[Senate Hearing 110-1258]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-1258
THE MIDWEST FLOODS: WHAT HAPPENED AND
WHAT MIGHT BE IMPROVED FOR MANAGING
RISK AND RESPONSES IN THE FUTURE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JULY 23, 2008
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/
congress.senate
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
88-903 WASHINGTON : 2015
_______________________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman
MAX BAUCUS, Montana JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
Bettina Poirier, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Andrew Wheeler, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
JULY 17, 2008
OPENING STATEMENTS
Boxer, Hon. Barbara, U.S. Senator from the State of California... 1
Bond, Hon. Christopher S., U.S. Senator from the State of
Missouri....................................................... 2
Grassley, Hon. Charles, U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa...... 4
Mccaskill, Hon. Claire, U.S. Senator from the State of Missouri.. 8
Durbin, Hon. Richard J., U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois. 10
Klobuchar, Hon. Amy, U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota.... 14
Inhofe, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma... 57
WITNESSES
Woodley, Hon. John Paul, Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil
Works Accompanied by: Major General Don T. Riley, Deputy
Commanding General, Civil and Emergency Operations............. 16
Prepared statement........................................... 18
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Inhofe........................................... 30
Senator Barrasso......................................... 32
Walsh, Brigadier General Michael J., Commanding General, U.S.
Army Engineer Division, Mississippi Valley..................... 34
Prepared statement........................................... 37
Response to an additional question from Senator Inhofe....... 43
Responses to additional questions from Senator Barrosso...... 43
THE MIDWEST FLOODS: WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT MIGHT BE IMPROVED FOR
MANAGING RISK AND RESPONSES IN THE FUTURE
----------
WEDNESDAY JULY 23, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The full committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer
(chairman of the full committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Boxer, Bond, Carper, Klobuchar.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Senator Boxer. Good morning. I was sorry to hear that
Senator Harkin is ill this morning. We are very happy to see
Senator Grassley here, and I understand Senator McCaskill is
trying to change her schedule and join us.
Today the Committee meets to examine the Midwest floods of
2008 and consider ways of improving flood protection and flood
response. I think all of America was shocked to see what
happened, Senator Grassley. We want to help, this Committee
wants to help.
We are joined today not only by right now, Senator
Grassley, and we hope other Senators, but by the Assistant
Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, John Paul Woodley, and
Brigadier General Michael J. Walsh, Commanding General U.S.
Army Engineer Division Mississippi Valley. But before we hear
from the Corps, we are so happy to have before us Senator
Grassley. I want to welcome you.
Your constituents have suffered through a terrible season
of devastating flooding and the Committee looks forward to
hearing your testimony. This summer's flooding in Illinois,
Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Missouri, those floods
resulted in unusual heavy precipitation which inundated the
Midwestern region of the U.S. throughout the early part of
2008. It appears to be continuing into the summer.
According to data from the Department of Commerce, over
1,100 daily precipitation records were broken across the
Midwest, mostly in Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin and Missouri.
Further complicating matters is that prior to June's extreme
rains, much of the upper Mississippi Basin had already
experienced very wet conditions from the spring and the winter.
Indeed, precipitation across the upper Mississippi from
December 2007 through December 2008 was the second wettest
since 1895. Naturally, this already over-saturated region could
not stand much more, and the impacts were devastating.
I would like to take a few moments to share a few images of
this catastrophic event. Here is a levee breaching in Missouri.
Then a levee breaching, damaging homes. This is an aerial view
of what happens when a levee breaches. And then, homes
destroyed. This chart dramatically shows just how terrible
flooding can be with homes and other structures uprooted and
slammed into a bridge.
But there can be some statistics that are just as dramatic
as pictures. At least two dozen people died, and 148 people
sustained injuries due to the floods. Forty-one levees
overtopped in Iowa, Indiana, Illinois and Missouri. Tens of
thousands of people had to leave their homes to escape the
flooding. Many economists predict that the floods are to blame
for at least $8 billion in losses to crop production.
Economic damages will likely be higher after losses to
livestock, farm machinery, buildings and infrastructure are
accounted for. This last point is something all Americans will
feel. I will let Senator Grassley tell the rest of the story.
But I believe these tragic floods have served as a wake-up
call. Our Nation's water infrastructure needs to be carefully
reviewed and carefully shored up. Having led a congressional
delegation to New Orleans last year, I saw for myself what
happens when we neglect our Nation's flood control
infrastructure. Like Hurricane Katrina, there is a lesson to be
learned from the Midwest floods, that we must shore up our
Nation's water and flood control infrastructure before
catastrophe strikes, not after.
And even though most of the levees that failed in this
year's flooding were non-Federal, we can do so much more to
help communities protect themselves. Indeed, in the 2007 WRDA,
we enacted a significant program to inventory and assess many
of our Nation's levees. However, that was only the first step.
I look forward to working with colleagues on both sides of the
aisle to improve and expand that program to inventory and
assess every levee in this Country as the Senate-passed WRDA
bill included. I will be asking the Corps about that project.
I am confident that this tragedy will help recommit our
Country and this Congress to shoring up our Nation's water
infrastructure. Last year, I was proud to join with Senator
Inhofe and all members of this Committee to lead the floor
fight to overturn the President's veto of WRDA 2007, and we did
it, by a vote of 79 to 14. I am very grateful for that. But
like that vote, I want us to come together again. We have to
tackle this problem, and it shouldn't have anything to do with
party affiliation.
So I look forward to hearing from Senator Grassley and any
other Senator who manages to get here this morning. And of
course, I look forward to hearing from Secretary Woodley and
Brigadier General Walsh. With that, I will call on Senator
Bond.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI
Senator Bond. Madam Chair, I thank you very much for
holding the hearing. My home State of Missouri, along with
Senator Grassley's State of Iowa, has endured flooding on the
Mississippi River, we also on the Missouri River and the
tributaries, as well as suffering from tornadoes this spring.
I very much appreciate your leadership in helping us get
WRDA passed. I was proud to be able to join you in the veto
override, because assuring appropriate water infrastructure is
a vitally important responsibility that we have in Washington
and this Congress bears through our Committee, environment and
public works. After the 1993 floods, the first of three 500-
year floods we have experienced in 15 years, I fought hard
against the OMB and the Administration then, which did not want
to rebuild the levees. With the help of my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle, we were able to begin to restore the levees
that had been destroyed in Missouri in that catastrophic flood.
I went to the White House and the President's assistant, my
good friend Leon Paneta, welcomed me by calling me Mr. Levee. I
said, now, Leon, that may be an insult to you, but I wear that
as a badge of pride back in the heartland.
It has been a very trying year for all of us in the flood
area. But one thing has rung clear: the mitigation of these
disasters has been a coordinated effort among the Federal,
State and local governments and volunteers. I am very proud of
the work that Midwesterners did. I saw the work, particularly
in Missouri, where I have made visits, as a testament to
showing how bad disasters can be prevented from becoming worse
disasters, when competent State and local leaders take
proactive steps to mitigate circumstances on the ground.
During Missouri's recent floods, I met with volunteers from
the Salvation Army, the Red Cross, Missouri's Civil Air Patrol,
local law enforcement, the National Guard, local surrounding
communities, and of course, representatives from the Corps of
Engineers. It was really inspiring to see these people come
together to protect lives and livelihoods.
Now, our National Guard acted valiantly. Their work gave
businesses and families the critical time needed to move
important assets out of harm's way where levees were in danger
of failing. People from all walks of life and from across
Missouri and the heartland have pitched in. It is truly an all
hands on deck effort, and I am tremendously proud.
Madam Chair, you might be interested to know that they had
so many volunteers coming in, they moved out 330,000 sand bags
and they had more volunteers coming. They used all the sand
bags that were available. We had thousands of volunteers ready
to come in. It turned out that the levees had been weakened and
the levees gave way, not because in most instances, not because
of lack of sand bags, but because of animals drilling holes in
the levee, and the fact that it stayed up so long. But Missouri
and the Midwestern States have pulled together, done an
outstanding job of preventing damage. And I was pleased to work
with Senator Grassley and other Senators from the Midwest,
Senator Harkin, Senator McCaskill, to fund vital programs to
get our communities up and running again. We included more than
$600 million to appropriate it to the Corps of Engineers for
repair of navigation and flood control structures damaged in
the flood event.
What is important to focus on now is the speedy repair of
damaged structures. It is my hope that the money in the
supplemental appropriations will enable the Corps to expedite
repair to levees, so when the next storm comes, our farms and
communities will be protected. We are not holding our breath
and counting on waiting another 499 years for the next 500-year
flood. Five hundred year floods tend to come a little more
frequently than that.
I thank you very much for holding this hearing and I look
forward to working with you on this.
Senator Boxer. Yes, we will.
Senator Grassley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES GRASSLEY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IOWA
Senator Grassley. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
What you laid out about the situation takes a lot of my
statement. I want to thank you very much for highlighting. . .
[remarks off microphone].
As Senator Harkin, if he were here, and because he is ill,
he can't be here, demonstrates the bipartisanship we have
approached this, I like to say that in regard to this flooding,
to paraphrase Senator Vandenberg in the 1940's and 1950's, he
said, when it comes to foreign policy, partisanship ends at the
shoreline. When it comes to flooding, partisanship in Iowa ends
at the water's edge.
I thank the Committee for holding the hearing and allowing
me to share with you this morning. As you know, the Midwest and
especially Iowa was hit extremely hard by tornadoes, storms and
flooding this spring. In Iowa, it started out by a deadly
tornado ripping through my home town and the surrounding areas,
causing significant damage and death.
A little more than a week later, record floods brought
havoc in central and eastern parts of our State, as it has in
about six or seven other States of the Midwest, maybe to a
lesser extent, but still damage.
We also had another tornado sweep through the western part
of our State that killed four Boy Scouts in early June. Many
people saw pictures on television or in their newspapers of the
damage throughout the Midwest and our State. However, those
pictures hardly do justice to the historic devastation. This
severe weather system caused a 500-year flood event and the
rivers overtook communities.
As Senator Harkin and I toured Iowa, this became very
apparent, especially when we flew over the affected areas. You
could hardly see a dry piece of land between any of the cities.
Our rich Iowa crop land looked like lakes; homes, public
buildings and businesses being inundated wither water. You
could only see the tops of many buildings. It was devastating
and there is hurt everywhere.
As the water recedes, people are attempting to start
rebuilding their lives. However, this is frustrating and a
discouraging process. Not only have folks lost their
belongings, family photos, heirlooms, they are faced with many
tough decisions about where they should live and how to protect
themselves from having to go through this experience again.
