    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                          PROPOSALS FOR A WATER RESOURCES
                              DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2022

    =======================================================================

                                    (117-38)

                                REMOTE HEARINGS

                                   BEFORE THE

                                SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                        WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT

                                     OF THE

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                       TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2022
                           TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2022
                           WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 2022

                                   ----------

                           Printed for the use of the
                 Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

              Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
         transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
                                 transportation

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                  __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    50-336                        WASHINGTON : 2023

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                 COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

                        PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
    ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,               SAM GRAVES, Missouri
      District of Columbia               DON YOUNG, Alaska
    EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas         ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
    RICK LARSEN, Washington                  Arkansas
    GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California      BOB GIBBS, Ohio
    STEVE COHEN, Tennessee               DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida
    ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey              THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky
    JOHN GARAMENDI, California           SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania
    HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,      RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
        Georgia                          JOHN KATKO, New York
    ANDRE CARSON, Indiana                BRIAN BABIN, Texas
    DINA TITUS, Nevada                   GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana
    SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York       DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
    JARED HUFFMAN, California            MIKE BOST, Illinois
    JULIA BROWNLEY, California           RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas
    FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida         DOUG LaMALFA, California
    DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey     BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas
    ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California        BRIAN J. MAST, Florida
    MARK DeSAULNIER, California          MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin
    STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts      BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
    SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON,
    ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland             Puerto Rico
    TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey           TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
    GREG STANTON, Arizona                PETE STAUBER, Minnesota
    COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas               TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee
    SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair   DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
    JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois   JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey
    ANTONIO DELGADO, New York            MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
    CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire          TROY E. NEHLS, Texas
    CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania             NANCY MACE, South Carolina
    SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts          NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York
    JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts      BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas
    CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia           CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida
    KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii              MICHELLE STEEL, California
    MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
    NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
    MARIE NEWMAN, Illinois
    TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
                Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment

                     GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California, Chair
    JARED HUFFMAN, California            DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
    EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas         DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida
    JOHN GARAMENDI, California           JOHN KATKO, New York
    ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California        BRIAN BABIN, Texas
    TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey           GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana
    ANTONIO DELGADO, New York            MIKE BOST, Illinois
    CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire          RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas
    CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia,          DOUG LaMALFA, California
      Vice Chair                         BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas
    FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida         BRIAN J. MAST, Florida
    SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON,
    GREG STANTON, Arizona                  Puerto Rico
    ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,               NANCY MACE, South Carolina
      District of Columbia               SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio)
    STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
    PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon (Ex
        Officio)
                                    CONTENTS

                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on Wednesday, January 12, 2022, ``Proposals for a
      Water Resources Development Act of 2022: Administration
      Priorities''...................................................     1

    Summary of Subject Matter........................................     2

                     STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

    Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of California, and Chair, Subcommittee on Water Resources
      and Environment, opening statement.............................     7
        Prepared statement...........................................     8
    Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      North Carolina, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water
      Resources and Environment, opening statement...................     9
        Prepared statement...........................................    10
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, opening statement..............................    11
        Prepared statement...........................................    12
    Hon. Jefferson Van Drew, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of New Jersey, prepared statement submitted for the
      record by Hon. David Rouzer....................................    67
    Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, prepared statement.............................    69

                                   WITNESSES

    Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
      Works, Department of the Army, oral statement..................    13
        Prepared statement...........................................    15
    Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and
      Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, oral
      statement......................................................    17
        Prepared statement...........................................    19

                           SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Submissions for the Record by Hon. Brian J. Mast:
        Letter of June 2, 2021, from Jaime A. Pinkham, Acting
          Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department
          of the Army................................................    43
        Letter of August 18, 2021, from Radhika Fox, Assistant
          Administrator, Office of Water, Environmental Protection
          Agency.....................................................    44
    Prepared Statement of the National Association of Flood and
      Stormwater Management Agencies, Submitted for the Record by
      Hon. Sam Graves of Missouri....................................    70

                                    APPENDIX

    Questions to both Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of
      the Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army, and
      Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and
      Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, from:
        Hon. David Rouzer............................................    75
        Hon. Brian Babin.............................................    76
        Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon................................    76
        Hon. Frederica S. Wilson.....................................    77
        Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana..............................    78
        Hon. David Rouzer on behalf of Hon. Michelle Steel...........    80
    Questions to Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of the
      Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army, from:
        Hon. David Rouzer............................................    81
        Hon. David Rouzer on behalf of Hon. Jefferson Van Drew.......    83
        Hon. John Garamendi..........................................    83
        Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana..............................    83
        Hon. Michael Guest...........................................    85
    Questions to Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of
      Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
      from:
        Hon. John Garamendi..........................................    85
        Hon. Jared Huffman...........................................    86
        Hon. Michael Guest...........................................    87
        Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana..............................    87
        Hon. David Rouzer on behalf of Hon. Tim Burchett.............    88

                                  ----------

    Hearing held on Tuesday, February 8, 2022, ``Proposals for a
      Water Resources Development Act of 2022: Stakeholder
      Priorities''...................................................    89

    Summary of Subject Matter........................................    90

                     STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

    Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of California, and Chair, Subcommittee on Water Resources
      and Environment, opening statement.............................    95
        Prepared statement...........................................    97
    Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      North Carolina, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water
      Resources and Environment, opening statement...................    98
        Prepared statement...........................................   101
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, opening statement..............................   102
        Prepared statement...........................................   102
    Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, prepared statement.............................   181

                                   WITNESSES

    Hon. Wade Crowfoot, Secretary, California Natural Resources
      Agency, oral statement.........................................   114
        Prepared statement...........................................   116
    Hon. Peter Yucupicio, Chairman, Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona,
      oral statement.................................................   118
        Prepared statement...........................................   120
    Hon. Michel Bechtel, Mayor, Morgan's Point, Texas, and Board
      President, Gulf Coast Protection District, oral statement......   123
        Prepared statement...........................................   125
    Hon. Darrell G. Seki, Sr., Chairman, Red Lake Band of Chippewa
      Indians, Minnesota, oral statement.............................   127
        Prepared statement...........................................   128
    Mario Cordero, Executive Director, Port of Long Beach,
      California, and Chairman, Board of Directors, American
      Association of Port Authorities, oral statement................   132
        Prepared statement...........................................   134
    Jim Middaugh, Executive Director, Multnomah County Drainage
      District, Portland, Oregon, oral statement.....................   137
        Prepared statement...........................................   139
    Julie Hill-Gabriel, Vice President for Water Conservation and
      Acting Vice President for Coastal Conservation, National
      Audubon Society, oral statement................................   141
        Prepared statement...........................................   142

                           SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Letter of November 29, 2021, from Farmers and Agricultural
      Businesses Supporting the Preservation of the Integrity of the
      Columbia-Snake River System, Submitted for the Record by Hon.
      David Rouzer...................................................    99
    Submissions for the Record by Hon. Grace F. Napolitano:
        Letter of February 7, 2022, from Chad Lord, Senior Director,
          Environment and Climate Policy, National Parks Conservation
          Association................................................   104
        Statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers.........   106
        Statement of Eileen Shader, Director, River Restoration,
          American Rivers............................................   110
        Post-Hearing Supplement From Witness Hon. Darrell G. Seki,
          Sr. to His Remarks to Hon. Dusty Johnson, Hon. Jared
          Huffman, and Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, and to His Prepared
          Statement..................................................   182
    Letter of February 8, 2022, from the American Chemistry Council
      et al., Submitted for the Record by Hon. Brian Babin...........   157
    Statement of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Submitted for the
      Record by Hon. Dusty Johnson of South Dakota...................   167

                                    APPENDIX

    Question from Hon. John Katko to Hon. Wade Crowfoot, Secretary,
      California Natural Resources Agency............................   185
    Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Hon. Michel Bechtel,
      Mayor, Morgan's Point, Texas, and Board President, Gulf Coast
      Protection District............................................   185
    Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Mario Cordero,
      Executive Director, Port of Long Beach, California, and
      Chairman, Board of Directors, American Association of Port
      Authorities....................................................   187
    Questions to Julie Hill-Gabriel, Vice President for Water
      Conservation and Acting Vice President for Coastal
      Conservation, National Audubon Society, from:
        Hon. Steve Cohen.............................................   187
        Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson...................................   188

                                  ----------

    Hearing held on Wednesday, March 16, 2022, ``Proposals for a
      Water Resources Development Act of 2022: Members' Day Hearing''   191

    Summary of Subject Matter........................................   192

                     STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

    Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of California, and Chair, Subcommittee on Water Resources
      and Environment, opening statement.............................   193
        Prepared statement...........................................   193
    Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      North Carolina, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water
      Resources and Environment, opening statement...................   194
        Prepared statement...........................................   194
    Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, opening statement..............................   195
        Prepared statement...........................................   196
    Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
      Infrastructure, prepared statement.............................   289
    Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Texas, prepared statement.............................   300

                                MEMBER TESTIMONY

    Hon. Lizzie Fletcher, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Texas, oral statement.......................................   197
        Prepared statement...........................................   199
    Hon. Robert J. Wittman, a Representative in Congress from the
      Commonwealth of Virginia, oral statement.......................   200
        Prepared statement...........................................   202
    Hon. Sylvia R. Garcia, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Texas, oral statement.................................   203
        Prepared statement...........................................   204
    Hon. Katie Porter, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      California, oral statement.....................................   205
        Prepared statement...........................................   206
    Hon. Rashida Tlaib, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Michigan, oral statement....................................   208
        Prepared statement...........................................   209
    Hon. Rick W. Allen, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Georgia, oral statement.....................................   210
        Prepared statement...........................................   211
    Hon. Darren Soto, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Florida, oral statement........................................   212
        Prepared statement...........................................   213
    Hon. Brian Higgins, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of New York, oral statement....................................   214
        Prepared statement...........................................   215
    Hon. Josh Gottheimer, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of New Jersey, oral statement..................................   216
        Prepared statement...........................................   218
    Hon. Jim Costa, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      California, oral statement.....................................   219
        Prepared statement...........................................   221
    Hon. Mary E. Miller, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Illinois, oral statement....................................   222
        Prepared statement...........................................   223
    Hon. Darrell Issa, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      California, oral statement.....................................   223
        Prepared statement...........................................   225
    Hon. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Representative in Congress from
      the State of Florida, oral statement...........................   225
        Prepared statement...........................................   227
    Hon. Dan Newhouse, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Washington, oral statement.....................................   228
        Prepared statement...........................................   230
    Hon. Kurt Schrader, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Oregon, oral statement......................................   236
        Prepared statement...........................................   237
    Hon. Paul Tonko, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      New York, oral statement.......................................   238
        Prepared statement...........................................   239
    Hon. Earl L. ``Buddy'' Carter, a Representative in Congress from
      the State of Georgia, oral statement...........................   241
        Prepared statement...........................................   242
    Hon. Kim Schrier, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Washington, oral statement \\..........................   244
    Hon. Lori Trahan, a Representative in Congress from the
      Commonwealth of Massachusetts, oral statement..................   245
        Prepared statement...........................................   246
    Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of Delaware, oral statement..............................   247
        Prepared statement...........................................   249
    Hon. Grace Meng, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      New York, oral statement.......................................   250
        Prepared statement...........................................   251
    Hon. Frank J. Mrvan, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Indiana, oral statement.....................................   252
        Prepared statement...........................................   253
    Hon. Bill Foster, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Illinois, oral statement.......................................   254
        Prepared statement...........................................   255

    ----------
    \\ Hon. Kim Schrier did not submit a prepared statement.
    Hon. Tracey Mann, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Kansas, oral statement.........................................   256
        Prepared statement...........................................   257
    Hon. Sanford D. Bishop, Jr., a Representative in Congress from
      the State of Georgia, oral statement...........................   258
        Prepared statement...........................................   259
    Hon. Earl Blumenauer, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Oregon, oral statement......................................   260
        Prepared statement...........................................   262
    Hon. Elaine G. Luria, a Representative in Congress from the
      Commonwealth of Virginia, oral statement.......................   263
        Prepared statement...........................................   265
    Hon. Pete Sessions, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Texas, oral statement.......................................   266
        Prepared statement...........................................   267
    Hon. Melanie A. Stansbury, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of New Mexico, oral statement............................   269
        Prepared statement...........................................   270
    Hon. David J. Trone, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of Maryland, oral statement....................................   273
        Prepared statement...........................................   274
    Hon. J. Luis Correa, a Representative in Congress from the State
      of California, oral statement..................................   275
        Prepared statement...........................................   276
    Hon. Susie Lee, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Nevada, oral statement.........................................   276
        Prepared statement...........................................   277
    Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett, a Delegate in Congress from the Virgin
      Islands, oral statement........................................   278
        Prepared statement...........................................   279
    Hon. David G. Valadao, a Representative in Congress from the
      State of California, oral statement............................   281
        Prepared statement...........................................   283
    Hon. Ed Case, a Representative in Congress from the State of
      Hawaii, oral statement.........................................   284
        Prepared statement...........................................   285

                           SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Letter of March 8, 2022, from Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member,
      Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure et al. to Hon.
      Michael S. Regan, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection
      Agency, and Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of the
      Army for Civil Works, U.S. Department of the Army, Submitted
      for the Record by Hon. Dan Newhouse............................   231
    Letter of March 16, 2022, from Hon. Pete Sessions to Hon. Grace
      F. Napolitano, Chair, and Hon. David Rouzer, Ranking Member,
      Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, Submitted for
      the Record by Hon. Pete Sessions...............................   268
    Letter of March 7, 2022, from Hon. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a
      Representative in Congress from the State of New York, to
      Colonel Matthew W. Luzzatto, Commander and District Engineer,
      U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Submitted for the Record by Hon.
      Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.......................................   305
    Prepared statements from the following Members of Congress:
        Hon. Pete Aguilar, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of California........................................   289
        Hon. Nanette Diaz Barragan, a Representative in Congress from
          the State of California....................................   290
        Hon. Kathy Castor, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Florida...........................................   291
        Hon. Diana DeGette, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Colorado..........................................   293
        Hon. Rosa L. DeLauro, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Connecticut.......................................   294
        Hon. Suzan K. DelBene, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Washington........................................   296
        Hon. Veronica Escobar, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Texas.............................................   296
        Hon. Russ Fulcher, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Idaho.............................................   297
        Hon. Andrew R. Garbarino, a Representative in Congress from
          the State of New York......................................   298
        Hon. Raul M. Grijalva, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Arizona...........................................   298
        Hon. Josh Harder, a Representative in Congress from the State
          of California..............................................   299
        Hon. Mondaire Jones, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of New York..........................................   300
        Hon. Marcy Kaptur, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Ohio..............................................   301
        Hon. Brenda L. Lawrence, a Representative in Congress from
          the State of Michigan......................................   302
        Hon. Doris O. Matsui, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of California........................................   303
        Hon. James P. McGovern, a Representative in Congress from the
          Commonwealth of Massachusetts..............................   303
        Hon. Tom O'Halleran, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Arizona...........................................   307
        Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in Congress
          from the State of Washington...............................   308
        Hon. Harold Rogers, a Representative in Congress from the
          Commonwealth of Kentucky...................................   310
        Hon. Bobby L. Rush, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Illinois..........................................   311
        Hon. Bradley Scott Schneider, a Representative in Congress
          from the State of Illinois.................................   312
        Hon. Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, a Representative in Congress
          from the Commonwealth of Virginia..........................   312
        Hon. Mikie Sherrill, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of New Jersey........................................   313
        Hon. Nydia M. Velazquez, a Representative in Congress from
          the State of New York......................................   314

    PROPOSALS FOR A WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2022: ADMINISTRATION
                                   PRIORITIES

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 12, 2022

                      House of Representatives,
       Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
                Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m. in room
    2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon. Grace F.
    Napolitano (Chair of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Members present in person: Mr. Rouzer, Dr. Babin, Mr.
    Graves of Louisiana, Mr. Bost, Mr. Westerman, Mr. Mast, and Mr.
    Guest.
        Members present remotely: Mrs. Napolitano, Mr. DeFazio, Mr.
    Huffman, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Lowenthal,
    Mr. Malinowski, Mr. Delgado, Ms. Bourdeaux, Ms. Wilson of
    Florida, Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Stanton, Ms. Norton, Mr. Cohen, Mr.
    Katko, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. LaMalfa, and Miss Gonzalez-
    Colon.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                January 7, 2022
        SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

        TO:       Members, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
        FROM:   Staff, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
        RE:       Subcommittee Hearing on ``Proposals for a Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022: Administration Priorities''
    _______________________________________________________________________

                                    PURPOSE
        The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment will meet on
    Wednesday, January 12, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. in 2167 Rayburn House Office
    Building and by video conferencing via Zoom to receive testimony from
    the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) on the administration's
    priorities for a new water resources development act (or WRDA) for
    2022. This hearing is also intended to provide Members with an
    opportunity to review the 2021 Report to Congress on Future Water
    Resources Development and several reports of the Chief of Engineers on
    individual water resources projects that have been submitted to
    Congress for authorization.\1\ These reports and administration
    priorities will inform the committee in its development of a new WRDA,
    which the committee expects to develop and approve in 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development
    was authorized by section 7001 of the Water Resources Reform and
    Development Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-121). This Report, as well as the
    pending Reports of the Chief of Engineers (hereinafter Chief's Reports)
    are publicly available at https://transportation.house.gov/water-
    resources-development-act-of-2022/reports.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   BACKGROUND
        The Corps is the federal government's largest water resources
    development and management agency. The Corps began its water resources
    program in 1824 when Congress, for the first time, appropriated funds
    for improving river navigation. Since then, the Corps' primary missions
    have expanded to address river and coastal navigation, reduction of
    flood damage risks along rivers, lakes, and the coastlines, and
    environmental restoration and protection.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://www.swl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Planning/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Along with these missions, the Corps provides water supply and
    storage opportunities to cities, agriculture and industry, aids in the
    production of hydropower, assists in national emergencies, and manages
    a recreation program. Today, the Corps is comprised of 38 district
    offices within eight divisions; operates more than 700 dams; has
    constructed 14,600 miles of levees; and maintains more than 1,000
    coastal, Great Lakes, and inland harbors, as well as 12,000 miles of
    inland waterways.\3\ To achieve its civil works mission, the Corps
    plans, designs, and constructs water resources development projects,
    typically in partnership with, and using the financial support of, non-
    federal interests (project sponsors). The Corps planning process seeks
    to balance economic development and environmental considerations as it
    addresses national, regional, and local water resources challenges.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Congressional Research Service (CRS), U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers Civil Works: Primer and Resources. (2021). https://
    crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11810.
        \4\ Congressional Research Service (CRS), Army Corps of Engineers:
    Water Resource Authorization and Project Delivery Processes (2019).
    https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45185.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    INITIATING A WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

        The first step in a Corps project is to study the
    feasibility of the project. This can be done in two ways. One,
    if the Corps has previously conducted a study in the area of
    the proposed project, the new study can be authorized by a
    resolution of either the House Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure or the Senate Committee on Environment and
    Public Works (pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 542). Two, if the area has
    not been previously studied by the Corps, then an act of
    Congress is necessary to authorize the study--usually through a
    WRDA bill.
        Typically, the Corps enters into a cost-sharing agreement
    with a non-federal project sponsor to initiate the feasibility
    study process. The cost of a feasibility study is usually split
    evenly between the federal government (subject to
    appropriations) and the non-federal project sponsor.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Section 118 of WRDA 2020 authorized a pilot program for the
    formulation of certain flood risk management and coastal storm risk
    management project studies in rural and economically disadvantaged
    communities at Federal expense. Funding to carry out this authority was
    included in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 117-
    58).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Since February 2012, the Corps' feasibility studies have
    been guided by the ``3x3x3 rule,'' which states that
    feasibility reports should, generally, be produced in no more
    than three years; with a cost not more than $3 million; and
    involve all three levels of Corps review--district, division,
    and headquarters--throughout the study process.\6\ \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/library/MemosandLetters/
    USACE_CW_Feasibility
    StudyProgramExecutionDelivery.pdf.
        \7\ The 3x3x3 process was codified in section 1001 of the Water
    Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        During the feasibility study phase, the Corps' district
    office prepares a draft study report containing a detailed
    analysis on the economic costs and benefits of carrying out the
    project and identifies any associated environmental, social, or
    cultural impacts. The feasibility study typically describes
    with reasonable certainty the economic, social, and
    environmental benefits and detriments of each project
    alternatives being considered, and identifies the engineering
    features, public acceptability, and the purposes, scope, and
    scale of each. The feasibility study also includes an analysis
    of any associated environmental effects of the project and a
    proposed mitigation plan. It also contains the views of other
    federal and non-federal agencies on project alternatives, a
    description of non-structural alternatives to the recommended
    plans, and a description of the anticipated federal and non-
    federal participation in the project. In addition, pursuant to
    section 116(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2020
    (WRDA 2020; 33 U.S.C. 2282 note), each feasibility study for a
    flood risk management or hurricane and storm damage reduction
    project is required to include a summary of any natural or
    nature-based feature alternative evaluated for the project that
    describes the long-term costs and benefits of the alternative
    and whether such alternative was utilized in the final
    recommended project.\8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ Division AA of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021
    (P.L. 116-260).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        After a full feasibility study is completed, the results
    and recommendations of the study are submitted to Congress in
    the form of a Report of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Chief
    of Engineers (more commonly referred to as a Chief's
    Report).\9\ If the results and recommendations on the proposed
    project are favorable, then the subsequent step is
    congressional authorization for construction of the project,
    which is typically performed in a WRDA bill.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ See https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/library.cfm.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    UTILIZING THE SECTION 7001 ANNUAL REPORT

        The Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014
    established an additional mechanism for Corps projects and
    studies to be communicated to Congress for potential
    authorization.\10\ Section 7001 of this legislation requires
    the Secretary of the Army to annually publish a notice in the
    Federal Register soliciting proposals from non-federal project
    sponsors for new project authorizations, new feasibility
    studies, and modifications to existing Corps projects. Further,
    it requires the Secretary to submit to Congress and make
    publicly available a Report to Congress on Future Water
    Resources Development (7001 Report) of those activities that
    are related to the missions of the Corps and require specific
    authorization by law. The 7001 Report includes information
    about each proposal, such as benefits, the non-federal project
    sponsors, and cost share information.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-
    121)
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    GUIDING THE CORPS

        The Corps is subject to all relevant federal statutes,
    including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
    Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Fish and
    Wildlife Coordination Act, and prior authorization bills for
    the Corps (e.g., previous WRDAs, flood control acts, and rivers
    and harbors acts). These laws and associated regulations and
    guidance provide the legal basis for the Corps planning
    process.
        For instance, when carrying out a feasibility study, NEPA
    requires the Corps to include: an identification of significant
    environmental resources likely to be impacted by the proposed
    project; an assessment of the project impacts; a full
    disclosure of the likely impacts; and a consideration of the
    full range of alternatives, including a ``No Action
    Alternative.'' \11\ Importantly, NEPA also requires a 30- to
    45-day public review of any final document produced by the
    Corps.\12\ Additionally, when carrying out a feasibility study,
    section 401 the Clean Water Act requires an evaluation of the
    potential impacts of the proposed project or action and
    requires a letter from a state agency certifying the proposed
    project or action complies with state water quality standards.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-V
        \12\ See id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        When formulating and evaluating water resources development
    project alternatives, the Corps utilizes the Economic and
    Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related
    Land Resources Implementation Studies, developed in 1983, more
    commonly known as the Principles and Guidelines (or P&G).
    However, in response to stakeholder concern about the Corps'
    over-reliance on national economic benefits as a required
    decision metric, in WRDA 2007, Congress established a new,
    national policy ``that all water resources projects should
    reflect national priorities, encourage economic development,
    and protect the environment by--(1) seeking to maximize
    sustainable economic development; (2) seeking to avoid the
    unwise use of floodplains and flood-prone areas and minimizing
    adverse impacts and vulnerabilities in any case in which a
    floodplain or flood-prone area must be used; and (3) protecting
    and restoring the functions of natural systems and mitigating
    any unavoidable damage to natural systems.'' \13\ Section 2031
    of WRDA 2007 directed the Corps to update the P&G in accordance
    with this policy.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ Pub. L. 110-114, Section 2031; see also Policy Directive--
    Comprehensive Documentation of Benefits in Decision Document, dated
    January 5, 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In 2013, the Obama administration established a framework
    to revise the P&G in accordance with the requirements of WRDA
    2007.\14\ This revised framework, now called the updated
    Principles, Requirements and Guidelines for Water and Land
    Related Resources Implementation Studies (or PR&G), is intended
    to ensure proper and consistent planning by all federal
    agencies engaged in water resources development projects and
    related activities, and ensure such projects maximize
    sustainable development, protect and restore the functions of
    natural systems, and affordably address the needs of
    economically disadvantaged communities.\15\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ceq/
    initiatives/PandG
        \15\ https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/
    guidance.cfm?Id=269&Option=Principles%20and
    %20Guidelines
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Corps has yet to formally adopt implementation guidance
    for the PR&G, as required by WRDA 2007. Accordingly, section
    110 of WRDA 2020 directed the Corps to issue final agency
    procedures for implementation of the PR&G and required the
    Corps to review and, as necessary, update the PR&G every five
    years.
        In addition, the Corps has issued two memorandums (January
    5, 2021 and March 6, 2021) that direct the Corps to examine
    potential benefits beyond the national economic development
    benefits for future Corps projects, including regional and
    societal benefits.\16\ These policy memorandums direct the
    Corps to include in the final array of alternatives an option
    that maximizes all project benefits, an option for flood risk
    reduction projects that utilizes a non-structural approach, and
    a locally-preferred plan, if requested by the non-federal
    project sponsor.\17\ However, any additional costs for
    implementing a locally-preferred plan are traditionally picked
    up by the non-federal project sponsor.\18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ See Policy Directive--Comprehensive Documentation of Benefits
    in Decision Document, dated January 5, 2021; and Director of Civil
    Works Memorandum--Comprehensive Documentation of Benefits in Decision
    Documents, dated March 6, 2021.
        \17\ See id.
        \18\ See e.g., section 1036 of WRRDA 2014; 33 U.S.C. 701b-15.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OUTLOOK FOR A WRDA 2022

    ANNUAL 7001 REPORTS:

        In recent years, the committee has utilized the 7001 Report
    as a guide to describe studies, projects, and modifications
    supported by non-federal project sponsors for inclusion in the
    development of a new WRDA bill. The 7001 Report for calendar
    year 2021 was submitted to Congress in November 2021, and the
    7001 Report for calendar year 2022 is expected in February
    2022. A list of all existing 7001 Reports is available at
    https://transportation.house.gov/water-resources-development-
    act-of-2022/reports.

    PENDING CHIEF'S REPORTS:

        Since enactment of WRDA 2020, the committee has received 14
    additional Chief's Reports for potential projects in:
    Fairfield/New Haven, Connecticut (coastal storm risk
    management); Elim, Alaska (navigation); Prado Basin, San
    Bernardino, Riverside and Orange Counties, California
    (ecosystem restoration); Lower Cache Creek, Yolo County,
    California (flood risk management); Portland, Oregon (flood
    risk management); Coastal Texas (coastal storm risk
    management); San Juan, Puerto Rico (coastal storm risk
    management); Monroe County, Florida (coastal storm risk
    management); Okaloosa County, Florida (coastal storm risk
    management); Selma, Alabama (flood risk management); Port of
    Long Beach, Los Angeles County, California (navigation); Folly
    Beach, South Carolina (coastal storm risk management); Pinellas
    County, Florida (coastal storm risk management); and Valley
    Creek, Bessemer and Birmingham, Alabama (flood risk
    management).\19\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ See id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PENDING DIRECTOR'S REPORTS:

        Director's Reports, also known as Post-Authorization Change
    Reports (PACR), document necessary changes to previously
    authorized water resources development projects, such as a
    change in project purpose or a significant change in the total
    cost of the project. Since enactment of WRDA 2020, the
    committee has received one PACR for the Washington, DC, Flood
    Risk Management project.\20\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ See id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ADDITIONAL CORPS AUTHORITIES:

        Congress has granted the Corps programmatic authorities--
    Continuing Authorities Programs (CAPs)--that enable the Corps
    to undertake small-scale projects with limited scope and cost
    without requiring project-specific congressional authorization.
    These projects are usually still cost-shared with a non-federal
    project sponsor. There are currently 9 CAP categories:
    streambank erosion and shoreline protection (section 14 of the
    Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r)); beach erosion
    control (section 3 of the Act of August 13, 1946; (33 U.S.C.
    426g)); navigation improvement (section 107 of the River and
    Harbor Act of 1960; (33 U.S.C. 577)); mitigation of shore
    damage by federal navigation projects (section 111 of the River
    and Harbor Act of 1968; 33 U.S.C. 426i)); regional sediment
    management/beneficial use of dredged material (section 204 of
    WRDA 1992; (33 U.S.C. 2326)); flood control (section 205 of the
    Flood Control Act of 1948; (33 U.S.C. 701s)); aquatic ecosystem
    restoration (section 206 of WRDA 1996; (33 U.S.C. 2330));
    removal of obstructions and clearing channels for flood control
    (section 2 of the Act of August 28, 1937; (33 U.S.C. 701g));
    and project modifications for improvement of the environment
    (section 1135 of the WRDA 1986; (33 U.S.C. 2309a)).
        Congress has also provided authority for the Corps to
    assist with the planning, design, and construction of drinking
    water and wastewater projects in specified areas, known broadly
    as Environmental Infrastructure (EI) assistance. EI authorities
    are typically developed either on a project-by-project basis
    (see section 219 of WRDA 1992) or on a programmatic basis for
    specified geographic regions. The EI programs support publicly
    owned and operated facilities, such as distribution and
    collection works, stormwater collection and recycled water
    distribution, and surface water protection and development
    projects.
        The Corps is also authorized to engage in technical
    assistance for certain activities, such as flood risk
    mitigation and watershed studies. Corps district offices
    partner with state, tribal, and local governments to provide or
    coordinate technical assistance or expertise through many of
    its programs. The primary Corps technical assistance programs
    include: Flood Plain Management Services (section 206 of the
    Flood Control Act of 1960; also referred to as Silver Jackets)
    and Planning Assistance to States (Section 22 of WRDA 1974).
    Section 111 of WRDA 2020 directed the Secretary of the Army to
    prioritize the provision of technical assistance to support
    flood risk resiliency planning efforts of economically
    disadvantaged communities or communities subject to repetitive
    flooding.

                                  WITNESS LIST

         LThe Honorable Michael L. Connor, Assistant
    Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army
         LLieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of
    Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
        Mrs. Napolitano. Good morning to everybody, welcome, and
    have a happy, healthy new year, everybody. I now call this
    meeting to order, and today's hearing is a very important one,
    serving as the kickoff to a new Water Resources Development Act
    for 2022.
        The Army Corps of Engineers carries out critical work
    across the country, and much of that work relies on consistent
    authorization from us, in Congress. This subcommittee has come
    together on a bipartisan basis for the last four Congresses to
    pass a new WRDA bill, and with this hearing, we initiate that
    tradition again.
        Let me begin by asking unanimous consent that the chair be
    authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's
    hearing.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        I ask unanimous consent that Members not on the
    subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at
    today's hearing and ask questions.
        And without objection, so ordered.
        As a reminder, please keep your microphones muted unless
    speaking. Should I hear any inadvertent background noise, I
    will request that the Member please mute their microphone.
        And finally, to insert a document into the record, please
    have your staff email it to DocumentsT&I@mail.house.gov.
        I am very pleased that our first hearing of the year is on
    the development of further legislation to benefit our Nation's
    economy, its environment, and the well-being of communities in
    every one of our congressional districts. Today, we begin the
    development of a new Water Resources Development Act for 2022,
    also known as WRDA.
        I am pleased we will start by hearing from the Biden
    administration and the Chief of the Army Corps of Engineers.
        The committee, on a bipartisan basis, has now completed
    work on four consecutive WRDAs since 2014. A proud
    accomplishment. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Today's hearing marks the beginning of our work on the
    fifth consecutive WRDA. This committee has been successful in
    enacting a WRDA every 2 years because our Members recognize how
    critical the Corps' work is to meeting the unique water
    resource needs of our communities.
        Through biennial enactment of WRDA legislation, this
    committee has met local, regional, and national needs through
    authorization of new Corps' projects, studies, and policies
    that benefit every corner of the Nation. However, all of the
    projects and studies authorized in WRDAs need appropriated
    funds for the communities to realize the full navigation, flood
    control, and environmental benefits these projects provide.
        Last year, Congress approved, and the President signed into
    law, the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
    This critical legislation provides $17.1 billion to the Corps
    to address the backlog of vital construction and operation, as
    well as maintenance, activities on projects throughout the
    Nation.
        Additionally, the Jobs Act follows the Biden
    administration's fiscal year 2022 budget request, which I
    remind my colleagues, was the largest single budget request for
    the Corps in its history. I am pleased that the Biden
    administration recommended sufficient funds to complete a dam
    safety project at Whittier Narrows in my district, and I trust
    and hope that the Corps will keep that in mind as it develops a
    spend plan for the funds from the Jobs Act.
        The combined funding from the Jobs Act and the annual
    appropriations and emergency supplemental bills is historic by
    any definition. This funding will allow for a game-changing,
    once-in-a-generation investment in our critical water resources
    infrastructure. This critical funding will enable the Corps to
    carry out authorized projects across the country, which will
    finally help communities to address local flooding needs, will
    ensure sustainable and predictable water supply needs for arid
    regions, and help to restore our Nation's environmental
    treasures.
        In addition, we have all seen the effect that COVID-19 has
    had on our economy and supply chains. These investments will
    advance projects, especially dredging, in our coastal ports and
    inland waterways that are so very critical to our economy.
    These projects will make it easier for American businesses to
    export their goods around the world and fuel our economy for
    the future.
        I am very pleased to have the top leadership of the Army
    Corps of Engineers before this committee today. Both Assistant
    Secretary Connor and Lieutenant General Spellmon bring years of
    experience and knowledge in managing the Nation's water
    resources needs.
        I welcome both of you here today and look forward to
    hearing from you on the priorities we should consider for the
    next WRDA, plans you have for the historic funding included in
    the Jobs Act, and updates on implementing policies from
    previous WRDAs, including one that I authored to review adding
    water supply to your core mission areas.
        The committee also thanks you for transmitting the annual
    ``Report to Congress on Future Water Resources Development for
    2021,'' or the 7001 Report, to us this past November. These
    statutorily required reports help us as we seek to authorize
    studies and projects in WRDAs. I hope that you will both commit
    today that the 2022 report will be submitted to Congress on
    time at the beginning of February of this year. That is just
    around the corner.
        And as I stated earlier, this is our first hearing on WRDA
    2022, and I plan to hear additional perspectives in the weeks
    and months to follow.
        I strongly encourage every Member and their staff to work
    with their local Corps district to learn about projects in
    their communities. I am fully committed to considering our
    track record and completing another bipartisan WRDA, and I
    value and appreciate the cooperation of the ranking member and
    your staff.
        Now, I am pleased to yield to the ranking member of the
    subcommittee, Mr. Rouzer, for any statement he may have.
        [Mrs. Napolitano's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in
    Congress from the State of California, and Chair, Subcommittee on Water
                           Resources and Environment
        I am pleased that our first hearing of the year is on the
    development of further legislation to benefit our nation's economy, its
    environment, and the well-being of communities in every one of our
    congressional districts.
        Today, we will begin the development of a new Water Resources
    Development Act for 2022, also known as WRDA, and I am pleased we will
    start with hearing from the Biden administration and the Chief of the
    Army Corps of Engineers.
        This committee, on a bipartisan basis, has now completed work on
    four consecutive WRDAs since 2014. Today's hearing marks the beginning
    of our work on the fifth WRDA in a row.
        This committee has been successful in enacting a WRDA every two
    years because our members recognize how critical the Corps' work is to
    meeting the unique water resource needs of our communities.
        Through biennial enactment of WRDA legislation, this committee has
    addressed local, regional, and national needs through authorization of
    new Corps projects, studies, and policies that benefit every corner of
    the nation.
        However, all of the projects and studies authorized in WRDAs need
    appropriated funds for communities to realize the full navigation,
    flood control, and environmental benefits these projects provide.
        Last year, the Congress approved, and the president signed into
    law, the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. This
    critical legislation provides $17.1 billion to the Corps to address the
    backlog of vital construction and operation and maintenance activities
    on projects throughout the nation.
        Additionally, the Jobs Act follows the Biden administration's
    Fiscal Year 2022 budget request--which I remind my colleagues, was the
    largest single budget request for the Corps in its history.
        I was pleased that the Biden administration recommended sufficient
    funds to complete a dam safety project at Whittier Narrows in my
    district and I trust and hope that Corps will keep that in mind as it
    develops a spend plan for funds from the Jobs Act.
        The combined funding from Jobs Act and annual appropriations and
    emergency supplemental bills is historic by any definition. This
    funding will allow for a game-changing, once-in-a-generation investment
    in our critical water resources infrastructure.
        This critical funding will enable the Corps to carry out authorized
    projects across the country, which will finally help communities to
    address local flooding needs, will ensure sustainable and predicable
    water supply needs for arid regions, and will help to restore our
    nation's environmental treasures.
        In addition, we have all seen the impact that COVID-19 has had on
    our economy and supply chains. These investments will advance projects,
    especially dredging, in our coastal ports and inland waterways that are
    so critical to our economy. These projects will make it easier for
    American businesses to export their goods around the world and fuel our
    economy for the future.
        I am very pleased to have the top leadership for the Army Corps of
    Engineers before the committee today. Both Assistant Secretary Connor
    and Lieutenant General Spellmon bring years of experience and knowledge
    in managing the nation's water resources needs.
        I welcome you here today and look forward to hearing from you on
    priorities we should consider for the next WRDA, plans you have for the
    historic funding included in the Jobs Act, and updates on implementing
    policies from previous WRDAs, including one that I authored to review
    adding water supply to your core mission areas.
        The committee also thanks you for transmitting the annual Report to
    Congress on Future Water Resources Development for 2021 or 7001 report
    this past November. These statutorily required reports help us as we
    seek to authorize studies and projects in WRDAs. I hope that you will
    both commit today that the 2022 Report will be submitted to Congress on
    time at the beginning of February of this year.
        As I said earlier, this is our first hearing on WRDA '22 and our
    subcommittee plans to hear additional perspectives in the weeks and
    months to come. I strongly encourage every member and their staff to
    work with their local Corps district to learn about projects in their
    communities.
        I am fully committed to continuing our track record and completing
    another bipartisan WRDA and I value and appreciate the cooperation of
    the Ranking Member and your staff.
        At this time, I am pleased to yield to my colleague, the Ranking
    Member of our subcommittee, Mr. Rouzer, for any thoughts he may have.

        Mr. Rouzer. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate you
    holding this hearing today. And I would also like to thank our
    witnesses for being with us, although remotely, and
    understandably so.
        Today's hearing marks the public kickoff phase of the House
    of Representatives drafting of a Water Resources Development
    Act for 2022. This is one of the most important pieces of
    legislation, I think we can all agree, that we do here, on the
    Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
        Every day, people across our country read stories and hear
    news reports about how Washington is broken. However, the WRDA
    process is something that works and one of the reasons why I
    look forward to this new year.
        These have not only been consistent, but also bipartisan.
    In fact, since 2014, Congress, as the chairman said, has passed
    a WRDA bill every 2 years. The WRDA 2020 passed the House by
    voice vote.
        And one thing we hear frequently from those who depend on
    these bills is how thankful that they are that we work together
    in a bipartisan manner, and do so through regular order.
        I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides
    of the aisle here on this committee, subcommittee, and the full
    House, to keep this institutional tradition intact. Throughout
    this process, we will hear from folks all around the country,
    representing a wide variety of interests. However, it makes
    sense to hear first from those who actually direct and do the
    work: the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Office
    of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works.
        There are several ways that the Corps and the Assistant
    Secretary help Congress develop a water resources bill. Perhaps
    most notable among them are the individual Chief's Reports for
    projects and the annual 7001 Report, named after the section of
    WRRDA 2014 that required an annual project list be provided to
    Congress that represents non-Federal entity input into the
    Corps' process.
        I look forward to hearing from the Assistant Secretary and
    the Chief of Engineers on these reports, and I also look
    forward to discussing best moves forward with the 2022 WRDA.
        [Mr. Rouzer's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress
     from the State of North Carolina, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
                        Water Resources and Environment
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano. I appreciate you holding this hearing,
    and I would also like to thank our witnesses for testifying today.
    Today's hearing marks the public kick-off phase of the House of
    Representatives' portion of the drafting of a Water Resources
    Development Act (WRDA) for 2022. This is one of the most important
    pieces of legislation that we do here at the Transportation and
    Infrastructure Committee.
        Every day, people across our country read stories and hear news
    about how Washington is broken. However, the WRDA process is something
    that works and one of the reasons why I look forward to this year.
    Since 2014, Congress has passed a WRDA bill every two years. These have
    not only been consistent but also bipartisan. In fact, WRDA 2020 passed
    the House by voice vote.
        One thing we hear frequently from those who depend on these bills
    is how thankful they are that we work together in a bipartisan manner
    and do so going through regular order. I look forward to working with
    my colleagues on both sides of the aisle here on the Committee and the
    full House to keep this institutional tradition intact.
        Throughout this process, we will hear from people all over the
    country representing a wide variety of interests. However, it makes
    sense to hear first from those who actually direct and do the work: the
    United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Office of the Assistant
    Secretary of the Army for Civil Works.
        There are several ways that the Corps and the Assistant Secretary
    help Congress develop a water resources bill. Perhaps most notable
    among them are the individual ``chiefs reports'' for projects and the
    annual 7001 report, named after the section of WRRDA 2014 that required
    an annual project list to be provided to Congress that represents non-
    federal entity input into the Corps process. I look forward to hearing
    from the Assistant Secretary and the Chief of Engineers on these
    reports and to discuss best moves forward with the 2022 WRDA.

        Mr. Rouzer. Again, thank you to our witnesses, and I yield
    back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Rouzer. At this time, I am
    pleased to recognize and note the chair of the full committee,
    Mr. DeFazio, for any thoughts he may have.
        Mr. DeFazio. Thanks, Madam Chair. As has been stated
    earlier, it was former Chairman Bill Shuster who started the
    tradition and the commitment to doing a Water Resources
    Development Act every 2 years, beginning in 2014. We continued
    that tradition last year, and I fully intend that we will
    continue again this year.
        Last year, as was noted, it did pass the House by voice
    vote. Actually, I believe it passed the House twice. And we
    negotiated with the committee of jurisdiction in the Senate.
    But even then, the Senate couldn't take up a bill that passed
    the House unanimously, and we had to do it in the year-end
    omnibus budget deal. Hopefully, this year, the Senate will be
    able to partner and work with us on the bill so that we can
    better develop the policy and the projects as we move forward.
        The last WRDA had 48 Chief's Reports. That was, as far as I
    know, more than any other time previously. That was more than
    in 2016 and 2018 combined, which shows that the Corps certainly
    has the capability to address the needs of the Nation, to
    design projects to meet our needs and restore some of our water
    infrastructure, some of which dates to the 1800s, and some of
    that is very critical infrastructure.
        The Corps has been really pathetically underfunded for
    decades. The backlog of critical infrastructure projects has
    grown and grown to tens of billions of dollars. We have allowed
    for too long our infrastructure--critical infrastructure--to
    degrade, whether we are talking about the inland waterways, the
    ports, the harbors, flood protection, or other issues. We get a
    C-minus from the American Society of Civil Engineers. We can do
    better than that.
        And there is a lot of promise now. The $17.1 billion in the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, $11 billion dedicated
    specifically to project construction. This will help reduce the
    backlog at our ports and reduce the price of goods. It will
    provide enhanced protection for our communities from flood and
    storm risks, and put the Nation on a path for sustainable
    infrastructure for future generations.
        The Corps only has a couple more days to finalize where
    those Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funds will be spent. And I
    am hopeful to hear more about that today. We will be following
    very carefully the focus, the implementation of this law, and
    the policy changes that were dictated in the last few WRDA
    bills.
        In 1996--things take a little while around here sometimes,
    sometimes way too long--I started working with Bud Shuster--
    that is Bill's dad--on the creation of a Harbor Maintenance
    Trust Fund to use the dollars, the tax dollars that have been
    dedicated since the Reagan era, to our port infrastructure,
    which had been sequestered in the Treasury, so that they could
    be used for illusory deficit offset, or spent elsewhere, even
    though the balance did accrue to the Treasury. Nearly $10
    billion. And we finally got that done last year, in WRDA 2020.
    Certainly, as the pandemic showed how overburdened and
    inadequate our ports are in this international economy, it
    couldn't have been more timely.
        I want that we will continue to better support the Corps in
    its expertise, make them accessible and available to any
    community who needs it, even those with unique challenges,
    economic disadvantages, those under severe threat from climate
    impacts or pollution, as we heard from Mr. Garamendi before the
    committee met, or other issues that have been raised in Florida
    and elsewhere.
        We need to build back better in a way that is resilient,
    that we are innovative, we can meet future challenges, and we
    don't leave any parts of the country behind, including rural,
    Tribal, and disadvantaged communities.
        Madam Chair, thank you for your leadership. And I want to
    thank Assistant Secretary Connor and General Spellmon for
    joining us today, and I look forward to the dialogue as we move
    forward with this hearing. Thank you, I yield back.
        [Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
          Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Since 2014, this committee has been successful in enacting four
    consecutive, bipartisan WRDA bills, and today, we take our first step
    in continuing that tradition in the 117th Congress.
        In 2014, former Chairman Bill Shuster made a commitment to enacting
    a new water resources bill every two years. That tradition has
    continued, unabated, since that time, and biennial consideration of
    WRDA legislation is now the regular order of this committee.
        Enacting WRDAs each Congress provides a predictable timeline for
    non-federal project sponsors and the Corps alike as projects move
    through the study and construction phases. Most importantly, the
    timeline works. It allows for Congress' timely consideration of the
    Corps' important water infrastructure projects that provide benefits to
    communities across the nation.
        In the last WRDA, we authorized 46 Chief's Reports. That's 46
    projects ready for construction. That's more projects than were
    authorized in '16 and '18 combined, showing that if this committee can
    do our part as authorizers, the Corps can do their job in studying,
    planning, and designing projects to address the country's urgent needs
    in water infrastructure.
        The other side of that coin, as always, is providing funding to
    complete the work that Congress has authorized. The Corps has been
    laughably underfunded for decades, leading to a $100 billion backlog of
    projects that would provide enumerable benefits in flood risk
    reduction, ecosystem restoration, water supply, and navigation.
        For too long, we have allowed our infrastructure to age and
    degrade, and have failed to modernize our systems to address current
    water resources challenges. If we have any hope of getting our water
    infrastructure above the current C-minus average grade provided by the
    American Society of Civil Engineers, we need to accurately value the
    essential work of the Corps to our economy, to our way of life, and to
    our environment.
        Fortunately, Congress has responded by taking one large step in
    addressing the project backlog. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
    provided over $17 billion dollars to the Corps, of which $11 billion is
    to be allocated specifically to project construction. This historic
    investment will have immediate and tangible benefits that will be felt
    by every American--reducing the prices of the goods and services we
    use, increasing the protection of our communities from flood and storm
    risks, and ensuring a safe and healthy environment for generations to
    come.
        In that respect, this hearing with Assistant Secretary Connor and
    Lieutenant General Spellmon is quite timely--statutorily, the Corps
    only has a couple more days to finalize where those Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law funds will be spent.
        I know everyone on this committee has been closely tracking that
    information as well as many of the other provisions that were passed
    within the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. I hope there are some updates
    you both can provide to the committee today.
        Careful and expedient implementation of the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Law will be a focus of the committee this year, as well
    as implementation of the policy changes included in the last few WRDA
    bills.
        For the past four Congresses, I have been working with members on
    both sides of the aisle to finally unlock federal investment for our
    nation's ports and harbors. In WRDA 2020, we were able to finally make
    headway in that direction, so I will certainly be closely following
    implementation of those changes to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
        In many ways, my 20-plus year effort to unlock critical harbor
    maintenance funds could not have happened at a better time,
    particularly when the global pandemic showed the vulnerability of our
    overburdened ports.
        We must be investing more in our nation's ports and harbors in
    order to keep America competitive in the global economy. Maintaining
    our inland waterways and coastal ports is a critical part of holding a
    competitive edge.
        Additionally, I hope to see this committee continue its work in
    ensuring the Corps' expertise is available and accessible to any
    community who needs it. That includes those with unique challenges,
    economic disadvantages, and those under severe threat from climate
    change impacts.
        As we work to upgrade the country's water infrastructure, we truly
    need to Build Back Better, and make sure that we are keeping an eye
    towards resiliency, innovative solutions, and future challenges. Our
    rural, Tribal, and disadvantaged communities cannot be left behind as
    we work to build and upgrade our water resources to meet the demands of
    the 21st century.
        Madam Chair, I again thank you for your leadership on this
    important legislation, and I look forward to working with you, Ranking
    Member Graves, and Ranking Member Rouzer to continue our bipartisan
    tradition of enacting a Water Resources Development Act every two
    years.
        I want to thank Assistant Secretary Connor and General Spellmon for
    joining us today. I look forward to an engaging dialogue with you and
    my colleagues on all of the critical work the Corps is currently doing,
    and how we can best partner with you in our formulation of a new WRDA
    bill.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, for your kind
    words, and very well put. Thank you very much.
        Now we will proceed to hear from our witnesses that are
    testifying today. I ask the witnesses to please, if you have
    your cameras on, leave them on for the duration of the panel.
    Thank you for being here and participating.
        On today's panel, we have the Honorable Michael L. Connor,
    Assistant Secretary Army of the Army for Civil Works and
    Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and
    Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
        Without objection, your prepared statements will be entered
    into the record. And our two witnesses are asked to limit their
    remarks to 5 minutes.
        Assistant Secretary Connor, welcome. You may proceed.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. MICHAEL L. CONNOR, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE
     ARMY FOR CIVIL WORKS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY; AND LIEUTENANT
     GENERAL SCOTT A. SPELLMON, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS AND COMMANDING
                 GENERAL, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS

        Mr. Connor. Thank you. Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano,
    Ranking Member Rouzer, Chairman DeFazio, members of the
    subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify today
    regarding WRDA 2022.
        As you introduced me, I am Mike Connor. I am the Assistant
    Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, a position I have been
    in since November 29th of last year. I submitted my written
    testimony, and will summarize a few highlights here.
        The Army Civil Works program is the Nation's largest water
    resources program. It serves three primary missions: flood and
    storm damage reduction, commercial navigation, and aquatic
    ecosystem restoration. It also addresses a host of other water
    resource and infrastructure needs, as directed by Congress.
        The Corps of Engineers has contributed significantly to the
    Nation's well-being. I appreciate the recognition of that fact
    here. It supports the economy with its infrastructure, and
    protects and improves the lives of Americans with actions to
    address flood risk, environmental protection needs, even
    drought. Today the Army Corps is committed to the national
    effort to work as partners with communities to improve their
    resilience to extreme weather events and other challenges
    related to a changing climate.
        As the President has made clear, the administration is
    focused on increasing infrastructure and ecosystem resilience,
    and decreasing climate risk for communities, based on the best
    available science, promoting environmental justice in
    disadvantaged, underserved, and rural communities, and creating
    good-paying jobs.
        The Army Civil Works program will continue to work within
    its own authorities to tackle the climate crisis at home. We
    also participated in a whole-of-Government effort, including
    the interagency Water Subcabinet and the Coastal Resilience
    Interagency Working Group. WRDA 2022 is where we can continue
    to ensure the authorities necessary to implement the
    administration's priorities.
        The President has set a goal that 40 percent of the overall
    benefits of Federal investments flow to disadvantaged
    communities: the Justice40 initiative. I am committed to
    working with Lieutenant General Spellmon to seek opportunities
    to secure environmental justice and spur economic opportunity
    for disadvantaged communities that disproportionately
    experience the adverse effects of climate change.
        I should also make clear the Army's role in supporting a
    broad range of infrastructure and landscapes. The Army works
    with our Nation's coastal ports to maintain their channels;
    operates and maintains the inland waterways of commerce;
    supports State, Tribal, and local flood risk management
    activities; restores significant aquatic ecosystems; and
    operates and maintains multipurpose dams and the reservoirs
    behind them. It is a great story, but much of the water
    resources infrastructure that the Army Corps owns and operates
    was constructed over 75 years ago, and will require significant
    investments to maintain.
        Thank you for the significant resources Congress has
    already provided, as referenced earlier.
        As the Army works on policy and administrative changes to
    improve infrastructure development and regulatory
    responsiveness, my staff and I are looking at authorities,
    policies, regulations, and procedures to identify opportunities
    for increased efficiency and effectiveness. This is
    particularly necessary, given the substantial resources
    provided to the Corps this past year, and the importance
    Congress ascribes to our programs.
        We want to ensure that Army Civil Works is using its
    significant capabilities in an equitable manner, that it
    incorporates natural and nature-based infrastructure solutions
    to resiliency efforts, that it reduces redundancy, and that it
    delegates authority for decisionmaking to the appropriate
    level. I am committed to working closely with the Chief of
    Engineers and his commanding officers to position the Civil
    Works programs for continued success.
        With respect to significant matters of interest to the
    committee, we are working with OMB to finalize a proposed rule
    to implement WIFIA, as provided for in the 2021 Energy and
    Water Development Appropriations Act. This proposed rule would
    implement a new Federal credit program to support investment in
    non-Federal dam safety projects through credit assistance to
    maintain, upgrade, and repair non-Federal dams. This new
    Federal credit program will provide another way for non-Federal
    dam owners and managers to enhance the safety of their dams,
    while also adjusting water supply, energy, and environmental
    needs in a changing climate.
        The Army has completed 18 WRDA 2020 implementation guidance
    documents, and made substantial progress on the remaining
    guidance. I know that is an interest to all of you. Certain
    provisions may require rulemaking. You have my commitment that
    WRDA 2020 implementation will be a priority, and we will
    continue to complete the remaining implementation guidance
    documents and rulemakings.
        The Army is also making progress on key regulatory issues.
    Together, we are working closely with EPA to develop a durable
    definition of ``waters of the United States'' informed by
    science, experience, and expertise to protect all interests
    dependent on clean water.
        The Army also lifted the temporary pause on finalizing
    section 404 permit decisions in November 2021, and is working
    to resolve the vast majority of outstanding jurisdictional
    determination decisions.
        The Army is also moving forward to coordinate with
    certifying authorities on water quality certifications that are
    potentially impacted by the recent vacatur of the 2020 Clean
    Water Act section 401 rule.
        Thank you, Madam Chair and all committee members. I look
    forward to answering questions after General Spellmon's
    testimony.
        [Mr. Connor's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of
                the Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army
        Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Graves,
    Ranking Member Rouzer and distinguished members of the Subcommittee,
    thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today to discuss
    the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works program priorities for
    water infrastructure needs in the proposed Water Resources Development
    Act (WRDA) of 2022.
        I am Michael Connor, the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
    Works (ASA(CW). I began serving in this position on November 29, 2021.
        The U.S. Army Civil Works Program is the Nation's largest water
    resources program. It serves three main missions: flood and storm
    damage reduction, commercial navigation, and aquatic ecosystem
    restoration. The Civil Works Program also addresses a host of other
    water resource and infrastructure needs as authorized and funded by
    Congress. Our civil works projects have contributed significantly
    toward the Nation's well-being, supporting the economy and protecting
    and improving the lives of Americans with innovative water management
    processes to address flood risk, environmental protection needs, even
    drought. As such, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is committed to the
    national effort to help communities improve their resilience to extreme
    weather events, through our technical assistance programs and our water
    resources projects, a mission of increasing importance with a changing
    climate. Much of the Army's work can only be accomplished through a
    foundation of partnerships between the Corps and local communities,
    which allow us to work together to help develop, manage, restore, and
    protect the Nation's water resources and the environment.
        The Administration is focused on increasing infrastructure and
    ecosystem resilience to climate change and decreasing climate risk for
    communities based on the best available science; and promoting
    environmental justice in disadvantaged, underserved, and rural
    communities and creating good paying jobs that provide the free and
    fair chance to join a union and collectively bargain. We believe in
    smart investments that maximize the resiliency and durability of our
    water management resources; moving into a more sustainable posture by
    investing in infrastructure that delivers benefits all across America.
    This can be accomplished through authorizations that address the
    effects of climate change.
        The President has directed each federal agency to work within its
    own authorities to tackle the climate crisis at home. As part of this
    whole of government effort and a member of the Federal family, we work
    with the Interagency Water Subcabinet, comprised of the Departments of
    Interior, Agriculture, Energy and Commerce (National Oceanic and
    Atmospheric Administration), and the Environmental Protection Agency,
    to streamline and coordinate the Federal government's approach to
    managing America's water resources and work to restore and protect the
    environment, safeguard public health and safety, and contribute to the
    nation's economy. We also partner with the Coastal Resilience
    Interagency Working Group, which includes the Departments of
    Transportation and Homeland Security, to elevate, coordinate and
    accelerate the Federal government's efforts to increase the resilience
    to climate change of the Nation's coasts and coastal communities. It is
    a priority of the Office of the ASA(CW) and the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers to increase resilience to the impacts of climate change;
    protect and conserve our water resources; and maintain the key features
    of our infrastructure that support the nation's economy. WRDA 2022 is
    where we can continue to ensure the authorities necessary to implement
    these priorities.
        The President has also set a goal that 40 percent of the overall
    benefits of Federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities--the
    Justice40 Initiative. The Justice40 Initiative is a critical part of
    the Administration's whole-of-government approach to advancing
    environmental justice. I am committed to working with Lieutenant
    General Spellmon and his team to seek opportunities to secure
    environmental justice and spur economic opportunity for disadvantaged
    communities that are experiencing adverse effects of climate change.
        The Army works with our Nation's coastal ports to maintain their
    channels; operate and maintain the inland waterways of commerce;
    support state, Tribal, and local flood and coastal storm damage risk
    management reduction activities; restore significant aquatic
    ecosystems; and operate and maintain multipurpose dams, as well as the
    reservoirs behind them. There are about 250 million day-visits a year
    for recreation at Corps' lands and reservoirs, making the Corps one of
    the top Federal recreation providers, an important outlet for many
    Americans during the course of the ongoing pandemic.
        The infrastructure that the Army maintains includes 13,000 miles of
    coastal navigation channels (including the channels of the Great
    Lakes), 12,000 miles of inland waterways, 715 dams, 241 locks at 195
    navigation sites, 14,700 miles of levees, and hydropower plants at 75
    locations with 353 generating units. These projects help provide risk
    reduction from flooding in our river valleys and along our coasts,
    facilitate the movement of approximately two billion tons of waterborne
    commerce, and provide up to 24 percent of the Nation's hydropower.
        Much of the water resources infrastructure that the Army Corps owns
    and operates was constructed over 75 years ago and will require
    significant investments to maintain.
        As the Army continues to work on policy and administrative changes
    to improve infrastructure delivery and regulatory responsiveness, my
    staff and I are looking at the organization, authorities, policies,
    regulations, and procedures, in order to identify opportunities for
    increased efficiency and effectiveness. We want to ensure that the Army
    Civil Works Program is using its significant capabilities in an
    equitable manner and to address longstanding environmental justice
    concerns; incorporates natural and nature-based infrastructure
    solutions into resiliency efforts where appropriate; reduces
    redundancy; and delegates authority for decision-making to the
    appropriate level. I am committed to working closely with the Chief of
    Engineers and his commanding officers to position the Army Civil Works
    Program for continued success.
        With respect to some specifics, we are working with the Office of
    Management and Budget to finalize a proposed rule to implement the
    Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act or WIFIA, as provided
    for in the 2021 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act. This
    proposed rule would implement a new federal credit program to support
    investment in non-federal dam safety projects through credit assistance
    to safety projects to maintain, upgrade, and repair non-federal dams.
    The FY2021 Appropriations Act included $12 million for a credit
    subsidy, and $2.2 million for program administration and a loan volume
    limit of $950 million. The appropriations limited WIFIA funds to safety
    projects to maintain, upgrade, and repair dams. This new federal credit
    program will provide another way for non-federal dam owners and
    managers to enhance the safety of their dams and to improve the
    durability of those dams while also addressing water supply, energy,
    and environmental needs in a changing climate.
        The Army has completed 16 WRDA 2020 implementation guidance
    documents and made substantial progress on the remaining documents.
    Certain provisions may require rulemaking. You have my commitment that
    WRDA 2020 implementation will be a priority and that we will complete
    the remaining implementation guidance documents and any potential
    rulemaking.
        The Army is also making progress on some key Regulatory issues.
    Together, we are working closely with the Environmental Protection
    Agency to develop a durable definition of ``waters of the United
    States'' (WOTUS) that is informed by science, experience, expertise and
    that protects public health, the environment, and downstream
    communities while supporting economic opportunity, agriculture, and
    other industries that depend on clean water. On December 7, 2021, Army
    and EPA published the a proposed rule that represents the first in a
    two-step process to revise the definition of WOTUS. The proposed rule
    will support a stable implementation of the Clean Water Act's WOTUS
    definition while the agencies continue to consult with states, Tribes,
    local governments, and stakeholders in both the implementation of WOTUS
    and future regulatory actions. Now, more than ever, we recognize the
    importance of our Nation's water resources and the role water plays in
    sustaining all of our communities across the nation.
        The Army also lifted the temporary pause on finalizing Section 404
    permit decisions in November 2021, and is working to resolve the vast
    majority of the outstanding jurisdictional determination decisions. The
    Army will also coordinate with certifying authorities on water quality
    certifications that are potentially impacted by the recent vacatur of
    the 2020 CWA Section 401 rule by the United States District Court for
    the Northern District of California.
        The Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works
    and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stand ready to help in addressing
    the water resources challenges of the 21st Century and doing so in an
    equitable manner that helps all of our communities in the United
    States. We look forward to working with this Committee on this very
    important issue.
        Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano and Committee
    Members. This concludes my statement. I look forward to answering any
    questions you or other Members of the Committee may have.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and now we will
    proceed to hear from Lieutenant General Spellmon.
        You may proceed.
        General Spellmon. Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano,
    Ranking Member Rouzer, and distinguished members of the
    committee, good morning to all of you, and I am honored to
    testify before you today with Mr. Connor. And thank you for the
    opportunity to discuss our execution of and your oversight of
    the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works program.
        I look forward to discussing the status of implementation
    of recent Water Resources Development Acts, as well as
    questions the committee may have regarding anticipated
    legislation for 2022. Most importantly, I look forward to
    continuing to work with this committee, Congress, and the
    administration to address the Nation's water resources
    infrastructure needs.
        The infrastructure authorized by the Water Resources
    Development Acts and implemented by the Corps are critical for
    this Nation's economic growth and national security, and
    ultimately, they benefit the well-being of all American
    citizens.
        We greatly appreciate the committee's continuing
    commitment, as mentioned, to enacting WRDAs on a 2-year cycle.
    This predictability has enabled critical water resources
    projects to be authorized for study and construction. This
    succession has also provided regular updates to our
    authorities, modernizing our methodologies, and enhancing
    flexibility into policies we utilize to execute our mission.
        We maintain a dedicated commitment to our partners; the
    value: the engagement we have held with stakeholders to gain
    their input in shaping guidance for implementation of these
    authorities.
        While the focus of this hearing may be on the proposed
    legislation being considered by this committee, it is
    important, I believe, to acknowledge the recent significant
    growth in the Corps Civil Works program that we have
    experienced over the past several years.
        Madam Chairwoman, the challenge for us in the Corps is that
    we are structured, we are organized, and we are staffed for
    what has historically been a $20 to $22 billion program for the
    Corps, and that is just not Civil Works, that is the work we do
    for the VA, that is the work we do for FEMA, and that is the
    work we are doing in 110 countries around the world today for
    our combatant commanders out in the field.
        Our current program is $84 billion, and it is growing. So,
    our Civil Works program has seen the greatest growth of all
    these programs these past 5 years, going from a $7 billion
    annual program to an annual budget of more than $48 billion,
    when you add in supplemental appropriations. This funding
    provides the Corps with a once-in-a-generation window of
    opportunity to deliver water resource infrastructure programs
    and projects that will positively impact the lives of
    communities across this great Nation. It is an opportunity we
    are taking advantage of to transform our organization and
    decisionmaking processes to safely finish quality projects on
    time and within budget.
        We are taking major steps to proactively identify risks to
    execute our mandates, then developing measures to reduce,
    resolve, or eliminate these risks, measures such as
    accelerating recruitment through direct hiring authorities and
    transforming our workplace to attract and retain the best
    talent, which will help us in fortifying our technical
    expertise to effectively develop and implement infrastructure
    projects.
        We are also combining traditional and alternative delivery
    concepts that allow us to develop additional contracting tools
    that enhance our partnership efforts. By evolving our programs,
    planning, and operations, we are able to overcome impacts from
    important drivers like global climate change. Considering
    adaptation and mitigation responses to climate change together,
    we have improved the resilience of natural and Corps-built
    water resources infrastructure. Integrating adaptation and
    resilience into our design processes has enhanced the
    effectiveness of the Corps Civil Works projects, reducing risk
    to vulnerable communities.
        Additionally, the Corps continues to provide meaningful
    engagement opportunities for overburdened and underserved
    communities and Native American Tribes to encourage and enable
    participation in decisions that impact their communities. The
    Corps does not accomplish anything by itself. We use our
    engineering expertise, and rely on a relationship to develop
    innovative approaches to address some of the most pressing
    water resource challenges we face as a Nation today.
        My top priorities include identifying the highest priority
    investments and that we safely deliver quality projects on time
    and within budget. I strongly feel that, to achieve this
    vision, we must execute our comprehensive research and
    development strategy to meet the challenges of the 21st
    century. We will accomplish this strategy with our U.S. and
    international partners in Government, industry, and academia.
        From climate change to war fighting, from overextended
    infrastructure to cybersecurity, there are no shortages of
    challenges that we will require bold new research and
    development to solve.
        Madam Chairwoman, I filed my complete written testimony
    with your staff that identifies the projects proposed in
    Chief's Reports and Post-Authorization Change Reports to date,
    since the enactment of WRDA 2020. I also included a brief
    summary for each project's purpose, total cost, as well as the
    Federal and non-Federal cost share. And thank you, Chairwoman
    Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members of the
    committee. I look forward to answering any questions that you
    may have.
        [General Spellmon's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of
         Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
        Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Graves,
    Ranking Member Rouzer and distinguished members of the committee. I am
    honored to testify before you today and I thank you for the opportunity
    to discuss the Army Civil Works program. I look forward to discussing
    the status of implementation of recent Water Resources Development Acts
    as well as any questions the committee may have. Most importantly, I
    look forward to continuing to work with this committee, the Congress,
    and the Administration to help address the Nation's water resources
    challenges.
        The Army Civil Works Program is the Nation's largest water
    resources program, and has three main missions, which are: commercial
    navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and ecosystem
    restoration. The Congress has authorized many of our reservoirs for
    multiple purposes, including ancillary purposes such as hydropower,
    recreation, and water supply. We implement our main missions consistent
    with the applicable Congressional authorizations, which include
    legislative initiatives and reforms, as well as the authorization of
    the studies and projects that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
    undertakes.
        The infrastructure authorized by the Water Resources Development
    Acts and implemented by the U.S. Army benefits the well-being of
    American citizens by contributing to the Nation's economic growth,
    restoring aquatic ecosystems, and addressing significant risks to
    public safety.
        While the focus of this hearing may be on the prospective
    legislation being considered by this committee, it is important to
    acknowledge the recent, significant increase in funding for the Army
    Civil Works program over the past several years. Less than four years
    ago, the Army received a significant infusion of capital from the 2018
    Bipartisan Budget Act ($17.4 billion), which was followed 16 months
    later by the 2019 Disaster Relief Act ($3.26 billion). These
    supplemental appropriations will allow the Army to help reduce flood
    and coastal storm risks in communities across the Nation, as well as
    address damages to existing projects. The program has also received
    several consecutive years of record-high annual appropriations in
    Fiscal Years 2018-2021 (spanning from $6.830 billion to $7.795
    billion). Within the past several months, the Congress also passed the
    Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2022 ($5.711
    billion) and the Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act ($17.089
    billion), representing well over $22 billion for additional Corps
    investments. This funding provides the Army with a once-in-a-generation
    window of opportunity to deliver water resource infrastructure programs
    and projects that will positively impact the lives of our communities
    across the Nation. Additionally, these funds will be used to maintain
    our existing Corps infrastructure to ensure that its key features
    remain operational while continuing to provide benefits to the Nation.
        The Corps has been providing engineering solutions to address our
    Nation's toughest challenges since 1775 and we fully understand the
    risks with executing our current workload. The Corps is being proactive
    in its efforts to identify major risks to execution and develop
    measures to reduce, resolve, or eliminate these issues. Measures to
    prepare the workforce include efforts toward the acceleration of
    recruitment actions and the execution of workplace transformation
    initiatives to attract and retain top talent. The Corps is actively
    working to fortify our Real Estate expertise across the enterprise to
    enhance support to our non-federal partners with identifying and
    acquiring the land needed to construct our projects, as well as
    evaluating opportunities to identify needed properties earlier and
    reduce the risks with initiating acquisition efforts. The Corps
    continues to explore expanding upon the tenets of Integrated Water
    Resources Management principles in formulating, evaluating, displaying,
    comparing, and recommending alternative plans in water and related land
    resources implementation studies. The Corps is also developing
    additional contracting tools that will allow us to establish and
    maintain partnerships, and look at combining our traditional delivery
    methods like Design-Bid-Build with alternative delivery concepts like
    Design-Build and Early Contractor Involvement strategies. The Corps
    continues to monitor supply and demand trends for building materials
    and other products that will be needed for construction to provide more
    reliable and cost-efficient project delivery.
        Under leadership of the current Administration, and in alignment
    with the authorities provided by this committee, the Corps is moving
    forward, along with other Federal agencies, to help address the vast
    water resource challenges posed by global climate change, including
    water scarcity, sea level rise, and observed increases in severe
    weather events. The Corps continues to develop, evaluate, and implement
    changes to programs and projects to incorporate and enhance resilience
    to climate change and particularly to help disadvantaged communities to
    reduce their risks, and to adapt, to a changing climate. The Corps
    continues to provide meaningful engagement opportunities for these
    disadvantaged communities, including in rural areas, to encourage and
    enable them to adopt solutions to the impact of climate change in their
    communities.
        Under leadership from the Administration, the Corps continues to
    seek opportunities to identify and document the full spectrum of
    economic, environmental, and other benefits to the Nation, including
    how we address environmental justice concerns. This focus on
    economically disadvantaged communities that are marginalized,
    underserved, or overburdened by pollution, including those in rural
    areas, will provide an opportunity to invest in these areas, which may
    have been left behind with past infrastructure development and
    construction. We can leverage these tools to enhance opportunities for
    these communities where our studies and projects can provide solutions
    to their water resources challenges.
        Our Tribal Nations Program enables the Army to partner with
    Federally recognized American Indian and Alaskan Native tribal
    governments to identify solutions to their water resources challenges,
    which will substantially benefit the people who live in Indian Country
    or in Alaska Native villages. The Corps reaffirms its commitment to
    engage in regular, meaningful, and robust consultation with Tribal
    officials in the development of water resources projects and on
    regulatory actions that have Tribal implications. The Corps works with
    Native American Tribes as cost-share partners on Civil Works projects
    through its Tribal Partnership Program, under its Planning Assistance
    to States Program, as well as through specifically authorized Civil
    Works projects. The Corps also can provide technical assistance to
    Native American Tribes under its Flood Plain Management Services
    Program. The Corps can also leverage interagency Silver Jackets teams
    established in each state to identify water resource challenges
    affecting Tribes and determine the best suited agency and program to
    assist Tribes, where possible, in addressing those challenges,
    including the aforementioned programs.
        The Corps uses its engineering expertise and its relationships with
    project sponsors and stakeholders to develop innovative approaches to
    address some of the most pressing water resources challenges facing the
    Nation. My top priorities include identifying the highest priority
    potential investments for the Army Civil Works Program, starting with
    the maintenance of our existing infrastructure, and ensuring that we
    deliver studies and finish quality projects safely, on time, and within
    budget. I am focused on delivering projects that will contribute to the
    effort to enhance the Nation's resilience to climate change. These
    priorities will ensure a better return on taxpayer investment and
    improve the lives of all Americans. Under my oversight and direction,
    and with the leadership of Assistant Secretary Connor and his team, the
    Corps is committed to efficiently and effectively executing the Civil
    Works program.
        I feel strongly that in order to achieve our vision, we will need
    to continue to invest in on our Research and Development (R&D) program.
    We are working to further inform our R&D initiatives and strengthen our
    partnerships with academic institutions to benefit from the enormous
    capacity of our Nation's scientists, so we will know how best to meet
    the challenges of the 21st Century. Investments in research and
    development help us find solutions for today's and tomorrow's
    challenges like those posed by extreme rainfall events and the impacts
    due to severe floods and coastal storms. We also look to R&D solutions
    to further inform the development of our sustainability strategies
    including Engineering With Nature (EWN). The Corps EWN initiative
    supports sustainable infrastructure systems and embraces the
    intentional and substantial use of natural systems in providing water
    resources solutions. Through EWN, the Corps aspires to implement
    nature-based solutions for civil works projects in partnership with
    cost-sharing sponsors.
        I am committed to ensuring that the Corps continues to identify the
    best ways to manage, develop, restore, and protect water resources in
    collaboration with sponsors and partners. Our goal is to achieve a high
    economic, environmental, and public safety return for the Nation, which
    will benefit all Americans.
        At the request of the Committee, my testimony identifies the
    projects proposed in Chief's Reports and Post-Authorization Change
    Reports to date, since the enactment of WRDA 2020. At the committee's
    request, I am also including an attachment that briefly summarizes each
    proposed project's purpose, estimated total cost, as well as federal
    and non-federal cost share.\\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \\ Editor's note: The attachment is retained in committee
    files and is available online at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/PW/
    PW02/20220112/114322/HHRG-117-PW02-Wstate-SpellmonG-20220112-SD001.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Since the enactment of WRDA 2020, I have signed 14 Chief's Reports.
    The proposed projects in these reports fall within the Army civil works
    main mission areas of flood and storm damage reduction, commercial
    navigation, and aquatic ecosystem restoration. The 14 Chief's Reports
    are:
        1.  Fairfield & New Haven Counties, CT
        2.  Elim Subsistence Harbor, AK
        3.  Prado Basin, CA
        4.  Lower Cache Creek, CA
        5.  Portland Metro Levee System, OR
        6.  Coastal Texas Protection & Restoration, TX
        7.  San Juan Metro Area, PR
        8.  Monroe County, FL
        9.  Okaloosa County, FL
        10.  Selma, AL
        11.  Port of Long Beach, CA
        12.  Folly Beach, SC
        13.  Pinellas County, FL
        14.  Valley Creek, Bessemer, AL

        Since the enactment of WRDA 2020, there has been one Post-
    Authorization Change Report with a Director of Civil Works (Director's)
    Report completed.
        1.  Washington, DC & Vicinity

        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I appreciate the
    opportunity to testify today and look forward to answering any
    questions you may have. Thank you.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, General Spellmon.
    That was very nicely put.
        We thank both our witnesses, and now we would like to move
    on to our Member questions. Each Member will be recognized for
    5 minutes. If there are additional questions, we may have an
    additional round, as necessary. Chairman DeFazio will begin the
    questioning.
        You are recognized.
        Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        To both the Secretary and the general, I want to thank you
    for the work you have done to extend the bids you have on the
    critical Coos Bay North Bend project to match with the timeline
    of OMB approving your workplan. Are we on track to get that
    done this week?
        Either one can respond.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will start. We have successfully
    extended the bid of both offers to the 1st of April. So, I
    think that gives us plenty of flexibility in moving forward.
        Mr. DeFazio. Right. But the question would be your entire
    workplan approval by OMB. I spoke to the acting head of OMB
    last week, and there seemed to be some confidence that we could
    have approval this week. Have you heard anything?
        Mr. Connor. Oh yes, Mr. Chairman. We have heard a lot, been
    involved in a lot of discussions. I think we are on track, yes.
        Mr. DeFazio. OK, that is good to know, because that is very
    important for the Nation.
        And as we rebuild, particularly, I want to look at the
    Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. General, you talked about the
    challenges of your long overdue, but significantly increased,
    investment in projects and obligations.
        In terms of being able to commit the harbor maintenance
    funds, I guess there are sort of two questions. And one would
    be, on the west coast, we have had chronic issues with the
    availability of dredging. And I just am hopeful that we are
    going to find a way to address that.
        And then the second thing would be, as we rebuild these
    failing jetties and breakwaters, I would assume that we are
    rebuilding them with an eye toward the future, toward higher
    levels, higher sea levels, and more violent storms. Is that
    correct?
        General Spellmon. Sir, that is correct. And you experienced
    that more than anyone with the storms and the violent water
    that we have out on the Oregon coast.
        Sir, just for example, the Coos Bay jetties that we are
    talking about here, those will be designed with climate change
    and adaptation in mind.
        Mr. DeFazio. That is good. That is good to know. On the
    Columbia River, Secretary Connor, I wrote in December we have
    heard from stakeholders--and the Corps has asserted numerous
    times--that they have the existing legal authorities that
    relate to future flood damage reduction protection in the
    Columbia River Basin.
        As you know, the treaty has expired. Canada has been
    dragging its feet. The State Department has been, shall we say,
    not exactly focused on this, either. And this causes tremendous
    concern with the expiration of the treaty, when we have
    potential for assuming rather large obligations for future
    flood risk on the Columbia. Can we expect a meaningful response
    on that soon?
        Mr. Connor. Mr. Chairman, we are starting those discussions
    in earnest, based on getting input on the discussions that are
    ongoing with Canada at this point in time. I think our first
    instinct is that we do have the necessary authority, but we are
    doing a deeper dive on those flood management services. That
    may change in response to how the treaty process negotiation
    plays out. So, we are taking a deep look at that, and we will
    keep in constant contact as the discussions evolve.
        So, we may have a response in the near term that may be
    evolving over the next several months. So, we want that to be
    an active dialogue with you and interested Members on both
    sides of the aisle.
        Mr. DeFazio. Great. As you know, this is a tremendous
    concern to the entire Pacific Northwest, and I look forward to
    that response.
        Just one other quick point. We authorized you to look at
    helping design and deal with non-Federal dams. I don't think
    that authority extended to diking, did it? Because there are
    areas--historically, the Corps was involved in building and
    diking, particularly throughout the Northwest and areas of
    flood danger. And then, in time lost to history, they turned
    those over to local diking districts, which just kind of
    disappeared ultimately, and people didn't even know, in many
    cases, they were protected by dikes, as in the case of one
    river in my district a few years ago.
        Does that authority extend to providing some assistance to
    these districts also, or is that something Congress would need
    to further authorize?
        Mr. Connor. I can take a first cut at that. I have got two
    thoughts on that.
        I think the authority that you are referring to is the
    WIFIA program, which has been limited to our ability to work
    with non-Federal dam owners----
        Mr. DeFazio. Right.
        Mr. Connor [continuing]. And work on safety issues. So, I
    don't believe--I will doublecheck this--that it extends to
    dikes.
        Mr. DeFazio. OK.
        Mr. Connor. But I need to doublecheck on that. And we are
    moving forward with the process of initiating a rulemaking to
    implement that authority.
        I do think we have authority elsewhere to work on levees
    and dikes through maybe the emergency response program or
    disaster preparedness program, but I will let General Spellmon
    correct me----
        General Spellmon. No, no, sir, you have it exactly.
        Sir, I would have to go back and doublecheck whether or not
    the water infrastructure program, or WIFIA, applies to dikes.
    But we do have other authorities, as you know, where we can
    help out non-Federal entities on the maintenance and repair of
    those structures.
        Mr. DeFazio. Oh, good. OK, thank you. I thank you both for
    your testimony.
        Madam Chair, I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. DeFazio.
        Mr. Rouzer, you are recognized.
        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you again to
    our witnesses for being here. I appreciate your work for the
    country very much.
        I have got a couple of questions with regard to my
    district, specifically. But before I get to that, with the
    passage of the bipartisan infrastructure bill this last year,
    several agencies, including the Corps, obviously, received
    funding to advance infrastructure projects across the country.
    However, despite this push for infrastructure, of course,
    projects still face significant bureaucratic and permitting
    hurdles that can cause years of delays.
        How is the Corps working to implement this legislation and
    create efficiencies in its processes to expedite critical
    infrastructure projects?
        General Spellmon. Sure, I will start. So, we recently
    renewed 57 nationwide permits, following extensive feedback
    from the public, and that will certainly enable accelerated
    delivery of projects with all the appropriate safeguards for
    the environment. We acknowledge we have more work to do on that
    front, and we are wide open to any additional recommendations
    that we get from the administration or Members of Congress.
        So, I would just highlight that as one example on how we
    are working hard to get these projects in the ground.
        Mr. Connor. And I would just add to that there has been a
    lot of changes in the regulatory world, as we all know, and I
    am sure will be discussed more today.
        So, I think--I appreciate the fact, stepping into this
    role, that the Corps' primary goal has been regulatory
    certainty and efficiency in which it carries out its regulatory
    actions. And I see that with the nationwide permits that
    General Spellmon referred to, and we will be seeking to do that
    as we move forward with ``waters of the U.S.'' and other
    regulatory changes that we need to deal with, that we need to
    go through the processes to get to some durable rules and
    regulatory certainty, so people can do their business.
        Mr. Rouzer. I am coming back to that in more detail later.
        General Spellmon, the coastal storm risk management project
    at Wrightsville Beach, which I know you are very familiar with,
    has existed and received assistance from the Army Corps since
    1986. During that time, as you know, that particular beach has
    used the same bar site for its sand. But due to a recent rule
    change at the Department of the Interior, the Corps can no
    longer use that historic bar site, and will have to go offshore
    for that necessary sand.
        Will the Corps have an offshore bar site identified and
    ready to be permitted before the 2022/2023 project season? What
    is your analysis of that?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So, in short, the answer is
    yes, sir. We are going through the permitting action now for
    that offshore borrow site. We expect to have that permit
    complete by September of this year, which will allow us, in
    turn, to do a quick contracting action to get after that work.
        Mr. Rouzer. As you are also aware, the Army Corps had
    previously worked with the towns of North Topsail Beach and
    Surf City to establish a coastal storm risk management project.
    The planning for this project went through many phases and had
    multiple cost estimates over the years. But the bottom line is
    that pricetag was high enough to where the town of North
    Topsail decided to withdraw.
        So, the bottom-line question: is the Corps able to move
    forward with this project, despite the town of North Topsail
    removing itself?
        And if not, what steps are going to be necessary to ensure
    that Surf City has what it needs?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So, my staff is completing now
    what we call a validation report. My discretionary authority on
    this project, a project that Congress authorized, is I can move
    forward as long as there is not about a 20-percent change in
    scope. And so, that is what we are validating right now. If it
    is not 20 percent, sir, we will move out. Congress was
    generous, and fully funded that project in the Defense Recovery
    Act of 2019, and I understand North Topsail Beach, for their
    portion of the bridge, they are moving forward under a FEMA
    program to seek the funds to implement the project on their
    beach.
        Mr. Rouzer. How soon do you think all that can be done?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir, so, I should have the
    validation report complete in March of this year, and then we
    are ready to move forward. And as I said, this has been fully
    funded, and it is just a matter of getting it under contract.
        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you. Since the enactment of WRDA 2020,
    the committee has received 14 Chief's Reports for potential
    projects, and certainly we appreciate the good work done by the
    Corps to get those completed and submitted.
        Do you have an estimate of how many more we can expect, and
    when we can expect them, especially before completion of the
    next WRDA?
        General Spellmon. Congressman, we are at 14 now, as you
    mentioned. I have seven more that I will sign before May of
    this year that I am--high confidence we will get those into
    WRDA 2022. And then, on top of that, there are another seven
    that we are working to pull to the left, so that we can get
    them in front of you for consideration.
        So, sir, it may be upwards of 28.
        Mr. Rouzer. What about Post-Authorization Change Reports?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I have that number, and I will
    follow up with you and get you that.
        Mr. Rouzer. Is there anything else that the committee
    should expect to receive that we don't know about at the
    moment?
        General Spellmon. Sir, we have completed hundreds of
    legislative drafting services. Those continue to come in. And,
    of course, we are always open to discussing any recommendations
    or tools that the Corps or the Secretary would like to see that
    would better enable us to deliver on this massive program that
    you have trusted us with.
        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Rouzer. I will now
    recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        This will be the first WRDA from the Biden administration,
    and we have heard that the Corps now has plenty of funding
    towards the missions.
        Mr. Connor and General Spellmon, what are the priorities of
    the administration and the Army Corps of Engineers for the
    Water Resources Development Act of 2022?
        Mr. Connor. I will take a first cut at that, Madam Chair.
    Obviously, in the set of priorities that we have are those
    identified in the 7001 Reports. The one that you noted was
    moved forward and sent to Congress last November, and we are
    working on one for fiscal year 2022, as you noted in your
    opening comments. So, we are working expeditiously to get that
    report up to Congress.
        Beyond that, we are looking at opportunities to further the
    administration's priorities, and those are to enhance our
    ability to build resilience with respect to our projects,
    activities, to enhance environmental justice, and our ability
    to move forward with economically disadvantaged and rural
    communities, as well as moving forward in our role in helping
    facilitate the Nation's supply chain, and dealing with those
    issues.
        Now, there are a lot of provisions that we are in the midst
    of implementing from WRDA 2020 in those areas. I think the
    bipartisan bill that was put together really moved forward a
    number of those initiatives.
        We have got some specific thoughts on other opportunities,
    particularly working with Tribal communities, but I will turn
    it over to General Spellmon, as this is a tag team, as you
    know.
        General Spellmon. Yes, ma'am, Madam Chairwoman, I would say
    our priorities in the Corps are those of Mr. Connor and the
    administration.
        I would just say, specifically for execution, my priority
    for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is to employ the tools and
    authorities that you have given us in this upcoming WRDA and
    previous WRDAs to the maximum effect, and that we safely
    deliver quality projects on time and within budget. And, as Mr.
    Connor said, we think there are a number of tools that the
    committee could consider that would enable us in this WRDA to
    do that even better.
        Mr. Connor. Can I just add to that?
        We have talked about it, and I think Chairman DeFazio
    mentioned this. We need to be innovative in our approach to
    deal with the challenges that we have in the area of water
    resources, and all the range of our programs. And a lot of that
    is driven by a changing climate.
        But as General Spellmon noted, the volume of work that is
    expected of this agency, which we welcome, requires innovation
    in how we approach that work. And the tools, from contracting
    to hiring, that help us carry that out, I think, is an area
    that we are looking at very closely. And Congress is doing its
    role, not just with the volume of resources, but the innovation
    with respect to the trust funds, the Inland Waterways Trust
    Fund and Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, and we very much
    appreciate the added flexibility and the incentives to use
    those funds more.
        I think it is a combination of all of these elements where
    we have to be innovative.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Then does that include checking off for
    supply shortages? Will the Army Corps be able to carry out the
    projects?
        General Spellmon. Ma'am, are you referring to supply chain?
        Mr. Connor. Yes, I was--supply chain or water supply?
        Mrs. Napolitano. Well, supply chain of equipment and stuff
    that you are going to need for your projects.
        General Spellmon. So, ma'am, I will just give you a quick
    vignette. I had to call the Air Force here about 2 weeks ago on
    a MILCON project that we were delayed on, because I could not
    get 3-inch screws to hold insulation and metal roofing down on
    three KC-46 hangars at Tinker Air Force Base. I have a few
    select shortages across the country like that. But thankfully,
    I have not experienced that in the Civil Works program so far.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Well, then, Mr. Connor, I am glad you are
    bringing your experience of Western water issues to the Corps.
    You have been working diligently for many years using
    reservoirs in the West more effectively for water supply. WRDA
    2020 included a provision I authored adding water supply to
    your primary mission.
        What is the status of this review, and when do you
    anticipate being able to share the results?
        Mr. Connor. A quick response, and I will turn it over to
    General Spellmon for more details.
        The report that is due on water supply as a primary mission
    function is due in June of this year, and so, we are on track.
    I know it is being put together, and we anticipate being able
    to deliver that report on the timeline that was identified in
    WRDA 2020.
        But I do want to talk to your sense, Madam Chair--and we
    have worked together a long time on these issues--and knowing
    the innovative approaches to water supply, I share that view
    completely. I mentioned in my opening comments, I think, I have
    been pleasantly surprised in understanding not just the
    magnitude of the overall Corps mission, but how it contributes
    to addressing water supply and drought in specific watersheds.
        And there is a way to do it with respect to how we operate
    our reservoirs, how we can better use and move water out, still
    rentain that flood control primary responsibility, but move
    water in a way that allows--as you know, in southern California
    we have done this at a couple of facilities, the deviation,
    where we release water, and you can help manage our aquifer
    recharge systems. We have done that in New Mexico.
        This was a WRDA 2020 provision involving Abiquiu Dam, where
    we can look at work needing to be done on another Bureau of
    Reclamation facility, El Vado Dam, but how do we make use of
    Abiquiu Dam, and space there to help make up that water supply,
    to help manage that system to help address the environmental
    needs in the Rio Chama in New Mexico.
        I think these opportunities are real. They are necessary in
    a changing climate. We do have a role in the West.
        I will just add one other area. Our environmental
    infrastructure program, in my view, has just simply taken off,
    with respect to communities understanding the benefits of
    working with the Corps to address aquifer recharge, water reuse
    needs, adding to water supply, building redundancy as drought
    impacts systems like California Bay Delta, as well as Colorado
    River. Communities are looking to the Corps to help build
    facilities that address those needs.
        And so, I will stop there.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Mr. Connor. My time
    has long been up. I now recognize Mr. Babin.
        Mr. Babin, you are recognized.
        Dr. Babin. Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much, Madam
    Chairwoman and Ranking Member Rouzer, and thank you to our
    witnesses for being here today with us.
        Assistant Secretary Connor, welcome to the Office of the
    Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. I look forward
    to working with you, now that your nomination has been
    confirmed.
        I would also like to personally extend an invitation to you
    to visit the Greater Houston area as soon as possible to view
    some of the great work our ports and the Corps' Galveston
    District are doing, working together on projects like the Port
    of Houston channel improvement project on the Galveston Bay, to
    Sabine's coastal storm risk management and ecosystem
    restoration project. And General Spellmon visited last year,
    and it helps very much to see firsthand the volume and the
    variety of commerce that our port handles for our Nation's
    economy.
        And General Spellmon, it is great to see you here again. I
    would like to thank you for your service to our country, and
    commend you on the attention you paid both to my district, 36
    Texas, and the State of Texas during your tenure in the Army
    Corps of Engineers. And my constituents and I are very happy to
    see you in front of us again.
        I am pleased that we have the opportunity today to be
    kicking off our discussions on the Water Resources Development
    Act. In years past, we have had the opportunity to use this
    legislation for inland waterway cost share adjustments to
    promote capital investment projects, incorporating flood risk
    management features in Orange County to mitigate surge
    flooding, dredging and widening of the Port at Cedar Bayou,
    enhancing the Sabine-Neches Waterway, and expanding, of course,
    the Port of Houston Ship Channel. We are very excited to
    continue and expand upon this work in WRDA 2022.
        As you know, I have the privilege of representing southeast
    Texas, from Houston over to Louisiana, to the border, which, in
    my district, includes four ports. I am very proud to have
    helped lead the effort, alongside other Houston delegation
    Members, to see through the successful authorization and
    appropriation to dredge and widen the Houston Ship Channel.
        And to expound upon that victory, we were able to secure
    $19 million and a New Start designation to begin construction
    of this incredibly important project. And most recently, the
    port and Corps signed a project partnership agreement. This was
    a huge win, as the Port of Houston is critical to our Nation's
    supply chain, and the number-one ranked port in the Nation in
    waterborne tonnage. It sustains 3 million American jobs, $802
    million in U.S. economic value, and generates $38 billion in
    Federal, State, and local tax revenues.
        And with the process having begun to dredge and widen the
    channel in Houston, the port has requested approval for the
    Corps to maintain the improved channel in Galveston Bay, and
    has submitted a package showing that it meets the Corps'
    standards for Federal maintenance requirements.
        So, Assistant Secretary Connor and General Spellmon, my
    question to both of you is this: The port needs a decision from
    the Corps and an agreement to maintain the channel before it
    can start construction of the next part of our project,
    currently scheduled for April 2022, this year. Will you work
    with the port to deliver a decision by March, so that it does
    not impact the current schedule for construction, and delay our
    project?
        I was very proud to work with Assistant Secretary R.D.
    James on several Texas issues during his tenure, and I look
    forward to now working with you both, and continuing to improve
    our port and water infrastructure as we explore priorities for
    the Water Resources Development Act.
        But would you give us, kind of, what your ideas are, and
    tell us by March if this can happen?
        General Spellmon. Sir, it is General Spellmon. I will
    start.
        I spoke with Colonel Vail and General Beck earlier this
    week that the section 204 package is with the region. We will
    expedite. We will get that up to headquarters for our review,
    and over to Mr. Connor for his consideration. Sir, I don't have
    any issues in meeting the March timeline.
        Dr. Babin. Excellent. That is great.
        And Mr. Secretary?
        Mr. