
The Fort Peck Tribes have supported the project since 1992 when
they conceived it and sought means of improving the quality of life in
the region. The planning was a logical step after successful completion
of an historic water rights compact with the State of Montana. This
compact was the national ``ice breaker'' that increased the level of
confidence by other Tribes in Indian water right settlement
initiatives. The Tribes did not seek financial compensation for the
settlement of their water rights but expected development of meaningful
water projects as now authorized.
The 1999 Montana Legislature approved a funding mechanism from its
Treasure State Endowment Program to finance the non-Federal share of
project planning and construction. Demonstrating support of Montana for
the project, there were only three votes against the statutory funding
mechanism in both the full House and Senate. The 2001 and 2003 Montana
Legislatures have provided all authorizations and appropriations
necessary for the non-Federal cost share.
Dry Prairie support is demonstrated by a financial commitment of
all 14 communities within the service area to participate in the
project. Rural support is strong, with about 70 percent of area farms
and ranches intending to participate as evidenced by their intent fees
of $100 per household.
need for water quality improvement
The Fort Peck Indian Reservation was previously designated as an
``Enterprise Community'', underscoring the level of poverty and need
for economic development in the region. The success of economic
development within the Reservation will be significantly enhanced by
the availability of higher quality, safe and more ample municipal,
rural and industrial water supplies that this regional project will
bring to the Reservation, made more necessary by an extended drought in
the region. Outside the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, the Dry Prairie
area has income levels that are higher than within the Reservation but
lower than the State average.
The feature of this project that makes it more cost effective than
similar projects is its proximity to the Missouri River. The southern
boundary of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation is formed by the Missouri
River for a distance of more than 60 miles. Many of the towns in this
regional project are located 2 to 3 miles from the river, including
Nashua, Frazer, Oswego, Wolf Point, Poplar, Brockton, Culbertson, and
Bainville. As shown on the enclosed project map, a transmission system
outside the Fort Peck Indian Reservation will deliver water 30 to 40
miles north of the Missouri River. Therefore, the distances from the
Missouri River to all points in the main transmission system are
shorter than in other projects of this nature in the Northern Great
Plains.
administration's budget for fiscal year 2005
The administration's budget for fiscal year 2005 was severe
disappointment. It was the only authorized project in the rural water
category with construction underway that did not receive funding. Other
projects authorized at the same time in both the rural water and water
and related resources categories, of similar nature to this project,
were generously funded. Of greatest concern now is the need for
Reclamation to justify the zero funding amount. In all previous
meetings with the Commissioner and his representatives and with OMB, no
concerns with the project were raised other than the concerns raised
with all projects that the Federal Budget is too constrained, non-
Indians should bear a greater cost share and other priorities, such as
homeland security, are more demanding of Federal funds. OMB
specifically stated in our favor that the project had provided more
support and justification of its benefits and costs than most Corps of
Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation projects prior to
authorization. Under the circumstances, there is considerable concern
on our part that previously undisclosed issues will be generated in
support of the absence of a budget request.
The Tribes and Dry Prairie worked extremely well and closely with
the Bureau of Reclamation prior to and following the authorization of
this project in fiscal year 2000. The Bureau of Reclamation reviewed
and commented on the Final Engineering Report, and all comments were
either incorporated into the report or agreement was reached on final
presentation. The Commissioner, Regional and Area Offices of the Bureau
of Reclamation were consistently in full agreement with the need,
scope, total costs, and the ability to pay analysis that supported the
Federal and non-Federal cost shares. Bureau of Reclamation reviewed in
writing all of these items thoroughly and formally and there were no
areas of disagreement or controversy in the final formulation of the
project. Bureau of Reclamation testimony during the authorization phase
fully supported the project within the Fort Peck Indian Reservation and
opposed any Federal participation in the costs of the project outside
the Fort Peck Indian Reservation, as a matter of policy, but Congress
addressed that issue in Public Law 106-382.
The Bureau of Reclamation collaborated with the Tribes and Dry
Prairie to conduct and complete value engineering investigations of the
Final Engineering Report (planning), the Culbertson to Medicine Lake
pipeline (design), the Poplar to Big Muddy River pipeline (design), the
Missouri River intake (design) and (during the week of March 31, 2003)
on the regional water treatment plant (design). Each of these
considerable efforts has been directed at ways to save construction and
future operation, maintenance and replacement costs as planning and
design proceeded. Agreement with Reclamation has been reached in all
value engineering sessions on steps to take to save Federal and non-
Federal costs in the project.
Cooperative agreements have been developed and executed from the
beginning phases to date between the Bureau of Reclamation and the
Tribes and between Bureau of Reclamation and Dry Prairie. Those
cooperative agreements carefully set out goals, standards and
responsibilities of the parties for planning, design and construction.
All plans and specifications are subject to levels of review by the
Bureau of Reclamation pursuant to the cooperative agreements. The
sponsors do not have the power to undertake activities that are not
subject to oversight and approval by the Bureau of Reclamation. Each
year the Tribes and Dry Prairie are required by the cooperative
agreements to develop a work plan setting out the planning, design and
construction activities and the allocation of finding to be utilized on
each project feature.
Clearly, the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water System is well
supported by the Bureau of Reclamation planners. Congress authorized
the project with a plan formulated in full cooperation and
collaboration with the Bureau of Reclamation, and major project
features are under construction.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Energy Distributors
Association
The Colorado River Energy Distributors Association (CREDA)
appreciates the opportunity to submit its views on funding for specific
programs of the Bureau of Reclamation and the Western Area Power
Administration in the fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Development
appropriations bill. We look forward to working with you and the
subcommittee on these issues of importance to electric consumers in the
Colorado River Basin States. The first issue is a request for Federal
funds to pay for costs of increased security at Federal multi-purpose
dams. The Bureau of Reclamation has requested $43 million for dams
under its jurisdiction for fiscal year 2005. CREDA is attempting to
determine whether this represents the total amount that will be spent
by the Bureau for increased security in fiscal year 2005 or not. The
second issue is a request for $10,000,000 of additional funds for the
Western Area Power Administration of the Department of Energy relating
to the Animas-La Plata project.
CREDA is a non-profit, regional organization representing consumer-
owned municipal and rural electric cooperatives, political
subdivisions, irrigation and electrical districts and tribal utility
authorities that purchase hydropower resources from the Colorado River
Storage Project (CRSP). CRSP is a multi-purpose Federal project that
provides flood control; water storage for irrigation, municipal and
industrial purposes; recreation and environmental mitigation, in
addition to the generation of electricity. CREDA was established in
1978, and serves as the ``voice'' of CRSP contractor members in dealing
with resource availability and affordability issues. CREDA represents
its members in dealing with the Bureau--as the owner and operator of
the CRSP--and the Western Area Power Administration--as the marketing
agency of the CRSP.
CREDA members serve nearly 3 million electric consumers in the six
western States of Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and
Wyoming. CREDA's member utilities purchase more than 85 percent of the
power produced by the CRSP. In addition, several Indian tribes have
joined CREDA as affiliate members prior to receiving allocations of
CRSP power on October 1, 2004.
With regard to the President's proposed fiscal year 2005 budget
request, CREDA has two primary concerns:
non-reimbursability of post-9/11 security cost increases
Federal multipurpose projects across the country provide millions
of citizens with a multitude of benefits, including flood control,
municipal, rural, and industrial water supply, navigation, recreation,
and, of course, hydropower. Providing adequate security for these
multi-purpose, federally owned facilities is important to all U.S.
citizens. In the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, 2001,
Federal agencies involved in the Federal power program (the U.S. Bureau
of Reclamation, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and the Federal Power
Marketing Administrations) have determined that significant increases
in security are needed, and will continue for years to come.
Adequately protecting and securing national assets, such as the
Federal multi-purpose dams, comes with a price tag. In 1941 and 1942,
Congress treated increased security costs before and after Pearl Harbor
as non-reimbursable (e.g., as costs to be borne by the Federal
Government and financed through appropriations, rather than reimbursed
by hydropower customers) because of the obvious national security
interest at stake and the benefits these projects offer to all
Americans. Thus far, Congress has agreed with this historical
precedent, as evidenced by Senate Appropriations report language for
fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year 2004, which stated that funds made
available to respond to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks shall
be non-reimbursable and indicates these costs ``are recurring'' (S.
Rept. 107-220 and S. Rept. 108-105). House report language for fiscal
year 2003 also supported this view (H. Rept. 107-681).
The Bureau of Reclamation received $28.4 million in the fiscal year
2003 Energy and Water Appropriations bill and an additional $25 million
in the 2003 Supplemental Appropriations bill to cover increased costs
to protect Reclamation dams and other facilities post September 11. The
Bureau also received $28.5 million for increased security costs in the
fiscal year 2004 Energy and Water bill that was signed into law in
December 2003. The Bureau of Reclamation recognized the above
historical precedent and the sound policy behind it and, in fiscal year
2003 and 2004, administratively determined that additional security
costs should be non-reimbursable (Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner
Keys, April 2002). The Corps of Engineers did not, treating additional
security investments at Corps facilities as reimbursable.
Due to budget constraints and pressures to control costs from the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), the President's fiscal year 2005
budget directs the Bureau and the Corps to recover some of the costs of
increased security measures from entities that benefit from the multi-
purpose projects. Given our past experience with the Bureau and the
Corps, we believe that power customers will be unfairly singled out to
pay the reimbursable costs.
The reasons that security costs at Federal dams should continue to
be non-reimbursable are: (1) these facilities are Federal and multi-
purpose in nature, and the benefits accrue to a vast number of citizens
in many States; (2) protection of these Federal facilities is clearly
in the national interest and should remain a Federal responsibility;
and (3) by taking this funding stream out of the appropriations
process, congressional oversight of Reclamation's use of the funds
would be greatly diminished, thereby reducing accountability for the
type and expense of the security measures imposed.
CREDA urges the committee to include the following statutory
language in the fiscal year 2005 Water and Energy Development
Appropriations bill, to clarify that the additional costs of securing
facilities of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers and the
Federal power marketing administrations are a Federal responsibility
and should be non-reimbursable:
``For fiscal year 2005 and each fiscal year thereafter, the
increased costs of ensuring security of Bureau of Reclamation dams,
federal power marketing administration facilities and Corps of
Engineers multipurpose facilities in the aftermath of the events of
September 11, 2001, shall be non-reimbursable and non-returnable.''
animas-la plata project
The Colorado Ute Settlement Act Amendments of 2000 (Title III,
Section 301(b)(10), Public Law 106-554, December 21, 2000) authorized
development of the Animas-La Plata Project to satisfy water right
claims of the Southern Ute and Ute Mountain Ute Tribes in southwest
Colorado (known collectively as the ``Colorado Ute Indian Tribes'').
The project requires construction of a reservoir, pumping plant and
appurtenant facilities to provide water supply and delivery of
municipal and industrial water and other benefits to the Tribes.
In order to provide power from the CRSP to the Durango Pumping
Plant, transmission facilities will need to be constructed, operated
and maintained by the Western Area Power Administration. These
transmission facilities do not provide any benefit to CRSP power
customers; they are required solely to deliver water to project
beneficiaries.
The Western Area Power Administration will be responsible for
construction, operation and maintenance of these transmission
facilities, and requires additional appropriations in the amount of
$10,000,000 in fiscal year 2005 to meet the construction timetable
established by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the project manager.
Since the transmission lines will power the pumping plant required for
delivery of water to Native American and non-Native American municipal
and industrial users, the costs related to the transmission facilities
and services should not be borne by the CRSP power customers and should
be considered non-reimbursable and nonreturnable. To do otherwise could
turn 102 years of Reclamation law on its head. Failure to address this
issue in the fiscal year 2005 appropriations cycle could jeopardize the
current construction schedule for the Animas-La Plata project and
subject CRSP power customers and the consumers they serve to an unfair
financial burden.
The Western Area Power Administration, the Bureau of Reclamation,
the Colorado River Energy Distributors Association, the water users and
the Colorado Ute Indian Tribes all support the inclusion of the
following language in the fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill:
``For carrying out the functions authorized by title III, section
302(a)(1)(E) of the Act of August 4, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7152), and other
related activities including conservation and renewable resources
programs as authorized, including official reception and representation
expenses in an amount not to exceed $1,500, $183,100,000 to remain
available until expended, of which $170,756,000 shall be derived from
the Department of the Interior Reclamation Fund: Provided, That all
authorities and future contributions described in Section 402,
subparagraph (b)(3)(B) of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and
Adjustment Act of 1992 previously assigned to the Secretary of Energy,
Western Area Power Administration, shall be transferred to the
Secretary of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation: Provided further,
That of the amount herein appropriated, $10,000,000 shall be available
until expended on a nonreimbursable basis to the Western Area Power
Administration to design, construct, operate and maintain transmission
facilities and services for the Animas-La Plata Project as authorized
by sections 301(b)(10) of Public Law 106-554.''
______
Prepared Statement of the Mni Wiconi Project
fiscal year 2005 construction budget request
The Mni Wiconi Project beneficiaries (as listed below) respectfully
request appropriations and can demonstrate capability for construction
in fiscal year 2005 in the amount of $39,317,000 as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System:
Core Facilities (Pipelines and Pumping Stations).... $8,128,000
Distribution System on Pine Ridge................... 10,224,000
West River/Lyman-Jones Rural Water System............... 11,020,000
Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System........................ 7,325,000
Lower Brule Sioux Rural Water System.................... 2,620,000
---------------
Total Mni Wiconi Project.......................... 39,317,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The project sponsors were provided by the 107th Congress (Public
Law 107-367) with all the authority necessary to finish this project at
the level of development originally intended on a schedule through
fiscal year 2008. Completion of the project is now clearly achievable
as shown in the table below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Federal Required (October 2003 Dollars)........... $409,523,000
Estimated Federal Spent Through Fiscal Year 2004........ $278,110,000
Percent Spent........................................... 67.9
Amount Remaining........................................ $131,413,000
Years to Completion..................................... 4
Average Required for Fiscal Year 2008 Finish............ $32,853,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The administration's budget for this project in fiscal year 2005
($18.2 million for construction) is a disappointment for a second year
in a row. The amount requested by the administration falls far short of
the average amount needed to complete the project in fiscal year 2008.
The needs and merits of this project are considerable as described in
section 3.
The project's operation, maintenance and replacement request from
the sponsors is in addition to the construction request and is
presented in section 8.
osrwss core pipeline to reach pine ridge indian reservation in fiscal
year 2005
OGLALA SIOUX WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM CORE REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
South Core:
Stamford to Kadoka:
Reservoir to Kadoka Pipeline.................... $1,036,000
Pump Station, 2 Reservoirs...................... 2,111,000
Kadoka to White River Pipeline...................... 2,587,000
North Core:
WTP toward Hayes Pipeline........................... 2,394,000
---------------
Total............................................. 8,128,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and parts of West River/Lyman-
Jones remain without points of interconnection to the OSRWSS core. The
requested funding level for the OSRWSS core of $8.128 million will
complete the project from Stamford to the northeast corner of the Pine
Ridge Indian Reservation where, in combination with the western part of
West River/Lyman-Jones, the remaining 50 percent of the design
population resides. Funds will also be used by the Oglala Sioux Tribe
to build the North Core westerly toward Hayes in the West River Lyman
Jones service area with the intent to complete the OSRWSS North Core
and all other core facilities in fiscal year 2007. Two additional years
of funding will be required to complete the OSRWSS North Core system to
serve the Reservation.
The 2000 census confirms that the Oglala Sioux population on Pine
Ridge is growing at a rate of 27 percent per decade or 1\1/2\ times
greater than projected from the 1990 census. Delivery of Missouri River
water to this area is urgently needed.
All proposed OSRWSS construction activity will build pipelines that
will provide Missouri River water immediately to beneficiaries. In many
cases, construction of interconnecting pipelines by other sponsors is
ongoing, and fiscal year 2005 funds are required to complete projects
that will connect with the OSRWSS core and begin others.
Funding for OSRWSS core and distribution facilities is necessary to
bring economic development to the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation,
designated as one of five national rural empowerment zones by the
previous administration. The designation serves to underscore the level
of need. Economic development is largely dependent on the timely
completion of a water system, which depends on appropriations for this
project.
Finally, the subcommittee is respectfully requested to take notice
of the fact that fiscal year 2005 will significantly advance
construction of facilities that continues our progress toward the end
of the project. The subcommittee's past support has brought the project
to the point that the end can be seen. Key to the conclusion of the
project in fiscal year 2008 is the completion of the OSRWSS core to the
Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. Toward this end, funds are included in
the fiscal year 2005 budget to build the connecting pipelines between
the northeast corner of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation and the
central portion of the Reservation near Kyle. Rosebud is similarly
engaged in the construction of major connecting pipelines that will
deliver water southerly to the central portions of the Rosebud Indian
Reservation and to service areas for West River/Lyman-Jones.
unique needs of this project
This project covers much of the area of western South Dakota that
was formerly the Great Sioux Reservation established by the Treaty of
1868. Since the separation of the Reservation in 1889 into smaller more
isolated reservations, including Pine Ridge, Rosebud and Lower Brule,
tensions between the Indian population and the non-Indian settlers on
former Great Sioux lands have been high with little easing by
successive generations. The Mni Wiconi Project is perhaps the most
significant opportunity in more than a century to bring the sharply
diverse cultures of the two societies together for a common good. Much
progress has been made due to the good faith and genuine efforts of
both the Indian and non-Indian sponsors. The project is an historic
basis for renewed hope and dignity among the Indian people. It is a
basis for substantive improvement in relationships.
Each year our testimony addresses the fact that the project
beneficiaries, particularly the three Indian Reservations, have the
lowest income levels in the Nation. The health risks to our people from
drinking unsafe water are compounded by reductions in health programs.
We respectfully submit that our project is unique and that no other
project in the Nation has greater human needs. Poverty in our service
areas is consistently deeper than elsewhere in the Nation. Health
effects of water-borne diseases are consistently more prevalent than
elsewhere in the Nation, due in part to (1) lack of adequate water in
the home and (2) poor water quality where water is available. Higher
incidences of impetigo, gastroenteritis, shigellosis, scabies and
hepatitis-A are well documented on the Indian reservations of the Mni
Wiconi Project area. At the beginning of the third millennium one
cannot find a region in our Nation in which social and economic
conditions are as deplorable. These circumstances are summarized in
Table 1. Mni Wiconi builds the dignity of many, not only through
improvement of drinking water, but also through direct employment and
increased earnings during planning, construction, operation and
maintenance and from economic enterprises supplied with project water.
We urge the subcommittee to address the need for creating jobs and
improving the quality of life on the Pine Ridge and other Indian
reservations of the project area.
Employment and earnings among the Indian people of the project area
are expected to positively impact the high costs of health care borne
by the United States and the Tribes. Our data suggest clear
relationships between income levels and Federal costs for heart
disease, cancer and diabetes. During the life of the Mni Wiconi
Project, mortality rates among the Indian people in the project area
for the three diseases mentioned will cost the United States and the
Tribes more than $1 billion beyond the level incurred for these
diseases among comparable populations in the non-Indian community
within the project area. While this project alone will not raise income
levels to a point where the excessive rates of heart disease, cancer
and diabetes are significantly diminished, the employment and earnings
stemming from the project will, nevertheless, reduce mortality rates
and costs of these diseases. Please note that between 1990 and 2000 per
capita income on Pine Ridge increased from $3,591 to $6,143, and median
household income increased from $11,260 to $20,569, due in large part
to this project, albeit not sufficient to bring a larger percentage of
families out of poverty (Table 1).
TABLE 1.--PROFILE OF SELECTED ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS: 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income
Change ---------------------- Families
Indian Reservation/State 2000 from 1990 Per Median Below Unemployment
Population (Percent) Capita Household Poverty (Percent)
(Dollars) (Dollars) (Percent)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pine Ridge Indian Reservation......... 15,521 27.07 6,143 20,569 46.3 16.9
Rosebud Indian Reservation............ 10,469 7.97 7,279 19,046 45.9 20.1
Lower Brule Indian Reservation........ 1,353 20.48 7,020 21,146 45.3 28.1
State of South Dakota................. 754,844 8.45 17,562 35,282 9.3 3.0
Nation................................ 281,421,906 13.15 21,587 41,994 9.2 3.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial support for the Indian membership has already been
subjected to drastic cuts in funding programs through the Bureau of
Indian Affairs. This project is a source of strong hope that helps off-
set the loss of employment and income in other programs and provide for
an improvement in health and welfare. Tribal leaders have seen that
Welfare Reform legislation and other budget cuts Nation-wide have
created a crisis for tribal government because tribal members have
moved back to the reservations in order to survive. Economic conditions
have resulted in accelerated population growth on the reservations.
The Mni Wiconi Project Act declares that the United States will
work with us under the circumstances:
``. . . the United States has a trust responsibility to ensure that
adequate and safe water supplies are available to meet the economic,
environmental, water supply and public health needs of the Pine Ridge,
Rosebud and Lower Brule Indian Reservations . . .''.
Indian support for this project has not come easily because the
historical experience of broken commitments to the Indian people by the
Federal Government is difficult to overcome. The argument was that
there is no reason to trust and that the Sioux Tribes are being used to
build the non-Indian segments of the project and the Indian segments
would linger to completion. These arguments have been overcome by
better planning, an amended authorization and hard fought agreements
among the parties. The subcommittee is respectfully requested to take
the steps necessary the complete the critical elements of the project
proposed for fiscal year 2004.
The following sections describe the construction activity in each
of the rural water systems.
oglala sioux rural water supply system--distribution
OGLALA SIOUX WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
West Boundary Supply.................................... $506,000
Manderson Loop.......................................... 1,454,000
Rockyford to Redshirt................................... 179,000
White River to HWY 73/44 Junction:
Pump Station, Service Lines and Reservoirs.......... 3,127,000
HWY 73/44 Junction to Kyle.............................. 4,923,000
Indefinite quantities................................... 35,000
---------------
TOTAL............................................. 10,224,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
With the conclusion of projects under construction in fiscal year
2002, the Oglala Sioux Tribe completed all facilities that can be
supported from local groundwater. The Tribe, representing more than 40
percent of the project population will rely on the OSRWSS core to
convey Missouri River water to and throughout the Reservation. Much
pipeline has been constructed, primarily between Kyle, Wounded Knee and
Red Shirt and between Pine Ridge Village and the communities of Oglala
and Slim Buttes. Additional construction of the Manderson Loop is
proposed in fiscal year 2005.
Of particular importance to the Oglala Sioux Tribe is the
continuation of the main transmission system from the northeast corner
(Highway 73/44 junction) of the Reservation to Kyle in the central part
of the Reservation. The transmission line is needed to interconnect the
OSRWSS core system with the distribution system within the Reservation
in order to deliver Missouri River water to the populous portions of
the Reservation. This critical segment of the project can be continued
in fiscal year 2005 to coincide with the westward construction of the
OSRWSS core to the northeast corner of the Reservation (see section 2).
It will require funds in fiscal year 2006 and fiscal year 2007 to
complete. This component of the Oglala system has been deferred for
several years due to inadequate funding. The component is urgently
needed for the OSRWSS core system to be utilized on the Pine Ridge
Indian Reservation.
west river/lyman-jones rural water system--distribution
WR/LJ RURAL WATER SYSTEM DISTRIBUTION REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mellette East........................................... $533,000
Moenville............................................... 9,566,000
Quinn Town Distribution................................. 176,000
Vivian Town............................................. 441,000
Indefinite Quantities................................... 304,000
---------------
Total............................................. 11,020,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Continued drought conditions in the project area have created
serious health and economic hardships for WR/LJ members waiting to
receive Mni Wiconi water service. A survey of members attending the WR/
LJ annual meeting on October 8, 2003 in Midland revealed that, of those
members not receiving project water, 67 percent were hauling water for
domestic use and 45 percent were hauling water for livestock. Their
current source of water, highly mineralized wells and dried up dams,
present a serious health hazard and unaffordable increases in
production costs due to the time and cost of hauling water.
The requested appropriation is directed to serving members between
Ft. Pierre and Philip. The highest priority is completion of the
Moenville project. Houston Rose, prior to his death, pioneered initial
efforts to bring quality water to this WR/LJ service area closest to
the Mni Wiconi water treatment plant. The economy of the area he
represented is based on livestock operations that are dependent on
quality water supplies.
WR/LJ is now the water service provider in the towns of Quinn and
Vivian, however, the existing distribution piping is over 50 years old
and is a very high priority for replacement. Funding is also requested
for the construction of pumping station and reservoirs required to
deliver the full design capability of the pipelines under construction.
As a testimony to public recognition of the advantages of quality water
and the reliability of the system WR/LJ continues to add users within
those areas previously constructed. These additions are being financed
by member contributions as part of the statutory non-Federal matching
requirement.
The Mni Wiconi project, due to continued congressional support, has
progressed to where the project beneficiaries can look forward to its
timely completion and receive the intended project benefits. We
sincerely appreciate your support.
rosebud rural water system (sicangu mni wiconi)
ROSEBUD SIOUX RURAL WATER SYSTEM REQUEST
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hidden Timber........................................... $1,317,000
Rosebud Improvements.................................... 737,000
Rural Antelope.......................................... 866,000
Okreek.................................................. 2,030,000
Mission Northwest....................................... 447,000
Livestock Water......................................... 1,271,000
Service Connections..................................... 657,000
---------------
Total............................................. 7,325,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year 2005 efforts build upon the successes of the past 2
years. The Rosebud Core pipeline will begin providing water from the
OSRWSS at Murdo to Rosebud and WR/LJ water users in Mellette County. As
a result, the limited supply of high quality ground water available
from the Rosebud wellfield can be used as a source of supply for
northeast Todd County.
The Rosebud Sioux Tribes efforts in fiscal year 2005 focus on
connecting additional homes to new and existing pipelines. The Antelope
to Okreek Pipeline, completed in late 2003, provides a supply of high
quality ground water to the rural Antelope, northwest Mission, Hidden
Timber and Okreek project areas. In this portion of northern Todd
County, the Ogallala Aquifer is not present and ground water is of poor
quality and limited quantity where available. Private and community
wells have failed in the area and while the Antelope to Okreek Pipeline
solved the problem for the community of Okreek, many rural residents
are anxiously waiting for water.
The problems are exacerbated in the Hidden Timber area. Where
ground water occurs, nitrate concentrations are frequently in excess of
the Safe Drinking Water Act primary standard. The high nitrate
concentrations pose an acute threat to the unborn and young children.
The major features of the proposed fiscal year 2005 work plan focus
on distribution and service lines for this area. Proposed projects for
this area include Rural Antelope, Mission Northwest, Okreek and Hidden
Timber. It is envisioned that both private contractors and the tribal
construction program would be responsible for construction.
The other major project proposed for fiscal year 2005 address
improvements needed in the community of Rosebud. In fiscal year 2004,
the Tribe will be connecting the lower older part of Rosebud to the
rural water system. While this will improve the quality and reliability
of supply, improvements are needed to ensure water reaches the users.
In several areas, older cast iron pipe has corroded and needs to be
replaced. In other areas, older asbestos concrete pipe is still in use
and felt to be a health threat. The focus of the work in Rosebud in
fiscal year 2005 is to provide a reliable source of high quality water
to all service connections.
The Tribe will also expand its service line program. The focus of
this effort is new homes and homes that have been constructed since
transmission or distribution lines have been installed. It is also
proposed to start developing livestock watering facilities. The Tribe
has not constructed any of these facilities to date with Mni Wiconi
funding and the realty of prolonged drought is having an affect on
historic livestock watering sources of supply. A reliable source of
water for livestock is necessary to maintain one of the more viable
components of the reservation economy.
The total amount requested for the Sicangu Mni Wiconi in fiscal
year 2005 is $7,325,000.
lower brule rural water system--distribution
The Lower Brule Rural Water System (LBRWS) has gained the support
of the other sponsors to complete its share of the project with funds
appropriated in fiscal year 2005 budget, based on an appropriation of
funds for the project in the range generally received. This support is
not only a benefit for LBRWS and its users but to the project as a
whole. By funding LBRWS in this manner, a savings of approximately $1.5
million will be experienced by the project.
With the funds received in fiscal year 2004, LBRWS will complete
the design, cultural resource evaluation and the securing of easements
for the remaining service areas and installing mainlines and service
lines required to provide water to all of the homes on the Lower Brule
Indian Reservation. The fiscal year 2004 funds will also allow LBRWS to
begin installing water lines to pasture taps. Since the area has
experienced 2 years of drought conditions, many of the dams are dry.
The provision of water will allow some pastures to be utilized that
would have otherwise been of no benefit to the ranchers.
The fiscal year 2005 funds will allow the completion of the
installation of pasture taps and a new 400,000 gallon elevated water
tank in Lower Brule. The existing tank is in a location where the
slides (soil movement) have occurred. As a result, the stability of the
tank's foundation is in question.
operation, maintenance and replacement budget
The sponsors have and will continue to work with Reclamation to
ensure that their budgets are adequate to properly operate, maintain
and replace (OMR) their respective portions of the overall system. The
sponsors will also continue to manage OMR expenses in a manner ensuring
that the limited funds can best be balanced between construction and
OMR. In fiscal year 2003, the approved budget for OMR was $8.228
million, which was adequate. Funding was not adequate in fiscal year
2004 at the $6.254 level and will not be adequate at the same leveling
the administration's proposed fiscal year 2005 budget of $6.254 million
for OMR.
The project has been making significant progress especially over
the last 2 years with the initiation of operation of the OSRWSS Water
Treatment Plant near Ft. Pierre and the installation of a significant
quantity of pipeline. The result is the need for sufficient funds to
properly operate and maintain the functioning system throughout the
project. As a result, the OMR budget must continue to be adequate to
keep pace with the portion of the system that is placed in operation.
In addition to ongoing operation and maintenance activities, water
conservation is an integral part of the OMR of the project. Water
conservation not only provides immediate savings from reduced water use
and production, it also extends the useful life and capacity of the
system. Proposed funding is not adequate to perform water conservation
functions.
______
Prepared Statement of the Redlands Water & Power Company
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Red River Valley Association
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Wayne Dowd, and
pleased to represent the Red River Valley Association, as its
President. Our organization was founded in 1925 with the express
purpose of uniting the citizens of Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma and
Texas to develop the land and water resources of the Red River Basin.
The Resolutions contained herein were adopted by the Association
during its 79th Annual Meeting in Bossier City, Louisiana on February
19, 2004, and represent the combined concerns of the citizens of the
Red River Basin Area as they pertain to the goals of the Association.
Our western rivers played a very important part in the development
and economic success of the States west of the Mississippi River. An
agency responsible for the development of those water resources has
been the Bureau of Reclamation. In our four State region they have been
most active in Oklahoma.
I would like to comment on two specific requests for the future
economic well being of the citizens residing in the Red River Valley
region in Oklahoma. We support the following two studies and request
that the Bureau of Reclamation be funded at their full fiscal year 2005
capability.
North Fork of the Red River, OK, Investigation Study.--The W.C.
Austin (Altus Lake and Dam) Project in southwestern Oklahoma, is
authorized to provide water for irrigation to approximately 48,000
acres of privately owned land in southwestern Oklahoma; control
flooding on the North Fork of the Red River and augment municipal water
supply for the City of Altus. Secondary benefits include fish and
wildlife conservation and recreation opportunities. Project features
include Altus Dam, four canals, a 221-mile lateral distribution system
and 26 miles of drains. The Lugert-Altus Irrigation District (LAID) is
responsible for operation and maintenance of the project.
Water demand in the District and region is growing which, in turn,
is reducing future water availability and economic development
opportunities. This proposed investigation would: (1) develop a
hydrologic model of the NFRR watershed; and (2) evaluate opportunities
for augmenting water availability in the project region.
We support a 3-year comprehensive evaluation of water resources in
the North Fork of the Red River in Oklahoma for a total study cost of
$670,000. We sincerely appreciate your support in allocating $150,000
in the fiscal year 2004 appropriations.
An allocation of $150,000 is requested for the fiscal year 2005
appropriations.
Arbucle-Simpson Aquifer Study.--The Arbuckle-Simpson Aquifer has
been designated a sole source aquifer by EPA and a large number of
Oklahomans depend on its protection for their health and economic
future. This is an important source of water supply for: the citizens
of Ada, Sulphur, Mill Creek and Roff; the Chickasaw National
Recreational Area; Chickasaw and Choctaw Tribal members; and many
farmers and ranchers owning land overlying the basin. Contributions
from the aquifer also provide the perennial flow for many streams and
natural springs in the area. The Arbuckle-Simpson Aquifer underlines
approximately 500 square miles of south-central Oklahoma.
During recent years, a number of issues have emerged which have
caused concerns about the utilization and continued health of the
aquifer. These concerns include issues over water use, exportation of
water out of the area, impacts of groundwater development on the flows
in the significant springs and rivers, and competition for water and
water quality.
In order to assure the future well-being of the aquifer we support
a 5-year study to include detailed assessments of; the formation's
hydrogeology, water quality and vulnerability; groundwater-surface
water interactions; land use changes and related impacts; Tribal-State
water rights; and overall management of the resources. The initial
estimates put the total study cost at $2.7 million; however, due to its
complexity and new issues concerning Chickasaw and Choctaw Tribal
interest, a better cost estimate will be known after the second year of
the study. We appreciate your support of this study by funding the
first year of the study in the fiscal year 2004 appropriations for
$700,000.
We request $1,000,000 be appropriated for fiscal year 2005 and
support that the study be cost shared, 90 percent Federal and 10
percent State/Local funds.
The Red River Valley Association understands these are difficult
times with our Nation's budget, so we appreciate your support for these
studies in fiscal year 2004. We feel they are extremely important to
the welfare of the citizens in Oklahoma and request that you again
support these studies in fiscal year 2005.
We are always available to provide additional information and
answer whatever questions you may have.
______
Prepared Statement of the Santa Clara Valley Water District
calfed bay-delta program, santa clara county, california
Background.--In an average year, half of Santa Clara County's water
supply is imported from the San Francisco Bay/Sacramento-San Joaquin
Delta estuary (Bay-Delta) watersheds through three water projects: The
State Water Project, the Federal Central Valley Project, and San
Francisco's Hetch Hetchy Project. In conjunction with locally-developed
water, this water supply supports more than 1.7 million residents in
Santa Clara County and the most important high-tech center in the
world. In average to wet years, there is enough water to meet the
county's long-term needs. In dry years, however, the county could face
a water supply shortage of as much as 100,000 acre-feet per year, or
roughly 20 percent of the expected demand. In addition to shortages due
to hydrologic variations, the county's imported supplies have been
reduced due to regulatory restrictions placed on the operation of the
State and Federal water projects.
There are also water quality problems associated with using Bay-
Delta water as a drinking water supply. Organic materials and
pollutants discharged into the Delta, together with salt water mixing
in from San Francisco Bay, have the potential to create disinfection
by-products that are carcinogenic and pose reproductive health
concerns.
Santa Clara County's imported supplies are also vulnerable to
extended outages due to catastrophic failures such as major earthquakes
and flooding. As demonstrated by the 1997 flooding in Central Valley,
the levee systems can fail and the water quality at the water project
intakes in the Delta can be degraded to such an extent that the
projects cannot pump from the Delta.
Project Synopsis.--The CALFED Bay-Delta Program is an
unprecedented, cooperative effort among Federal, State, and local
agencies to restore the Bay-Delta. With input from urban, agricultural,
environmental, fishing, and business interests, and the general public,
CALFED has developed a comprehensive, long-term plan to address
ecosystem and water management issues in the Bay-Delta.
Restoring the Bay-Delta ecosystem is important not only because of
its significance as an environmental resource, but also because failing
to do so will stall efforts to improve water supply reliability and
water quality for millions of Californians and the State's trillion
dollar economy and job base.
The June 2000 Framework for Action and the August 2000 Record of
Decision/Certification contain a balanced package of actions to restore
ecosystem health, improve water supply reliability and water quality.
It is critical that Federal funding be provided to implement these
actions in the coming years.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--An amount of $9 million was appropriated
for CALFED activities under the various units of the Central Valley
Project in fiscal year 2004.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
committee support an appropriation add-on of $15 million, in addition
to the $15 million in the administration's fiscal year 2005 budget, for
a total of $30 million for California Bay-Delta Restoration.
san luis reservoir low point improvement project
Background.--San Luis Reservoir is one of the largest reservoirs in
California, and is the largest ``off-stream'' water storage facility in
the world. The Reservoir has a water storage capacity of more than 2
million acre-feet and is a key component of the water supply system
serving the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and California's State
Water Project. San Luis is used for seasonal storage of Sacramento-San
Joaquin delta water that is delivered to the reservoir via the
California Aqueduct and Delta-Mendota Canal. The San Luis Reservoir is
jointly owned and operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and the
California Department of Water Resources.
The San Luis Reservoir provides the sole source of CVP water supply
for the San Felipe Division contractors--Santa Clara Valley Water
District (District), San Benito County Water District and, in the
future, Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency. When water levels in San
Luis Reservoir are drawn down in the spring and summer, high water
temperatures result in algae blooms at the reservoir's water surface.
This condition degrades water quality, making the water difficult or
impractical to treat and can preclude deliveries of water from San Luis
Reservoir to San Felipe Division contractors. In order to avoid the low
point problem, the reservoir has been operated to maintain water levels
above the critical low elevation--the ``low point''--resulting in
approximately 200,000 acre-feet of undelivered water to south of the
Delta State and Federal water users. The frequency of the low point
problem will increase in the future as delta pumping becomes more
restricted and demands grow for full allocation and use of all of the
water in San Luis Reservoir.
Project Goals and Status.--The goal of the project is to increase
the operational flexibility of storage in San Luis Reservoir and ensure
a high quality, reliable water supply for San Felipe Division
contractors. The specific project objectives are to:
--Increase the operational flexibility of San Luis Reservoir by
increasing the effective storage.
--Ensure that San Felipe Division contractors are able to manage
their annual Central Valley Project contract allocation to meet
their water supply and water quality commitments.
--Provide opportunities for project-related environmental
improvements.
--Provide opportunities for other project-related improvements.
From the Public Scoping meetings held in August 2002 and working with a
Stakeholder Committee and Regulatory Agencies, the District identified
approximately 75 conceptual solutions to the low point problem. From
these, the District has narrowed down the list of conceptual solutions
to seven feasible alternatives to be studied in the environmental
review process.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--No appropriation was requested in fiscal
year 2004.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
committee support authority for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to
conduct feasibility studies of the San Luis Reservoir low point problem
and an appropriation add-on of $5.5 million.
san jose area water reclamation and reuse program (south bay water
recycling program)
Background.--The San Jose Area Water Reclamation and Reuse Program,
also known as the South Bay Water Recycling Program, will allow the
City of San Jose and its tributary agencies of the San Jose/Santa Clara
Water Pollution Control Plant to protect endangered species habitat,
meet receiving water quality standards, supplement Santa Clara County
water supplies, and comply with a mandate from the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency and the California Water Resources Control Board to
reduce wastewater discharges into San Francisco Bay.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (District) collaborated with
the City of San Jose to build the first phase of the recycled water
system by providing financial support and technical assistance, as well
as coordination with local water retailers. The design, construction,
construction administration, and inspection of the program's
transmission pipeline and Milpitas 1A Pipeline was performed by the
District under contract to the City of San Jose.
Status.--The City of San Jose is the program sponsor for Phase 1,
consisting of almost 60 miles of transmission and distribution
pipelines, pump stations, and reservoirs. Completed at a cost of $140
million, Phase 1 began partial operation in October 1997. Summertime
2003 deliveries averaged 10 million gallons per day of recycled water.
The system now serves over 450 customers and delivers over 7,000 acre-
feet of recycled water per year.
Phase 2 is now underway. In June 2001, San Jose approved an $82.5
million expansion of the program. The expansion includes additional
pipeline extensions into the cities of Santa Clara and Milpitas, a
major pipeline extension into Coyote Valley in south San Jose, and
reliability improvements of added reservoirs and pump stations. The
District and the City of San Jose executed an agreement in February
2002 to cost share on the pipeline into Coyote Valley and discuss a
long-term partnership agreement on the entire system. Phase 2's near-
term objective is to increase deliveries by the year 2010 to 15,000
acre-feet per year.
Funding.--In 1992, Public Law 102-575 authorized the Bureau of
Reclamation to work with the City of San Jose and the District to plan,
design, and build demonstration and permanent facilities for reclaiming
and reusing water in the San Jose metropolitan service area. The City
of San Jose reached an agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation to
cover 25 percent of Phase 1's costs, or approximately $35 million;
however, Federal appropriations have not reached the authorized amount.
To date, the program has received $26.5 million of the $35 million
authorization.
Fiscal Year 2004 Funding.--An amount of $3 million was appropriated
in fiscal year 2004 for project construction.
Fiscal Year 2005 Funding Recommendation.--It is requested that the
congressional committee support an appropriation add-on of $3 million
in fiscal year 2005 budget to fund the work.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southwestern Water Conservation District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, the Southwestern Water
Conservation District (the ``District'') is a political subdivision of
the State of Colorado formed by the Colorado legislature in 1937 under
C.R.S. 37-47-101, et seq. The District is charged with conserving and
developing the waters of the San Juan and Dolores Rivers, tributaries
to the Colorado River.
On behalf of the District, we are writing to request your support
for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 included as an
item in the administration's proposed budget for the Bureau of
Reclamation (``Reclamation'') labeled ``Endangered Species Recovery
Programs and Activities for the Upper Colorado River Region''. Of that
amount, $691,000 is designated for construction activities under the
San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program (``San Juan
Program'') and $4,008,000, is designated for similar construction
activities under the Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered
Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River Basin (``Upper Basin
Program''). In addition, $535,000 is designated for Fish and Wildlife
Management and Development, consistent with the President's budget
request. The requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow
construction of endangered fish passages, floodplain restoration
activities, screening of existing diversion canals, endangered fish
propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and non-native fish
management.
These cooperative programs involving the States of Colorado, New
Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, four Indian tribes, Federal agencies and
water, power and environmental interests are ongoing in the Upper
Colorado River and San Juan River Basins and have as their objective
recovering endangered fish species while water development proceeds in
compliance with the Endangered Species Act, State water law, and inter-
State water compacts.
The San Juan Program is supported by the States of Colorado and New
Mexico, the Southern Ute Indian, Jicarrilla Apache and Ute Mountain Ute
Tribes and the Navajo Nation, water development interests, Reclamation,
the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Bureau of Land Management, and the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (``FWS''). The Program provides
Endangered Species Act compliance for new depletions and for 600,000
acre-feet of existing depletions in Colorado and New Mexico, including
the Animas-La Plata and the San Juan-Chama Projects, which are to
provide water as part of tribal reserved water rights settlements. In
addition, the Program provided the ESA compliance for a 121,000 acre-
foot/year depletion to complete the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project.
In fiscal year 2005, the San Juan Program will continue substantial
recovery activities that include habitat restoration, endangered fish
propagation, and the development of fish passage structures in the San
Juan River to expand the available habitat for the endangered fish.
The Upper Basin Program is supported by the States of Colorado,
Utah and Wyoming, environmental organizations, power users, water
development interests, Reclamation, the FWS, and the Western Area Power
Administration. This Recovery Program, now in its fifteenth year of
operation, has the objective of cooperatively recovering four
endangered fish in compliance with the Endangered Species Act while
water development moves forward. Beginning in fiscal year 1994, the
Upper Basin Program initiated specific studies and actions in
preparation for the construction activities necessary to recover the
endangered fish.
The fiscal year 2005 funds for both Programs will enable their
vital activities to continue and to be successfully completed in
subsequent fiscal years. The past support and assistance of your
subcommittee has greatly facilitated the success of these multi-State,
multi-agency programs. We request the subcommittee's assistance
relative to fiscal year 2005 funding to ensure the Bureau of
Reclamation's continuing financial participation in these vitally
important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy
District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and inter-State water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy
District
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the Colorado River Congress
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
Prepared Statement of Denver Water
Chairman Domenici and Senator Reid, I am writing to request your
support for an appropriation in fiscal year 2005 of $5,234,000 to the
Bureau of Reclamation within the budget line item entitled ``Endangered
Species Recovery Implementation Program'' for the Upper Colorado River
Region. The President's recommended budget for fiscal year 2005
includes this line-item amount. Of these funds, I respectfully request
the designation of $4,008,000 for the Upper Colorado River Endangered
Fish Recovery Program; $691,000 for the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program and $535,000 for Fish and Wildlife Management
and Development, consistent with the President's budget request. The
requested fiscal year 2005 appropriation will allow construction of
fish passage, floodplain restoration activities, screening of existing
diversion canals, propagation facilities, endangered fish stocking, and
non-native fish management.
These funds are authorized by Public Law 106-392. Substantial non-
Federal cost sharing funds are provided by the States of Colorado,
Wyoming, Utah, and New Mexico, power users, and water users in support
of these recovery programs. These programs are carried out consistent
with State law and interstate water compacts.
The past support and assistance of your subcommittee has greatly
facilitated the success of these multi-State, multi-agency programs. I
request the subcommittee's assistance relative to fiscal year 2005
funding to ensure the Bureau of Reclamation's continuing financial
participation in these vitally important programs.
______
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Prepared Statement of the Health Physics Society (HPS) and Health
Physics Program Directors Organization (HPPDO)
This written testimony for the record for fiscal year 2005 requests
$500,000 for the Health Physics Graduate Fellowship program through the
Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology
(DOE-NE) to help address the shortage of Health Physicists, which is an
issue of extreme importance to the safety of our Nation's workers,
members of the public, and our environment.
The Department of Energy has recognized that the safety of our
Nation's workers, members of the public, and our environment is in
jeopardy because of the projected near-term and long-term shortage of
sufficient educated radiation safety professionals to protect them. The
organizations responsible for the performance and education of
radiation safety professionals, i.e., the Health Physics Society (HPS)
and the Health Physics Program Directors Organization (HPPDO), are very
pleased that DOE-NE brought this crisis to the attention of the
committee and has committed to take action to address it. In his
testimony to the committee on March 3, 2004, William D. Magwood, IV,
Director of the Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology,
stated, ``The Department is concerned that the Nation may soon not have
the trained health physicists who are needed to assure the safety of
all nuclear and radiological activities. With this budget, we begin
building a program to reverse the negative trends in this field as we
have already done in nuclear engineering.''
The committee has expressed strong support for the University
Reactor Fuel Assistance and Support program's efforts to provide
fellowships, scholarships, and grants to students enrolled in science
and engineering programs at U.S. universities, and has expressed
concern about the ability of the Nation to respond to the growing
demand for trained experts in nuclear science and technology. In Senate
Report 108-105, the committee also recognized the need to support
health physics academic programs as part of this effort when it wrote,
``The Committee recommendation strongly encourages the Department to
request sufficient funding in future years to fund all meritorious
proposals, including appropriate proposals to support health physics
university programs.''
We applaud DOE's response to the committee's encouragement by
including, in the words of Director Magwood, ``. . . a small but
important element to provide scholarships and graduate fellowships to
students studying the vital and too-often overlooked discipline of
health physics'' and we are appreciative of having the $200,000 in the
President's proposed budget applied to health physics programs.
However, the HPS and HPPDO believe that in order to meet the supply
needs of health physicists funding for the health physics programs
should be at least $500,000 in order to build a program to reverse the
negative trend.
Health Physics is the profession that specializes in radiation
safety, an integral and necessary distinct discipline within the
nuclear sciences. A recent workforce study by the Nuclear Energy
Institute (NEI) has shown that the projected demand for health
physicists for both the Government and Industry far surpasses the
current ability of the academic programs to meet these employment
demands, projecting a shortage of over 100 health physicists by 2011.
The number of health physics program graduates in 2001 was one-half the
number in 1996. A matter of great concern is that the NEI study does
not address the impact that the lack of sufficient qualified radiation
safety professionals will have on our Nation's health and homeland
security programs. For example, the homeland security effort to provide
training and radiation detection instruments to first responders, to
establish guidelines for responding to a radiological terrorist event,
to develop and deploy measures for the interdiction of radioactive
materials beyond our borders, and to employ nuclear and radiation
technology in screening for contraband materials requires health
physics professionals. A recent survey conducted by the Health Physics
Society indicates that present demand for radiation safety
professionals is approximately 130 percent of supply. The NEI study
projects a growth in that number to 400 percent by 2011 in the nuclear
industry alone.
We submitted testimony to the committee last year that requested
approximately $2 million in fiscal year 2005 and included a plan we
felt would stem the decline of health physics university academic
programs, and would assist in the public's understanding of radiation
safety as it is applied to the Nation's energy, health, and security
policies. That plan included academic program support for HP Graduate
Fellowship Programs, HP Undergraduate Scholarship Programs, Health
Physics Education & Research (HPER) Grants, and HP Minority-Majority
Partnerships. It also included Health Physics Society program support
for academic program ABET-ASAC Accreditation and HPS Science Teacher
Workshops. We are realistic about the pressures of this year's budget
and realize all six of these of these programs cannot be supported this
fiscal year.
We consider it important program to address immediately the HP
Graduate Fellowship program. We need between 15 and 20 fellows in a 2-
year Masters Degree program to start meeting our Nation's manpower
needs for radiation safety personnel. A single fellowship would be
about $30,000 annually, considering stipend, tuition and fees. Funding
of $500,000 would allow for approximately 15 fellows and allowance for
overhead administration costs. Funding at the administration's budget
request of $200,000 would support approximately 6 fellows, less than
half of the minimum need.
The committee's favorable consideration of this request will help
meet our Nation's radiation safety needs of the future.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Nuclear Society
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the
American Nuclear Society, I would like to express our concern regarding
recent changes in the direction of U.S. fusion research. In a letter
exchange with Dr. John Lindl of the Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, Dr. Raymond Orbach, the Director of the DOE Office of
Science stated the current administration position: ``now is not the
right time for us to invest in energy related R&D for fusion, for
either MFE (magnetic fusion energy) or for IFE (inertial fusion
energy)''. This position has been reflected in the Office of Fusion
Energy Science fiscal year 2005 budget request in which the so-called
``long-range'' fusion technology research activities have been
terminated. DOE has also been reducing its efforts on the advanced
design of fusion energy systems. The total funding cut in these areas
is about $9 million from the fiscal year 2003 level.
With these changes, U.S. magnetic fusion energy research will
become effectively a plasma physics research program while inertial
fusion energy research will become a high-energy-density physics
program. As the eliminated programs represent less than 5 percent of
fusion research expenditures, their elimination is based mainly on
policy grounds (as opposed to cost saving reasons).
It is difficult to understand this decision to terminate the fusion
technology program given the support for fusion energy research at the
highest administration levels,\1\ the plan for the United States to
join construction of the ITER device which is the highest priority
facility listed in DOE Office of Science's Strategic Plan,\2\ and the
continuing construction of the National Ignition Facility (NIF).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See for example President Bush's February 2003 statement at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030206-12.html:
``We're also going to work to produce electricity and hydrogen
through a process called fusion. Fusion is the same kind of nuclear
reaction that produces--that powers the sun. The energy produced will
be safe and clean and abundant. We've spent quite a bit of money, as
the senators here will tell you, on whether or not fusion works. And
we're not sure if it will be able to produce affordable energy for
everyday use. But it's worth a try. It's worth a look. Because the
promise is so great.
``So the United States will work with Great Britain and several
European nations, as well as Canada, Japan, Russia and China, to build
a fusion test facility and create the largest and most advanced fusion
experiment in the world. I look forward to working with Congress to get
it funded. I know you all have considered this in the past. It's an
incredibly important project to be a part of.
``Imagine a world in which our cars are driven by hydrogen and our
homes are heated by electricity from a fusion power plant. It'll be a
totally different world than what we're used to . . .''.
See also Secretary Abraham's January 2003 statement (at http://
fire.pppl.gov/) specifically stating that: ``It is imperative that we
maintain and enhance our strong domestic research program . . .
Critical science needs to be done in the U.S., in parallel with ITER,
to strengthen our competitive position in fusion technology.''
Also, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science 2004
Strategic Plan states: ``The President has made achieving commercial
fusion power the highest long-term priority for our Nation. Our
challenge is to develop a science-based solution that harnesses fusion
energy to power our industry and homes. We will do this by joining an
international burning plasma experiment, ITER, and exploring other
promising technologies.''
\2\ See http://wwwofe.er.doe.gov/Sub/Mission/Mission_Strategic.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It would seem prudent to maintain some balance in the program
between science and technology and between MFE and IFE. This is
reflected in several statements from the Fusion Energy Science Advisory
Committee (FESAC, which provides advice and recommendations to the DOE
Office of Science Director) in regard then to the fiscal year 2004
budget. At that time, DOE had proposed to terminate the fusion
technology effort in fiscal year 2004 but a Congressional add-on and a
strongly-worded letter from FESAC \3\ helped to provide a reprieve. The
fiscal year 2005 budget request includes the same fusion technology
funding cuts which, as part of the fiscal year 2004 budget, were
criticized by FESAC in 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ In a March 5, 2003 letter to Dr. Orbach, the FESAC said, ``. .
. devastating cuts to certain program elements are alarming; this note
expresses our most serious concerns,'' and commented, ``Thus, FESAC is
puzzled by the elimination in the fiscal year 2004 budget of funding
for fusion technology.'' The FESAC said, ``Similarly, inertial fusion
energy (IFE) is an important element of a balanced U.S. fusion program:
it provides the principal alternative to magnetic fusion and takes
advantage of NNSA investments in the National Ignition Facility. The
fiscal year 2004 budget, however, eliminates (fusion) chamber
technology for both MFE (magnetic fusion energy) and IFE.'' With
respect to the Advanced Design and Analysis program, the FESAC said,
``The study of future energy systems is a central component of fusion
research. Its evolving conceptualization of an eventual fusion power
plant has helped us visualize our target, while allowing us to identify
key scientific challenges.'' ``In summary,'' the 2003 FESAC letter
said, ``FESAC finds the Presidential request for fusion research
funding in fiscal year 2004 to be not only meager but also harmfully
distorted. It terminates components of the program that are truly
essential.'' (see http://www.ofes.fusion.doe.gov/More_HTML/
FESAC_Charges_Reports-
.html).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fusion technology research addresses the fundamental scientific
issues that will be encountered in fusion systems with substantial
amount of fusion energy (including such fusion facilities as ITER and
NIF). It provides solutions to near term technology issues that will
certainly arise in building and operating facilities like the NIF and
ITER. The advanced design and analysis of fusion energy systems provide
a vision of the ultimate fusion energy goal and a tool that is useful
for guiding the highest leverage near term scientific research.
Other participants in ITER, in particular the E.U. and Japan, have
strong programs in fusion technology R&D in preparation for testing in
ITER and leading to a power reactor in the future. It would be
regretful at this stage for the United States to pull out of this R&D
area and to be left in the precarious position of having to catch-up
with our international partners in the future once we decide to
seriously develop the advanced technology required for attractive
fusion power plants (of either MFE or IFE types).
I hope that this subcommittee will share our concern about this
apparent disconnect between the administration fusion energy goals and
this recent fusion energy funding policy change as well as about the
increasing gap in fusion technology expenditure and expertise between
the United States and its international partners. We strongly recommend
additional funding to the Department of Energy, Office of Science,
Fusion Energy Sciences fiscal year 2005 budget, with at least $5
million specifically allocated to restoring the funding in the Fusion
Technologies and Advanced Design categories. We also recommend a strong
accompanying statement of support from the subcommittee on these
activities.
______
Prepared Statement of the Coalition of Northeastern Governors
Dear Mr. Chairman, the Coalition of Northeastern Governors (CONEG)
is pleased to provide this testimony for the record to the Senate
Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development as it
considers fiscal year 2005 funding for the Office of Energy Efficiency
and Renewable Energy (EERE) of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
While we recognize the many demands being placed upon Federal resources
in the coming year, we urge the subcommittee to provide the increased
Federal funding support for renewable energy programs, particularly the
national and regional partnerships that advance research, development,
demonstration and deployment of renewable energy technologies. The
Governors appreciate the subcommittee's previous support for one of
these partnerships, the Regional Biomass Energy Program (RBEP), and the
decision of the EERE to continue this valuable Federal-State-private
partnership for bioenergy. We request the subcommittee to fund the
EERE's renewable programs at a level that will enable DOE to continue
its support of the RBEP program at $5 million in fiscal year 2005.
Renewable energy plays an increasingly vital role in a strategy to
meet the country's near and longer-term energy needs. It is an
important component of the diverse mix of fuels essential for a
reliable energy supply. Today, biomass provides a larger percentage of
the Nation's total energy mix than do hydroelectric sources; and it is
responsible for more energy output than all other renewable
technologies combined. Ethanol and electricity generation from biomass
feedstocks contribute over 3 percent of the Nation's energy
consumption. In the Northeast, bioenergy produced from the region's
forest and agricultural resources contributes to approximately 5
percent of the region's energy consumption. Some of the most promising
technologies which can meet renewable energy needs in the near-term and
lessen the Nation's dependence on fossil fuels use biomass.
While the CONEG Governors recognize Federal support for bioenergy
can take many forms, we specifically support a level of funding for the
EERE's renewable energy programs that will enable the DOE to continue
its support of the Regional Biomass Energy Program and its effective
network of regional host organizations at a level of $5 million in
fiscal year 2005. This RBEP network is an important partner in the
Federal Government's multi-faceted initiatives to encourage a diverse
energy resource mix and energy efficiency across the country. Funding
for the RBEP program will allow this valuable Federal-State-private
sector initiative to continue--without interruption--the pioneering
regional projects and technical assistance networks which help bring
bioenergy into regional energy markets across the Nation.
The revitalized RBEP encompasses all 50 States in five regional
programs. It is an important tool in the Nation's effort to realize the
opportunities which bioenergy offers for energy production, economic
development and sound environmental management. The regional program is
uniquely situated to target program resources to the specific biomass
opportunities of each part of the country. Through a blend of projects
and technical assistance networks, the RBEP identifies opportunities
for and helps reduce barriers to the commercialization of biomass
technologies; promotes coordinated State and Federal public policies in
support of bioenergy; and educates consumers on the opportunities and
benefits of biomass energy.
The RBEP's success is closely tied to its use of State-based
regional organizations to administer and coordinate program resources
and activities. These organizations, with their direct ties to elected
and appointed State decision-makers and agencies, are uniquely able to
leverage Federal, State and private sector resources and cooperation
across State and Federal agencies, among various States, and between
the public and private sector. These organizations have:
--the ability to gain governors' and State legislators' attention and
commitment to bioenergy;
--the capacity to leverage resources and cooperation for
collaborative policy and technical projects from private
companies and multiple State and Federal agencies--
transportation, environmental protection, public utility
commission, and agriculture;
--the capability to move quickly to address emerging issues; and
--the ability to offer staff with extensive biomass program
management experience.
The CONEG Policy Research Center is pleased to be part of the
Northeast Regional Biomass Program (NRBP) and its work to advance
renewable biomass energy, the region's most abundant resource. From
Maine to Maryland, the NRBP encompasses a wide range of activities that
cover all biomass resources and technologies. The NRBP makes possible
State-level working groups that promote public-private partnerships for
biomass development, and it helps promote policies that support
renewable biomass. It encourages demonstrations of leading edge
technologies, and conducts public education and outreach that helps
condition the marketplace for new bioenergy technologies and biobased
products. A major strength of the NRBP is its ability to link biomass
development to other public policy goals, such as creating new economic
opportunities, preserving agricultural or forest lands for current use,
and reducing air and water pollution. As Renewable Portfolio Standard
programs have and continue to be promulgated in the Northeast States,
biomass power has recently begun to be a focus of new and significant
project development. The contributions of the NRBP program over the
years has played, and will continue to play, an essential role in
stimulating and facilitating this market development through its
working groups, extensive networking, and leadership of its regional
coordinator.
Congressional funding for EERE's renewable energy programs at a
level in fiscal year 2005 that will permit $5 million for the RBEP will
allow these partnerships, with their administration by proven host
agency organizations, to strengthen the established bioenergy networks
that transfer experience and coordinate activities within a State,
throughout a region and across the Nation.
We thank the subcommittee for this opportunity to share the views
of the Coalition of Northeastern Governors, and we stand ready to
provide you with any additional information on the importance of the
Regional Biomass Energy Program and the Northeast Regional Biomass
Program to the Northeast and the rest of the Nation, as well as the
vital role biomass can play in meeting the Nation's energy needs.
______
Prepared Statement of Bob Lawrence & Associates, Inc.
cost/benefits of geothermal energy r&d
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Dr. L.R.
(Bob) Lawrence, Jr., and I am President of Bob Lawrence & Associates,
Inc., a consulting firm in Alexandria, Virginia. I, and my firm, have
been working with the Department of Energy's Geothermal program since
1990, and during the past 14 years, we have seen many positive changes
in the program which are helpful to the industry and to our country as
a whole. I come before you, today, to request $30 million for the
program for fiscal year 2005, the same level that was appropriated for
fiscal year 2003, of which, $6 million would be applied to the
GeoPowering the West portion of the Program.
Geothermal electric generation, at 16 billion Kw-hrs per year, is
the largest contributor to delivered electricity from Renewables except
for Hydro generation. For the past several years, the Geothermal
Technology program has been held back at budget levels below $30
million. This has been harmful to the industry which is dependent upon
the technology evolving from the DOE programs to develop new and ever
more difficult resources. During the fiscal year 2003 appropriations
process, the Senate funded the Geothermal program at $37 million.
Although the Conference only funded the program at $30 million, it was
certainly a step in the right direction. It is consummately in the
national interest to increase the funding level of this program to $30
million annually to accelerate increased geothermal use for energy
purposes. The fiscal year 2004 appropriation of $25.5 million was,
unfortunately, a step backward, causing cuts in numerous, high quality,
ongoing programs.
At $30 million, it gives the Geothermal program the chance to move
forward with industry on several fronts. At the $30 million level,
strong programs, heavily cost shared with industry, can move ahead
addressing Enhanced Geothermal Systems, where tertiary treated waste
water is injected deep into the earth to provide additional needed
water to under-saturated geothermal resources. The GeoPowering the West
program, addressing 19 Western States, can be strengthened. And most
importantly, Cost-Shared Exploratory Drilling, Reservoir Definition,
and New Resource Exploration can move forward in areas where it has
slowed to nearly a stop. Even at $30 million, the Geothermal program
will be the lowest funded of all Renewables, even though the program
returns the most revenue to the government and has been the most
successful based on present generation annual levels.
overview
Cost-shared Department of Energy investments in geothermal energy
R&D, starting in the 1970's, have made possible the establishment of
the geothermal industry in the United States. Today that industry
generates over 16 billion kilowatt-hours per year in the United States,
alone. The total, retail value of this electricity exceeds $1 billion
per year. The Industry:
--returns over $41 million annually to the Treasury in royalty and
production payments for geothermal development on Federal
lands;
--supplies the total electric-power needs of about 4 million people
in the United States, including over 7 percent of the
electricity in California, about 10 percent of the power in
Northern Nevada, and about 25 percent of the electricity for
the Island of Hawaii (the Big Island);
--employs some 30,000 U.S. workers;
--uses over $500 million worth of steel structures;
--displaces emissions of at least 16 million tons of carbon dioxide,
20,000 tons of sulfur dioxide, 41,000 tons of nitrogen oxides,
and 1,300 tons of particulate matter every year, compared with
production of the same amount of electricity from a state-of-
the-art coal-fired plant;
--has installed geothermal projects worth $3.0 billion overseas,
mostly in the Philippines and Indonesia.
near term potential
The geothermal industry, with appropriate government R&D support,
can provide an additional 600 Megawatts of power in about 18 months.
This power will come from:
--Use of tertiary treated wastewater injection (Enhanced Geothermal
Systems): 200 MW.
--Implementation of new technologies into old plants, well field
upgrades, and turbine replacements: 400 MW.
In addition, direct use increases, through the GeoPowering the West
initiative, will provide an additional, near term, 100MW of use for
heating, cooling, industrial drying, agricultural applications, and
recreational purposes.
This is an additional 700MW of clean, renewable, geothermal energy
available within 2 years with appropriate government funding and
support, right in the heart of the western States that presently have
the most critical power problems.
longer term potential
The long term potential of Geothermal energy in the United States
is estimated to be 25,000 MW of electrical generation and an additional
25,000 MW of direct use. To date, the geothermal industry has made use
of only the highest grade geothermal resources in the United States.
The keys to realizing the enormous potential of geothermal energy are
improved technology to tap resources that can not, at present, be
economically developed, and cost shared programs with industry for
accelerated implementation of the technology. Substantial investments
in R&D by the geothermal industry, acting alone, have not happened and
are unlikely, because the developers are uniformly financial entities,
with small engineering components, which rely on the technology
centered at national laboratories and university institutes for project
development and engineering.
technology needs
Applied R&D is essential to reduce the technical and financial
risks of new technology to a level that is acceptable to the private
sector and its financial backers. The U.S. geothermal industry has
conducted a series of workshops to determine the industry's needs for
new technology and has recommended cost-shared R&D programs to DOE
based on the highest-priority needs.
The Geothermal Industry supports the Strategic Plan of the DOE
Office of Geothermal Technology. The plan calls for increased spending,
quickly reaching $50 to $60 million per year, a geothermal budget level
consistent with that recommended by the President's Committee of
Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) in their 1997 report.
Technical needs include:
Drilling.--Geothermal drilling differs dramatically from oil and
gas drilling since the necessary production holes are three times as
wide as oil and gas production holes, and they must be drilled through
hard, volcanic rock rather than sedimentary soils. Also, because of the
high temperatures and corrosive nature of geothermal fluids, geothermal
drilling is much more difficult and expensive than conventional oil and
gas drilling. Each well costs $1 million to $3 million, and an average
geothermal field consists of 10 to 100 or more wells. The drilling
technology program continues to show cost-saving advancements.
Exploration and Reservoir Technology.--The major challenge facing
the industry in exploration and development of geothermal resources is
how to remotely detect producing zones deep in the subsurface so that
drill holes can be sited and steered to intersect them. No two
geothermal reservoirs are alike. Present exploration techniques are not
specific enough, and result in too many dry wells, driving up
development costs. The industry needs better geological, geochemical,
and geophysical techniques, as well as improved computer methods for
modeling heat-extraction strategies from geothermal reservoirs.
Energy Conversion.--The efficiency in converting geothermal steam
into electricity in the power plant directly affects the cost of power
generation. During the past decade, the efficiency of dry- and flash-
steam geothermal power plants was improved by 25 percent. It is
believed that geothermal power-plant efficiency can be improved by an
additional 10 to 20 percent over the next decade with a modest
investment in R&D.
Reclaimed Water Use for Geothermal Enhancement.--Many potential
geothermal resources are not utilized due to insufficient water in the
hot zones. Reclaimed water, the disposal of which is an expensive
problem for many communities, could be used productively, in many
cases, to enhance the geothermal resources, making them more
economically viable for local use. In the United States, over 300
western communities each have a potentially useable geothermal resource
co-located within 5 miles. The technology which will evolve from this
effort could be broadly applicable to these communities and their
combined energy and wastewater problems.
GeoPowering the West.--This initiative, now in its fourth year,
seeks to develop, as well as provide information and implement, those
technologies needed to utilize geothermal resources in the over 300
presently identified ``co-located'' communities in 19 Western States.
Studies now underway may increase the number of communities to over
350. The program is creating partnerships with the subject communities
to utilize hot geothermal waters for direct use applications such as
space conditioning, industrial drying, agricultural applications, and
recreational purposes. Additionally, the program will provide
technology needed to explore these resources for generation potential.
In the short time that this program has been ongoing, it has played a
major role in expanding the number of States with geothermal electric
generation potential from four to eight, or a doubling of candidate
States. This program is singularly important to the expanded geothermal
future of our country and should be expanded to $6 million for fiscal
year 2005.
GeoSciences.--Basic research in the GeoSciences needs to continue
at national laboratories, universities, and research institutes to
expand and advance the knowledge base in this technology area. Funding
the GeoSciences ensures a flow of new, capable, engineers and
scientists into this important field as well as expanding the basic
knowledge base surrounding geothermal resources and geothermal energy.
It is important for this program to continue.
conclusion
The cost shared, cooperative, research, development, and
implementation projects of the Department of Energy's Geothermal
program should serve as a model for programs whose purpose is to
provide and enhance national benefits, while reaping a return on
investment for the taxpayer. The $41 million that the industry returns
to various governmental entities in royalties and leases exceeds,
annually, the amount that the government invests in the future of the
technology. Yet, the future of the technology and the expanded industry
is closely tied to these programs. Clearly, the Geothermal research and
technology development is an outstanding example of a proper, taxpayer
investment. $30 million is required for fiscal year 2004.
______
Prepared Statement of Bob Lawrence & Associates, Inc.
required replacement of the topock-davis-mead transmission line
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Bob
Lawrence, and I am President of Bob Lawrence & Associates, Inc., a
consulting firm in Alexandria, VA. Our company is involved in a variety
of high technology subjects largely related to the Energy sector.
I am here, today, to request an appropriation of $20 million for
fiscal year 2005 for replacement of the Topock-Davis-Mead transmission
line with Aluminum Matrix Composite Conductor (AMC). The Topock-Davis-
Mead line runs along the Colorado River on the Western boundary of
Arizona and serves the electricity needs of the communities there
including Havasu City (pop. 50,000), Bullhead City (33,769), Mohave
Valley (13,694), Needles, CA (5193) and the Mohave Indian Tribe. It is
the primary load server for this region. The line also provides needed
service to Kingman, AZ (22,092) and Blythe, CA (21,376). The line is
operating with all of its capacity allocated. The $20 million requested
would be the first of two increments for a total of $35 million to
replace this line with AMC conductor. Studies accomplished by WAPA and
others show that to double the capacity of this transmission corridor
would cost $10 million to $17 million more with conventional
technologies than it would using the AMC conductor option. A simple
line for line replacement, using the AMC option, will increase the
capacity by well over a factor of 3, and some studies indicate a factor
of 8.
WAPA ratepayers presently pay about $80 million more to the
government than WAPA receives in appropriations on an annual basis. If
WAPA were a private utility, these funds would be available to upgrade
their system. In the WAPA case, the ``surplus'' goes back to the
Federal treasury. Yet, the WAPA budget request to Congress contains
only $12 million for ``construction'' which is woefully inadequate to
maintain their system with needed upgrades. Therefore, it is requested
that the funding to pay for the upgrading of this line come from the
annual ``surplus,'' and be designated ``non-reimbursable.''
The service area for this line is one of the hottest regions of the
United States. Without air conditioning, individuals of fragile health
in the region could be at considerable risk. The region served by
Topock-Davis-Mead is populated largely by retirees, causing a greater
than normal percentage of elderly in the population. These are the
people that could be particularly, negatively affected by a
transmission shutdown, causing a loss of electrical service, and air
conditioning, during peak summer temperatures. The situation is now
approaching critical.
The region is experiencing load growth, as much as 10 percent per
year in some areas. The Parker-Davis dam system is operating at full
capacity, and all of the generated power is being delivered through the
transmission system. There is no capability for additional transmitted
power in the immediate region above what is presently demanded.
WAPA is legislatively responsible for ``system reliability,'' but
is not required to provide for load growth beyond the generation of the
Parker-Davis dam system.
The Topock-Davis-Mead line, when running at peak capacity, is
thermally limited and limited by the sag. If additional power is
transmitted, the line would sag beyond the safe limits established by
national electrical safety code standards. It was excessive sag in a
transmission line that triggered the blackout event of August 14, 2003,
in the Northeast and Midwest. It is essential that this be avoided in
this WAPA DSR transmission trunk.
The conventional solution to this problem would be to construct a
new transmission line in the area, requiring new right-of-way, new
towers, and new lines. The transmission path is in an archeologically
significant and environmentally sensitive area, which makes new right-
of-way an unattractive option.
The Department of Energy has been evolving this potential solution
at the request of Congress. Since 1998, DOE has been developing and
testing the Aluminum Matrix Composite Conductor (AMC), also called
Aluminum Conductor Composite Reinforced (ACCR). This is a high capacity
transmission line conductor that could provide very substantial
capacity increases by simply replacing the old technology lines with
the new, AMC/ACCR option. Field testing of this option, now underway,
has met all needed utility specifications. AMC/ACCR is in operational
service in Hawaii, North Dakota, Minnesota and Arizona. AMC/ACCR is now
available for commercial sale and application.
The use of this new technology on the Topock-Davis-Mead line would
offer key benefits including:
--Ensure delivery of power to the citizens of the surrounding
communities.
--Improve the reliability of the region by addressing a known
problem.
--Elimination of a bottleneck resulting in an 8-fold increase in
power transfer capability (in this case the flow would be north
to Mead, the most critical 500kV feed into Southern California)
--Preserve the visual landscape since no visual change to the
existing line would occur and no additional land is required.
--Avoid the environmental impact associated with building a new line
and time delays that can occur during the permitting process.
--Provide additional revenue to the Federal Government in the form of
increased power sales or additional wheeling charges for
carrying power from other producers.
Finally, this project would provide a ``showcase installation'' for
a new, well tested, technology and would spur further adoption. The
experiences of the past 2 years have clearly shown that our Nation
needs an affordable option that will improve, upgrade, and increase the
capacity of our national grid without adding to the environmental
insult of overhead, electric transmission lines. The Aluminum Matrix
Composite Conductor appears to be the most near term option available.
The program to develop this option was begun in fiscal year 2002
with $4 million, and was continued through fiscal year 2003 and fiscal
year 2004 at $4 million per year. Substantial cost sharing from both
industry and utilities occurred. The need for the Congressionally
mandated $4 million per year has now ended. Accessories tailored for
each conductor installation were also developed and tested. The testing
included a low-voltage outdoor test span operated by ORNL that can
continuously cycle a 1,200-foot multispan line to high-temperature
operation.
Multi-year field trials are now demonstrating medium and large size
conductor performance under different conditions, such as various
voltages, mechanical loading conditions, and operating conditions. The
testing is proceeding flawlessly. WAPA is hosting two of the ongoing
field trials which began in fiscal year 2002 under this program.
In conclusion, I would like to thank the chairman and his staff for
having the foresight to provide the needed funding to bring the
development program and the status of the technology to this point.
Clearly, it is the best option to replace outdated, conventional
technology lines in critical locations such as the Topock-Davis-Mead
corridor.
______
Prepared Statement of Bob Lawrence & Associates, Inc.
high temperature superconductivity r&d
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, my name is Bob
Lawrence, I am President of Bob Lawrence and Associates, Inc., of
Alexandria, Virginia. I appreciate the opportunity to present this
testimony, today, on the important subject of Superconductivity. I am
here to request an appropriation of $49 million for the Department of
Energy program for fiscal year 2005.
background
Of all the technologies which are emerging today, Superconductivity
is arguably one of the most promising in terms of dramatic, potential
enhancements to American infrastructure and national benefits.
Laboratory results have moved into government-industry partnerships
aimed at accelerating superconducting products into the electrical
marketplace with concurrent, dramatic, energy efficiency and
environmental improvements. Energy Committee Chairman Pete Domenici
summed up the promise and accomplishments of this program, earlier this
year, when he noted that, 20 years ago, superconducting material only
came in 1 centimeter lengths, whereas today, they are making cables out
of it. This is exceptional progress in research.
Superconductivity is the property of a material to conduct
unusually large quantities of electrical current with virtually no
resistance. Since the middle of the century, researchers have known
that certain ceramic materials show superconducting properties when
they approach a temperature near absolute zero, or the temperature of
liquid hydrogen and liquid helium. Practical applications of these
materials are difficult, however, since they are characteristically
very costly to make, very brittle in nature, and prohibitively
expensive to cool to the required, very low temperature.
In 1986, a new class of ceramic materials was discovered which
showed superconducting properties at temperatures up to 34K. Since that
time, improvements have produced superconducting materials at the
temperature of liquid nitrogen, or 72K. These ``high temperature''
superconducting (HTS) materials have generated great excitement since
the projected costs of applications have dropped by orders of
magnitude, and first viable products appear to be within reach.
the program
Today, a number of HTS-based pieces of electrical equipment are at
the prototype stage with capable manufacturing entities intimately
involved. Early candidates for commercial products include
Transformers, Electric Motors, Generators, Fault Current Limiters, and
underground Power Cables. Later in the commercialization process,
replacements for overhead transmission lines are also foreseen;
however, this will not be an early application. To enhance and
accelerate the prospects for early commercialization of HTS products,
the Department of Energy has developed a vertically integrated program
in which product oriented teams are focused on the development and
implementation of HTS equipment. Under the title of the
Superconductivity Partnership Initiative (SPI), these vertically
integrated teams typically each consist of an electric utility, a
system manufacturer, an HTS wire supplier, and one or more national
laboratories. Supporting these vertical teams is a Second Generation
Wire Initiative, in which development teams are exploiting research
breakthroughs at Los Alamos, Argonne, and Oak Ridge National labs that
promise unprecedented current-carrying capabilities in high-temperature
superconducting wires. Since superconducting wire is the main component
of all superconducting cables, products and systems, the price drop
projected by the Second Generation technology is highly significant and
important to successful commercialization.
Transformer development is being carried out by the team of
Waukesha Electric Systems, Intermagnetics General Corporation,
Rochester Gas and Electric, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the
Oak Ridge National Laboratory. This team has conducted a series of
reference designs concentrating mostly on a 30-MVA, 138-kV/13.8kV
transformer which is representative of a class expected to capture
about half of all U.S. power transformer sales in the next two decades.
According to industry experts, Japan and Europe are somewhat ahead of
the United States in transformer development.
The United States HTS electric motor team is headed by Reliance
Electric with American Superconductor Corp as the HTS coil supplier and
manufacturer. Also on this team are Centerior Energy (a utility
company) and Sandia National Laboratory. ``In February 1996, Reliance
Electric successfully tested a four-pole, 1800 rpm synchronous motor
using HTS windings operating at 27K at a continuous 150kW output. The
coils . . . achieved currents of 100A . . . , 25 percent over the
initial goal of 80 A.'' This program has now been extended to ``develop
a pre-commercial prototype of a 3.7MW HTS motor''. The demonstration of
this motor will be an important milestone in the commercialization
process, since it will provide a measure of efficiency, reliability,
and projected costs and benefits.
Generator efforts in the United States have recently begun with a
team headed by General Electric. The efforts here, again, appear to be
behind those in Japan. In Japan, funds expended on HTS design,
development, and demonstration exceed those in the United States. This
Japanese, heavily funded effort involves 16 member organizations with
representation from the electric utilities, manufacturers of electric
power equipment, research organizations, manufacturers of HTS wire and
tape, refrigeration and cryogenic suppliers, and independent research
institutes.
Fault Current Limiters represent a new class of electric utility
equipment with many attractive properties. This type of equipment may,
in fact, be a market leader, since its properties appear to provide
substantial potential cost savings to electric utilities as well as
containing power outages. This type of equipment is only possible using
superconducting technology.
Exciting developments have taken place in the field of underground
HTS cables for transmission and distribution. In the United States, two
teams are pursuing two different technical concepts, but each team is
led by a powerhouse electrical cable manufacturer; Pirelli North
America, and Southwire Co. First design cables are now under test in
practical applications. Worldwide, about 10 superconducting electric
power cable demonstrations are now underway, in various stages of
completion.
the benefits
Dramatic cost and energy savings are projected when the candidate
systems and products from superconducting technology are fully
implemented, with incremental benefits accruing from the time of
technology readiness and commercial introduction to the time of full
market penetration. When fully implemented into the electric generation
and utilization sectors of our economy, superconducting technology is
expected to save $8 billion per year in retail value of presently lost
electricity, lost due to transmission and distribution. An additional
$8 billion per year can be saved with the installation of
superconductive transformers and electric motors. Yet another $1
billion or so can be saved by full implementation of HTS generators.
This totals fully implemented benefits of $17 billion per year from
full implementation of HTS technology in presently envisioned
equipment. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) experts and studies
carried out by Energetics, Inc. indicate that HTS underground cable
savings would be in the range of 125,000 kWhr per mile, per year. At
the present average rate of 6.89 cents per kWhr, this corresponds to
retail level monetary savings of $8,612.50 per mile per year. These
savings will flow directly into reductions in taxpayer electric bills,
under a competitive electricity delivery environment.
effects of fiscal year 2004 cuts
As is well known, the Department of Energy, for fiscal year 2004,
elected to fund the Superconductivity program at $32 million, even
though the final, Conference version of the fiscal year 2004
appropriations bill ``urged'' a funding level of $48 million. This
decision has been devastating to the program and the industry, and if
it isn't corrected, the damage to the program will be such that it will
take many years to recover. This type of action must absolutely be
avoided in the future.
national security
Above ground transmission lines are vulnerable to terrorist attack,
as well as severe weather. High Temperature Superconductivity would
allow transmission lines to be placed underground with very large
capacity increases per cross section. This also allows for a more
environmentally effective use of the surface land. Higher national
security and better environmental posture: a good combination.
There are Defense applications of this technology, enabling in
nature, applying to directed energy weapons. Exact applications are
sensitive in nature, but it is important to note that the benefits from
success in this technology will apply to many cross sections of the
American economy and infrastructure.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to
present this testimony. Major efforts in this technology are now
underway in China, South Korea, Japan, and a number of European
countries, as well as the United States. It is very important that we
make every effort to be ahead of the rest of the world in this
technology, and for that reason, I ask that the committee provide an
appropriation of $49 million for the Superconductivity R&D program for
fiscal year 2005.
______
Prepared Statement of the Solar Energy Industries Association
The Solar Energy Industries Association represents photovoltaic,
concentrating solar power, and solar thermal manufacturers,
distributors, contractors, and installers nationwide. I am writing to
request research funding of $100 million for photovoltaics, $20 million
for Concentrating Solar Power, and $5 million for Solar Heating and
Lighting, as well as potential future Federal procurement programs.
This is a substantial increase over current funding levels, but in line
with funding proposed in the conference Energy Bill, as supported by
SEIA.
photovoltaics
Our industry is at a critical decision point. While clean energy
industries soar worldwide, the United States is increasingly left
behind. Worldwide solar production in 2003 was more than 760 million
watts, up from just over 550 million in 2002. However, the United
States produced just 109 megawatts--the first U.S. production decline
in recent memory. We must stop this trend, before we become dependent
on importing yet another source of energy.
The overall industry is supercharged; world PV production is now
doubling almost every 2 years. Bell Labs produced the first watt of
commercial PV in 1954, and we expect to produce more than one billion
watts in 2004. However, increasingly, that production occurs in Japan
and Germany.
Leaving aside environmental and energy security concerns, this is a
major issue. The Renewable Energy Policy Project estimates that each
megawatt of solar produced supports 35.5 jobs over 10 years--more than
any other energy source. At that rate, a solar industry which continues
to grow at current rates would support more than 100,000 jobs by 2020;
an industry half the size of General Motors. Many of these are very
high value-added manufacturing jobs, with major manufacturing in TN,
NJ, MI, IL, MA, OH, MD, WA, DE, CA, and elsewhere. Federal R&D has a
real impact on where these plants develop. My members tell me that the
opportunity to participate in DOE's world-class research is one of
their primary considerations when deciding where to locate
manufacturing.
Other nations have noted this industry's potential, and are
coupling incentive programs with increasingly aggressive research
funding. However, while the photovoltaics industry has more than
doubled in size since 2000, U.S. research funding for photovoltaics has
remained essentially flat; this makes even less sense when you consider
the program's impressive results. The DOE PV research program has been
a major reason why solar manufacturing prices have dropped by more than
half in the last 10 years alone. (Below--DOE's PV Roadmap is now
predicting that solar electricity will be available for less than $.08/
kWh within the next 10 years.) These innovations occur in a competitive
cost-sharing environment that ensures rapid development of technologies
that would not likely emerge otherwise. As a result of this excellent
work, PV electricity is now cost-competitive in a growing number of
markets for homes, businesses, and remote applications alike--the
number and size of these markets will only increase as costs continue
to fall.
Continuing advances in crystalline silicon technologies could bring
prices down by half again, while DOE's Systems-Driven Approach squeezes
optimum efficiency and reliability out of every part of the solar
system, from panels to connectors to inverters. Meanwhile, the Thin
Film Partnership is beginning large-scale commercialization of their
products, which use much less raw material and more rapid continuous-
line production processes. Equally exciting are the ``generation beyond
next'' nanostructured and organic solar cells being developed by many
domestic companies and labs--these flexible cells offer the possibility
of manufacturing millions of watts of solar on machines similar to
today's printing presses, out of chemicals we currently use to make
paint and toothpaste.
The 2003 Peer Review of DOE's Photovoltaics subprogram, assembled
by a team of eminent scientists and researchers including a retired
Scientific Advisor for Exxon Corporate Research, heaped praise upon the
program's achievements, noting ``The role of the laboratories in the
projects reviewed has been outstanding in terms of quality of science,
technology and engineering; relevance to national needs and DOE
mission; and programmatic performance, management and planning.''
However, they felt the need to note that DOE is now in the position of
having to choose between research and basic equipment needs:
``Equipment and facilities are aging and failing at the
laboratories . . . Funds for personnel and current research are being
cannibalized to sustain equipment that should have been replaced long
ago . . . An exceptional research capability at both Sandia and NREL is
at risk in the immediate future unless DOE develops a strategy for
dealing with these ongoing strains . . . the panel heard frequent
references to specific equipment and facilities that were:
``--Aging and less capable than new equipment.
``--Failing from lack of maintainability.
``--Being kept in operation at the expense of funds to support staff
patent applications, conferences and publications.
``It appears that the operating budgets at NREL and Sandia are
being partly cannibalized to keep basic equipment operating.''
(Emphasis added.)
The current fiscal year 2005 administration request for the
photovoltaics program--ca. $75 million--is insufficient to support the
research needs of the evolving technology and growing industry behind
these programs. If we are to meet DOE's goal of PV-generated
electricity for $.06/kWh by 2020, funding needs to be increased
substantially. SEIA requests $100 million for the photovoltaics program
in total.
concentrating solar power
CSP systems currently produce 354 MW of clean, reliable, and
relatively inexpensive power in the California desert--enough for ca.
120,000 homes. New companies are now entering this market with newer,
more refined, and more sophisticated technologies. Early construction
has begun for another 50 MW plant in Nevada, and a 1 MW plant in
Arizona. Other project sites are in early negotiations now, and the
Western Governor's Association has stated that they support further
developing this resource. Recently, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson
announced he plans to use $3 million in capital outlay funds to attract
concentrating solar power plants to his State.
A recent ``due diligence'' review of the CSP program, conducted by
third party consultants Sargent and Lundy under the auspices of the
National Research Council, found that ``CSP technology is a proven
technology for energy production, there is a potential market for CSP
technology and that significant cost reductions are achievable assuming
reasonable deployment of CSP technologies occurs.'' The
administration's own budget document for 2003 states:
``Large-scale CSP technologies have been operating successfully in
the California desert for 15 years. Over this time the cost of these
systems has decreased by a factor of 3 . . . they are currently the
least expensive source of solar electricity. Recent technology
advancements . . . (have) revitalized the CSP industry and placed them
in a position to play a major role in near-term green power
opportunities, both domestically and overseas, as costs are projected
to drop into the 6 to 8 cents/kWh range.''
Given this degree of support and promise, a closeout budget request
(ca. $2 million) is unjustifiable. The funding rollercoaster for the
CSP program has damaged its ability to make long-term investments and
retain high quality staff. Laboratory staff has been reduced by 70
percent, a staggering loss of knowledge and expertise. Priceless
equipment goes unused or will be soon dismantled.
Funding of $20 million would allow the Department of Energy to
revitalize this program, maintaining an ability to validate technology
and components as well as lowering operations and maintenance costs in
a stable environment. We expect that CSP plants could generate massive
amounts of electricity for prices in the neighborhood of $.07 to $.09/
kWh by the end of the decade. (For instance, using CSP on less than
one-quarter of 1 percent of Arizona's land area could meet the State's
entire electrical needs.) Given the growth potential of this industry
and the very strong international interest in these technologies, it
seems a small price to pay.
We also note with interest the provision of the recent conference
Energy Bill that provides substantial research support for using
Concentrating Solar Power as a source of new hydrogen fuel. Solar will
undoubtedly be one of the critical cornerstone technologies of the
hydrogen economy, giving us the ability to produce zero-emissions motor
fuels when and where we want them. Concentrating Solar Power offers two
unique opportunities in this regard; conventional electrolysis of water
to generate hydrogen, and, unique to solar, inexpensive thermochemical
processes that use a direct catalytic conversion.
solar heating and lighting/zero energy buildings
SEIA also strongly supports the Solar Buildings projects, including
the visionary Zero Energy Buildings Program. The multi-year goal of ZEB
is to allow widespread adoption of zero energy residences by 2010 and
commercial buildings by 2015. This would slow and eventually eliminate
new buildings' consumption of our finite energy sources. Builders
around the country are increasingly developing new construction
techniques and materials, and including solar technologies which will
achieve zero finite fuel source energy consumption. For these programs
we request $8 million in funding, and we support the administration's
attempts to move this program into its logical niche in the Interior
appropriations budget, where partnerships with DOE's Buildings program
could make the most of relevant equipment and expertise. A different
program, formerly filed under the ``solar buildings'' heading, is Solar
Heating and Lighting. Solar water heating technologies are utilized
around the world in quantities far exceeding those in the United
States. Such systems can significantly reduce electricity and natural
gas consumption. Solar water heating technologies are already
ubiquitous in many other countries, thereby saving other energy sources
for higher value purposes.
Within this program, emphasis is placed on reducing the cost of
solar water heating by using lightweight polymer materials to replace
the heavy copper and glass materials in today's collectors. The goal is
to complete R&D on new polymers and manufacturing processes to reduce
the cost of solar water heating to 4 cents/kWh by the end of 2004. We
recommend that this program be funded explicitly at the $5 million
level.
future appropriations
While they are not yet law, we would like to draw the
subcommittee's attention to two areas of the proposed energy bill as
supported by SEIA (both H.R. 6 and the new S. 2095). Sec. 205 would
authorize substantial purchases of photovoltaics on the part of the
Federal Government, driving down costs nationwide and giving the
government a good long-term energy investment. Sec. 902 would cost-
share the installation of renewable energy systems in State or local
buildings, improving the energy independence and financial situation of
State and local governments with new clean energy devices.
conclusion
Solar energy's benefits to the Nation are far too numerous to list
here comprehensively. However, we cannot mention enough that as a long-
lived source of renewable energy, solar enables us to make more of our
energy at home, rather than being forced to acquire it overseas or from
volatile fuel markets. Modular and simple to install, it can provide
quick answers to grid congestion or supply inadequacy, while
sidestepping environmental and NIMBY issues. The high coincidence of
solar panels' peak output with daily peak demand makes them an
attractive solution for load pockets or seasonal demand spikes,
avoiding the dirtiest and least efficient conventional generators.
Increased investment in solar also ties us more closely to a source
of energy that can be used anywhere in the Nation, and which becomes
less expensive, not more, every single year. These are nontrivial
considerations when the Chairman of DuPont recently declared that high
natural gas costs will prompt the company to shift its ``center of
gravity'' overseas, and when the Conference Board, the Chicago Fed, and
Federal Reserve Chairman Greenspan all publicly cite volatility and
escalation in energy costs as a major uncertainty as well as a drag on
economic growth.
Expanded use of renewable energy is also a key recommendation of
the report on mitigating the natural gas market crisis, as issued in
September 2003 by the Secretary of Energy's National Petroleum Council
(NPC). The NPC report set as its number one recommendation to ``Improve
Demand Flexibility and Efficiency'' with an emphasis on the use of
renewable fuels and technologies for power generation.
Clean energy is the most likely next tech boom, and other nations'
research and incentive spending shows that they are very much aware of
this fact. As Business Week correctly observed in their March 22 issue,
economically viable solar power could drive a transformative ``job
boom'' in the coming century, maintaining American leadership in the
world economy as did the automobile and the commercial aircraft earlier
this century. I urge the subcommittee to make the most of this historic
opportunity.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society of Plant Biologists
The American Society of Plant Biologists (ASPB) is a non-profit
society of nearly 6,000 scientists. My name is Mary Lou Guerinot,
President of ASPB and Professor at Dartmouth College. ASPB urges the
subcommittee to support the fiscal year 2005 budget request of the
Department of Energy of $228,422,000 for the Chemical Sciences,
Geosciences and Biosciences Division of the Office of Basic Energy
Sciences. This represents an increase of $8.8 million or 4 percent.
The Biosciences program within the Chemical Sciences, Geosciences
and Biosciences Division supports fundamental research needed to
develop future biotechnologies related to energy. The supported
research focuses on the biological mechanisms occurring in plants and
microorganisms.
Plants and microbes fit readily into the energy context by virtue
of serving as renewable resources for fuel and other fossil resource
substitutes, as vehicles to restore previously disrupted environmental
sites, and as potential components of industrial processes to produce
new products and chemicals in an environmentally benign manner.
The Biosciences program is devoted to the fundamental science
underlying the use of biological systems to produce and conserve
energy.
Biosciences research on plants and microbes opens the opportunity
to synthesize an almost limitless variety of energy-rich organic
compounds and polymers. DOE's biosciences fundamental research could
lead to higher quality plant products, more environmentally benign
products and a reduction in the increasing demand for imported
petroleum.
The DOE Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences'
Division of Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and Biosciences is a
competitive grants program in which awards are made based on merit. The
Division and its Biosciences program select the best research proposals
as determined in a process of peer review. Leading researchers at
universities throughout the Nation are funded by the Biosciences
program.
The Biosciences program currently supports research in the
following areas:
Plant Science
--Structure and function of the plant cell wall (cellulose, lignin,
hemicellulose, and protein)
--Biophysical and biochemical mechanisms of photosynthesis
--Plant primary and secondary metabolism
--Genetic and biochemical mechanisms of plant growth and development
--Bioenergetics, ion uptake, and other membrane-related phenomena
--Arabidopsis genome sequencing
--Functional plant genomics
Fermentation Microbiology
--Bioenergetics and metabolic properties of anaerobic microbes
--Degradation of lignin, cellulose, and hemicellulose
--Biochemistry, genetics, and physiology of microbes that metabolize
one and two carbon compounds
--Mechanisms of plant symbiotic and pathogenic interactions
--Functional microbial genomics
Extremophilic Organisms
--Biochemistry, genetics and physiology of hyperthermophilic microbes
--Mechanisms of life under extreme conditions, temperature, salt, pH,
etc.
--Metabolism of inorganic compounds
Biomaterials and Biocatalysis
--Biosynthesis of novel materials
--Catalytic antibodies
--Structural and kinetic characterization of energy-related enzymes
--Bioadhesion
The Biosciences program has sponsored many leading research
efforts. For example, Biosciences program grant support led to a
breakthrough in cellulose biosynthesis research. Plant cell walls are
the major energy component of renewable biological resources. Cellulose
is the major constituent of the plant cell wall and represents the most
abundant biopolymer on earth.
Dr. R. Malcolm Brown, Jr. and colleagues at the University of Texas
at Austin gave the first experimental confirmation of an important
structure involved in cellulose biosynthesis. This work featured a
combination of molecular biology and immunocytochemistry techniques.
This research provides an exciting springboard for future applications
in the efficient design of specific complex carbohydrates and other
renewable carbon resources.
As another example, research sponsored earlier by the Biosciences
program led to new findings on the capture of energy from
photosynthesis. This research led to the presentation to Biosciences-
program-grantee Dr. Paul Boyer of the shared award of the 1997 Nobel
Prize in Chemistry (biochemistry). Photosynthesis is nature's way of
utilizing sunlight to produce chemical energy and to bring carbon
dioxide into biological organisms. Increased knowledge in this area
could lead to a better understanding of how to manage carbon dioxide in
the atmosphere. Further research in this area could also contribute to
development of alternative energy sources.
At the latter part of the 19th Century, people throughout the world
were dependent upon plants and other contemporaneous biological sources
for the production of organic materials. Plants and animals provided
the only sources of fibers, coatings, lubricants, solvents, dyes,
waxes, fillers, insulation, fragrances, detergents, sizing, wood,
paper, rubber and many other types of materials. In 1930, fully 30
percent of industrial organic chemicals were still derived from plants.
The discovery of extensive petroleum reserves and advances in
chemistry and petroleum engineering resulted in a major shift to
reliance on fossil sources of organic feedstocks such as petroleum.
These developments also led to the development of petroleum-based
materials, such as inexpensive plastics, with properties that could not
be duplicated at the time by abundantly available natural materials.
Advances in modern plant research made possible by support from the
Biosciences program can result in a shift toward use of feedstocks from
domestically grown plants for chemical products. Plant-produced
products can provide the chemical industry with much greater diversity
than is available from the comparatively limited structures found in
crude oil.
Knowledge gained from Biosciences-supported research is leading to
enhanced plants that will provide the feedstocks for new types of
polyurethane, new biodegradable lubricants and superior quality nylon
having stronger and more flexible fibers. The United States produces
nylon, polyurethane and other plastics to supply multi-billion dollar
markets. Genetically modified crop production of nylon alone could
create over $2 billion in new income for America's growers.
Plants are a major source of renewable and alternative fuels in the
United States. Greater knowledge of the basic biology of plants will
lead to further economies in domestic production of renewable fuels.
The science community deeply appreciates the continued strong
support of the subcommittee for innovative research on plants and
microbes sponsored by the Chemical Sciences, Geosciences and
Biosciences Division.
______
Prepared Statement of Southeastern Federal Power Customers, Inc.
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the
Southeastern Federal Power Customers (``SeFPC'' or ``Customers''), I am
pleased to provide testimony in reference to the administration's
fiscal year 2005 budget request for the Department of Energy and
related Federal Power Marketing Administrations (``PMAs''). My
testimony will focus primarily on the budget request for the
Southeastern Power Administration (``SEPA''). Among other issues, we
wish to emphasize that the proposed changes in SEPA's Puchased Power
and Wheeling (``PP&W'') budget would have a negative impact on Federal
preference power customers throughout the Southeast.
SEPA purchases, transmits, and markets the power generated at
Federal reservoirs to municipal systems, rural electric cooperatives,
and other wholesale customers throughout the Southeast. The SeFPC has
enjoyed a long and successful relationship with SEPA that has greatly
benefited the approximately 5.8 million customers that are SeFPC
members. As the subcommittee is aware SEPA markets the energy and
capacity that is generated from the Federal reservoir projects in the
Southeast. The SeFPC represents some 238 rural cooperatives and
municipally owned electric systems in the States of Alabama, Georgia,
Mississippi, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida,
Virginia, and Illinois, which purchase power from SEPA. In some cases,
SEPA supplies as much as 25 percent of the power and 10 percent of the
energy needs of SeFPC customers.
administration's proposal to zero out purchased power and wheeling
The administration has proposed the elimination of all Federal
funding for PP&W by the end of 2004. The President's proposal would
reduce PP&W funding for SEPA by 100 percent in the upcoming fiscal
year, from the current level of $34.5 million to the proposed level of
$0. This proposal is very troubling to the SeFPC. The failure to fund
these important programs under SEPA's jurisdiction could have dire
consequences for the Federal power program in the Southeast and Federal
preference power generally.
If the President's proposal becomes law, the power supply for the
not-for-profit distributors and their customers throughout the
Southeast will be severely disrupted. SEPA's customers also will likely
lose the benefits of long-term contractual arrangements for
transmission and purchased power. Because SEPA does not own its own
transmission lines, the loss of PP&W appropriations will force us to
arrange our own transmission services, including delivery services from
SEPA projects. Also, elimination of SEPA's purchased power funds will
force us to buy our power from sources other than SEPA at higher
prices, which will be passed directly to our customers.
proposal would yield no cost savings for federal government
It is important to note that the President's proposal would yield
no cost savings for the Federal Government. The use of PP&W revenues is
a discretionary function with no budgetary impact. PP&W funds are
repaid annually by preference customers. Moreover, if PP&W funds are
eliminated, SEPA's annual return to the U.S. Treasury of roughly $155
million would likely be reduced significantly.
Thank you in advance for considering our comments on the
President's proposed fiscal year 2005 budget for SEPA.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Public Power Association
The American Public Power Association (APPA) is the national
service organization representing the interests of over 2,000 municipal
and other State and locally owned utilities throughout the United
States (all but Hawaii). Collectively, public power utilities deliver
electricity to one of every seven electric consumers (about 40 million
people), serving some of the Nation's largest cities. However, the vast
majority of APPA's members serve communities with populations of 10,000
people or less.
We appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement outlining
our fiscal year 2005 funding priorities within the Energy and Water
Development Subcommittee's jurisdiction.
renewable energy production incentive program (repi)
The Department of Energy's REPI program was created in 1992's
Energy Policy Act (EPAct) as a counterpart to the renewable energy
production tax credits made available to for-profit utilities. EPAct
authorizes the Department of Energy (DOE) to make direct payments to
not-for-profit public power systems and rural electric cooperatives at
the rate of 1.5 cents per kWh (now closer to 1.8 cents when adjusted
for inflation) from electricity generated from solar, wind, geothermal
and biomass projects. According to DOE sources, in order to fully fund
all past and current REPI applicants, $60 million would be needed for
fiscal year 2005. Despite the demonstrated need, however, DOE has again
asked for only $4 million for fiscal year 2005, citing budgetary
constraints.
Approximately 25 percent of electric utility customers are served
by not-for-profit public power systems and rural electric cooperatives.
Fully funding REPI is an issue of comparability for the communities
served by these systems. For example, in 2000, for-profit utilities and
private developers received about $58 million in renewable energy tax
credits for wind power alone. The same year, REPI subscribers received
only $3.99 million for renewable energy projects of all types. While
APPA supports increasing renewable energy use throughout the utility
sector, our member utilities simply must receive comparable federally
sanctioned incentives to help in that effort.
We believe Congress was committed over a decade ago to removing
economic barriers to enable all communities to benefit from the
production of more renewable and clean energy. We also believe that
Congress is equally committed today--not only to producing more
renewable energy, but also to diversifying America's portfolio of
fuels, decreasing our reliance on foreign sources of energy, and
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, under a fully funded REPI
program, close to 60 million metric tons of carbon equivalent could be
reduced through the development of existing landfills into landfill-
gas-to-energy projects. In order to ensure that these efforts and other
renewable energy goals are achieved throughout the electric utility
industry, Congress must provide an increase for REPI.
renewable energy programs
As is demonstrated by our strong support for REPI, APPA believes
that investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy programs is
critical. We urge the subcommittee to support adequate funding to
ensure that renewable energy usage continues to increase as part of the
portfolio of fuel options available to our Nation's electric utilities.
federal power marketing administrations (pma's)
Purchase Power and Wheeling
We urge the subcommittee to authorize appropriate levels for use of
receipts so that the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA), the
Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA) and the Southwestern Power
Administration (SWPA) can continue to purchase and wheel electric power
to their municipal and rural electric cooperative customers.
The fiscal year 2005 DOE budget proposes to eliminate the ability
of WAPA, SEPA, and SWPA to use receipts--which do not score in the
Federal budget process--to provide these services to their customers.
Although appropriations are no longer needed to initiate the purchase
power and wheeling (PP&W) process, the subcommittee continues to
establish ceilings on the use of receipts for this important function.
The PP&W program is important because hydroelectric generation and
customer use are rarely in exact balance--both vary from hour-to-hour
and day-to-day. The PMA's often make purchases in the spot market to
``firm'' the resource when generation is less than the amount
contracted for delivery. Additionally, in low-water years, the PMA's
often purchase additional power to fulfill their contracts with
customers. The PMA's then must negotiate to transmit this power to
their customer--often over non-Federal transmission lines (wheeling is
the charge that the PMA's pay to move electricity over a non-Federal
transmission line). For individual PMA customers--many of whom are the
distribution utility of very small towns--to be forced to perform these
purchase power and wheeling functions would be extremely inefficient,
and would almost certainly result in rate increases for the retail
customers of these small utilities.
The PP&W arrangement is effective, has no impact on the Federal
budget, and is supported by the PMA customers who pay the costs.
Therefore, we request that the subcommittee authorize the use of
receipts in fiscal year 2005 as follows:
--Western Area Power Administration (WAPA).--$227.6 million
authorization needed in the fiscal year 2005 bill.
--Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA).--$32.7 million
authorization needed in the fiscal year 2005 bill.
--Southwestern Power Administration (SWPA).--$2.9 million
authorization needed in the fiscal year 2005 bill.
Security Costs
We urge the subcommittee to reaffirm the Federal Government's
responsibility to pay the costs of increased security measures at
Federal, multi-purpose facilities and delivery systems and include
language to ensure that such costs are non-reimbursable.
Following the September 11, 2001 attacks, the U.S. Bureau of
Reclamation moved aggressively to strengthen security measures at
Federal dams throughout the West, including such facilities as Hoover,
Grand Coulee and Glen Canyon dams. These multipurpose facilities
provide important flood control, water storage for irrigation,
municipal and industrial uses, power generation, recreation and
environmental mitigation benefits, and are a linchpin of the regional
economy.
To date, funds appropriated in fiscal year 2003 and fiscal year
2004 for anti-terrorism/site security measures at Bureau of Reclamation
facilities have been treated as non-reimbursable pursuant to an
administrative determination. This decision found that counter-
terrorism protections are not considered normal operation and
maintenance activities and that the national security interests
justifies making the expenditures a Federal responsibility.
This determination is also consistent with how similar costs were
treated in the aftermath of the attacks on Pearl Harbor in World War
II. To ensure that the costs of increased security at Federal
facilities continue to be treated as a non-reimbursable Federal
expenditure, we request that you include the following language in the
fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Appropriations bill:
``For fiscal year 2005 and each fiscal year thereafter, the
increased costs of ensuring security of Bureau of Reclamation and Corps
of Engineers dams and the Federal power marketing administrations in
the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, shall be non-
reimbursable and provided through appropriated funds.''
Animas-La Plata
The Colorado Ute Settlement Act Amendments of 2000 (Title III,
Section 301(b)(10), Public Law 106-554, December 21, 2000) authorized
development of the Animas-La Plata Project to satisfy water right
claims of the Southern Ute and Ute Mountain Tribes in southwest
Colorado (known collectively as the ``Colorado Ute Indian Tribes.'')
The project requires construction of a reservoir, pumping plant and
appurtenant facilities to provide water supply and delivery of
municipal and industrial water and other benefits to the Tribes.
In order to provide power from the Colorado River Storage Project
(CRSP) to the Durango Pumping Plant, transmission facilities will need
to be constructed, operated and maintained by the Western Area Power
Administration. Because these transmission facilities are associated
with the satisfaction of the Tribes' water rights claims, all amounts
expended for their construction, operation and maintenance should be
considered non-reimbursable and non-returnable. If Congress does not
clarify that these costs are non-reimbursable and non-returnable, CRSP
power customers run the risk that the costs of the transmission
facilities and services will be shifted to them, despite the fact that
they receive no benefit from them.
WAPA will be responsible for the construction, operation and
maintenance of these transmission facilities, and requires additional
appropriations in the amount of $10,000,000 in fiscal year 2005 to meet
the construction timetable established by the Bureau of Reclamation,
the project manager. WAPA, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Colorado
River Energy Distributors Association, the water users, the Colorado
Ute Indian Tribes and APPA all support the inclusion of the following
language in the fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations bill:
``For carrying out the functions authorized by title III, section
302(a)(1)(E) of the Act of August 4, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7152), and other
related activities including conservation and renewable resources
programs as authorized, including official reception and representation
expenses in an amount not to exceed $1,500, $183,100,000 to remain
available until expended, of which $170,756,000 shall be derived from
the Department of the Interior Reclamation Fund: Provided, That all
authorities and future contributions described in Section 402,
subparagraph (b)(3)(B) of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and
Adjustment Act of 1992 previously assigned to the Secretary of Energy,
Western Area Power Administration, shall be transferred to the
Secretary of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation: Provided further,
That of the amount herein appropriated, $10,000,000 shall be available
until expended on a nonreimbursable basis to the Western Area Power
Administration to design, construct, operate and maintain transmission
facilities and services for the Animas-La Plata Project as authorized
by sections 301(b)(10) of Public Law 106-554.''
storage for high-level nuclear waste
Since 1982, the Nation's electricity customers have contributed $22
billion to the Nuclear Waste Fund to finance centralized Federal
management of spent nuclear fuel used for commercial purposes. We
therefore support the administration's efforts to finalize the location
of a permanent storage site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
The President requested $880 million for fiscal year 2005 for the
nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain. While we support the
President's budget request of $880 million, if legislation is not
enacted to take $749 million of the requested funds ``off-budget'' as
the administration assumes, we hope that resources are available to the
subcommittee to adequately fund Yucca, but not at the expense of other
valuable programs, such as the Renewable Energy Production Incentive
and other programs mentioned in this statement.
advanced hydropower turbine program
APPA supports the administration's budget request of $6 million for
the Advanced Hydropower Turbine Program for fiscal year 2005. This
program is a joint industry-government cost-share effort to develop a
hydroelectric turbine that will protect fish and other aquatic habitats
while continuing to allow for the production of emission-free
hydroelectric power.
During the next 15 years, 220 hydroelectric projects will seek new
licenses from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Publicly
owned projects constitute 50 percent of the total capacity that will be
up for renewal. Many of these projects were originally licensed over 50
years ago. Newly imposed licensing conditions can cost hydro project
owners 10 to 15 percent of power generation. A new, improved turbine
could help assure that any environmental conditions imposed at
relicensing in the form of new conditioning, fish passages or reduced
flows are not accomplished at the expense of emission-free, renewable
energy production. This is particularly important given the
increasingly competitive market in which electric utilities operate
today. Flow levels will affect the economics of each of these projects
and many will be unable to compete if the current trend toward flow
reduction continues.
federal energy regulatory commission (ferc)
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has requested $210
million for fiscal year 2005 for its overall operations. APPA supports
this request. The FERC is charged with regulating certain interstate
aspects of the natural gas, oil pipeline, hydropower, and electric
utility industries. Such regulation includes issuing licenses and
certificates for construction of facilities, approving rates,
inspecting dams, implementing compliance and enforcement activities,
and providing other services to regulated businesses. These businesses
pay fees and charges that cover most of the cost of the government's
operations.
navajo electrification demonstration program
APPA supports full funding for the Navajo Electrification
Demonstration Program at its $15 million authorized funding level for
fiscal year 2005 and for each succeeding year of its authorization
(through 2006). The purpose of the program is to provide electric power
to the estimated 18,000 occupied structures in the Navajo Nation that
lack electric power.
The Navajo Nation is served by the Navajo Tribal Utility Authority
(NTUA), an APPA member. NTUA provides electric, natural gas, water,
wastewater treatment, and photovoltaic services throughout the Navajo
Indian Reservations in the States of Arizona, New Mexico and Utah.
Fully funding the Navajo Electrification Demonstration Program will
significantly improve the quality of life for the people of the Navajo
Nation.
national climate change technology initiative
APPA supports the administration's efforts to promote greenhouse
gas reductions through voluntary programs and investments in new
technologies. We therefore support DOE's request of $3 million for
fiscal year 2005 to spur innovation of technologies that will reduce,
avoid, or capture greenhouse gas emissions.
______
Prepared Statement of the Biomass Energy Research Association
This testimony pertains to the fiscal year 2005 appropriation for
biomass research, development, and deployment (RD&D) conducted by the
Department of Energy's (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable
Energy (EERE). Separate statements will be submitted in support of
biomass RD&D performed under the Interior and Related Agencies Bill by
EERE, and on forest biomass production research performed by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USDAFS).
BERA recommends appropriations of $92,500,000 for biomass RD&D in
fiscal year 2005 under EERE's Biomass and Biorefinery Systems program
and Hydrogen Technology program as follows:
--$2,000,000 for Feedstock Infrastructure R&D.
--$26,000,000 for Platforms R&D: Thermochemical Conversion
($13,000,000) and Bioconversion ($13,000,000).
--$19,000,000 for Utilization of Platform Outputs, Integration of
Biorefinery Technologies at PDU and pilot scales:
Thermochemical Conversion ($9,000,000) and Bioconversion
($10,000,000).
--$39,000,000 for State-Industry Partnerships: Biorefinery Systems
Development ($34,000,000 demonstration facilities) and State &
Regional Partnerships (SRP, formerly the Regional Biomass
Energy Program, RBEP) ($5,000,000).
--$6,500,000 for biomass-related projects under Hydrogen Technology.
On behalf of BERA's members, I would like to thank you, Mr.
Chairman, for the opportunity to present the recommendations of BERA's
Board of Directors for the high-priority projects and programs that we
strongly urge be continued or started. BERA is a non-profit association
based in Washington, DC. It was founded in 1982 by researchers and
private organizations that are conducting biomass research. Our
objectives are to promote education and research on the production of
energy and fuels from virgin and waste biomass that can be economically
utilized by the public, and to serve as a source of information on
biomass RD&D policies and programs. BERA does not solicit or accept
Federal funding for its efforts.
The level of earmarks in the last few years has resulted in
premature reductions of scheduled programs by EERE. BERA respectfully
asks the subcommittee to carefully consider the impacts of all earmarks
on EERE's RD&D. If they are for projects that are not included in DOE's
formal funding request, BERA urges that they be add-ons to the baseline
funds rather than deductions. In fiscal year 2004, about 35 percent of
the appropriation for EERE's RD&D is provided as earmarked funds.
EERE's planned objectives are therefore extremely difficult or
impossible to achieve because the appropriation provided for fiscal
year 2004 is only about 7.5 percent more than the baseline funding
requested.
The original goal of the Biomass and Bioproducts Initiative (BBI)
created as a result of ``The Biomass Research and Development Act of
2000'' and Title IX of the Farm Bill was to triple the usage of
bioenergy and biobased products. Congress has provided annual funding
for the BBI since fiscal year 2000. A strategic plan was developed by
the multi-agency Biomass Research and Development Board (BRDB), co-
chaired by the Secretaries of Energy and Agriculture, to achieve this
goal. Its achievement is necessary because of environmental and energy
security and supply issues, and our increasing dependence on imported
oil. We must determine whether practical biomass systems capable of
displacing much larger amounts of fossil fuels can be developed. For
example, biomass energy consumption in 2002 was about 1.66 million
barrels of oil equivalent (BOE) per day. BERA strongly urges that the
BBI be continued in fiscal year 2005 at the funding level recommended
by BERA for the cost-shared demonstration projects shown in the table
on page 3. The highest priority should be given to this program
component.
program integration, coordination, and management
For several years, BERA has urged that all biomass-related research
funded by DOE should be coordinated and managed at DOE Headquarters so
that the program managers are heavily involved in this activity. We are
pleased to note that this process, which began in fiscal year 2002, has
continued in fiscal year 2004. BERA congratulates DOE on the progress
made in restructuring the program and its management. BERA also
congratulates DOE and USDA for the cooperation and joint coordination
of the programs of each department to increase the usage of
agricultural and forestry biomass for the production of much larger
amounts of affordable fuels, electricity, and biomass-derived products
than have been realized in the past. These efforts are expected to help
facilitate the transition of waste and virgin biomass in the United
States into major sources of renewable energy, fuels, and chemicals.
However, without full incorporation of the BBI into DOE's and
USDA's biomass research programs, the time table for this transition
will be stretched out for several decades and possibly never happen
except to a very limited extent for niche markets. Large, strategically
located, energy plantations are ultimately envisaged in which waste
biomass acquisition and virgin biomass production systems are
integrated with conversion systems and operated as analogs of petroleum
refineries to afford flexible slates of multiple products from multiple
feedstocks. Unfortunately, relatively large amounts of capital and
inducements are required to convince the private sector to get involved
in developing even modest size projects in the field. So to help
implement this essential program, BERA includes the BBI as a line-item
in its annual testimony.
BERA also continues to recommend that implementation of the BBI
should include identification of each Federal agency that provides
funding related to biomass energy development and each agency's
programs and expenditures, as is done by the DOE and USDA today. This
is an on-going activity that should be expanded to include other
agencies and departments to help fine-tune the critical pathways to
program goals. Continuous analysis of the information compiled should
enable the coordination of all federally funded biomass energy programs
through the BRDB to facilitate new starts focused on high priority
targets, and help to avoid duplication of efforts, unnecessary
expenditures, and continuation of projects that have been completed or
that do not target program goals. Full implementation of the BBI will
enhance the value of the Federal expenditures on biomass research to
the country in many different ways.
bera recommendations
BERA's recommendations consist of a balanced program of mission-
oriented RD&D on conversion research and technology transfer to the
private sector. Advanced conversion processes and power generation
technologies, alternative liquid transportation fuels, and hydrogen-
from-biomass processes are emphasized. Biomass production RD&D for
energy uses is expected to be done by the USDA.
BERA continues to recommend that at least 50 percent of the Federal
funds appropriated for biomass research, excluding the funds for scale-
up projects, are used to sustain a national biomass science and
technology base via sub-contracts for industry and universities. While
it is desirable for the national laboratories to coordinate this
research, increased support for U.S. scientists and engineers in
industry, academe, and research institutes that are unable to fund
biomass research will encourage commercialization of emerging
technologies and serious consideration of new ideas. It will also help
to expand the professional development and expertise of researchers
committed to the advancement of biomass technologies.
Although progress has been made, EERE has terminated research in
several critical thermochemical and microbial conversion areas. BERA
believes that a balanced program of high-priority research should be
sustained and protected, so we continue to recommend both a diversified
portfolio of research and an appropriate amount of funding for scale-up
without diminishing either EERE's R&D or scale-up programs. BERA's
specific dollar allocations are listed in the table on page 3.
Additional commentary on each program area is presented on pages 3, 4
and 5. Other mission-oriented biomass RD&D programs are funded through
EERE's Industrial Technologies Program by the Interior and Related
Agencies Bill. DOE's basic research on biomass energy outside of EERE
by the Office of Science, which supports academic research, should be
designed to complement EERE's mission-oriented biomass RD&D and the
BBI.
allocation of appropriations recommended by bera for fiscal year 2005
BERA recommends that the appropriations for biomass RD&D in fiscal
year 2005 be allocated as shown in the accompanying table. For fiscal
year 2005, EERE has again incorporated revisions in nomenclature and
has zeroed-out, consolidated, or moved some programs within EERE. So
our recommendations are generally listed in the same order as the
funding requests under EERE's headings and program area titles except
several program areas are included that are either new or that BERA
recommends be restored to maintain a balanced program. Note that the
recommended budgets for the demonstration projects do not include
industry cost-sharing, which is required to be a minimum of 50 percent
of each project cost. BERA recommends that funds for the BBI be used
for these scale-up projects after evaluating the projected contribution
of each project to the BBI's goals. New projects should not be started
until this is done.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommended Budget for
Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Program Area -------------------------------
Energy Research Scale-Up
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Biomass/Biorefinery Systems:
Feedstock Infrastructure.................. Harvesting Equipment/Storage/ $2,000,000 ..............
Logistics.
Platforms R&D............................. Thermochemical Conversion:
Advanced Combustion & Controls 2,000,000 ..............
Oxygenates from Syngas........ 4,000,000 ..............
Liquid Fuels from Pyrolysis... 4,000,000 ..............
Chemicals from Syngas & 3,000,000 ..............
Pyrolysis.
Bioconversion:
Pretreatment and Hydrolysis... 4,000,000 ..............
Organisms and Enzymes......... 4,000,000 ..............
Fermentation (Ethanol)........ 4,000,000 ..............
Fermentation (Methane)........ 1,000,000 ..............
Utilization of Platform Outputs............... Integration of Biorefinery
Technologies:
Thermochemical Conversion:
Small Modular Power .............. $2,000,000
Generation \2\.
Biomass Cofiring Power .............. 2,000,000
Generation \2\.
Oxygenates and Mixed .............. 5,000,000
Alcohols \2\.
Bioconversion:
Ethanol from Cellulosics \2\ .............. 5,000,000
Value-Added Products \2\.... .............. 5,000,000
State-Industry Partnerships................... Biorefinery Systems Development:
\3\
Design Optimization, \3\ 1,000,000 ..............
Efficiencies.
Product Slates, Economics, \3\ 1,000,000 ..............
Markets.
Siting, Acquisition, \3\ 2,000,000 \3\ 20,000,000
Construction.
Operations.................... .............. \3\ 10,000,000
State & Regional Partnerships... 0 5,000,000
-------------------------------
Subtotal................................ ................................ 32,000,000 54,000,000
=================================================================
Hydrogen Technology \1\....................... Thermal Processes (Reforming)... 500,000 1,000,000
Photolytic Processes (Algae).... 1,000,000 ..............
Innovative Conversion Processes. 4,000,000 0
-------------------------------
Subtotal................................ ................................ 5,500,000 1,000,000
-------------------------------
Totals.................................. ................................ 37,500,000 55,000,000
===============================
Grand Total............................. ................................ .............. 92,500,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ BERA's recommendations pertain only to the biomass-based portion of Hydrogen Technology.
\2\ BERA's recommendations should be used for scale-up at the PDU and pilot-plant scales, preferably with
industry cost-sharing.
\3\ All demonstration projects should be cost-shared with industry and state participation.
Feedstock Infrastructure, Harvesting Equipment, Storage, and
Logistics.--DOE terminated biomass production research a few years ago
and is concentrating on infrastructure development, including novel
systems for collecting agricultural residues, the analysis of
sustainable feedstock systems, and regional and national cost-supply
relationships. In fiscal year 2005, EERE plans to continue work on the
harvesting and logistics roadmap, the sustainability roadmap, and
policy considerations, and is expected to include work on one-pass
harvesting systems for wheat straw and corn stover, innovative
densification and storage systems, and regional modeling that
integrates economic and environmental considerations. BERA recommends
that EERE continues to develop the feedstock infrastructure, while the
USDA Forest Service initiates and continues RD&D on woody biomass for
energy.
Platforms R&D, Thermochemical Conversion.--Continuation of
thermochemical conversion R&D to develop advanced biomass combustion
and gasification methods could have environmental and economic benefits
that can lead to significant growth in power generation from waste
biomass and combined energy recovery-disposal methods for certain kinds
of high-moisture waste biomass such as biosolids (municipal sewage),
and for MSW, agricultural residues, and wood wastes. Most of this
research has been phased out by EERE. Completion of the development of
medium-Btu biomass gasification technologies is also an essential
component for the production of fuel gases including synthesis gas
(syngas) and hydrogen, power, and chemicals. BERA recommends
restoration of this R&D with the goal of developing the next generation
of advanced combustion and gasification processes for power generation.
Several thermochemical conversion methods are available for
liquefaction of waste and virgin biomass feedstocks to afford storable
liquid fuels and chemicals. Included among them are the catalytic
conversion of syngas from biomass to liquid products such as ethanol,
mixed alcohols, and other oxygenates; the catalytic hydrogenation of
biomass and biomass derivatives such as natural oils and waste
triglycerides for the direct production high-cetane diesel fuels; and
biomass liquefaction under supercritical conditions of pressure and/or
temperature in aqueous media. These technologies offer a wide range of
options for liquefaction of all categories of waste and virgin biomass.
Note also that syngas production from biomass is established
technology, and that several processes are commercially available. For
several years, BERA has recommended that EERE support thermochemical
liquefaction processes. This should have been a key component of EERE's
research, but has been a minimally funded R&D effort, particularly when
compared with the effort expended on other conversion technologies. It
is noteworthy that EERE has significantly increased this activity for
fiscal year 2005.
The pyrolysis of biomass, or its thermal decomposition in the
absence of oxygen, yields a large number of gaseous, liquid, and solid
products. Hardwood feedstocks were used commercially until the 1930's
to manufacture fuel gases, solvents, chemicals, fuel oils, and
charcoal. Because of the continuously increasing prices of natural gas
and crude oils, a few small-scale commercial biomass pyrolysis systems
have recently been installed and operated under innovative conditions
that increase product flexibility to yield cost-competitive products.
BERA recommends that R&D on both waste and virgin biomass pyrolysis be
added to EERE's program to help perfect advanced processes. It is
encouraging to note that pyrolytic oils have been added to EERE's
project roster for fiscal year 2005. All of the basic data compiled at
DOE on biomass pyrolysis in the 1970's and 1980's should be reexamined
in this work.
BERA urges that thermochemical conversion R&D for both biomass
liquefaction and gasification processes be restored, expanded, and
continued and be given a higher priority by EERE.
Platforms R&D, Bioconversion.--The goal of achieving efficient
hydrolysis of low-cost cellulosic feedstocks to obtain the sugars and
of simultaneous conversion of the resulting pentoses and hexoses to
fermentation ethanol requires the use of special processes for
producing genetically engineered organisms and cellulase systems at
acceptable costs and performance on a commercial scale. Research by
industry and academe should continue to perfect these technologies for
incorporation into the overall conversion systems used for these
processes. This will ensure that the best possible skills and
technologies are brought to bear.
Methane fermentation (anaerobic digestion) is unique in that it
produces methane, the major component in natural gas, at high
concentrations in the medium-Btu product gas from a full range of
virgin and waste biomass. DOE has terminated most of this research,
which can lead to advanced waste disposal-energy recovery processes as
well as the alleviation of numerous environmental problems encountered
during waste treatment in urban communities and agricultural
facilities. This research should be restored.
Bioconversion is useful for converting a variety of biomass and
derivatives to a wide range of commodity or high-value organic
chemicals and polymers. The use of selected microbial populations is in
fact the only practical route to certain types of chemicals and
polymers. An exploratory program to advance this technology is a
natural adjunct to DOE's on-going Bioconversion R&D. BERA recommends
that part of this research effort should focus on this field.
Utilization of Platform Outputs, Integration of Biorefinery
Technologies, Thermochemical Conversion and Bioconversion.--BERA
recommends that this effort utilize the best available information
produced by the Platforms R&D programs for testing, confirming, and
perfecting the conversion technologies at the PDU and pilot-plant
scales shown in the table on page 3. This will generate the information
needed to support the design, construction, and operation of
demonstration facilities under State-Industry Partnerships, Biorefinery
Systems Development (see following section).
Commentary on the value of intermediate scale process R&D is in
order. For example, several projects performed at semi-commercial plant
scales or that involved modules of commercial plants have been funded
to develop processes for converting low-cost cellulosic feedstocks to
fermentation ethanol. Unfortunately, the results of this effort have
not led to operating systems despite the excessive time and relatively
large budgets that have been provided to conduct the work. It is
apparent that although the science is feasible, the scale-up projects
have not yet been successful. But it is still important to
commercialize this technology to help reduce the cost of fermentation
ethanol. Intermediate-scale projects such as those conducted at the PDU
and pilot-plant scales can more readily focus on efficient development
of the critical information and operating data needed to overcome or
eliminate existing scale-up barriers. It is also essential that
integrated feedstock acquisition-biorefinery systems be designed and
built using this information for demonstration in the field on a
sustainable basis. The pathways to successful development of these
systems are in hand now. They should be implemented.
State-Industry Partnerships, Biorefinery Systems Development.--
Overall, this program component should focus on the ultimate objective
of sustainable operation of biorefineries integrated with biomass
acquisition systems in relatively large field demonstration facilities
(energy plantations). This effort should address siting, plant design,
financing, permitting, construction, environmental controls, waste
processing and disposal, and sustained operations; feedstock selection,
transport, storage, and delivery; all waste disposal and emissions
issues; and storage and delivery of the salable products to market.
BERA recommends that industrial partners and States be carefully
selected for participation in this cost-shared program. This work
should be given the highest priority. BERA recommends that the funds
for the BBI provided by Congress should be used for this effort. Long-
range planning is essential to ensure that each project has a high
probability of success and lays the groundwork for continued
installation of similar systems by the private sector. Since only a
minimal effort has been conducted to date in the United States on this
type of program, BERA recommends that the first demonstration facility
target the acquisition of waste and/or virgin biomass feedstocks for
conversion into electricity, liquid and gaseous fuels, and chemicals.
Existing moderate- and large-scale facilities from terminated and
continuing EERE projects, such as biomass cofiring, gasification,
liquefaction, and fermentation, should be carefully examined to
determine whether one or more are suitable for these projects. The
partnerships should be in place at the start of each demonstration
project.
State and Regional Partnerships (Formerly Regional Biomass Energy
Program).--The Regional Biomass Energy Program (RBEP) was a model
outreach program for more than 20 years. No other DOE program had the
information transfer role, capabilities, level of experience, or
widespread networks of the RBEP, nor has there been a partnership
program so closely affiliated with the highest levels of State and
regional government energy organizations. DOE has replaced the RBEP
with a new program, State and Regional Partnerships (SRP), that will
involve collaboration with States on technology transfer, research,
development, field testing, and other needed efforts to overcome market
barriers. BERA feels that RBEP can provide a strong foundation for the
SRP, and that adequate funding should be provided to sustain the new
SRP because of the history and successful track record of the RBEP.
Hydrogen Technology.--Research on the thermal reforming of biomass
and on splitting water with algae, should be continued. In addition,
innovative conversion methods such as the use of anaerobic digestion
under ambient conditions and catalytic and non-catalytic thermochemical
gasification under certain operating conditions that minimize methane
formation while maximizing hydrogen formation should be studied. These
technologies may lead to low-cost hydrogen production methods.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Museum of Natural History
about the american museum of natural history
The American Museum of Natural History (AMNH) is one of the
Nation's preeminent institutions for scientific research and public
education. Since its founding in 1869, the Museum has pursued its
mission to ``discover, interpret, and disseminate--through scientific
research and education--knowledge about human cultures, the natural
world, and the universe.'' It is renowned for its exhibitions and
collections of more than 32 million specimens and cultural artifacts.
With nearly 4 million annual visitors--approximately half of them
children--its audience is one of the largest and most diverse of any
museum in the country. Museum scientists conduct groundbreaking
research in fields ranging from all branches of zoology, comparative
genomics, and bioinformatics to earth, space, and environmental
sciences and biodiversity conservation. Their work forms the basis for
all the Museum's activities that seek to explain complex issues and
help people to understand the events and processes that created and
continue to shape the Earth, life and civilization on this planet, and
the universe beyond.
More than 200 Museum scientists, led by 46 curators, conduct
laboratory and collections-based research programs as well as fieldwork
and training. Scientists in five divisions (Anthropology; Earth,
Planetary, and Space Sciences; Invertebrate Zoology; Paleontology; and
Vertebrate Zoology) are sequencing DNA and creating new computational
tools to retrace the evolutionary tree, documenting changes in the
environment, making new discoveries in the fossil record, and
describing human culture in all its variety. The Museum also conducts
undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral training programs in
conjunction with a host of distinguished universities.
The AMNH collections are a major resource for Museum scientists as
well as for more than 250 national and international visiting
scientists each year. They often include endangered and extinct species
as well as many of the only known ``type specimens,'' or examples of
species by which all other finds are compared. Collections such as
these are historical libraries of expertly identified and documented
examples of species and artifacts, providing an irreplaceable record of
life on earth.
The Museum interprets the work of its scientists, highlights its
collections, addresses current scientific and cultural issues, and
promotes public understanding of science through its renowned permanent
and temporary exhibits as well as its comprehensive education programs.
These programs attract more than 400,000 students and teachers and more
than 5,000 teachers for professional development opportunities. The
Museum also takes its resources beyond its walls through the National
Center for Science Literacy, Education, and Technology, launched in
1997 in partnership with NASA.
support for department of energy science mission and goals
As one of the world's leading science organizations, DOE's primary
strategic goals include maintaining a world class scientific research
capability and protecting the Nation's security. Its science program
supports fundamental research in energy, matter, and the basic forces
of nature and the advanced computational tools critical to research.
The American Museum shares DOE's fundamental commitments to cutting-
edge research and technology in support of science and education.
Genomic Science
DOE's scientific leadership encompasses genomics research and
advanced sequencing technologies. With the historic completion of the
first draft of the human genome, work on the frontiers of genome
science continues as a critical element of the DOE mission, not only by
helping to protect against bio-terrorism but also by contributing to
the broad goal of developing ``a fundamental, comprehensive, and
systematic understanding of life.'' DOE focus areas include research in
energy-related biology, comparative genomics, organisms' responses to
biological and environmental cues, and experimental and computational
approaches to predictive understanding of microbes and microbial
communities. The Genomes to Life program is based on the understanding
that genomes, especially those of the simplest organisms, provide a
window into the basic mechanics of life. The program addresses energy,
environmental, and national security needs and also promises advances
in medical treatment.
The American Museum is home to a preeminent molecular research
program and is deeply engaged in genome research closely tied to DOE's
mission areas and research priorities. In the era of genomics, museum
collections have become critical baseline resources for the assessment
of genetic diversity of natural populations. Studying genomic data in a
natural history context makes it possible to more fully understand the
impacts of new discoveries in genomics and molecular biology.
Frozen Tissue Collection
The Museum offers unique research resources in support of its
molecular program. It has expanded its collections to include
biological tissues and isolated DNA preserved in a super-cold storage
facility. Because this collection preserves genetic material and gene
products from rare and endangered organisms that may become extinct
before science fully exploits their potential, it is an invaluable
research resource in many fields, including genetics, comparative
genomics, and biodefense. Capable of housing 1 million specimens, it
will be the largest super-cold tissue collection of its kind. Since it
was launched 3 years ago, 22,000 specimens not available at any other
institute or facility have already been accessioned.
Cluster Computing
DOE science programs are committed to ``providing extraordinary
tools for extraordinary science.'' The Museum, too, is a leader in
developing computational tools, as parallel computing is an essential
enabling technology for phylogenetic (evolutionary) analysis and
intensive, efficient sampling of a wide array of study organisms.
Museum scientists have constructed an in-house 700-processor computing
facility that is the fastest parallel computing cluster in an
evolutionary biology laboratory and one of the fastest installed in a
non-defense environment. Their pioneering efforts in cluster computing,
algorithm development, and evolutionary theory have been widely
recognized and commended for their broad applicability for biology as a
whole. The bioinformatics tools Museum scientists are creating will not
only help to generate evolutionary scenarios, but also will inform and
make more efficient large genome sequencing efforts. Many of the
parallel algorithms and implementations (especially cluster-based) will
be applicable in other informatics contexts such as annotation and
assembly, breakpoint analysis, and non-genomic areas of evolutionary
biology and other disciplines.
Institute of Comparative Genomics
Building on its strengths in comparative genomics, and in concert
with the scientific goals of DOE, in 2001 the Museum established an
Institute for Comparative Genomics so as to contribute its unique
resources and expertise to the Nation's genomic research enterprise.
The Institute is positioned to be one of the world's premier research
facilities for mapping the genome across a comprehensive spectrum of
life forms.
The Institute has already established a record of significant
research achievements. These include obtaining a patent for an
innovative approach to analyzing microarray data that will facilitate
improved diagnoses of diseases such as cancer and development of drugs
to treat such diseases; developing computational techniques to analyze
chromosomal sequence data; building a comprehensive database of all
known finished and incomplete genomes of microbial species; developing
effective methods of culturing difficult to culture species as well as
new methods for obtaining embryos for antibody staining; conducting
whole genome analysis of disease causing microorganisms to understand
the evolutionary changes that take place in a genome to make it more or
less virulent; and developing phylogenetic techniques to advance
understanding of bacterial genomics and the evolution of pathogenicity.
Institute scientists have also won major grants to lead international
research teams in assembling the ``tree of life.''
The Institute's research programs are complemented by an ambitious
agenda of genomics-related exhibitions, conferences, and public
education programming, including the landmark exhibition, The Genomic
Revolution in 2001. Education and afterschool programs introduce
students to genome science, and the Museum has held several
international conferences on important genomics topics: Sequencing the
Human Genome: New Frontiers in Science and Technology, in Fall 2000;
Conservation Genetics in the Age of Genomics in Spring 2001; New
Directions in Cluster Computing in June 2001; and in 2002, an
international meeting to examine current knowledge of life's history,
Assembling the Tree of Life: Science, Relevance, and Challenges. The
March 2004 symposium presents Expanding the Ark: The Emerging Science
and Practice of Invertebrate Conservation.
As it moves forward, the Institute, working in cooperation with New
York's outstanding biomedical research and educational institutions, is
focusing on molecular and microbial systematics, on constructing large
genomic databases, and on expanding our understanding of the evolution
of life on earth and the evolution of critical organismal form and
function through analysis of the genomes of selected microbes and other
non-human organisms. Development of Institute activities entails
expanding expertise in microbial systematics and the molecular
laboratory program that now trains dozens of graduate students every
year; utilizing the latest sequencing technologies; employing parallel
computing applications that allow scientists to solve combinatorially
complex problems involving large real world datasets; and developing of
K-12 curriculum materials, scientific conferences, and exhibits.
As the foregoing makes clear, the research interests and expertise
of DOE and the Museum are closely aligned in key areas pertinent to the
agency's biological and environmental research, including comparative
and microbial genomics, bioinformatics, and computational science. We
are mutually committed to the importance to humans of nonhuman
organisms' DNA sequences, to developing the computational tools to
integrate and understand data, and to modeling complex biological
systems. We seek a partnership with DOE to further these mutual goals,
advancing projects such as the following:
--New strategies for studying complex microbial communities.--
Investigations into the molecular characterization and
phylogenic analysis of genes involved in biofilm formation to
offer new insights into the formation, properties, and
evolution of microbial communities.
--New approaches to bioinformatics and algorithm development.--Using
statistical physics analogues to model NP-hard problems in
evolutionary tree construction in order ultimately to aid in
the design of novel approaches to long-standing biological
problems and generate new insights into the processes of
interest to DOE.
--New strategies for characterizing microbial communities in
nature.--Analysis of samples of uncultured microbial
communities, stored in the Museum's frozen tissue collection at
temperatures that preserve nucleic acids and proteins, to
complement field analysis, and to provide access for the
scientific community to this information through the
collection's database and informatics tools.
The Museum requests $3 million to partner with DOE and to employ
the unique capacities of the Institute of Comparative Genomics for
advancing shared research and education priorities in genomics science.
The Institute's comparative and microbial research programs support
DOE's biological and environmental research function (the BER account);
and its diverse strengths and unique resources in comparative genomics
will help to further DOE's goals for building a scientific research
capacity to enable advances and discoveries in DOE science through
world-class research. The Museum intends to support the Institute with
funds from non-Federal as well as Federal sources and proposes to use
the requested $3 million towards overall costs for the Institute's
microbial genomics research program, including equipping the molecular
laboratories to accommodate additional senior scientists, graduate and
postdoctoral trainees; upgrading instrumentation with the latest high-
throughput technology; and scientific outreach and dissemination via
website, online databases, and other means.
______
Prepared Statement of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New
Jersey
The following is the testimony of the University of Medicine and
Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ), the largest freestanding public
university of the health sciences in the Nation. The University is
located on five State-wide campuses and contains three medical schools,
and schools of dentistry, nursing, health related professions, public
health and graduate biomedical sciences. UMDNJ also comprises a
University-owned acute care hospital, three core teaching hospitals, an
integrated behavioral healthcare delivery system, and affiliations with
more than 200 health care and educational institutions State-wide.
We appreciate the opportunity to bring to your attention our
priority projects that are consistent with the biomedical research
mission of the Department of Energy. These projects are State-wide in
scope and include collaborations both within the University system and
with our affiliates.
Our first priority is the development of the Regional
Biocontainment Laboratory at UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical School in Newark.
The 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, the release of anthrax
through the United States mail, and the proliferation of biological
weapons materials and technologies have resulted in an unprecedented
sense of urgency for greater bioterrorism preparedness. In 2003 the
NIH-National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID)
selected the Northeast BioDefense Center (NBC), a consortium of
research organizations spread across four States, as one of eight
Regional Centers of Excellence for BioDefense and Emerging Infectious
Diseases Research. Scientists at UMDNJ, along with researchers at
Rutgers University and the Public Health Research Institute, are key
partners in helping the NBC frame practical solutions to public health
threats emanating from both bioterror and emerging infectious diseases.
Following NIAID's designation of the Northeast BioDefense Center as
a Regional Center of Excellence, UMDNJ-New Jersey Medical School was
awarded almost $21 million from the NIH to build a 13,000-square-foot
regional biocontainment (Bio Safety Level-3) laboratory at the
International Center for Public Health (ICPH) in Newark, New Jersey.
NIH views the construction of the regional biocontainment laboratories
as critical components of the planned network of extramural Regional
Centers of Excellence to accelerate research on the highly dangerous
and infectious pathogens in the biodefense field.
This new BSL-3 facility augments two other existing laboratory
facilities at the ICPH and on the UMDNJ Newark campus, and once
operational, will bring the total BSL-3 space in Newark to 21,500
square feet, creating one of the largest focal points of containment
space in the country. Of the 208 scientists participating in the NBC
program, more than 50 percent work within 25 miles of Newark. The
construction of the laboratory will allow a critical mass of biodefense
scientists to be assembled in Newark, forming the heart of biodefense
and infectious disease research in the region. The strategic location
of the new laboratory is well suited to provide infrastructure support
to regional public health agencies in the event of a national
bioterrorism emergency. UMDNJ respectfully seeks $10 million in
targeted appropriations to supplement the NIAID award as the received
funds do not fully provide for the laboratory's construction.
Our second priority is the development of the Child Health
Institute of New Jersey at UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School
(RWJMS) in New Brunswick. As part of the State's public higher
education system, the medical school encompasses 21 basic science and
clinical departments and integrates diverse clinical programs conducted
at 34 hospital affiliates and numerous ambulatory care sites in the
region. RWJMS ranks among the top one-third of medical schools in the
Nation in terms of grant support per faculty member. It is home to The
Cancer Institute of New Jersey, the only NCI-designated comprehensive
cancer center in New Jersey; The Center for Advanced Biotechnology and
Medicine; the Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute,
one of the leading environmental health programs in the country; and
the Child Health Institute of New Jersey.
The mission of the Child Health Institute is to build a
comprehensive biomedical research center focused on the health and
wellness of children. In this program, medical researchers direct
efforts towards the prevention and cure of environmental and genetic
diseases of infants and children at molecular and cellular levels.
The Child Health Institute will be the cornerstone institution of a
major research and clinical effort to understand, prevent and treat
childhood diseases. It is integral to the long-term plan for the
enhancement of research at UMDNJ-RWJMS in developmental genetics,
particularly as it relates to disorders that affect a child's
development and growth, physically and cognitively. The program will
enable the medical school to expand and strengthen basic research
efforts with clinical departments at the Robert Wood Johnson University
Hospital (RWJUH) and, in particular, those involved with the new
Bristol-Myers Squibb Children's Hospital at RWJUH, especially
obstetrics, pediatrics, neurology, surgery and psychiatry. The
construction of the Child Health Institute at RWJMS will fill a
critical gap through the expansion, by new recruitment, of a
intellectual base upon which basic molecular programs in child
development and health will build.
At the Child Health Institute, research will serve as the basis for
new treatments, therapies and cures for such devastating and
debilitating childhood syndromes as asthma, autism, diabetes, muscular
dystrophy, birth defects and neuro-developmental disorders. Research
will focus on the molecular and genetic mechanisms which direct the
development of human form, subsequent growth, and acquisition of
function. Broadly, the faculty and students will investigate disorders
that occur during the process of development to discover and study the
genes contributing to developmental disabilities and childhood
diseases; to determine how genes and the environment interact to cause
childhood diseases; and to identify the causes and possible avenues of
treatment of cognitive disorders broadly found among conditions such as
mental retardation, autism and related neurological disorders.
Research at the Child Health Institute will focus on molecular
mechanisms of early embryonic development, a natural, but vulnerable,
water-based environment. Normal child development is a water dependent
process, reflecting water quality, quantity and its ``management'' by
cells and tissues. A critical component of the research infrastructure
being developed within the Child Health Institute is an Imaging Core
Facility. Through this facility researchers will be able to better
visualize the dynamics of structures within cells and cells within
developing tissues. Understanding these dynamics is crucial to
expanding knowledge of the processes involved in embryonic and later
development.
The Child Health Institute of New Jersey builds on existing
significant strengths in genetic, environmental, and neurosciences
research within the UMDNJ-RWJMS and associated joint programs with
Rutgers University and other research institutes. For example, the
Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences Institute (EOHSI) is a
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) recognized
center of excellence which investigates environmental influences on
normal and disordered functions; The Cancer Institute of New Jersey
(CINJ), a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer
Center, studies disordered cell growth; and the Center for Advanced
Biotechnology and Medicine (CABM) characterizes gene structure and
function.
The CHI will act as a magnet for additional growth in research and
healthcare program development in New Jersey. The Institute will
encompass 150,000 gross square feet and will house more than 40
research laboratories and associated support facilities. Fourteen
senior faculty will direct teams of M.D. and Ph.D. researchers,
visiting scientists, postdoctoral fellows, graduate students and
technicians, for a full complement of some 130 employees.
Construction costs for the Institute are estimated to be
approximately $72 million; approximately half of this figure is
generally associated with local employment. At maturity, the Institute
is expected to attract $7 to $9 million of new research funding
annually. The Institute's total annual operating budget is projected to
be $10 to $12 million, with total economic impact on the New Brunswick
area projected to be many times this amount.
The Child Health Institute has assembled more than $40 million to
fund its building and programs through a strong partnership among
private, corporate and government entities. The support of the Congress
has resulted in more than $6 million in directed appropriations for the
CHI over the past 4 years, including appropriations from this committee
in fiscal years 2001 and 2002.
We respectfully seek $2 million to complement support already
received in Federal participation to further advance the development of
the Child Health Institute of New Jersey. Requested funding will be
utilized for the purchase of analytical equipment, including laser
scanning and photon microscopes for the Imaging Core Facility within
the Child Health Institute.
Support is also requested in fiscal year 2005 to enable the
Informatics Institute of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of
New Jersey to recruit additional faculty and build core research
facilities for modern drug discovery. This initiative will strengthen
the University's graduate program in bioinformatics that is training
the next generation of scientists in the field, and will accelerate the
work of UMDNJ scientists to convert research findings into novel drug
candidates.
Bioinformatics is revolutionizing biomedical research by
integrating mathematics, computer science, molecular biology and
genetics. Scientists use bioinformatics to accelerate the discovery of
new drugs and vaccines for the prevention and treatment of many
diseases. The Informatics Institute was established in 2001 to
strengthen informatics-driven activities at the University of Medicine
and Dentistry of New Jersey and to forge new academic/industry
partnerships in this emerging area. The University's first graduate
program in bioinformatics, funded by a $2.3 million grant from the
State of New Jersey, is helping to meet a critical shortage of skilled
workers in bioinformatics and related disciplines.
Academic collaborations already established by the Informatics
Institute are advancing priority Federal goals in homeland security and
the discovery of cures and treatments for major diseases. Partnerships
forged by the Institute complement and enhance significant Federal
resources that have strengthened UMDNJ's centers of excellence in
biodefense and infectious disease research, cancer research and
treatment, environmental health and toxicology, and biomedical polymer
engineering.
UMDNJ presently supports a broad array of research programs engaged
in the discovery and characterization of potential drug targets (genes,
proteins). However, the full value of these substantial research
accomplishments is often lost, due to the absence of capacity for
translating these targets into novel drug candidates. This capability
can be provided only through major investment in resources for modern
drug discovery: bioinformatics, computer-aided molecular modeling and
design, medicinal chemistry, and high-throughput synthesis and
screening of drug candidates. The opportunity is especially compelling
in New Jersey, which is home for 15 of the world's largest
pharmaceutical companies and more than 150 biotechnology companies and
which ranks highest in per capita number of scientists and engineers in
the Nation.
The sustained growth of our graduate program and other informatics
initiatives requires a major investment in computational facilities and
the recruitment of additional bioinformatics faculty and staff. We
respectfully seek Federal participation of $6 million in fiscal year
2005 to recruit additional bioinformatics and medicinal chemistry
faculty and postdoctoral researchers, and to build core research
facilities for modern drug discovery.
We thank this committee for its strong support of biomedical
research and for the University's programs.
______
Prepared Statement of the California Government and Private Sector
Coalition for Operation Clean Air's Sustainable Incentive Program
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, on behalf of the
California Government and Private Sector Coalition for Operation Clean
Air's (OCA) Sustainable Incentive Program, we are pleased to submit
this statement for the record in support of our fiscal year 2005
funding request of $11,000,000 for OCA as part of a Federal match for
the $180 million already contributed by California State and local
agencies and the private sector for incentive programs. This request
consists of $11,000,000 from DOE for alternative fuels and utility
infrastructure funding.
California's great San Joaquin Valley is in crisis. Home to over
3.3 million people, its 25,000 square miles now has the unhealthiest
air in the country. Even Los Angeles, long known as the smog capital of
the Nation, can boast better air quality by certain standards. While
peak concentrations of air pollutants are still greater in Los Angeles,
for the past 4 years, the San Joaquin Valley has exceeded Los Angeles
in violations of the ozone 8-hour Federal health standard.
A combination of geography, topography, meteorology, tremendous
population growth, urban sprawl and a NAFTA corridor of two major
highways with over 5 million diesel truck miles per day, have collided
to produce an air basin in which over 300,000 people, nearly 10 percent
of the population, suffer from chronic breathing disorders. In Fresno
County, at the heart of the San Joaquin Valley, more than 16 percent of
all children suffer from asthma, a rate substantially higher than any
other place in California. The extreme summertime heat creates smog
even though smog-forming gases are less than half the amount in the Los
Angeles basin. There is no prevailing wind to flush the natural
geologic bathtub and, as a result, pollutants and particulates
stagnate, accumulate, and create unhealthy air.
Degradation of human health is not the only consequence of poor
quality air. In December 2003, the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution
Control District Board decided to become the first Air District in the
Nation to voluntarily declare itself an ``extreme'' non-attainment
area. This designation, if approved by USEPA, will defer until 2010 the
date for attainment of Federal standards of air quality, but comes at a
cost of imposing permitting on thousands of more businesses and even
further discouraging business expansion or relocation. More Valley's
businesses will be required to obtain permits and comply with
increasingly burdensome regulations imposed by Federal and State law
and the Air Pollution Control District, resulting in added cost in
compliance, reporting and record keeping. At the same time, the area is
burdened by chronic unemployment rates of nearly 20 percent.
Encouraging business expansion in or relocation to the San Joaquin
Valley to combat unemployment will be extremely difficult in the face
of such regulatory burdens.
The San Joaquin Valley is home to the most productive agricultural
land in the world. Over 350 crops are produced commercially on 28,000
farms encompassing more than 5 million irrigated acres. While the
agricultural industry has made great strides at considerable expense to
replace old diesel engines and manage fugitive dust and other
emissions, farming does contribute to the problem. However, it is a $14
billion industry that forms the backbone of the Valley's economy, and
its vitality is crucial.
Industry alone is not the source of the Valley's poor air quality.
Population growth rates exceeding those in the rest of the State and
most of the Nation, in an area without effective mass transit, where
cheap land has led to a landscape of suburbia and sprawl, results in
excessive over-reliance on the automobile. Trucking has increased
dramatically with the increase in population, and Federal free trade
policies. Other factors such as fireplace burning in the winter, open
field agricultural burning because of lack of sufficient alternatives,
and wild fires resulting from lack of controlled burning in the nearby
foothills and mountains all contribute to the problem.
Despite the challenges listed above, much progress has been made.
The State has spent nearly $80 million on improvement and compliance
programs. Local government and private industry have spent over $100
million on technology and compliance. As specific examples, over one-
half of the diesel operated irrigation pumps used by agriculture have
been replaced with cleaner engines. The City of Tulare has converted
its entire fleet of vehicles to natural gas as have several other
private fleet operators. A $45 million federally financed comprehensive
study of ozone and particulate matter is nearing completion. As a
result, the number of 1-hour EPA health standard exceedences has been
reduced by 40 percent since 1989.
But much more needs to be done. The District estimates that daily
emissions must be reduced by 300 tons to achieve attainment. There is
no single or short-term quick fix. The entire Valley (an area the size
of the State of Connecticut) is part of the problem and the entire
Valley will need to be part of the solution.
Operation Clean Air is a coalition of business, government, health
care, and environmental groups throughout the eight-county San Joaquin
Valley Air Pollution Control District. Its goal is to clean the
Valley's air and increase its economic prosperity. The coalition seeks
to catalogue efforts that have produced positive effects and identify
those strategies that could produce even greater effects if supported
by sufficient resources. At the heart of its efforts will be an array
of sustainable, voluntary practices and activities that can and will be
undertaken by all of the residents of the San Joaquin Valley, both
public and private, to improve air quality.
This unique public-private partnership has invested considerable
resources in this project to date, and will continue to do so, but
Federal funding is both imperative and justified to help address what
is essentially an unfounded Federal mandate.
For fiscal year 2005, our Coalition is seeking funding of
$11,000,000 from the Department of Energy's (DOE) Energy Supply Program
for the installation and operation of alternative fuels infrastructure
throughout the San Joaquin Valley Air Basin. Infrastructure for both
mobile and stationary engines is included and will allow for the
accelerated introduction of alternatively fueled vehicles in municipal
fleets, public school fleets, and private fleets as well as for
stationary, agricultural irrigation pump engines in the rural areas.
The widespread use of lower-emitting engines will provide significant
improvement to air quality in the San Joaquin Valley while furthering
the goals of the President's National Energy Policy, which recommends
enhancement of the supply of reliable energy while protecting our
environment. OCA believes, like DOE, that there is direct applicability
of alternative fuel (e.g. natural gas) engine expertise to the
development and deployment of hydrogen power systems. OCA wants to see
the San Joaquin Valley as the first area in the Nation for hydrogen
infrastructure development and hydrogen vehicle deployment. This is in
direct alignment with the Secretary's long-term vision of a zero
mission future, free of reliance on imported energy. Development of
alternative fuel infrastructure will augment the low-emission vehicle
program by providing much needed compressed natural gas (CNG) and
liquefied natural gas (LNG) fueling facilities.
Thank you very much your consideration of our requests.
______
Prepared Statement of the University of Rochester
program
DOE Inertial Confinement Fusion Program--DOE [National Nuclear
Security Agency (NNSA)] Defense Programs for fiscal year 2005.
background
The inertial confinement fusion (ICF) program is a key element in
the Department of Energy's (DOE) Stockpile Stewardship Program (SSP)
authorized by Public Law 103-160 to ``establish a stewardship program
to ensure the preservation of the core intellectual and technical
competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons.'' The OMEGA laser
at the University of Rochester's Laboratory for Laser Energetics (LLE)
is the principal laser research facility for the University and three
national laboratories (Los Alamos, Sandia, and Livermore) for ICF and
SSP experiments. LLE is the only facility that also trains significant
numbers of graduate students in inertial fusion. The OMEGA laser, the
highest-power ultraviolet fusion laser in the world, is the principal
laser facility for SSP activities for DOE in fiscal year 2005 and for a
number of years to come. The Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (SEAB)
National Ignition Facility Laser System Task Force Report noted the
importance of continuing scientific contact with ``. . . the laser-
based research at the University of Rochester.''
LLE (since 1970) is the only ICF program that has been jointly
supported by the Federal Government, State government, industry,
utilities, and a university. LLE makes fundamental scientific
contributions to the national program. The Laboratory transfers
technology to the public and private sectors through the training of
graduate students and interactions with industry and other Federal
laboratories. The Laboratory also serves as a National Laser Users'
Facility benefiting scientists throughout the country.
The present primary mission of LLE's research is to validate the
direct-drive option for ICF intended for use on the National Ignition
Facility (NIF) in order to demonstrate ignition and energy gain. DOE
proclaimed that OMEGA is also needed to meet mission-critical
requirements for ignition on NIF, and to conduct experiments to support
the SSP mission, including some that are classified, in collaboration
with the national laboratories.
The OMEGA laser at LLE is the only operating experimental facility
that can demonstrate the scientific potential of direct drive to
provide a modest- to high-gain energy option for the Nation. For fiscal
year 2005 funds are also requested to continue construction of the
extended performance capability (EP) to the OMEGA facility and funds to
continue to develop petawatt technologies for the national program. DOE
has approved the mission need and purchase of long-lead procurements
during fiscal year 2003, and approval of the final design is expected
during fiscal year 2004. The Congress provided $20,000,000 to continue
the OMEGA EP project in the fiscal year 2004 Energy and Water
Development Appropriation Act, which will significantly expand the
research capabilities of the existing OMEGA facility. OMEGA EP provides
the Nation with an enhanced capability to perform SSP experiments, to
test high-gain ICF concepts, and to provide a premier high-intensity-
laser interaction facility for the United States. The University of
Rochester is providing a new building ($20 million) for the OMEGA EP
project at no cost to the government. Because the new cost-shared
facility will keep the research at the LLE technologically current, LLE
will be able to continue to be a national and world leader in its
field, and serve as an important, cost-effective support facility to
assure the success of the NIF. This represents an unusually successful
partnership among the private sector, academia, and the State and
Federal governments. The OMEGA facility will be the only large laser
implosion facility for NNSA in the United States until at least 2008
when NIF construction is completed.
requested action
To provide the support for program deliverables and the operation
and extension of OMEGA (for both ICF experiments and SSP experiments),
and to maintain the related training programs at Rochester, a total of
$69,469,000 for the University of Rochester for fiscal year 2005 is
required. This amount includes $41,469,000 for operating funds and
$4,000,000 for the OMEGA EP facility included in the administration's
request, and an additional $21,000,000 for the OMEGA extended
performance capability, and $3,000,000 for petawatt technology
development required to maintain the cost and schedule of the project.
discussion
Thermonuclear fusion is the process by which nuclei of low atomic
weight such as hydrogen combine to form higher atomic weight nuclei
such as helium. In this process some of the mass of the original nuclei
is lost and transformed to energy in the form of high-energy particles.
Energy from fusion reactions is the most basic form of energy in the
universe; our sun and all other stars produce energy by thermonuclear
fusion reactions occurring in their interior. Fusion is also the
process that provides the vast destructive power of thermonuclear
weapons. The most significant long-term potential commercial
application of fusion is the generation of electric power.
To initiate fusion reactions, the fuel must be heated to tens of
millions of degrees. In stellar bodies, containment is possible because
of the large gravitational force. On earth, two approaches are being
investigated to demonstrate controlled fusion: magnetic confinement
fusion and inertial confinement fusion (ICF). ICF involves the heating
and compression of fusion fuel by the action of intense laser or
particle beam drivers. There are two approaches to ICF, direct and
indirect drive: indirect drive involves the conversion of beam energy
to X-rays to compress a fuel capsule in an enclosure called a hohlraum;
direct drive involves the direct irradiation of spherical fuel capsules
by energy from a laser and may be more energetically efficient than
indirect drive. For either approach, if very extreme density and
temperature conditions are produced, it is possible to produce many
times more energy in these fusion reactions than the energy provided by
the drivers.
omega extended performance (omega ep) facility at ur/lle
The University of Rochester's Laboratory for Laser Energetics (UR/
LLE) is the lead laboratory for direct-drive inertial confinement
fusion (ICF) and is the location of the OMEGA laser facility. Only
three facilities, OMEGA at Rochester, Z at Sandia National Laboratory,
and a few operating beamlines of NIF are available to conduct high-
energy-density physics experiments in support of the Nation's Stockpile
Stewardship Program (SSP) and ICF. (In fiscal year 2003, over half of
the OMEGA shots, 742, were for outside users, including 578 for the
national laboratories.) OMEGA and the National Ignition Facility (NIF)
under construction at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory are
designed to support SSP and ICF by performing planar-target and
spherical-implosion experiments at high laser irradiation intensities.
Using high-energy, high-power lasers, a highly compressed core of
deuterium-tritium fuel can be assembled that, with the full energy of
NIF, will achieve controlled thermonuclear ignition and gain. (Ignition
refers to initiating a self-sustaining fusion reaction, and gain refers
to achieving more energy out of the reaction than was used to initiate
it.)
Three years ago UR/LLE proposed to construct a super-high-
intensity, high-energy laser facility. DOE has approved the mission
need and purchase of long-lead procurements in fiscal year 2003, and
approval of the final design is expected during fiscal year 2004. The
Fiscal Year 2004 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act
provided $20,000,000 to continue this project. The project schedule and
cost, based on actual funding received to date, are shown in the table
below. The total cost ($82,000,000 in as-spent dollars) is unchanged
from the previous request. The University of Rochester is providing a
building, estimated to cost about $20,000,000 to house the new
facility. The new building is under construction and is slated for
completion by January 2005.
OMEGA EP will significantly benefit SSP and ICF through the ability
to produce intense photon, proton, and electron beams for radiography
and by conducting experiments to test advanced computer codes relevant
to nuclear weapons, basic science, and astrophysics. There are
additional exciting basic science applications that enhance our
national ability to attract and retain the scientific expertise
required for the United States' nuclear weapons program in the future.
Super high-intensity, high-energy laser sources will significantly
advance ignition physics. Very high intensities allow the ICP and SSP
programs to test advanced concepts that can increase the gain of an ICF
target. During the past year, LLE scientists have examined using NIF
for direct drive (laser light directly drives the target). Calculations
indicated that the gain is potentially at least three times larger than
can be achieved using indirect drive (conversion of laser light to X-
rays that drive the target). Since a conversion of laser light to X-
rays is not required for direct drive, the efficiency of the process is
higher. With direct drive, the target absorbs about five times more
energy, and it is this increased energy that is responsible for the
higher gain.
OMEGA EP, when completed, will support the SSP and ICF programs.
Concomitantly, with the delay of the NIF this added capability would
contribute substantially to the critical need to recruit and retain
graduate students, postdoctoral associates, University faculty members,
and national laboratory scientists in areas of national need.
OMEGA is the only facility capable of assembling an highly
compressed deuterium-tritium core from a cryogenic target; it is the
only location where advanced concepts for ignition and gain can be
tested. Other advantages include (1) operating synergies with OMEGA
will reduce operating costs, (2) UR/LLE has an established scientific
user base, and (3) UR/LLE has a proven track record of delivering
similar-sized projects on time and on budget as well as operating and
maintaining large-scale laser systems.
The construction time line and cost for this extended capability is
as follows:
[In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
2004 2005 2006 2007
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design & Long Lead Procurement................. 13 ........... ........... ........... ...........
Procurement and Assembly....................... ........... 20 25 ........... ...........
Integration & Commissioning.................... ........... ........... ........... 17 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Project Cost.--$82,000,000 (OMEGA EP) plus $20,000,000
(building) plus $1,500,000 from New York State (auxiliary target
chamber) equals $103,500,000. (This is for OMEGA EP, $82 million from
the Federal Government, $20 million from the University, and $1.5
million from New York State. Not included is the operating and research
cost that are included in the administration's request annually.)
PREVIOUS FEDERAL FUNDING
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Year 2004 Appropriation.......................... $63,132,000
Fiscal Year 2003 Appropriation.......................... 47,878,800
Fiscal Year 2002 Appropriation.......................... 34,693,000
Fiscal Year 2001 Appropriation.......................... 33,150,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
requested action
To provide the support for program deliverables and the operation
and extension of OMEGA (for both ICF experiments and SSP experiments),
and to maintain the related training programs at Rochester, a total of
$69,469,000 for the University of Rochester for fiscal year 2005 is
required. This amount includes $41,469,000 for operating funds and
$4,000,000 for the OMEGA EP facility included in the administration's
request, an additional $21,000,000 for the OMEGA extended performance
capability, and $3,000,000 for petawatt technology development required
to maintain the cost and schedule of the project.
______
Prepared Statement of the Energy Sciences Coalition
Chairman Domenici, the Energy Sciences Coalition expresses its
great appreciation for the leadership you have shown as chairman of the
Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee. We applaud
your vision of how the programs of the Department of Energy's Office of
Science will lead to research discoveries and technological
developments benefiting this and future generations. We are requesting
$3.8 billion for the Office in fiscal year 2005.
The Energy Sciences Coalition is a broadly based organization
representing scientists, engineers and mathematicians in universities,
industry, professional societies, and national laboratories. We share
your belief that the research supported by the Office of Science has
and will make significant contributions to our Nation's security and
standard of living.
The coalition supports the findings of several reviews of the
programs of the Office of Science, and the pressing need to augment its
funding. Last fall, Secretary Spencer Abraham's Advisory Board released
a report on the department's science programs. This task force panel
was chaired by MIT President Charles Vest, including the former
president of the NASDAQ Stock Market; industry, university, and
association CEOs; and senior policy analysts. Among their findings and
conclusions are:
``America can be free, secure and economically strong in the 21st
century only if we continue to excel in science and advanced
technology.'' ``America can meet its energy needs if and only if we
make a strong and sustained investment in research in physical science,
engineering, and applicable areas of life science, and if we translate
advancing scientific knowledge into practice.'' ``DOE science budgets
have not received the priority merited by their importance to our
Nation's future energy, security, and economy.'' ``The federal
investment in physical science and engineering has been stagnant for
over thirty years. During this same period, the Department's national
laboratories have suffered from decay and deferred maintenance, and
U.S. industry has largely phased out its basic research programs and
organizations. As a result, the U.S. is no longer the clear leader in
some important areas of science.''
Groundbreaking research supported by the Office of Science is
conducted in universities and other institutions across the United
States.
Our Nation benefits not only from the discoveries that will be made
with this support, but also from the training of America's next
generation of researchers. Such training will be instrumental in
maintaining our Nation's technological superiority in the international
marketplace. The Office of Science also plays an extremely important
and unique role in the design, construction, and operation of large-
scale user facilities used by researchers supported by the Department
of Energy, National Institutes of Health, and the National Science
Foundation.
Enclosed please find a copy of the Energy Sciences Coalition's
fiscal year 2005 funding statement. After carefully considering the
President's science goals in areas such as hydrogen energy, fusion, the
human genome, climate change, and a review of the 20-year facilities
and strategic plans, the Coalition recommends an increase in the budget
for the Office of Science of not less than $350 million to a level over
$3.8 billion.
In closing, I again express the coalition's gratitude for the
leadership that you and your colleagues have demonstrated in supporting
the important work of the Office of Science. Please do not hesitate to
contact me if the Coalition can be of any assistance.
The Energy Sciences Coalition (ESC) supports the Department of
Energy (DOE) Office of Science funding levels approved by both the
House and Senate in their respective versions of the Energy Policy Act.
These funding levels are easily justifiable given the tremendous
scientific opportunities that currently exist, as well as the broad
range of other science-related issues that the Office of Science is
uniquely positioned to address. These opportunities, and the facilities
and projects needed to achieve them, are well documented and outlined
in both the Department's 20-year scientific facilities plan released in
November 2003 and the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board's (SEAB)
December 2003 report on DOE science.
However, the Energy Sciences Coalition is also aware of the
significant fiscal constraints facing the administration and Congress
this year. Weighing the economic and national security value of
investments in these science programs against current fiscal
constraints, the Energy Sciences Coalition urges an fiscal year 2005
increase of not less than $350 million for the DOE Office of Science,
bringing the total DOE Office of Science budget to a level over $3.8
billion. While significantly less than the fiscal year 2005 levels
contained in the House and Senate passed energy policy bills cited
above, this figure is similar to the funding levels these bills
contained for fiscal year 2004.
We believe that growth for the DOE Office of Science at a rate
lower than 10 percent in fiscal year 2005 and in the next few years--a
growth rate which is less than what is called for in the House and
Senate authorization bills--will make it virtually impossible for the
Department to move forward with the initiatives and recommendations
outlined in the 20-year plan and by SEAB without severely damaging
already existing and very successful DOE science programs.
fiscal year 2005 esc funding statement endorsees
American Chemical Society; American Institute of Physics; American
Mathematical Society; American Physical Society; American Society of
Agronomy; American Society of Plant Biologists; Association of American
Universities; Battelle; Crop Science Society of America; Fusion Power
Associates; General Atomics; Krell Institute; Massachusetts Institute
of Technology; Michigan State University; National Association of State
Universities and Land-Grant Colleges; North Carolina State University;
Ohio State University; Optical Society of America; Princeton
University; Purdue University; Society for Industrial and Applied
Mathematics; Soil Science Society of America; Southeastern Universities
Research Association; Stanford University; Stony Brook University;
Universities Research Association, Inc.; University of California;
University of Chicago; University of Cincinnati; University of Houston;
University of Pittsburgh; University of Southern California; University
of Tennessee; University of Washington; University of Wisconsin-
Madison.
______
Prepared Statement of the University Corporation for Atmospheric
Research
On behalf of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
(UCAR) and the university community involved in weather and climate
research and related education, training and support activities, I
submit this written testimony for the record of the Senate Committee on
Appropriations, Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development.
UCAR is a 68-university member consortium that manages and operates
the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and additional
programs that support and extend the country's scientific research and
education capabilities. In addition to its member research
universities, UCAR has formal relationships with approximately 100
additional undergraduate and graduate schools including several
historically black and minority-serving institutions, and 40
international universities and laboratories. UCAR's principal support
is from the National Science Foundation (NSF) with additional support
from other Federal agencies including the Department of Energy (DOE).
doe office of science
We were extremely pleased to see the recommendations of the task
force of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board contained in the Final
Report of the Task Force on the Future of Science Programs at the
Department of Energy. The scientific community is aware that the report
recommendation to strengthen the Federal investment in the physical
sciences and advanced engineering research is supported by many members
of Congress; it is a recommendation on which I am sure many
subcommittee members would like to act.
DOE is the largest Federal sponsor of basic research in the
physical sciences, but the level of funding for DOE's core science
programs has remained stagnant for years, while the number of
``congressionally directed projects'' has increased. While many of
these add-ons seem worthy, they are diverting DOE's base funding from
peer-reviewed research programs that are planned well in advance to
accomplish DOE's mission in service to the country and are competed
among the country's top researchers.
In the House Science Committee's recently released ``Views and
Estimates'' for fiscal year 2005, the committee acknowledges the very
difficult budget decisions Congress will have to make this year.
However, as it has in past years, it criticizes the administration's
budget request for DOE's Office of Science, calling it ``inadequate''
and ``dwarfed'' by support for the life sciences in recent years. Two
bills, H.R. 34 and S. 915, authorize increased funding for the Office
of Science, essentially doubling its budget. The conference report to
H.R. 5, The Energy Policy Act of 2003, recommends that the Office of
Science budget be funded at $4.2 billion, a 23 percent increase over
the fiscal year 2004 amount.
As you are well aware, a healthy science budget ensures a vital
workforce, strong economy, and contributes directly to national
security. The administration's fiscal year 2005 request cuts DOE's
Office of Science by 2 percent. I urge the subcommittee to fund the DOE
Office of Science at the level of the fiscal year 2004 Original
Appropriation plus Adjustments, or $3.5 billion, at the very least, and
to enable the agency to apply the entire appropriated amount toward
planned agency research priorities. This level of research funding will
critically augment and reinvigorate the work of researchers throughout
the Nation.
biological and environmental research
Within the Office of Science, the Biological and Environmental
Research (BER) program develops the knowledge necessary to identify,
understand, and anticipate the potential health and environmental
consequences of energy production and use. These are issues that are
absolutely critical to our country's well-being and security, yet the
request of $496.6 million for BER research is down over 29 percent from
the fiscal year 2004 enacted level of $641.5 million. This reduction
eliminates over $80.0 million worth of ``extra projects'' funded last
year.
Peer-reviewed university research programs play a critical role in
the BER program involving the best researchers the Nation's
institutions of higher learning have to offer, and developing the next
generation of researchers. Approximately half of BER basic research
funding supports university-based activities directly and indirectly.
All BER research projects, other than those in the ``extra projects''
category, undergo regular peer review and evaluation. In step with the
recommendation made above for the Office of Science, I urge the
subcommittee to fund Biological and Environmental Research at the level
of the fiscal year 2004 Original Appropriation plus Adjustments, or
$641.5 million, and to enable BER to apply the entire appropriated
amount toward planned agency research priorities that are peer-reviewed
and involve the best researchers to be found within the Nation's
university research community as well as the DOE labs.
climate change research
Within BER, the Climate Change Research long-term goal is to
deliver improved climate data and models for policy makers to determine
safe levels of greenhouse gases for the Earth system. This work is
critical to the health of the planet. The extremely important target
capability for fiscal year 2005 is to enable studies of the
interactions between the carbon cycle and climate and between secondary
sulfur aerosols and climate. The Climate Change Research Request of
$142.9 million is flat with the fiscal year 2004 Original Appropriation
level. I urge the subcommittee to fund Climate Change Research at a
level that is consistent with the request for BER stated above.
Climate Change Research is composed of several programs of great
importance to the atmospheric sciences community and the Nation.
Climate and Hydrology contains Climate Modeling which develops the best
coupled atmospheric-ocean general circulation models, and Atmospheric
Radiation Measurement (ARM) Research which contributes to our
understanding of the processes that control solar and thermal infrared
radiative transfer through clouds and at the earth's surface. ARM
supports a number of scientific ``Fellows,'' making an important
contribution to the development of the next generation of climate
scientists. Both Climate Modeling and ARM are programs that are of
critical importance to the Nation's overall climate change research
efforts. Climate and Hydrology receives a 0.6 percent increase in the
fiscal year 2005 request. I urge the subcommittee to fund Climate and
Hydrology at a level that is consistent with the request for BER and
Climate Change Research stated above.
Also within Climate Change Research, Atmospheric Chemistry and
Carbon Cycle is a program that includes Atmospheric Science, the work
of which is essential for assessing the effects of energy production on
air quality and climate through the quantification of the impacts of
energy-related aerosols on climate. This work will be closely linked
with the ARM program described above. I urge the subcommittee to fund
Atmospheric Chemistry and Carbon Cycle at a level that is consistent
with the request for BER and Climate Change Research stated above.
global change education program (gcep)
Within the Climate Change Research program, the Global Change
Education Program funds the DOE's Summer Undergraduate Experience and
Graduate Research Environmental Fellowships, as well as positions in
the Significant Opportunities in Atmospheric Research and Science
(SOARS) program, which is managed by UCAR. The DOE education programs
are not slated to receive an increase, which has been the case for many
years. DOE participation in the multi-agency funded SOARS program has
been eliminated completely by BER program managers because of funding
issues.
The lack of ethnic diversity among advanced-degree atmospheric
science graduates is well documented. SOARS is a model mentoring
program, which received the prestigious Presidential Award for
Excellence in Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Mentoring in 2001.
Now in its eighth year, SOARS provides a unique, 4-year experience for
underrepresented students interested in graduate work in the
atmospheric and related sciences. If funding for the Climate Change
Research Program does not increase over the fiscal year 2005 requested
level, underrepresented students will be turned away from this
invaluable SOARS experience.
advanced scientific computing research (ascr)
DOE's ASCR provides advances in computer science and the
development of specialized software tools that are necessary to
research the major scientific question being addressed by the Office of
Science. ASCR's continued progress is of particular importance to
atmospheric scientists involved with complex climate model development,
research that takes enormous amounts of computing power. By their very
nature, problems dealing with the interaction of the earth's systems
and global climate change cannot be solved by traditional laboratory
approaches. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has
begun work on its Fourth Assessment Report to be completed in 2007, and
ASCR's contribution to this international document will be critical. In
order to maintain our international leadership in advanced computing, I
urge the subcommittee to provide ASCR with the requested level of
$204.3 million.
conclusion
On behalf of UCAR and the atmospheric sciences research community,
I want to thank the subcommittee for the important work you do for U.S.
scientific research. We appreciate your attention to the
recommendations of our community concerning the fiscal year 2005 budget
of the Department of Energy. We understand and appreciate that the
Nation is undergoing significant budget pressures at this time, but a
strong Nation in the future depends on the investments we make in
science and technology today.
______
Prepared Statement of the Southern States Energy Board
Mr. Chairman, the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB) is pleased to
provide this statement for the record to the U.S. Senate Appropriations
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development as it considers fiscal
year 2005 funding for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), and specifically related
to the biomass/biofuels fiscal year 2005 budget request. SSEB governors
recommend that the Congress appropriate $5,000,000 to the State/
Regional Biomass Partnership and direct the Department to work with
regional governors' organizations, specifically the Southern States
Energy Board, the Coalition of Northeast Governors Policy Institute,
the Council of Great Lakes Governors and the Western Governors'
Association, to make the Partnership even more successful.
This line item, which would continue an appropriation that has
appeared in every Federal budget since fiscal year 1983, is for the
purpose of promoting economic development by fostering the use of
biobased products and bioenergy, and takes advantage of and sustains
existing networks and infrastructure developed throughout the Nation by
the regional governors' organizations.
The Board commends Congress for restoring $3,000,000 to the U.S.
DOE Regional Biomass Energy Program (RBEP) in the Fiscal Year 2003
Omnibus Bill and $2,000,000 in the Fiscal Year 2004 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations bill. In addition, the Board wishes to
commend the administration for reinstating the State/regional biomass
partnership in the fiscal year 2005 budget request. SSEB and other
regional governors organizations received new cooperative agreements
for the fiscal year 2003 funding on March 2, 2004.
Energy independence is a critical element in the administration's
Energy Policy and can be significantly enhanced by developing viable
domestic alternative energy sources. Funding for the State/regional
biomass partnership greatly enhances the States' ability to participate
in the development of biomass energy markets.
As the precursor to the State/Regional Biomass Partnership, the
Regional Biomass Energy Program was created by Congress in 1983 under
the Energy and Water Development Appropriations bills Public Law 97-88
and Public Law 98-50. The enabling legislation instructed DOE to design
its national program to work with States on a regional basis, taking
into account regional biomass resources and energy needs.
The five regional partnerships, working with representatives in all
50 States, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, and hosted primarily by
regional governors' organizations (Southern States Energy Board,
Coalition of Northeastern Governors, the Council of Great Lakes
Governors and the Western Governors' Association) are recognized
nationally for their combined experience related to biomass
technologies and policies. SSEB and other regional governors'
organizations hosting State/regional biomass energy partnerships are
critical to DOE for formulating policies and facilitating private
sector deployment of advanced energy technologies and practices into
target markets.
Beyond the potential economic development benefits, participating
States gain the opportunity to strengthen and integrate the work of
energy, agriculture, forestry, environmental and other State agencies.
Where issues are the same among several States, strategies can be
developed to address these issues across State borders. Examples
include the development of similar State legislative actions, working
with the private sector with multi-State locations, and multi-State
training and outreach to economize resources.
In the past, the southern States have participated in this strategy
through the Southeastern Regional Biomass Energy Program (SERBEP) which
has provided over $5.8 million in project funds since 1992 with a cost-
share of over $21 million by leveraging State and private funding for
technology development and deployment. In 1999, SSEB was selected as
the ``host organization'' for the SERBEP and received funding through a
5-year cooperative agreement.
SSEB is an interstate compact organization with enabling
legislation in each member State, covering the 16 States plus Puerto
Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, all members of the Southern Governors
Association. To assure broad based representation, SSEB is governed by
a board composed of the governor and a member of the House and Senate
from each member State and a Federal representative named by the
President under Public Law 87-563 and Public Law 92-440. Over the years
of administering the SERBEP, SSEB has created awareness and support for
bioenergy/biobased products in the executive and legislative branches
of State government, improved the effectiveness of State/regional
biomass activities, provided more formal interaction between the States
and improved policy development and coordination in particular.
We urge Congress to include this modest but vital appropriation in
the fiscal year 2005 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill
to protect the Federal Government's 20-year investment in State/
regional biomass activities, and to continue the promotion of the
strong Federal interest in viable and growing biobased products and
bioenergy.
______
Prepared Statement of the American Society for Microbiology
The American Society for Microbiology (ASM), the largest single
life science organization in the world, with more than 43,000 members,
appreciates the opportunity to provide written testimony on the fiscal
year 2005 budget for the Department of Energy (DOE) science programs.
The ASM represents scientists working in academic, medical,
governmental, and industrial institutions worldwide. Microbiological
research is focused on human health and the environment and is directly
related to DOE programs involving microbial genomics, climate change,
bioremediation, and basic biological processes important to energy
sciences.
doe office of science
The scientific enterprise and the overall economy continue to
benefit enormously from investments in the basic sciences made by the
DOE Office of Science. The DOE Office of Science, the Nation's primary
supporter of the physical sciences, is also an essential partner in the
areas of biological and environmental science research as well as in
mathematics, computing, and engineering. Furthermore, the Office of
Science supports a unique system of programs based on large-scale,
specialized user facilities that bring together working teams of
scientists focused on such challenges as global warming, genomic
sequencing, and energy research. The Office of Science is also an
invaluable partner in certain scientific programs of the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF)
and supports peer-reviewed, basic research in DOE-relevant areas of
science in universities and colleges across the United States. These
cross-disciplinary programs contribute enormously to the knowledge base
and training of the next generation of scientists, while providing
worldwide scientific cooperation in physics, chemistry, biology,
environmental science, mathematics, and advanced computational
sciences.
The Office of Science will play an increasingly important role in
the administration's goal of U.S. energy independence in this decade.
Many DOE scientific research programs share the goal of producing and
conserving energy in environmentally responsible ways. Programs include
basic research projects in microbiology, as well as, extensive
development of biotechnology-based systems to produce alternative fuels
and chemicals, to recover and improve the process for refining fossil
fuels, to remediate environmental problems, and to reduce wastes and
pollution.
The administration's proposed budget for fiscal year 2005 includes
$3.4 billion for the Office of Science, representing a decrease of $68
million compared to fiscal year 2004. The 2 percent cut proposed for
fiscal year 2005 for the Office of Science is a significant departure
from the congressionally authorized level of $4 billion. The proposed
budget for Biological and Environmental Research (BER) in fiscal year
2005 is $502 million or $140 million below fiscal year 2004. The
proposed budget for Basic Energy Sciences (BES) in fiscal year 2005
would provide $1.06 billion, representing an increase of $53 million,
or 5.2 percent, over the prior year.
biological and environmental research programs
DOE is the lead Federal agency supporting genomic sequencing of
non-pathogenic microbes through its Genomics: GTL Program. This
sequence information provides clues into how we can design
biotechnological processes that will function in extreme conditions and
potentially solve pressing national priorities, such as energy and
environmental security, global warming, and energy production. The
administration has requested $67.5 million for fiscal year 2005,
compared to funding of $63.5 million for fiscal year 2004. These
requests include a $4 million increase for research on function and
control of molecular-scale machines for energy and environmental
applications, as well as $5 million for Project Engineering and Design
of the first Genomics: GTL project, the Facility for Production and
Characterization of Proteins and Molecular Tags.
In view of the valuable insights and tremendous practical potential
from microbial genomic sequencing, the ASM recommends that Congress
provide an additional $25 million for the GTL Program in fiscal year
2005. ASM believes that these additional funds will be vital if DOE's
role in this science frontier is to expand.
ber genomics: gtl program
Since microbes power the planet's carbon and nitrogen cycles, clean
up our wastes, and make important transformations of energy, they are
an important source of biotechnology products, making DOE research
programs extremely valuable for advancing our knowledge of the non-
medical microbial world. Knowing the complete DNA sequence of a microbe
provides important keys to the biological capabilities of the organism
and is the first step in developing strategies to more efficiently
detect, use, or reengineer that microbe to address an assortment of
national issues. The DOE Genomics: GTL genomic sequencing program has
an important impact on nearly every other activity within BER. In
addition to this program itself, a substantial portion of the DOE Joint
Genome Institute's (JGI) sequencing capacity continues to be devoted to
the sequencing of microbial genomes as well as DNA in mixed genomes
obtained from microbial communities dwelling within specialized
ecological niches. As part of these efforts, DOE continues to complete
DNA sequences of genomes in microbes with potential uses in energy,
waste cleanup, and carbon sequestration.
About 40 percent of the JTI capacity is dedicated to serving direct
DOE needs, primarily through the Genomics: GTL program, while the
remaining 60 percent of this capacity serves as a state-of-the-art DNA
sequencing facility for whose use scientists submit proposals that are
subject to merit review. These sequencing projects will be conducted at
no additional cost for the extramural scientific community. These
efforts are expected to have a substantial impact on the BER
Environmental Remediation Sciences program, reflecting the fact that
much of this program is focusing on the use and role of microbes in
environmental remediation. In addition, the Genomics: GTL program will
continue to have a major impact on the BER Climate Change Research
program because of the role microbes play in the global carbon cycle
and the potential for developing biology-based solutions for
sequestering carbon.
The ASM applauds DOE's leadership in recognizing this important
need in science and endorses expansion of its microbial genome
sequencing efforts, particularly in using DNA sequencing to learn more
about the functions and roles of the preponderance of microorganisms
that cannot yet be grown in culture. The ASM also sees this program as
the basis for an expanded effort to understand more broadly how genomic
information can be used to understand life at the cellular and higher
levels, and thus urges Congress to fully support this exciting program.
environmental remediation
The overall goal of the DOE Environmental Management Science
Program (EMSP), which was transferred from Environmental Management to
the BER program, is to support basic research that improves the science
base underpinning the clean up of DOE sites. Traditional clean up
strategies may not work or be cost effective for many of the challenges
that could prevent the successful closure of DOE sites. The EMSP,
through its support of basic research, aims to develop and validate
technical solutions to complex problems, providing innovative new
technologies to overcome major obstacles that lead to future risk
reduction and cost and time savings. It is the intent or the
expectation of the EMSP that the basic research projects funded are
directed toward specific issues and uncertainties at the DOE cleanup
sites.
DOE bioremediation activities are centered on the Natural and
Accelerated Bioremediation Research (NABIR) program, a basic research
program focused on determining how and where bioremediation may be
applicable as a reliable, efficient, and cost-effective approach for
cleaning up or containing metals and radionuclides in contaminated
subsurface environments. In the NABIR program, research advances will
be made from molecular to field scales; on genes and proteins used in
bioremediation and in overcoming physicochemical impediments to
bacterial activity; in non-destructive, real-time measurement
techniques; on species interaction and response of microbial ecology to
contamination; and in understanding microbial processes for altering
the chemical state of metallic and radionuclide contaminants. NABIR
activities have a substantial involvement of academic scientists.
Additional EMSP research efforts will focus on contaminant fate and
transport in the subsurface, nuclear waste chemistry and advanced
treatment options, and novel characterization and sensor tools. In
addition, studies on bioremediation of organic contaminants are
conducted in EMSP, complementing EMSP projects will continue to be
funded through a competitive peer review process. The most
scientifically meritorious research proposals and applications will be
funded based on availability of funds and programmatic relevance to
ensure a complete and balanced research portfolio that addresses DOE
needs. Research will be funded at universities, national laboratories,
and at private research institutes and industries. This research will
be conducted in collaboration with the Office of Environmental
Management. Funding is reduced to increase research at and development
of Field Research Centers through the NABIR program.
The administration's proposed budget for Bioremediation research,
including the NABIR program, is $105 million, a $2.8 million decrease
compared to fiscal year 2004. The ASM considers these DOE environmental
remediation programs to be of considerable importance, and recommends
that funding for fiscal year 2005 be increased by an additional $5
million.
climate change research
The ASM is pleased to see the administration's support of Climate
Change Research continue in its fiscal year 2005 budget. The ASM
endorses the President's proposed $143 million budget for fiscal year
2005, which is about equivalent with levels in fiscal year 2004. The
Climate Change Research subprogram seeks to apply the latest scientific
knowledge (i.e., genomic, new computational methods) to the potential
effects of greenhouse gas and aerosol emissions on the climate and the
environment. This program is DOE's contribution to the interagency U.S.
Global Change Research Program proposed by President Bush in 1989 and
codified by Congress in the Global Change Research Act of 1990 (Public
Law 101-106). This program is vital if science is to advance its
understanding of the radiation balance between the surface of the Earth
and the uppermost portions of the atmosphere and how this will affect
the planet's climate and ecosystems.
The Ecological Processes portion of the subprogram is focused on
understanding and simulating the effects of climate and atmospheric
changes on the biological structure and functioning of planetary
ecosystems. Research will also identify potential feedbacks from
changes in the climate and atmospheric composition. This research is
critical if we are to better understand the changes occurring in our
ecosystems from increasing levels of atmospheric pollutants.
The ASM urges Congress to support this important research within
the Office of Science budget. The Climate Change Research subprogram is
a key component in developing more accurate climate modeling and
ecosystem data, and promises to yield new technologies to address
future climate shifts.
basic energy science
The administration's requested funding for the Office of Basic
Energy Sciences (BES) for fiscal year 2005 is $1.06 billion,
representing an increase of $53 million over fiscal year 2004. This
program is a principal sponsor of fundamental research for the Nation
in the areas of materials sciences, chemistry, geosciences, and
biosciences as it relates to energy. Program initiatives include
microbiological and plant sciences focused on harvesting and converting
energy from sunlight into energy feedstock such as cellulose and other
products of photosynthesis, as well as how those chemicals may be
further converted into energy rich molecules such as methane, hydrogen
and ethanol. Alternative and renewable energy sources will remain of
strategic importance in the Nation's energy portfolio, and DOE is well
positioned to advance basic research in this area. The advances in
genomic technologies have given this research area a tremendous new
resource for advancing the Agency's bioenergy goals.
new technologies and unique facilities
New technologies and advanced instrumentation derived from DOE's
expertise in the physical sciences and engineering have become
increasingly valuable to biologists. The beam lines and other advanced
technologies for determining molecular structures of cell components
are at the heart of current advances to understand cell function and
have practical applications for new drug design. DOE advances in high
throughput, low cost DNA sequencing; protein mass spectrometry, cell
imaging and computational analyses of biological molecules and
processes are other unique contributions of DOE to the Nation's
biological research enterprise. The budget request for the DOE
Nanoscale Science program includes an increase of $8.7 million to a
level of $211 million for fiscal year 2005. Furthermore, DOE has unique
field research facilities for environmental research important to
understanding biogeochemical cycles, global change and cost-effective
environmental restoration. In short, DOE's ability to conduct large-
scale science projects and draw on its unique capabilities in physics,
computation and engineering is critical for future biological research.
The ASM strongly supports the basic science agenda across the
scientific disciplines and encourages Congress to maintain its
commitment to the Department of Energy research programs. Such
commitment will help maintain U.S. leadership in science and
technology.
SCHEDULE OF FEDERAL AWARDS 2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grants Receipts or Grants
Federal Grantor/Pass-through Grantor/Program Title Cost Federal Program or Receivable 1/1/ Revenue Disbursements/ Receivable 12/
Center CFDA Number Award Amount 2004 Recognized Expenditures 31/2004
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MAJOR PROGRAMS:
Resident Postdoctoral Research.................. 783 93.283 $999,381.00 $89,902.49 ............ .............. $89,902.49
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Major Programs.......................... ....... ........... 999,381.00 89,902.49 ............ .............. 89,902.49
===================================================================================================
OTHER FEDERAL ASSISTANCE:
HHS:
NIGMS-MARC.................................. 789 93.88 431,300.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Environmental Micoorganisms................. 694 93.856 10,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
DNA Repair and Mutagenesis.................. 457 93.393 25,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Summer Institute............................ 848 93.856 24,000.00 532.99 ............ .............. 532.99
Conf Biofilms............................... 425 93.121 25,000.00 25,000.00 ............ .............. 25,000.00
Environmental Pathogens..................... 694 93.856 10,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Microbial Triggers of Disease............... 666 93.855 5,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Candida and Candidiasis..................... 434 93.121 10,000.00 .............. ............ .............. ..............
National Science Foundation:
Plant Biotechnology......................... 678 47.074 15,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Pathogens................................... 697 47.074 110,000.00 33,608.72 ............ .............. 33,608.72
Sub Contract BioSciEd Net................... 787 47.076 100,000.00 30,838.75 ............ .............. 30,838.75
Beyond Microbial Genomics................... 691 47.074 15,000.00 .............. ............ .............. ..............
U.S. Department of Energy:
DNA Repair and Mutagenesis.................. 457 81.049 20,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Prokaryotic Development..................... 472 81.049 10,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Geobiology.................................. 675 81.049 15,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Microbial Ecology and Genomics.............. 676 81.049 25,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Multicellular Cooperation................... 671 81.049 15,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Systems Microbiology........................ 691 ........... 10,000.00 6,461.06 ............ .............. 6,461.06
USDA:
Conference Salmonella....................... 421 10.206 10,000.00 10,000.00 ............ .............. 10,000.00
Pre-harvest Food Safety..................... 663 10.001 5,000.00 5,000.00 ............ .............. 5,000.00
Pre-harvest Food Safety..................... 663 10.2 25,000.00 19,350.00 ............ .............. 19,350.00
Pre-harvest Food Safety..................... 663 10.206 10,000.00 7,000.00 ............ .............. 7,000.00
Conf Salmonella Pathogenesis................ 421 10.206 10,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
EPA:
Microbial Eolocy............................ 676 66.5 20,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
Infectious Disease GI Tract................. 670 66.606 50,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
PO HHS/FDA Pre-harvest Food................. 663 ........... 10,000.00 10,000.00 ............ .............. 10,000.00
PO US Dept of Army.......................... 475 ........... 10,000.00 .............. ............ .............. 0
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Other Awards........................ ....... ........... 1,025,300.00 147,791.52 $0.00 $0.00 147,791.52
===================================================================================================
Total Federal Awards...................... ....... ........... 2,024,681.00 237,694.01 0.00 0.00 237,694.01
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prepared Statement of the Nuclear Energy Institute
On behalf of the nuclear energy industry, I thank you for your
support of nuclear technology-related programs in the Energy Department
(DOE) and your oversight of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for
fiscal 2004.
The Nuclear Energy Institute is responsible for developing policy
for the U.S. nuclear industry. NEI's 270 corporate and other members
represent a broad spectrum of interests, including every U.S. energy
company that operates a nuclear power plant. NEI's membership also
includes nuclear fuel cycle companies, suppliers, engineering and
consulting firms, national research laboratories, manufacturers of
radiopharmaceuticals, universities, labor unions and law firms.
My statement for the record addresses three key points for your
consideration this year:
(1) Congress should reclassify the Nuclear Waste Fund, reorienting
it to its original purpose and ensuring adequate funding for the Yucca
Mountain repository project.
(2) Increased research and development (R&D) on advanced nuclear
technology is essential to maintain America's leadership role in
commercial nuclear technologies.
(3) The NRC's budget and staffing should be reassessed in light of
current trends.
I also will discuss briefly several important programs that the
nuclear energy industry supports, including research into the health
effects of low levels of radiation.
congress should reclassify the nuclear waste fund
The Nuclear Waste Fund was established in 1982 as a separate
account in the Federal treasury. However, congressional efforts to
control deficit spending in the 1980's and 1990's changed the status of
the fund. Currently, Congress funds the used fuel programs within the
confines of the discretionary spending allocation for the Energy and
Water Development Appropriations bill. As a result, annual
appropriations for Yucca Mountain and related programs have been
reduced $723 million below DOE's budget requests in the past 11 years--
significantly hampering DOE's progress toward accepting the Nation's
used nuclear fuel. Funding shortfalls in past years have forced DOE to
defer important programs, including procuring transportation containers
for used reactor fuel; acquiring transportation and logistics services;
creating the final grant process for providing emergency responder
assistance; developing a transportation infrastructure in Nevada; and
working with regional, State, tribal and local representatives on
transportation planning.
The industry urges Congress to reclassify the Nuclear Waste Fund
this year, as proposed by the president's fiscal 2005 budget and
introduced as H.R. 3981, to prevent future funding shortfalls for Yucca
Mountain. The Nuclear Waste Fund has three unique characteristics that
justify modifying the current budget rules governing its use in this
way:
--The Federal Government is obligated by law and contracts signed
with electric companies that operate nuclear power plants to
implement the used fuel management program.
--The fund is intended to cover the entire cost of the Federal
Government's commercial used fuel management program over
several decades.
--The disposal of used nuclear fuel from commercial reactors is
financed entirely through a fee established by Federal law and
paid by consumers of electricity generated at nuclear power
plants.
industry supports budget request of $880 million for yucca mountain
The industry greatly appreciates the House for its report language
emphasizing the need for early action on infrastructure development for
the used nuclear fuel disposal program. The committee's direction
resulted in an announcement by DOE on preferences for rail transport in
Nevada and should lead to a record of decision on route selection this
year.
Last year, the H.R. 6 conference report endorsed the highest level
of funding for Yucca Mountain to date. At $580 million, DOE could
address many technical challenges necessary for submitting an
application to the NRC by December for a license to construct the
repository.
NEI recognizes the challenge that the committee faces in fiscal
2005, based on assumptions included in the budget request on this issue
and urges the committee to make allocations under section 302(b) of the
Budget Act consistent with fully funding the administration request of
$880 million for Yucca Mountain. Absent sufficient funding in fiscal
2005, the industry does not believe the program will meet key
milestones for accepting used fuel in 2010, and these potential delays
will result in higher costs for the program and increased liabilities
to the government.
Although the repository program is the foundation of our national
policy for managing used nuclear fuel, the nuclear industry also
recognizes the value in researching emerging technology for used
reactor fuel treatment and management. Such farsighted programs will
allow our Nation to remain the world leader in nuclear technologies.
However, technologies like transmutation--the conversion of used
nuclear fuel into a smaller volume of less toxic materials--still
require a Federal repository for disposal of the radioactive by-
products generated from the process.
research and development of new nuclear energy systems necessary
The industry supports increased funding for fiscal 2005 for DOE's
R&D programs for the development of new nuclear energy systems. The
nuclear energy industry urges the committee to approve at least $60
million for the Nuclear Energy Technology (NET) program. Within the NET
program, $10 million should be earmarked for the early site permit
process as requested by DOE. This is an important component of the
revised NRC licensing process for new nuclear power plants passed by
Congress in 1992, and testing is already under way. An additional $50
million should be used to begin a 6-year, cost-shared program to test
the combined operating and construction license process for new nuclear
plants, based on the industry's response to a DOE solicitation that
will be awarded this year. DOE should support deployment of proven
generation III-plus technology for this program.
The industry believes that the government has an early role in
bringing advanced reactor concepts, known as Generation IV reactors, to
the marketplace. NEI urges your support for a next-generation nuclear
plant at the new Idaho National Laboratory, funded through the
Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative program. The industry
also supports the Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative at $9 million.
Although DOE continues to fund the International Nuclear Energy
Research Initiative (I-NERI), the domestic version of this program,
NERI, has been terminated and a new initiative has been proposed. We
believe the current program fills a vital need identified in a 1997
report by the President's Council of Advisers on Science and Technology
(PCAST) and endorsed by the energy secretary's Nuclear Energy Research
Advisory Committee. We do not support the change for NERI. Rather, the
industry believes this collaborative program between national
laboratories, industry and universities should be continued at $7
million for fiscal 2005.
PCAST also recommended another R&D initiative--the Nuclear Energy
Plant Optimization (NEPO) program--to produce additional amounts of
affordable energy from America's 103 commercial reactors. Through NEPO,
DOE has been working with the nuclear industry and DOE's national
laboratories to apply new technology to nuclear and non-nuclear
equipment. The industry encourages the committee to allocate $10
million for the NEPO program to help fund important research on
materials management issues at nuclear power plants, including improved
availability and maintenance at nuclear plants; technology to predict
and measure the extent of materials degradation from plant aging;
introducing new materials in a cost-effective manner to mitigate
materials effects; and as an underpinning to both the applied materials
and technology development and deployment activities, advanced research
tools and the evolving knowledge of materials properties. DOE has
proposed no funding for the program in fiscal 2005 despite the obvious
benefits that the national laboratories can bring to bear on these
issues.
The industry also requests $27.5 million for DOE's University
Support Program, which supports vital research and educational programs
in nuclear science at the Nation's colleges and universities. With
nuclear plant license renewal continuing at a brisk pace and the
industry considering plans for new nuclear plants, demand for highly
educated and trained professionals will continue. NEI encourages the
committee to consider a new $2 million program within the Office of
Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology to support universities that
have undergraduate and graduate programs in health physics. The
industry's most recent human resources survey reveals an increasing
demand for health physics professionals. This need will become acute in
the next few years when many will retire.
nrc budget and staffing should be reassessed
Our Nation's focus on security has led to significant security
enhancements at nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plant security was
among the most robust in the industrial sector before the Sept. 11,
2001, terrorist attacks, and our facilities are even more secure today.
By year's end, our industry will have invested an additional $1 billion
over the past 2 years in security-related improvements, such as
fortified perimeter security, improved background checks and tighter
access control and detection ability at our plants. The nuclear energy
industry has added one-third more security officers, for a total of
7,000 well-trained, armed security officers at our 67 nuclear power
plant sites. The industry will continue to make these investments and
improvements to enhance private industry's best security program.
The NRC's proposed fiscal 2005 budget totals $670.3 million, an
increase of $44.2 from the fiscal 2004 budget, and the highest ever for
this agency. Fiscal 2005 is an appropriate time for the NRC to review
its budget and resource allocations in light of current demands and
other resources available. The industry's 103 commercial reactors are
operating at world-class levels of safety and reliability. Nearly 75
percent of the reactors have the NRC's highest safety performance
indicator in all categories, and most of the others have only a single
indicator in the next lower level. The excellent safety record of U.S.
nuclear power plants lays the groundwork for refining regulatory
oversight based on performance and safety insights. Additionally,
insights from the reactor oversight process indicate that several major
regulations for power reactors are not providing a significant safety
value. A disciplined review of the regulatory process should be
undertaken to focus on the more probable, safety-significant events
rather than highly unlikely events.
industry support for additional activities
Nuclear Nonproliferation.--The industry supports the disposal of
excess weapons-grade nuclear materials through the use of mixed-oxide
fuel in reactors in the United States and Russia.
Low-Dose Radiation Health Effects Research.--The industry strongly
supports continued funding for the DOE's low-dose radiation research
program.
Nuclear Research Facilities.--The industry is concerned with the
declining number of nuclear research facilities. We urge the committee
to fully fund the request for a DOE lead lab in Idaho for nuclear
energy research and development.
Uranium Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning.--The industry
fully supports cleanup of the gaseous diffusion plants at Paducah, KY;
Portsmouth, OH; and Oak Ridge, TN. Commercial nuclear power plants
contribute more than $150 million to the Decontamination and
Decommissioning Fund for government-managed uranium enrichment plants
each year. Other important environmental, safety and/or health
activities at these facilities should be paid for out of general
revenues.
International Nuclear Safety Program and Nuclear Energy Agency.--
NEI supports the funding requested for the DOE and NRC's international
nuclear safety programs. They are programs aimed at improving the safe
commercial use of nuclear energy worldwide.
Medical Isotopes Infrastructure.--The nuclear industry supports the
administration's program for the production of medical and research
isotopes.
______
Prepared Statement of the Society of Nuclear Medicine
The Society of Nuclear Medicine (SNM) appreciates the opportunity
to submit written comments for the record regarding funding for a
National Isotope Program in fiscal year 2005. SNM is an international
scientific and professional organization founded in 1954 to promote the
science, technology and practical application of nuclear medicine. Its
14,000+ members are physicians, technologists and scientists
specializing in the research and practice of nuclear medicine.
To that end, SNM advocates the creation of a National Isotope
Program to ensure consistent radioisotope research and production
programs as isotope availability is crucial to nuclear medicine
procedures and innovation in this field. The Society stands ready to
work with policymakers at the local, State, and Federal levels to
advance policies and programs that will that our Nation have a steady
supply of isotopes for the advancement of nuclear medicine research.
what is nuclear medicine?
Nuclear medicine is a medical specialty that involves the use of
small amounts of radioactive pharmaceuticals, called ``Radiotracers''
or ``Tracers,'' to help diagnose and treat a variety of diseases. These
tracers are detected by special types of cameras that work with
computers to provide nuclear medicine physicians and the patient's
doctor precise pictures of the area of the body being imaged. It is a
way to gather medical information that may otherwise be unavailable,
require exploratory surgery, or necessitate more expensive diagnostic
tests.
Nuclear medicine procedures, such as PET (positron emission
tomography) and SPECT (single-photon emission tomography), often
identify abnormalities very early in the progression of a disease--long
before some medical problems are apparent with other diagnostic tests.
This early detection allows a disease to be treated early in its course
when there may be a more successful prognosis.
An estimated 16 million nuclear medicine imaging and therapeutic
procedures are performed each year in the United States. Nuclear
medicine procedures are among the safest diagnostic imaging tests
available. The amount of radiation from a nuclear medicine procedure is
comparable to that received during a diagnostic X-ray.
Some of the more frequently performed nuclear medicine procedures
include:
--Bone scans to examine orthopedic injuries, fractures, tumors or
unexplained bone pain.
--Cardiac scans to identify normal or abnormal blood flow to the
heart muscle, measure heart function or determine the existence
or extent of damage to the heart muscle after a heart attack.
--Breast scans which are used in conjunction with mammograms to more
accurately detect and locate cancerous tissue in the breasts.
--Liver and gallbladder scans to evaluate liver and gallbladder
function.
--Cancer imaging to detect tumors and determine the severity
(staging) of various types of cancer.
--Treatment of thyroid diseases and certain types of cancer.
--Brain imaging to investigate problems within the brain itself or in
blood circulation to the brain.
--Renal imaging in children to examine kidney function.
funding cuts and program restructuring threaten nuclear medicine
The Nation needs a consistent, reliable supply of isotopes for
medical, security, space power, and research uses. Today, new isotopes
for diagnostic and therapeutic uses are not being developed, critical
isotopes for national security are in short supply, and demand for
isotopes critical to homeland security exceeds supply. Additionally,
the national isotope infrastructure is chronically under funded at the
DOE.
New science, such as molecular nuclear medicine, is emerging that
will require reliable supplies of isotopes. By abandoning isotope
research at the DOE, innovative medical research progress into
radiopharmaceuticals will be lost, and the medical community will not
benefit from valuable discoveries for the diagnosis and treatment of
millions of Americans.
Isotopes for research & development (R&D) at reasonable prices are
not available due to declining resources and policy change in the DOE
Isotope Program. The DOE program and its resources have been declining
for two decades, and recent policy changes by DOE have significantly
worsened the situation and are impeding the development of new isotope
applications. Recently DOE eliminated all R&D funding for DOE
applications and production. Lost opportunities to develop new advanced
technologies through isotope research will have major impacts on
pressing needs of the United States in health care and national
security.
The Advanced Nuclear Medicine Initiative (ANMI) at the DOE fostered
peer-reviewed nuclear medicine research studies that advanced medical
and clinical research and practice in this important area of medicine.
The program was funded at $2.5 million in fiscal year 2000, 2001 and
2002. By abandoning this program in fiscal year 2003, innovative
medical research progress into radiopharmaceuticals was lost.
Also, the fiscal year 2003 budget instituted an upfront payment
policy for development and production of radionuclides for treatment or
research. This restructuring severely hampered researcher's ability to
obtain essential radioisotopes by imposing a much higher cost on
researchers, and created a difficult payment situation, since
researchers often cannot commit outlays until grants are issued and
funds are received, with the end result being an adverse effect on
public health. A resulting crisis in the availability of isotopes
constrained existing nuclear medicine procedures and had a chilling
effect on research into new procedures to diagnose and treat serious
and life-threatening diseases, such as cancer.
Additionally, relying on foreign sources for radioisotopes severely
hampers researcher's ability to obtain essential radioisotopes. Because
no commercial isotope-producing reactors exist in the United States,
there is a strong dependence on foreign sources for reactor-produced
radioisotopes. The U.S. facilities for reactor-produced isotopes are
limited to DOE and university reactors, primarily at the University of
Missouri Research Reactor Center (MURR). The resulting crisis in the
availability of isotopes will constrain existing nuclear medicine
procedures and will have a chilling effect on research into new
procedures to diagnose and treat serious and life-threatening diseases,
such as cancer.
Decline in nuclear and radiochemistry education is not being
addressed to avoid impacts on radioisotope production and applications
R&D. A recent survey with 19 universities found a continuation of a
long-term decline in the number of graduate programs, graduate
students, and faculty in the United States in nuclear and radiochemical
fields. Currently, there are 5-10 U.S. Ph.D. graduates in these
research fields each year while the projected demand in the near future
at the DOE and within the nuclear medicine community will be several
hundred Ph.D.'s. In the past, foreign graduates have solved the
shortage of nuclear scientists. However, because of a worldwide decline
in the number of young scientists in the field, foreign graduates are
not available to address the shortage.
creation of a national isotope program
Congress should realign isotope resources to create the National
Isotope Program to produce essential isotopes, reestablish R&D for
production and isotope applications, establish nuclear technology
education activity, and support isotope production infrastructure of
new and existing facilities.
Major components of a National Isotope Program include:
--Establishment of a national program to meet the national need for
isotopes. The program should be supported at the Secretary of
Energy level with the program director reporting at a high
level in DOE;
--Collaboration with R&D, medical, and industrial users to assess
isotope needs and transfer technologies to accelerate
applications;
--Facilitation of the transfer of commercially viable isotope
programs to the private sector;
--Investment in R&D to improve isotope production, processing, and
utilization;
--Continuously monitoring the isotope needs of researchers and
clinicians;
--Establishment of an education program to ensure that the next
generation of nuclear and radiochemists are trained and
available to support the Nation's needs; and
--Upgrade the capability at the University of Missouri and other
existing facilities that produce isotopes.
A National Isotope Program will continue innovation in nuclear
medicine to meet the health care needs of the Nation. To that end, SNM
advocates the allocation of $25 million in fiscal year 2005 for the
creation of the National Isotope Program.
conclusion
The Society of Nuclear Medicine once again stands ready to work
with policymakers to advance policies that will reduce and prevent
suffering from disease for all Americans, while ensuring an adequate
nuclear medicine workforce. Again, we thank you for the opportunity to
present our views on funding for nuclear medicine workforce and
research related programs and stand ready to answer any questions you
may have.