A key component, then, in decisions for individuals and
communities on how to rebuild is what type and level of flood
protection that will be in place. The Army Corps of Engineers
has been partnering with the State of Iowa in emergency and
recovery efforts. I appreciate the assistance that they have
provided to Iowans. They have been assessing the damage and the
need for Federal levees affected by this disaster, and are
scheduling their emergency repairs. It is my hope that my
colleagues in Congress will help to provide the moneys needed
for the Corps to carry out their emergency repair and to do it
immediately.
Brigadier General Walsh is here. I would like to share a
story which emphasizes the need for this emergency assistance.
Senator Harkin and I were viewing the damage in Louisa County,
and particularly the city of Oakville that was inundated. This
area experienced having approximately 4,000 feet of their levee
washed away. Another opening had to be cut downstream to give
the water somewhere to go.
So as you can imagine, the whole town had to be evacuated.
It was completely underwater, people in distress. Senator
Harkin and I called General Walsh and personally asked that the
Corps immediately begin assessing and putting into motion the
emergency repair of the levee, and they acted accordingly, and
we thank them very much for that. So we will continue to work
with the Rock Island District of the Corps in these efforts.
Furthermore, after the great flood of 1993, which now may
be a lesser great flood of 1993 than what we had in 2008, it
was decided in 1993 that a comprehensive plan to integrate
existing and needed projects into a coordinated system for
flood damage reduction and flood plain management on the upper
Mississippi and Illinois Rivers was warranted. Congress
authorized this plan in Section 459 of the Water Resources
Development Act of 1999. Earlier this year, the Army Corps
completed the study. It shows that systemic flood protection is
achievable. It now awaits congressional approval.
I look forward to working with this Committee in the near
future in evaluating and implementing such a plan. Adequate
appropriations for this effort will also be needed so work can
begin to reduce the risk of a repeat flood like this year.
Thank you for letting me testify today about Iowa's floods.
I would like to reiterate the need for additional Federal
assistance to help the Midwest in recovery efforts. As we
toured Iowa communities during the last month, and I did it as
recently as Monday, once again our constituents often ask us
``not to forget'' about them.
So I bring that message to my colleagues. Iowans have great
pride, great resilience. They aren't complainers, but they are
hurt. I see I in their eyes every day as they sort through the
rubble. We only ask that Congress give Iowans and those in the
Midwest the same consideration that they gave victims of other
major disasters.
I hope we acted, when I was chairman of a committee,
responsibly after the New York disaster, after the Katrina
disaster, and I would like to have the same response from
Congress with this disaster, because I think it is just as bad,
and encourage you to work quickly to get that help.
[The prepared statement of Senator Grassley follows:]
Statement of Hon. Charles Grassley, U.S. Senator
from the State of Iowa
I thank the Committee for holding this hearing and for
allowing me to share with you this morning. As you know, the
Midwest and especially Iowa was hit extremely hard by
tornadoes, storms, and flooding this spring. In Iowa it started
by a deadly tornado ripping through my hometown and the
surrounding area causing significant damage. Little more than a
week later, record floods wrecked havoc in the central and
eastern parts of our state. We also had another tornado sweep
through the Western part of the state, causing four Boy Scouts
to lose their lives.
Many people saw pictures on television or in their
newspapers of the damage throughout the Midwest and in Iowa.
However, those pictures hardly do justice to this historic
devastation. This severe weather system caused a 500-year flood
event and the rivers overtook our communities.
As Senator Harkin and I toured Iowa this became very
apparent, especially when we flew over the effected areas. You
could hardly see a dry piece of a land between any of the
cities. Our rich Iowa cropland looked like lakes. Homes, public
buildings, and businesses were inundated with water. You could
only see the tops of many buildings. It was devastating and
there is hurt everywhere.
As the water recedes, people are attempting to start
rebuilding their lives. However, this is a frustrating and
discouraging process. Not only have these folks lost their
belongings, family photos, and heirlooms they are faced with
many tough decisions about where they should live and how to
protect themselves from having to go through this experience
again. A key component in the decision for individuals and
communities on how to rebuild is what type and level of flood
protection will be in place.
The Army Corps of Engineers has been partnering with the
State of Iowa in emergency and recovery efforts. I appreciate
the assistance they have provided to Iowans. They have been
assessing the damage and needs on the Federal levees affected
by this disaster and are scheduling their emergency repairs. It
is my hope that my colleagues in Congress will help to provide
the moneys needed for the Corps to carry out these emergency
repairs immediately.
Since Brigadier General Walsh is testifying at this
hearing, I would like to share a story which emphasizes the
need for this emergency assistance. Senator Harkin and I were
viewing the damage in Louisa County and the city of Oakville.
This area experienced having approximately 4,000 feet of their
levee wash away. Another opening had to be cut on a levee down
stream to give the water somewhere to go. As you can imagine,
the whole town had to be evacuated. It was completely
underwater and folks are distressed. Senator Harkin and I
called the General and personally asked that the Corps
immediately begin assessing and putting into motion the
emergency repair of this levee. We continue to work with the
Rock Island District of the Corps on these efforts.
Furthermore, after the Great Flood of 1993, it was decided
that a comprehensive plan to integrate existing and needed
projects into a coordinated system for flood damage reduction
and floodplain management for the Upper Mississippi and
Illinois Rivers was warranted. Congress authorized this plan in
Section 459 of the Water Resources Development Bill of 1999.
Earlier this year the Army Corps of Engineers completed the
study. It shows that systemic flood protection is achievable.
It now awaits congressional approval.
I look forward to working with this Committee in the near
future in evaluating and implementing such a plan. Adequate
appropriations for this effort will also be needed so work can
begin to reduce the risk of a repeat of floods like this year.
Thank you again for letting me testify today about the Iowa
floods. I would like to reiterate the need for additional
Federal assistance to help the Midwest in our recovery efforts.
As we've toured Iowa communities during the last month, our
constituents often ask us to ``not forget'' about them. So, I
bring that message to my colleagues. Iowans have great pride
and resiliency. They aren't complainers, but they are hurt. I
see it in their eyes every day as they sort through the rubble.
We only ask that Congress give Iowans and those in the Midwest
the same consideration that they gave the victims of other
major disasters. Nothing more, nothing less.
Senator Boxer. Senator Grassley, I am so pleased you are
here.
At this point, I want to put into the record, without
objection, Senator Harkin's testimony. It really does match
yours. He is a little more specific. I hope that his staff will
share it with you, because I think he outlines some very good
ideas.
I won't take time, because I know all of our colleagues are
under time stress. I do want to say one thing here. He says in
his presentation, ``To give you some idea of the magnitude of
the flooding, consider that since the 1850's, the highest flood
level in Cedar Rapids had been 20 feet. The levees in Cedar
Rapids are at 22 feet. Last month, the water level rose to more
than 31 feet, well above the estimate 500-year flood level.''
[The prepared statement of Senator Harkin follows:]
Statement of Hon. Thomas Harkin, U.S. Senator
from the State of Iowa
Chairman Boxer and members of the Committee, I appreciate
this opportunity to report to the Committee on the recent
flooding in Iowa, and to share my views on the lessons we can
draw from this disaster as we plan for similar events in the
future.
First, I want to publicly salute the professionals in the
Corps of Engineers, who worked day and night both before and
during the flooding to minimize damage. In addition, local
governments and many thousands of volunteers worked around the
clock to fight the flood waters, and they did a magnificent
job.
However, the storms and subsequent flooding were simply
overwhelming. In Iowa, we had more rain in the first 6 months
of this year than in any other 6-month period on record. The
already-saturated soil, combined with downpours day after day,
resulted in what has been characterized as worse than 500-year
flood events on the Cedar River, which inundated Cedar Rapids,
and on the Iowa River, which flooded Iowa City and a number of
other communities.
To give you some idea of the magnitude of the flooding,
consider that, since the 1850's, the highest flood level in
Cedar Rapids had been 20 feet. The levees in Cedar Rapids are
at 22 feet. Last month, the water level rose to more than 31
feet, well above the estimated 500-year flood level.
In addition to the flooding, Iowa has been hit be a number
of devastating tornadoes. Senator Chuck Grassley's hometown,
New Hartford, was hit by an F5 tornado, killing two people.
Just weeks later, the same town was engulfed by flood waters
when a local levee failed to protect the community. Thousands
lost their homes and businesses.
The obvious lesson we have learned is that we need to
substantially increase the resources devoted to preventing
flood damage. The current level of funding is clearly
inadequate.
I am proud to have been the chief sponsor of the 1993
Hazard Mitigation and Relocation Assistance Act, which
substantially increased the FEMA mitigation program. And, now,
funding has been further increased for states with an approved
mitigation plan. Mitigation is absolutely crucial and we need
to substantially increase our efforts.
Where we have low-lying areas that are repeatedly flooded,
an excellent alternative to building levees is to convert that
land to parks and recreation uses.
The Federal Government should increase assistance to cities
like Davenport, Iowa, that are taking this approach. However,
this approach will not work in most cases, due to topography or
existing structures. I would also add that flood plain
easements can be a very useful tool in rural areas as an
alternative to levees.
We need a formal assessment of what worked and what did not
work during the recent flooding. But there are some things that
are already clear.
One obvious problem is that we have a hodgepodge of levees
in Iowa and elsewhere across the Nation. Some levees are under
the Corps authority, built to their specifications. Some are
owned by cities. Others are owned by drainage districts or are
effectively privately maintained.
The ideal would be for the Corps to have responsibility for
a national network of levees. However, I believe that, at a
minimum, we should start with a regular program of Corps
inspections of all significant levees, as Chairman Boxer
proposed in the EPW-proposed version of the Corps
reauthorization.
Regrettably, that proposed program was sharply narrowed to
the creation of an inventory of levees in the final version of
the Corps reauthorization. That is important, but it is only an
initial step. We should go further by requiring rigorous
inspections that identify needed maintenance and improvements.
The Corps budgets have been excessively tight for many
years. In most cases, projects have been delayed at the design
phase or construction phase for long periods because of lack of
funding. Projects take far too many years to complete, and many
do not get started at all. We need a substantial increase for
the Corps and in many other areas of infrastructure
improvement.
We need to improve our ability to predict very high flood
levels. In Cedar Rapids, I am told, the modeling was not
sophisticated enough to predict the kind of flooding we had in
June, which was so far beyond normal boundaries. If local
officials and citizens had been given warning of the potential
for such a flood, they could have taken precautions
accordingly, and damage could have been reduced.
Where we have reservoirs, I believe we need to consider
operating with lower water levels in order to maximize flood
protection. If we move major structures that might be damaged
by significant water releases, this would allow for faster
releases prior to water exceeding the spillway level.
When we begin a flood-control project, we need to improve
the coordination between the Corps of Engineers and the USDA's
watershed structure program, which constructs small flood-
control structures in rural areas. These small structures can
have a significant, positive impact, often at a reasonable
cost. We need more conservation practices that slow the
movement of water.
Today, levees across the United States are mostly 100-year-
event levees. Given the realities of climate change and the
greater frequency of severe weather, we need to revisit the
assumptions behind this practice.
I would also like to note that a significant part of the
damage in Iowa was not caused directly by the flooding rivers
or tornadoes. It was caused in places where storm-water pipes
and sewer pipes are combined. As the system was overwhelmed,
the waste water was pushed directly into people's homes. We
need to provide more support to cities as they work to modify
these systems--to protect both property and the environment.
I am hopeful that the National Flood Risk Management
Committee, which brings together Federal agencies as well as
State and local interests, can make excellent recommendations.
But the bottom line is the bottom line: We simply need more
funding for flood mitigation.
I thank the Committee.
Senator Boxer. So something is happening out there. We can
argue about why, and I don't want to get into it, because
frankly, it is painful. We are not going to argue why. But we
are going to do something about it together. I think we can.
And that is the objective of this Committee under my
chairmanship.
So now I am going to, because Senator Klobuchar is such a
good soldier, she said, please, let's hear from our two
colleagues. So, Senator Durbin, you are recognized, followed by
Senator McCaskill. We really welcome you. We know your
schedules are tight.
Senator Grassley. Can I go?
[Laughter.]
Senator Boxer. You may leave, sir, the teacher gives you
permission. We look forward to working with you and Senator
Harkin as well as all the Midwestern Senators.
Senator Durbin. I would like to defer to Senator McCaskill,
please.
Senator Boxer. OK.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CLAIRE McCASKILL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI
Senator McCaskill. I would like to thank my colleague,
Senator Durbin. We share a river and we are neighbors, and it
was very nice of him to give me just a minute. I need to go
introduce a great Missourian who is going to be confirmed as an
ambassador, hopefully, today.
And I just want to say that my senior Senator from Missouri
and I agree completely about this incident and the struggles
Missouri has had over the last year. He and I have been
together looking at damage from Mother Nature in southwest
Missouri. He and I both obviously visited the flooded areas
over the last few months. And he and I stand in lockstep to try
to get this thing done.
Missourians have had nine Federal disasters since June of
last year. It has been a rough year. It is when it is rough
that I stand in awe of the work ethic and the values of
Missourians. My beloved State has the best that there is when
it comes to communities that join together and do what is
necessary to help one another. This flood was a great example
of communities coming together and helping one another.
We need to get these levees repaired. We are grateful that
none of the Federal levees were breached in this incident. But
I echo Senator Bond's comment that haste is important here in
terms of getting the work done and the repairs done that are
necessary. Obviously, we want to stand in vigilance to make
sure the bureaucratic nightmares that sometimes go with
assistance from the Federal Government are kept at a minimum. I
know Senator Bond and I agree on that.
I will place my statement in the record. I am very grateful
to the very senior Senator from Illinois for giving me a couple
of minutes so that I could weigh in on this very important
issue to the State I love and to the people in that State that
I love even more. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Senator McCaskill follows:]
Statement of Hon. Claire McCaskill, U.S. Senator
from the State of Missouri
Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe, I want to thank
you for holding this hearing. As you are well aware, the entire
Midwest Region has been devastated by recent flooding events.
Missouri alone has had 22 counties, in addition to the city of
St. Louis, declared disaster areas and an excess of 300,000
acres of farm land were flooded, many of which remain under
water and unable to be planted. So having this platform to
express the needs of many Missourians will help send the signal
that Washington is listening.
This past year, Missouri have faced significant hardship.
Except for 3 days in March, Missouri has been under a State of
emergency since December 2007 and has had nine Federal
disasters since June 2007. In fact, in March of this year,
Missouri received another significant flooding event where 72
of our counties and the independent city of St. Louis received
disaster declarations. Just this one event took several lives
and caused millions of dollars of damage across the state. And
then we were hit again by last month's epic flooding.
Madam Chairman, I had the opportunity to view some of the
affected communities both by land and by air. I was escorted by
Col. Lewis Setliff of the St. Louis District of the Army Corps
of Engineers who helped guide me through the damage areas and
provide me details off their extensive flood fighting efforts.
Remarkably, Missourians at the State and local levels came
together to prevent a significant amount of damage yet, the
devastation was still overwhelming. It was like flying over an
ocean right there in Missouri and while it was enough to take
your breath away what was more astonishing was the resilience
and determination of the people I met. Missourians have an
unbelievable ability to overcome when faced with tremendous
challenges, just as we did after 1993, but they won't be able
to do it without the assistance of the Federal Government.
Thankfully, during all of the severe weather Missouri has
had this past year, none of our Federal levees were breached.
This is a good sign that the repairs made along the Mississippi
after 1993 were a wise investment. However, there is still work
to be done. We did have several non-Federal levees breach and
many others, including some Federal levees that are in need of
repair. It's imperative that the Corps act swiftly to make the
necessary repairs so that these communities are protected from
any future weather events.
Finally, Madam Chairman, I would just like to close by
stating that while this recent event has caused significant
damage to thousands of Midwest communities, I am confident that
our local, State and Federal entities will do what is necessary
ensure they are renewed and revitalized.
This concludes my testimony.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much, Senator. We do look
forward to working with everyone on this.
Senator Durbin, welcome.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
Senator Durbin. Thank you very much, Senator Boxer. I also
want to thank Senator Bond and Senator Klobuchar for being part
of this hearing. It is certainly timely.
I can remember the flood of 1993. I was a Congressman and
had a big chunk of our State that was under water. We had
problems on the Mississippi River, problems on the Illinois
River. I spent day after day, weekend after weekend, out
sandbagging and working with local people. They gave us some
consolation as we toiled away to try to save towns and homes
and farms. They said, thank goodness this is a 500-year event.
You have seen it for the last time in your lifetime and you can
tell your grandkids about it.
Well, 15 years later, we had a replay of this 500-year
event, which I think should give us some pause here. It isn't
just the nature and scope of this disaster. It was bad in my
State, much worse in Iowa, I am sure bad in parts of Missouri
and other places, Wisconsin. But the fact is, it isn't just the
change in weather, which I think is part of it, but it is also
the change in the way we live, the way we build, and the way we
develop. I think it has had an impact in terms of runoff in the
water reaching levels unheard of before. That I think has
challenged all of us to look honestly at some of the larger
policy and program decisions made at every level, Federal,
State and local, and to ask are there things, thoughtful things
that we can do that acknowledge what is happening here and try
to avoid it coming again.
I just have to tell you that the unusual thing about this
set of disasters was I can always pinpoint the western part of
my State along the Mississippi River as the most vulnerable
part, and then usually the Illinois River, which feeds into it,
a little bit south of where I live. This time we got hit not
only in that area, but also in the southeastern part of the
State, where the Wabash River and the Embra River breached the
levees and the town of Lawrenceville and surrounding towns
faced a lot more devastation than ever.
And then north in our State, just west of Chicago, in the
Rockford-Machesney Park area, we had additional problems of
flooding. Some of those poor people were in for the third flood
of the year when I went to visit them in their homes. They had
pulled out of their homes and then came another flood and then
it receded, they started reconstruction, remodeling their
homes, putting in new drywall, and then came the third flood of
the year. So something is happening here that I have never seen
before in the time that I have lived in this State and paid
closer attention to it. I hope that we will take a look at
that, too.
As Senator McCaskill said, I have to agree with her, when
Mother Nature brings out here worst, people bring out their
best all across America. I am so proud in Illinois of so many
people who stepped forward, local elected officials, many of
whom don't get paid anything, who worked night and day to try
to save their communities. People who were working for levee
districts, like the Sny, which is a 53-mile long private levee
maintained by farmers just north of St. Louis, Senator Bond.
These men and women were working night and day to save this
levee, which they maintain with their own tax dollars. They are
pretty good at it, incidentally.
And we had volunteers, National Guard showed up as usual, a
great number of State employees. People pitched in. Barack
Obama and I were out there filling sandbags in Quincy,
Illinois, trying to help local volunteers. Businesses that saw
the potential damage, closing down their business and costing
jobs, their workers left the offices, left their computers and
were out filling sandbags. They pitched in because they knew
they had to, and they did it over and over again. Those who
were too young or too old and couldn't pitch in were making
sandwiches and bringing out cold water to the volunteers. It
was a terrific feeling, even though we were facing all this
adversity, that so many people came together.
Let me tell you a quick story, I mentioned Machesney Park
to you. It is a story about a woman named Stacy. The Red Cross
was able to move her disabled mother to a hotel, but Stacy, her
husband and four kids stayed in a car at a campsite because
their home was flooded and they couldn't afford a hotel. She
wasn't alone. Over 500 homes that had been affected in
Machesney Park, a small community in Winnebago County, without
a public works department and without any trucks or other
equipment to help them with cleanup efforts. You think about
what their family has been through, and I met with a lot of
them. They had a smile on their face, but they were going
through some tough times, and a lot of people faced even worse.
A couple of things that I thought we might think about in
the future is first, rail operations. On rivers, it turns out
to be a big deal. That railroad bridge can turn out to be
critically important. There was a problem in 1993 with these
bridges. There was a problem again in 2008. Many times, we
don't have good communications between the emergency disaster
agencies and the railroads. In this one situation, this
railroad bridge was a swing bridge. And they were fearful that
if they swung it open, it would destabilize the bridge and the
waters would overcome it and knock it down. If they closed it,
they were afraid that if the water got up to the bridge, it
would start accumulating debris, holding back the river,
putting more pressure on the levees behind it and they would
fail, devastating tens of thousands of acres.
It was a terrible moral dilemma. Thank goodness, the waters
started to recede and the bridge did not cause that ultimate
problem. But I will just tell you that there were anxious days
there when the local people didn't know where to turn and there
wasn't good communication with the railroads. We can do a lot
better.
I also want to tell you that even though the stories are
behind us, the water is not. There are many areas still
flooded, like Henderson County in my State. We have to worry
about de-watering these counties. Your Committee has such an
important job. I know that you have had fires in your home
State, Senator Boxer, you have talked to me about them. I know
how devastating they are to the people that you represent.
Senator Bond's State of Missouri, Senator Klobuchar's State of
Minnesota, we have all faced these disasters.
I have felt, in the time that I have served in Congress,
this is when we are called on as an American family. One of the
members of our family is having a problem. It may not be in my
back yard, but it is part of my family concern. This Committee,
as much if not more than any other Committee in the Senate, is
going to be asked to step forward. I hope that we will have an
appropriations bill before we leave this year that includes a
substantial commitment to disaster assistance, to give peace of
mind to people in Missouri and Wisconsin and Iowa and Illinois,
Minnesota and all throughout the Midwest, who want to know that
at the end of the day, we are going to be there. We promised
them they would, and we have to keep our word.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I ask that my statement be made
part of the record.
[The prepared statement of Senator Durbin follows:]
Statement of Hon. Richard J. Durbin, U.S. Senator
from the State of Illinois
Before I begin, I want to thank Chairman Boxer and Ranking
Member Inhofe for holding today's hearing and giving me an
opportunity to talk about our experience in Illinois.
As we've just heard from Senator Harkin and Senator
Grassley, Iowa and the rest of the Midwest is still reeling
from weeks of flooding and tornadoes.
damage estimates
We know from the Great Flood that devastated the Midwest in
1993--and, more recently, from Hurricane Katrina and the
California wildfires--that the losses from a natural disaster
can be catastrophic and more than any one community or State
can bear.
In Illinois, we still don't know the full extent of our
losses. Damage assessments are ongoing. Some places, like
Henderson County, are still underwater.
Although we were not as hard hit as our neighbors in Iowa,
very early, very preliminary estimates put the costs of
recovery and rebuilding for Illinois in the millions--maybe
billions--of dollars.
The flooding started in early June even before the banks of
the Mississippi began to overflow, along the Wabash and
Embarras rivers in southeast Illinois. In Lawrenceville, over
10,000 people were without running water for more than a week.
Then, alone the Mississippi, record and near-record water
levels caused levees to break, flooding hundreds of thousands
of acres of farmland and forcing people from their homes in
towns like Keithsburg and Gulfport.
Nearly two thousand homes have been impacted by the
waters--everything from a flooded basement to complete
destruction.
Farmers in my State face at least $1.3 billion in crop
damage and the loss of hundreds of thousands of acres of corn
and soybean.
Floodwaters have also caused damage to roads in the tens of
millions of dollars.
Then there are the losses you can't count in dollars. There
are people like Stacy whose home in Machesney Park was flooded.
The Red Cross was able to move her disabled mother to a hotel
but Stacy, her husband, and her four kids stayed in a car at a
campsite because they couldn't afford a hotel.
Stacy isn't alone. Over 500 homes have been affected in
Machesney Park, a small community in Winnebago County without a
public works department and without trucks or any other
equipment to help with the clean-up efforts.
My heart goes out to everyone affected by the floods,
especially those have watched their homes and livelihoods
disappear under muddy waters.
commending illinoisans
The damage is bad, but it could have been a lot worse had
it not been for the hard work and determination of everyone who
helped us prepare for the floods.
They showed up day after day--Illinois residents,
volunteers, emergency workers, members of the National Guard.
In cities and towns all along the Mississippi, they worked
around the clock to fill sandbags and fortify levees. Even
after the flooding started, they didn't stop working. It's
because of their perseverance that more levees--like Sny
Island's--didn't overtop.
It's not easy to stand your ground in the face of a force
as mighty as the Mississippi, but these folks did just that.
Their resolve and determination showed an amazing spirit at
work.
It's a spirit Senator Obama and I had a chance to see for
ourselves when we helped sandbag in Quincy. I saw it again and
again as I visited communities hit by the floods--from Grafton,
south of Quincy on the Mississippi, to Lerna and Lawrenceville
on the other side of the state, to Machesney Park up north by
Rockford.
No doubt it's a spirit at work today as these river
communities bounce back from the flooding.
As one City Council member said about her hometown of
Grafton: ``Grafton people are resilient people. They're river
people.''
I also want to commend the Illinois departments and
agencies who worked 24/7 to ensure that communities had the
resources to fight the floodwaters. They're still working today
to make sure these communities are equipped with the resources
to recover.
I want to thank FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the
other Federal agencies whose help has been essential to helping
Illinois fight the floodwaters.
When Mother Nature brings her worst, we bring our best.
Thanks to this team effort, even though the flooding may have
been historic in some places along the river in Illinois, it
looks like the damage will not be.
looking forward
This is the second time in 15 years that the Midwest has
been devastated by historic flooding.
The Great Flood of 1993 was one of the costliest natural
disasters to hit the United States. Back then I was a
Congressman in central Illinois, with a big swath of the
Mississippi River in my district, and I saw the devastation
first hand.
More than 50 people died and thousands more were evacuated
from their homes as hundreds of levees along the Mississippi
failed. The economic damage exceeded $15 billion.
Experts told us this was a 500-year flood event. But then
we found ourselves, 15 years later, facing a similar disaster.
It's clear that these 200-and 500-year flood events are
happening more frequently than every 200 or 500 years. It's
also clear that we need to do a better job preparing for them.
Often, weather-related disasters strike with no warning.
But floods are different. We can see them coming. We can use
the lessons of the past to better prepare for the future.
With that in mind, I want to offer a couple of observations
from our experience in Illinois.
The first is the lack of clear direction on rail bridge
operations during a natural disaster. It was a problem in 1993
and a problem in 2008. Both times the railroad companies
refused to listen to the local community's concerns and to lift
a bridge out of the way of oncoming floodwaters. In 1993, their
refusal caused the water pressure to build and a levee to
overtop. This time around, we were fortunate that the water
levels were not high enough to cause a repeat of that
situation.
During a flood event or other natural disaster, who has the
navigation rights over an inland waterway? The answer is
unclear. A second concern is dewatering.
The flooding has receded in many parts of Illinois. But
there are still some places--like parts of Henderson County--
that are underwater. FEMA, the Corps, the Illinois Emergency
Management Agency, and locals have been working together to
drain the standing floodwaters. But it's been weeks since the
rain stopped falling.
There has to be a better way to coordinate among the
Federal, State and local partners to more quickly help
communities hardest hit by the floods get back on their feet.
conclusion
I want to thank Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe
again for this chance to speak about my state's experience. An
important part of the rebuilding and recovery effort is looking
back to see what lessons can be brought to bear now and in the
future. These lessons help us better prepare for and mitigate
the damage from future flood events.
As we move forward to work on the second supplemental, I
hope we keep in mind that disasters don't end with the news
coverage. There are still communities across the Midwest trying
to clean up and get on with their lives. We, the Congress, have
to make sure we give them all the tools they need to do that.
The communities and the people affected should not face this
disaster alone. America, and this Senate, will stand with them.
Senator Boxer. Absolutely. And I just want to thank you.
Yes, Senator.
Senator Bond. I just wanted to make two comments to my
colleague and neighbor from across the river. No. 1, my father
used to be a member of the Sny Drainage District, had a small
farm at Pleasant Hill. So I know those people. They work well.
No. 2, we had the same problem that apparently Machesney
Park had with the town of Plattsburg in 1993. Plattsburg was
flooded out in early June, they were halfway rebuilt, they
flooded out again. I believe that in that instance, the people
of Plattsburg agreed to a buy-out. With the help of the Corps
and the State agencies we moved them out of that flood plain.
It sounds like perhaps more buy-outs will lessen the risk to
people in Machesney Park. I am a supporter of that where the
local officials and citizens agree.
Senator Durbin. I might add, Senator Bond, that in the city
of Valmeyer, across the river from Missouri, Congressman
Costello and I worked, and they literally moved the town,
picked it up and moved it to high ground. One farmer stuck
around, and he had some tough times ahead of him because he
did. But by and large, those who moved felt that they made the
right decision.
And you also know, and I am sure the people from the Corps
of Engineers can back me up, the world of levees changes south
of St. Louis. North of St. Louis it is kind of a private
endeavor and a local endeavor. South of St. Louis, there is
much more Federal participation. I think that reflects the
history of the Congress and the number of southern Senators and
Congressmen who took care of their own long before you and I
arrived here.
Senator Bond. Fortunately, we can still earmark.
[Laughter.]
Senator Boxer. Fortunately, we are still here, for the
moment.
Senator Klobuchar. Senator Durbin, you are free to go. I
don't want to rush you, but I know you don't want to miss
anything.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
Senator Klobuchar. I wanted to express my sympathy to the
States that were hurt even more than Minnesota, and that is
particularly to Senator Grassley and Senator Harkin, to Senator
Durbin and Obama in Illinois, and to Senator McCaskill and
Senator Bond in Missouri and several other States that were
victims of these floods.
In Minnesota, I was listening with great interest to your
story, Senator Durbin, about the one farmer that stayed behind.
Because I went and toured Austin, Minnesota, about a week after
the floods hit. The mayor and sheriff took me around, and the
exact same thing happened. They showed me how they had moved
through a long-term 10-year flood mitigation project, they had
moved about 50 homes. They weren't expensive homes, so it was
fairly easy to do. They had turned this whole area and the
river into a park. It is a beautiful park, with bike paths,
things like that. There was one guy that wouldn't take the buy-
out, wouldn't move. They showed me his house; it was completely
wrecked Because he wouldn't take it.
So they were able to really tell which businesses and
houses needed to move and were able to avert severe damage. It
wasn't just the individual home buyers, which was interesting
to me, they saved the taxpayers tons of money. Because in the
other floods, in Austin, Minnesota, by the way, the home of
Hormel Foods, the home of Spam, in other floods in the past,
the sewer system had backed up. So it had cost taxpayers a lot
of money. This time, that didn't happen at all. We saw great
flood mitigation projects in Winona and in Rochester,
Minnesota, so they also withstood some of the damage.
That is not to say that we didn't experience enormous
damage in this flood. Several of our counties were declared
disaster areas. We had the crop damage, especially with corn,
and some of the farmers tried to replant with soybeans at the
end. But that was difficult. Then finally, we lost the life of
a man who was simply driving down a country road to help out
his daughter and get a sump pump, middle of the night, storm is
raging. He is driving down the road, and suddenly the pavement
just went out from under him. I went to the spot, and it was
like from here to that wall where the road had just broken down
into the culvert behind. His car went down, another car landed
on his car. And that driver, because his car was there first,
actually survived, the one on the top.
But it just again brought home to me, Madam Chair, the
importance of this infrastructure funding, the importance of
thinking ahead with these floods, and using this as an
opportunity for public works projects at a time when our
economy is suffering, that we really have to focus on
infrastructure.
I see our friends who are going to testify, I remember
seeing you in New Orleans as we talked about the levee issues,
that we should see this as a way of saving lives. But we should
also see this as an economic development opportunity for our
Country. Thank you very much.
Senator Boxer. Thank you, Senator.
I know both Senators have to leave. We thank you so much.
Now it is my pleasure to ask Hon. John Paul Woodley, the
Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works, and Brigadier
General Michael Walsh, Commanding General, U.S. Army Engineer
Division, Mississippi Valley, to come forward.
Mr. Woodley, we will give you 7 minutes instead of five, so
that you don't have to rush through your statement. Then if you
need more time, we are happy to give it to you.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN PAUL WOODLEY, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE
ARMY, CIVIL WORKS ACCOMPANIED BY: MAJOR GENERAL DON T. RILEY,
DEPUTY COMMANDING GENERAL, CIVIL AND EMERGENCY OPERATIONS
Mr Woodley. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Distinguished members of the Committee, we very much
appreciate the opportunity to testify before the Committee and
report to you on the June 2008 Midwest floods.
Accompanying me today is Major General Don Riley, who is
Deputy Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations,
and Brigadier General Michael Walsh, Commanding General of the
Mississippi Valley Division. General Walsh will report to you
on the specifics of the recent flood, and I am going to discuss
the current program activities of the Corps addressing the
bigger issue of flood risk management.
I have a complete statement that I would ask for permission
to put into the record.
Senator Boxer. Absolutely, it will be in the record.
Mr Woodley. Responsibility for flood risk management in the
United States is shared among multiple Federal, State and local
government agencies, with a complex set of programs and
authorities. The Corps of Engineers and FEMA have programs to
assist States and communities in reducing flood damages.
However, the authority to determine how land is used in flood
plains and to enforce flood-wise requirements is entirely the
responsibility of State and local governments.
Many reports have offered lessons from prior floods and
recommendations for the future. Common themes have included a
call for improved interagency coordination and emphasis on
public safety and the need for improved flood risk
communication. Many have also called for greater use of flood
plain management measures by local and State government,
including wise land use planning, flood-proof building code
requirements, easements and relocation of flood-prone
structures in conjunction with traditional engineered flood
water management structures.
The Midwest floods of June 2008 have again highlighted the
importance of evaluating and communicating the risks to the
public and decisionmakers associated with levee systems. There
are many questions that need to be answered. How many miles of
levees exist? What is the condition of these levees? Which
entity is responsible for them? What areas are the highest
risk? How should Federal, State and local resources be
prioritized to reduce these risks? And what can be done
together in the interim to reduce risk?
In 2006, the Corps of Engineers began a major effort to
work on answering these questions. Using $30 million of the
Fiscal Year 2006 supplemental appropriation from Congress, the
Corps created its Levee Safety Program to assess the integrity
and viability of levees and recommend actions to ensure that
levee systems do not present unacceptable risk to the public,
property and environment.
Over the last 2 years, the Corps has made great strides
toward a National levee inventory for levees that are active in
the Corps' levee program and a methodology for technical risk
assessments of existing levees. Although great advances have
been made in collecting and assessing information about levee
systems, much remains to be done and detailed information is
still needed about many Federal levees, most non-Federal
Government levees and all private levees.
Also in 2006, the Corps established the National Flood Risk
Management Program to take the first step of bringing together
Federal agencies, State and local governments and private
sector entities with a stake in flood risk management. The
objective is a unified national flood risk management strategy
that eliminates conflicts between programs and takes advantage
of all opportunities for collaboration.
On November 8, 2007, as the Chairman has previously
indicated, the Water Resource Development Act of 2007 became
law. Title IX of this statute, cited as the National Levee
Safety Act of 2007, calls for recommendations for a national
levee safety program in addition to the inventory and
inspection of levees. The Act complements many of the ongoing
activities of the Corps' Levee Safety Program.
The Administration was able to include funding in its
Fiscal Year 2009 budget to begin the work outlined in Section
2032 of WRDA 2007 that would assess the vulnerability of the
United States to flooding. The study will assess the extent to
which existing programs operate, individually and together, and
develop recommendations for improving the effectiveness,
efficiency and accountability of these programs.
In summary, Madam Chair, the responsibility for flood risk
management in the United States is shared between multiple
Federal, State and local government agencies who all must work
together to effectively address these complex issues. While
great strides have been made in the last 2 years with the
leadership of this Committee, we remain to implement many of
the things that have been put in place, and there is much work
that needs to be done. I am delighted to appear before you and
answer any further questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Woodley follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Boxer. Thank you very much, Mr. Woodley.
Brigadier General Walsh, welcome.
STATEMENT OF BRIGADIER GENERAL MICHAEL J. WALSH, COMMANDING
GENERAL, U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DIVISION, MISSISSIPPI VALLEY
General Walsh. Madam Chair and members of the Committee, I
am honored to appear before you today and report on the
response of the Corps of Engineers Mississippi Valley Division
during the Midwest flood event on the Mississippi in June 2008.
My testimony addresses both the response of the extensive
flooding in the Midwest area as well as how we continue to
support and provide assistance to the people of this region in
the recovery efforts from this significant event. The Corps'
first concern is always to ensure the safety of U.S. citizens.
We cannot stress enough that each and every citizen should
maintain situational awareness of current and future flood
events, stay in touch with the latest updates and warnings,
particularly with the changing weather and river conditions as
monitored and forecast by the National Weather Service; have
evacuation plans prepared and implemented and stay away from
flooded areas and moving waters unless involved with the flood
fight effort.
In March of this year, the focus of the Corps' flood
response efforts was centered on the lower Mississippi River
from Arkansas to Tennessee down to the Gulf of Mexico. In June,
our focus shifted to the middle and upper reaches of the
Mississippi and its tributaries, where extensive flooding, in
some locations record-setting flooding, occurred. Many
Mississippi River tributaries, including in the Cedar, Des
Moines and Iowa Rivers, reached record and near-record stages.
The climate conditions early this spring led to continuous
weather systems moving through the middle section of our
Country. These systems resulted in rainfall amounts twice the
normal level for that time of year.
This record rainfall led to rivers and streams not only
being filled to capacity, but in numerous locations causing
over-bank flooding. The magnitude of the Midwest flood event of
2008 adversely impacted and continues to impact areas along the
Mississippi River and its tributaries from Wisconsin and
Minnesota to Arkansas and Tennessee. The Cedar River set new
record stages, reaching 6 feet above the 1999 record stage at
Cedar Falls, Iowa, and reaching 11 feet above previous records
at Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The Iowa River in Iowa City, Iowa,
crested at three feet above the 1993 record stage, flooding
facilities in the University of Iowa campus as well as other
areas in the city.
Record stages were set in over 47 gauge stations on more
than 12 tributary rivers and creeks. The Mississippi River set
new record stages at Keithsburg and Gladstone, Illinois, and
Burlington, Iowa and approached record stages in many areas.
Within the Mississippi Valley Division, specifically in the
Rock Island and St. Louis Districts, a total of 19 non-Federal
levee projects and 6 Federal levee projects, all under the
Public Law 84-99 program, were over-topped along the
Mississippi River and in the Iowa and Turkey River basins.
However, of the 200 levee projects in the 84-99 program in
those two districts, 175 did not over-top.
The locks at the locks and dams from 12 to 25 on the
Mississippi and the Calcasieu River were taken out of
operation, as flood waters over-topped the facilities, closing
navigation to a major reach of the upper Mississippi River. In
response to these historic flood events in the Midwest,
reservoirs were operated in accordance with their established
water control manuals.
In addition, the Corps responded through emergency support
to State and local governments as well as through mission
assignments from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA.
Emergency operations centers responded to a variety of flood-
fighting activities on a continuous basis from our district
offices in St. Paul, Rock Island, St. Louis and Memphis
Districts.
The Corps also provided assistance to State and local
governments through our own authorities, as well as through the
mission assignments from FEMA. These missions included
emergency response, technical assistance for all phases of
debris management, inspection of water and water treatment
systems. We assisted in the assessment of temporary housing
needs and conducted assessments for the provision of temporary
emergency power through the deployment of our 249th Engineer
Battalion and provided support for the power needs of critical
facilities, including the University of Iowa hospital.
Approximately 1.7 million liters of drinking water were
provided to the State of Iowa, as well as critical public
facility assistance and engineering design for repair and
restoration of public schools. At the peak, there were 239
personnel engaged in providing flood-fighting assistance.
Approximately 13 million sand bags, 100 pumps, 3,000 rolls of
polyethylene sheeting were provided to support the local and
State efforts.
I visited many of these impacted areas on several
occasions, and I have had the opportunity to talk to a lot of
people and see the efforts put forth to control the situation.
I also had visited the Sny Island Levee District in Illinois
and watched at least 10 bulldozers continuing to push sand back
up onto the levee to bolster the fight, to meet the predicted
event. This example shows how the citizens of the regions
responded heroically to the difficult challenges in these past
few months.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will coordinate an
interagency levee task force, comprised of Federal, State and
local agencies whose purpose is to conduct a regionally
coordinated assessment of flood risk management systems in the
areas affected by the 2008 flood. The task force will offer an
opportunity for all participating agencies to address a rapid
and effective response to damaged flood systems that will
minimize future risk to life and property while ensuring an
effective inter-agency approach to flood damage mitigation,
including opportunities for non-structural alternatives in a
collaborative manner.
Activities are currently underway to assess damages to
flood damage reduction projects that are actively enrolled in
the Corps' rehabilitation and inspection program, leading to
the subsequent repair of those projects. As accurate rainfall
and river forecasts are vital to the protection of human life,
property and business operations as the 2008 floods,
reemphasized, we will also put together a rainfall and river
forecasting summit with Federal agencies, State and local
government entities and commercial interests and the public.
This is planned for the October timeframe to determine what
went right, what went wrong and what can be improved in the
river forecasting process.
The recent Supplemental Appropriations Act provided $600
million for the Corps to address multiple recent natural
disasters, including the flooding in the Midwest. The Corps
will continue to work with our partners in the Federal, State
and local agencies to repair flood risk management
infrastructure as well as explore other means for reducing the
risks of future flooding.
Again, thank you for allowing me to testify here today,
Madam Chair. This concludes my testimony.
[The prepared statement of General Walsh follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Boxer. Thank you very much.
Mr. Woodley, as you noted in your testimony, most of the
levees that were over-topped were non-Federal levees, levees
built and maintained by individual farmers and property owners,
or local or State governments. The National Levee Safety Act
included in WRDA 2007, which you alluded to, would inventory,
inspect and assess levees that fall within the Federal levee
program. That would cover a significant amount of the Nation's
levees.
However, the program could be expanded to include every
levee in the Country, including levees that failed in the
Midwest flooding. My question is, would the Corps support that,
and what kinds of resources do you believe we would need to
make available to make that program work? Whoever would like to
address that.
Mr Woodley. Senator, I believe we would support a
comprehensive levee assessment, something along the lines of
the dam safety programs that we have underway in cooperation
with State authorities. I think that the investment required
would be very substantial, both Federal and State, although I
think that it would not be very large compared to the losses
that are suffered.
Senator Boxer. Do you agree with that, Brigadier General?
General Walsh. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Boxer. And do you as well?
General Riley. Yes, ma'am, of course. And the bill
authorizes $20 million per year to do that inventory. If I may
just point----
Senator Boxer. But that is not an inventory for everything.
It is just the inventory for----
General Riley. It does authorize an inventory of more than
just the Corps projects.
Senator Boxer. Of every levee in the Country?
General Riley. Yes, ma'am. The bill authorizes us to----
Senator Boxer. OK, hold on 1 second.
I was told not every levee is covered. But the point is, so
you do feel there is enough funding now to do every levee?
Because my understanding is you were just doing those levees
that fall within the Federal levee program. Am I incorrect in
that?
General Riley. Ma'am, the funding available now is only for
what is in the Federal program. If I may refer to the chart
just----
Senator Boxer. Before you get off that, I want to be
specific. So the funding that you have available to you right
now is just for the Federal levees. Did you say it is $20
million?
General Riley. We received, in the 2006 supplemental, $30
million, which began our levee inventory.
Senator Boxer. Good.
General Riley. And in the latest supplemental this year, we
have allocated $10 million of that supplemental to continue the
inventory of the levees in the Federal program.
Senator Boxer. OK, so my question is, how much more would
be needed to get everything assessed, all the levees assessed?
General Riley. I don't have that figure on all of them, but
we will get that to you.
Senator Boxer. Mr. Woodley, I would so appreciate it if you
could get it. Because you have a lot of friends here who want
to see us be more proactive. So if you could get that number to
me, that would be very helpful.
Senator Boxer. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Boxer. Did you want to add something? I cut you
off, Mr. Riley, so go ahead.
General Riley. If I could refer to the chart, which shows
the total number of levees. Across the bottom of this chart are
four general categories. The first category are those that are
built and maintained by the Corps of Engineers. There are about
2,100 miles of those, the majority of which are in the lower
Mississippi Valley.
The second category are those levees that are built by the
Corps and then we turn them over to sponsors to locally operate
and maintain. The third category----
Senator Boxer. And how many of those?
General Riley. That is almost 10,000 miles, 9,650 miles.
The third category are those that are locally built, but we
have enrolled them in our rehabilitation and inspection program
under Public Law 84-99. And those three categories----
Senator Boxer. And how many of those?
General Riley. Those are 2,250 miles. So about 14,000 miles
in the Federal program, some built by us, some not built by us.
Now, the other----
Senator Boxer. And excuse me for interrupting, because you
are educating me. We are talking about here the Midwest or the
whole Country?
General Riley. This is the entire Country.
Senator Boxer. The entire Country.
General Riley. About 14,000 miles of Federal and non-
Federal programs.
Senator Boxer. That is very helpful. I am going to read it
back to you. Twenty-one hundred miles are Corps-maintained,
10,000 miles were approximately turned over to locals, the
Corps built it, and then 2,250 locally built?
General Riley. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Boxer. That is very helpful.
General Riley. And then the last category, the fourth
category, is an unknown number of locally built and maintained.
Senator Boxer. I see. What was the 2,250? I thought that
was locally built.
General Riley. That was locally built and we have enrolled
them into our Federal program.
Senator Boxer. OK.
General Riley. The others are locally built, nobody in the
Country has a handle on those. But your last bill, the WRDA
2007, authorizes us to inventory all those levees in the
Nation. So we are now authorized to do that.
Senator Boxer. OK. So just so I understand, what you are
doing now is you are inventorying all the locally built that
have not been turned over?
General Riley. Ma'am, if I could flip to the next chart.
Senator Boxer. Yes, please.
General Riley. Then I will show you where we stand on our
inventory. Of those 14,000 miles of levees in the Federal
program, by the end of this year we will have completed a
detailed inventory of 9,800 miles of those. So the 14,000 miles
we have in the Federal program, we have identified those, they
are in the data base. We have completed a detailed inventory of
about 9,800, that will be complete by the end of this year.
Those again are the Federal levees.
So we will have to then continue on with the remaining
funding to complete detailed inventory of those Federal levees.
The detail I speak about, these show the features of the levees
that are in the data base, but there are about 200 data fields
that go in that fill in all the data. So it is a detailed
survey.
So once we complete the 14,000 miles in the Federal
program, then we will proceed with all of those other locally
built and maintained that really nobody knows how many are out
there, because there are many, many private levees.
Senator Boxer. I think it is an excellent move. I wanted to
ask, as you build the data base, are you also including in that
the, if the levees are strong, if they are weak, if they are
problematic, or is that another step?
General Riley. That is another step. That will fill in all
the detailed data of the physical characteristics of the
levees. Then we will conduct, in our inspection program, under
Public Law 84-99, and as we are funded, we will conduct a
portfolio risk assessment. So we have routine annual
inspections, we have inspections every 5 years that are
periodic. Then the highest risk levees, we will conduct an even
more detailed study where we will look at even sub-surface
conditions to determine the characteristics and the capability
of those levees to withstand any size flood.
Senator Boxer. Major General, can you tell us a timeframe
here that you are working off of? Because here is the thing.
What I really want to do is start, obviously, as we get the
information, have a list, what are the most endangered levees,
where do we have to work, where does it not pay to fix the
levee, maybe it pays to move folks, maybe it pays to turn it
into a flood plain, all these other things. Because we really,
in this Committee, we want to do kind of an emergency levee
bill to just give you a little more juice as we move forward to
get more funding. We know that the appropriators can do it. But
if we have an overall bill that identifies the priority.
So where are you on the timeframe here?
General Riley. Yes, ma'am, on this, of course, the 9,800
miles, by the end of this year, and the rest of the 14,000
miles we will complete in the next 2 years after that. That is
in the Federal program. Then we will also, in 2 years, begin
risk assessments on those levees to determine which ones are
the greater risk.
Now, at the end of this year, we will have this website
with all this data on it. It will be accessible to the public.
All the data won't be accessible, because we will have to
restrict some of it. But it will be accessible of course to the
Corps, FEMA, and then other Federal, State and local agencies
that work in that program. We will begin next year to make
those priority choices of which ones are at the highest risk.
Senator Boxer. Let me ask you this, and anyone can answer
it. Could we speed up that program if we gave you, if we made
it a Manhattan Project, if we just said, look, at the rate
these storms are coming, we need to move quicker? So is there a
way, if we were to, I am not asking your opinion whether we
should or shouldn't, because that is our decision. But if you
were able to, say, get double the funding, could you double the
time in which this could be done?
General Riley. Ma'am, I think the best way to approach that
is through your WRDA bill you authorized a national levee
safety committee. Our Director of Civil Works is here. He is
the chair of that committee. Mr. Woodley has directed that
committee now be stood up. Your bill requires within 180 days
that they come back to you and Mr. Woodley and then the
Congress with a national strategy. So that has to be done in
less than 6 months from now.
I think that committee, which include representatives from
all over the Nation, external to the Corps, chaired by our
director, will provide you a good analysis of that.
Senator Boxer. Of where we go from there. So Mr. Woodley,
if in 6 months you are ready, you would be able to tell me at
that time whether or not additional funding would be able to
move this process along, is that right?
Mr Woodley. Yes.
Senator Boxer. OK. Well, I look forward to that.
Mr. Woodley, Carl Strock, former Chief of Engineers of the
Army Corps, has testified about the value of wetlands in
helping to prevent and mitigate funding. Chief Van Antwerp
similarly testified to their benefits. In the upper Mississippi
River basin, there has been considerable wetland loss in many
of the affected States. Iowa has lost 89 percent, Illinois 85,
Missouri 87 percent. Do you believe this loss of wetlands may
have helped contribute to these regular devastating floods in
the region? And are there any policies you could support that
could help turn that wetlands loss around?
Mr Woodley. Senator, I am quite confident that loss of
wetlands nationwide has altered hydrologies in ways that make
the severity of floods greater than they otherwise might have
been. Now, when a flood is 11 feet above the historic figure,
it is hard to say that there would not have been a flood in
that location regardless. But this is one of the prime reasons
for our national policy of restoration of the Nation's
wetlands. Of course, our regulatory program seeks to protect
existing wetlands, and we have also embarked on a policy or a
planning process in the Upper Mississippi to engage in a number
of aspects of ecosystem restoration on the Upper Mississippi
and its tributaries that I believe, in, the planning process
and we should be able, or I hope to be able to make a
recommendation to Congress very soon.
Senator Boxer. Good.
Mr Woodley. The other thing that I would mention in this
context is the very strong provisions in the Farm Bill that are
available for farmers to devote parts of their appropriate
land, on a voluntary basis, for wetlands restoration and
preservation.
Senator Boxer. I fought for that one.
Mr Woodley. It is a very important policy.
Senator Boxer. It is. From my own experience, when I first
got involved with the Army Corps, it was so many years ago. In
those years, it was before I even got to the Congress, it was
in local government in the 1970's. The Corps thought, concrete
channel, concrete channel, that was basically the mind set, how
do you get that water fast, we move it out. Then through the
years, I have watched with just great relief as the Corps has
embraced these other kinds of strategies to allow the water to
spread out and go slower and so forth. Certainly, in my
experience in California, those wetlands are just a tremendous
addition to any flood control that we are going to do.
So I look forward to that. I think, again, a lot of the
times, you are put in a difficult position. What we need from
you is just not, you should do this, but if you were to be able
to restore wetlands, it would mean X, it would mean Y. These
are the things we need from you, and then we have to make a
policy choice.
Mr. Woodley, are you aware of the findings in a recent
report released by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, in
cooperation with NOAA, titled Weather and Climate Extremes in a
Changing Climate? This study shows that the last few decades
have brought more heavy summer rainfall, especially to the
central United States. This trend toward heavier precipitation
is caused by global warming primarily, because warmer air can
hold more moisture.
This report projects that the trend toward heavy
precipitation will continue. For example, those big storms in
the Midwest that historically would be seen once every 20 years
could happen once every 5 years by the end of the 21st century.
How is the Army Corps taking into account this latest science
indicating a trend toward heavier rainfall events in the future
and the implications for flood management?
Mr Woodley. Senator, we are examining climate change
aspects within our organization through our Institute of Water
Resources, which is our policy institute that is engaged in
that sort of thing and that follows that very closely. In fact,
it is something that they are very proud of, that organization
that deals with that on an international scale actually won a
Nobel Prize last year. One of the members of the organization
is a staffer at our Institute of Water Resources. I was there
last week, and they have put his Nobel Prize on the wall there.
They are very, very proud of it.
So we are keeping very close tabs on the science of climate
change, and I believe I am going to be seeing a draft white
paper on the engineering aspects of climate change. It is
mainly something that would affect us within our own program in
the projections that we make and the risk assessments that we
make. We are transitioning to consider these aspects as aspects
of risk and we are recognizing the practical impossibility of
absolute protection. I visited Cedar Rapids and the people
there are, I would encourage anyone who wanted to see the human
spirit at its most noble to visit Cedar Rapids and see the way
that people are coping with it.
But the thing that I saw, in the work that I do, I would
say engineering is probably not going to prevent or protect
against a flood that is 11 feet above any experience we have
had before. But we need to express the risks to people, what
are your risks. And the other thing about a levee is that
levees are just human structures, they will be over-topped,
they will fail, they will develop weaknesses, animals will
burrow into them, every kind of thing can happen to a levee. It
is a very fragile structure, and it holds back an enormous
force of nature.
At any rate, that is a long way of saying that we are very
much following the matters that you describe and continuing to
use them in a very dynamic way to inform the recommendations
that we make to Congress.
Senator Boxer. Mr. Woodley, I found that testimony to be
extremely straightforward, and I appreciate it. I am going to
say it back to you and see if I heard you right.
When I asked you, and I think this would be interesting for
Senator Carper, whether or not the Corps was taking into
account global warming in its projections of what they have to
do and what people have to expect, Mr. Woodley basically said,
we can't promise absolute protection, because of the way these
storms are coming. And I think that is an important point for
all of us to hear. Because unless we build, I don't know what,
fortresses around our cities, this is a problem. And this isn't
your job, it is ours. We need to get a handle on this global
warming and we need to do something so that 25 years from now,
with other people sitting here, of course, Tom will still be
here, 25, 30, 40 years from now, and who knows, Mr. Woodley,
you have proven yourself to be, you have been around a while.
So you might be here.
And when somebody says, oh, my God, what can you do? And we
are not going to be able to give them a good answer unless we
today, and it isn't you, it is us, and it is a future
President, takes strong action to make sure that the
temperatures don't go up 3, 4, 5, 6 degrees average
temperatures. Because you are already saying it is getting
problematic. I appreciate that. Because I will tell you, when I
was a kid growing up, we thought, no problem, we can master
this. And you know what? So far, we have. But if we can't get a
handle on global warming and reverse what could happen in the
worst of circumstances, I don't know that levees are going to
matter that much.
But I do have a question for General Walsh. Of the Federal
levees that were over-topped, how many of these levees remain
structurally sound, and how many will need substantial
structural work to once again operate at a functioning level? I
was really glad that they held pretty well. But how many were
over-topped? Do we know?
General Walsh.
[Off microphone.] There were six Federal levees that were
over-topped.
Senator Boxer. Could you make sure you turn on your
microphone?
General Walsh. Madam Chair, there were six Federal levees
that were over-topped in the area. Two of them were rated at a
100 year level of protection, three were at 50 years. We really
need to wait until the flood waters go down some more and
damage survey repair teams will go out. Then we will write up
project information reports, and then fund them and go into the
repair process.
Senator Boxer. Good. So this is interesting. You said two
were 100 year?
General Walsh. Two were rated at a 100 year level of
protection.
Senator Boxer. And those were breached?
General Walsh. And three were 50 year.
Senator Boxer. Wow. And 100 year is the biggest that we aim
for, right? The biggest flood that we try to protect from?
General Walsh. That is where we start, FEMA works their
insurance piece. But there are 500 year levees and even higher.
Senator Boxer. There are 500 year, OK.
General Walsh. Yes, ma'am, and if I may?
Senator Boxer. Please.
General Walsh. For any of those, any system that we take a
look at, we make an assessment based on the risk and will
design a levee based on the reduction of risk in that area. It
may be at any level of protection. And 100 year only refers to
FEMA's protection for the National Flood Insurance Program.
Senator Boxer. Do you work with private insurers ever just
to find out what they are doing in some of these flood-prone
areas? Mr. Woodley, do you ever talk to them about it? Because
we have heard stories that private insurers are not coming in
to some of these areas.
Mr Woodley. Senator, I am not aware of any direct
interaction we have with them on particular cases. I believe
that we have been consulting with the trade groups and
representatives of the industry as a whole in understanding and
getting a better understanding on our own part of risk
management and the tools that they use in their business for
risk management and how to express it. Because that is a
tremendous challenge for us right now.
Senator Boxer. I have one last question, then I am going to
turn the gavel over to Senator Carper to run the rest of the
hearing as he sees fit. This is to Mr. Woodley.
In 1993, devastating floods hit much of the same region
that was hit this year. Following the Midwest flood of 1993,
President Clinton chartered the U.S. Interagency Task Force on
Flood Plain Management, headed by General George Galloway of
the Corps. He wrote the Galloway Report. The report argued that
the responsibility for flood plain management needed to be more
clearly defined among Federal, State, tribal and local
governments. The report also acknowledged the critical
ecological services, such as nutrient and water uptake provided
by wetlands and upland forests. It noted that loss of wetlands
significantly increased runoff, contributing to an area's
susceptibility to flooding.
Are you familiar with this report, and can you tell us the
status of those recommendations, how many were implemented and
how many still remain to be implemented?
Mr Woodley. I certainly am, and I am very familiar with
General Galloway as well, who is, I think, one of the Nation's
premier experts on flood risk policy. We consult with him all
the time. I believe the answer is that many of the
recommendations have been partially implemented, a few have
been fully implemented. I think to the extent they have been
implemented the effects of this year's flooding have been
ameliorated. There are some aspects of the report that we are
still working our way toward as a Nation. And some of them have
not been fully taken to heart.
But I believe that the recommendations of that report
remain valid and that we can see, to the extent that they have
been implemented, that the effects of the subsequent flooding
have been ameliorated.
Senator Boxer. Here is the thing. I haven't read it. But
would you commit to me that the Corps would take a review of
the 1993 task force report to either reaffirm its
recommendations or put forward new ideas? I think a lot of
times, we have a crisis and we write a report. And this one,
here it is. This is the summary. And I am sure there are some
things in there that you would want to do and some things you
wouldn't.
Would you commit to me that you would do a thorough review
of this report and get it to me as to which recommendations you
think still have merit, which ones have been done? I mean, this
is 1993. So if you would make that commitment?
Mr Woodley. Senator, I will do something better than that.
I will task the Levee Safety Committee that the Congress
created in the last WRDA bill to make that their first order of
business.
Senator Boxer. That would be wonderful. I think that is
great. Because it may be that there are six or eight or ten or
five things in there that we just didn't do. And there is
nothing about blame. It is the nature of humanity, we have so
many things on our plate.
But I think if you could do that, I am just thrilled with
that answer, and I really look forward to going over that with
you. When you get that done, please come see me and we will
take a look at it. It may make the job of your task force a
little easier, because maybe half the things that we need to do
are already detailed in that report. That would be good. And we
can move faster.
So with that, let me just say to all of you, I thank you
very much for being here today. We are on the same team on
this. The main thing I need from you is your honest appraisals.
I think I have gotten that today. That is all I can ask you
for. Then the rest is up to us. So if you just give us your
opinion and then we will make the policy decisions, that is all
I ask. I do hope and pray that we don't have to have a lot of
these hearings after the fact.
But I am a realist, like you are, Mr. Woodley, and we are
in this difficult moment, for whatever reason. The main thing
we need to do is prevent as much as we can, much of this from
happening. Then when something does happen, respond quickly and
do the mitigation after the fact. And whatever that mitigation
is, we have to be honest. And you were very honest today and I
really appreciate that.
So I will turn the gavel over to my dear friend, such a
great member of this Committee, Senator Carper.
Senator Carper.
[Presiding] Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for your
leadership and thank you for turning that gavel over to me. We
will be finished here in about 3 hours.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. It may feel like 3 hours, but it won't be
long at all.
First of all, it is good to see you all. Thank you for
coming and thank you for your stewardship and for your
leadership on issues that are important to us, whether they are
happening on the west coast, in California, where I used to
live, before I moved to Delaware on the east coast, to find my
fame and fortune. Well, actually, my fame, not my fortune.
Every now and then, I run into people who say, well, I live
in an area where it is described as a 100 year flood zone or
maybe a 500 year flood zone. And people say, well, particularly
in one place in northern Delaware where we had literally twice
in about a 5-year period of time 100 year floods, and so
probably after the first time it happened, people said, well,
we are good for another 100 years. It turned out we weren't.
But sometimes the term 100 year flood or 500 year flood is
misleading. I have seen it with my own eyes and heard with my
own ears how misleading that can be.
But telling people that they have a 1 percent chance, that
would be like a 100 year flood situation, or a 0.2 percent
chance of flooding, which would relate to a 500 year flood,
telling them that those are their chances of being flooded in a
year can also be misleading. Let me just ask how you think we
can maybe better communicate to Americans living in high risk
areas the flood risks that they do face?
Mr Woodley. Senator, you have put your finger right on the
biggest communication issue and difficulty we have in this
whole arena. And we are, as we speak, creating a new vocabulary
for communication of risk. And it is----
Senator Carper. Can you tell us a little bit about it?
Mr Woodley. Actually, I think General Riley probably could
describe it in more understandable terms than I can. It is not
ready to be released, and it is something that we are wrestling
with within the Federal family and also with the State
agencies. There are two major groups that embody the State
actors on this, NAFSMA, which is the National Association of
Flood and Storm Management Agencies, and the Association of
State Flood Plain Managers. They are actively working with us
on this. And NOAA needs to be involved in it. But I am going to
ask General Riley to describe the way we are going to be trying
to communicate these risks in the future.
Senator Carper. Good, thanks, if you would do that, General
Riley, that would be great.
General Riley. Yes, sir. Then we might even hear more
specifics by General Walsh on how well New Orleans has accepted
it. But probably our first example was in New Orleans. Also, we
had some dams at risk at Wolf Creek and Center Hill,
California, as well. Those were in Tennessee, and then in
California. We have used the same sort of methodology. We found
that in New Orleans in particular it took a great deal of
modeling and sophistication, but we articulated the risks
through inundation maps. You are able to now go onto Google,
type in your address, go right to your home, and it says, if
you live there, you have a risk every year of being flooded to
this depth, two, three, four feet, or no feet if you are on a
little bit higher ground.
We have found that to be the most effective way to convince
people. That is the risk every year from all storms, including
rainfall, not just hurricanes.
So we tried to get away from the terminology of percent,
although it is difficult to get away from that, so we still use
that. But we say, you can expect this depth every year from any
type of storm to a certain percent, whether it be the 1 percent
chance every year. Then we compared that 1 percent chance to
some other event in their life that they can compare that to.
Senator Carper. Such as what?
General Riley. Well, such as the risk of crossing the
street or the risk of flying, is probably an easier one,
because they have those statistics available. So the
comparative risk methodology is quite a body of knowledge. We
are not all experts on it, but as Senator Boxer asked earlier
about the insurance, we have partnered with the auto insurance
agencies to help us be able to articulate risk, because they do
that very, very well, and for a living.
Senator Carper. Good, thanks. You guys are ahead of the
curve on that one.
I have one more issue I want to touch on. I serve on a
couple other committees, some of which are meeting right now.
One of those committees is the Banking Committee. Before I was
Governor, I served on the House Banking Committee. About 20
years ago, we worked on an effort to overhaul our Nation's
flood insurance, which needed to be overhauled then, and
frankly, still needs it today. One of the things that I found
is that a lot of people want levees built to protect them and
their family, their homes, their businesses, to protect them
from floods and to protect them from having to buy flood
insurance. Let me just ask, how is the latter issue handled by
the Corps? How is that issue handled by the Corps?
Mr Woodley. Senator, we work very closely with FEMA on
defining and setting the parameters necessary for them to
operate their program. But their program actually does not
directly influence our decisionmaking on formulating projects.
That is, our methodology in formulating new projects is
determined by the value of the property that is expected to be
protected and the amount of value then of benefit to the Nation
from protecting it depends on the risk that it is under or the
amount to which we are reducing its risk of being destroyed,
then compare that against the cost of creating the engineering
structure and, or the cost of the whole project with the non-
structural and structural elements. Then you do the cost
benefit analysis, and if you get a benefit from that, then we
could recommend that a project be built.
And that may have the additional benefit of freeing the
residents of the area from the necessity of purchasing flood
insurance. If it does, I think that is a separate benefit, not
a direct benefit from the project. That is not why we build the
project, that is a benefit. It may be why the people who live
there want the project to be built even more than their concern
about inundation. But within our program, it is not used as a
factor.
Senator Carper. Does anyone want to add to that? General
Riley?
General Riley. Yes, sir, thank you, if I might. FEMA and
the Corps work closely together; we have worked with many
communities together. If I could just refer to this chart on my
right as to how one State, has taken the work that FEMA and we
have done with all of the State and flood plain managers around
the Nation.
In this case, it is California, and I asked permission to
use their chart. This was our sort of depiction, our concept of
buying down risk, all the different methods you can use to
lower the risk of living in a flood plain, where you begin with
an initial risk and you take steps. It is a shared
responsibility, so everybody participates. It would be building
codes, zoning, outreach, evacuation planning, insurance, and
levees. Then you still end up with some residual risk. That is
what has been missing in the past, when people thought if they
had a levee, they were protected.
What California did, they took this, they came back to us,
here is what we are doing to buy down risk. And they put
several hundreds of millions of dollars behind this effort in
the State of California, especially, and this is in the central
valley in this particular case, where they start with the most
critical levee repairs, they go through some Federal projects,
but then they get into State projects as well. They go down
through building codes, insurance restrictions of building in
the flood plain. After 2015, if they are not making adequate
progress in protection, then they won't allow development.
After 2025, there will be no development in a 200-year flood
plain.
So they have taken all those steps. This is about a 35 page
briefing. I picked one slide out of it. But they go into great
detail how they show that everybody, from State, local and
private, insurance, bankers, developers, investors, all
participate in lowering the flood risk. At the end of it, there
is still a residual risk and that gets back to the education
question you asked earlier.
Senator Carper. Good, thank you. What is the old saying, a
picture is worth a thousand words. That is a pretty good
picture. Thanks for sharing that with us.
Just a followup to my earlier question on flood insurance.
What should the Corps' role be in ensuring that the flood
insurance program is solvent and that people living in high
risk areas have flood insurance? The answer may be, well, we
have no responsibility, but there may be some responsibility.
We found on the heels of Katrina that a 20 year old flood
insurance or 35 year old flood insurance program was all of a
sudden underwater to the tune of about $20 billion. The flood
insurance program statutorily may draw on the Treasury, they
have a line of credit to the Treasury. Over the years, it has
been sort of off and on in terms of being solvent. But after
Katrina, it was $20 billion underwater. But what role, if any,
do you think is appropriate for the Corps with respect to
trying to make sure that the program is solvent going forward?
Mr Woodley. Senator, I don't think we participate in the
management of the program to the extent of assuring its
solvency. But I think that the way we manage, or the way we
formulate projects, has changed in that we now are looking,
when we formulate a project, we are looking at more non-
structural measures. Those can include the buy-out of flood-
prone areas and returning those areas to a natural flood plain
State. We have done that in many, many cases as part of a
mixture of different measures, whereas at some point in the
past, we might have advocated a purely engineering solution of
protecting all areas, to the maximum extent possible.
Now, we will ask the question, is it really better that
some part of this community be relocated and the place that
they had previously settled be returned to a flood plain State.
If you look at places like Grand Forks in North Dakota, where
we have actually implemented that, and some projects in
California and others in parts of the Midwest. Obviously, once
that happens, all those formerly at-risk structures are no
longer in the flood insurance program and the additional
structures that would be in the flood program would, we hope,
have a lower level of risk, increasing that solvency of the
program to that degree.
Senator Carper. Thank you. There is a community in northern
Delaware which I mentioned earlier that went through, over a
span of about a half dozen years, two 100 year floods. The
decision was finally made that, maybe we don't want to look for
that third time for lightning to strike. The community people
were assisted and helped to relocate from there. The area has
been pretty much returned to its natural State.
OK. In closing, anything that either of the three of you
would like to say, reiterate, say again, repeat, emphasize? Or
just or not. General Walsh, you are welcome to chime in here as
well, if there is anything you want to add.
General Riley. Sir, if I may, to add to the last question,
I co-chair an intergovernmental committee with the director of
FEMA's flood mitigation program. We meet quarterly, and we meet
with all of the representatives of the flood and storm managers
around the Nation, the State and local storm managers. So we
work that together to get consistency of FEMA and Corps policy
and the application of those.
Senator Carper. Good.
General Riley. We get the State and local feedback at the
same time.
Second, on the flood insurance program, a major purpose of
that is flood risk education. So we work closely with FEMA to
educate people on their actual flood risk, and then of course,
FEMA deals with the insurance component of that.
Senator Carper. Good, thank you. Thanks for that
clarification.
Secretary Woodley.
Mr Woodley. Senator, the only thing that I wanted to make
sure we had indicated on the record in this hearing is that we
had discussed in the supplemental appropriation, there was some
approximately $600 million in emergency funding for the Corps,
of which about half was directed to the Midwest. I would like
to have it in the record very clearly that is a preliminary
amount intended as a, well, certainly more than a placeholder,
but at the time that the supplemental was prepared, we had by
no means, and we even now today have not conducted the kinds of
assessments and engineering work and cost estimates necessary
to determine the final amount.
So I think it is clearly indicated in our submissions, but
I wanted to make it clear on the record of this hearing, that
the amounts in the supplemental are very likely to be increased
later as a result of the detailed assessments of our
facilities, and of the damaged levees that are currently
underway in the Mississippi Valley Division.
Senator Carper. All right, thank you. General Walsh, do you
want to add a closing word before I give the benediction?
[Laughter.]
General Walsh. Yes, thank you, Senator. I just wanted to
mention that when I visited Quincy, Illinois and Hannibal,
Missouri, Cedar Rapids, Waterloo, Iowa, Des Moines, Iowa----
Senator Carper. When were you at those places?
General Walsh. During the flood fights. I was very proud of
our American people in working the flood fights. Certainly in
Quincy, when the mayor asked for some volunteers to fill sand
bags, 5,000 folks showed up working day and night filling sand
bags. Thirteen million sandbags is what we distributed and
filled, not just at Quincy but at other places as well.
At Hannibal, again, volunteers just working day and night,
putting together reception centers and just watching small
government and the prideful American people to go after these
floods, it was very moving to me.
I talked to Governor Culver and the Governor of Illinois
and Missouri and told them I was very proud of their people and
how they were responding to these floods. Just let us figure
out how to do it, and we will ask you when we need help. I
think we have been able to respond to that so far.
Senator Carper. That is inspiring to hear that account.
Thank you.
Let me just close by saying, on behalf of not just the
people who live in the communities that you have just
mentioned, but from west coast to east coast, and particularly
the folks in Delaware, DelMarVa Peninsula, whom I am privileged
to represent, we have a wonderful history of working with the
folks who run your operation in the greater Delaware area,
which includes a suburb of Wilmington, Philadelphia. That is a
little humor there. But you had some just terrific leadership,
on the military side and on the civilian side. We very much
treasure, I think that is probably not too strong a word,
treasure the relationship we have and the terrific cooperation
that we get and support that we receive from the Army Corps. So
thank you very, very much.
With that having been said, I am going to reach over here
and grab Chairman Boxer's gavel and we will conclude this
hearing. Thank you so much.
[Whereupon, at 11:07 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]
Statement of Hon. James M. Inhofe, U.S. Senator
from the State of Oklahoma
Thank you, Chairman Boxer. I'd like to welcome our
colleagues who are here today to give us their observations on
the impacts of the flooding and what their communities might
now need. Also welcome to Secretary Woodley and General Walsh,
who will provide us with specific details on the emergency
preparedness and response activities of the Corps of Engineers
and whether their efforts were at all hampered by existing
authorities, as well as the impacts of the flooding across all
Corps mission areas.
The Corps of Engineers can play a critical role during
excessive rain events. Last year, my home State of Oklahoma
experienced record-breaking floods, but the Corps was right
there to help lessen the impacts. The Tulsa District did an
excellent job of, in particular, managing water levels at the
reservoirs in order to prevent hundreds of millions of dollars
in additional damages. Unfortunately, these floods caused a
fair amount of damage at our recreation areas, leading to
reduced services this year. Heavy rains again this year in the
region have had impacts for the navigation industry as well.
The flooded region today's hearing is focused on is facing
a similarly broad range of water resources issues. It is not
simply a question of whether the levees performed as intended
and if so, whether we need more or larger levees or if not, why
not. The questions we need to discuss involve how to balance
all the needs and benefits of the Mississippi River and its
tributaries.
These waterways are used for navigation, recreation,
hydropower, fish and wildlife habitat and other water resources
needs. Sometimes these uses seem to be in conflict with one
another. It is our job as policymakers to provide the technical
experts at the Corps of Engineers with enough guidance and the
proper tools to promote the national interest in the use of the
waterways. Today we get a chance to hear a status update on
this particular flooding incident, as well as any
recommendations for future improvements.
[all]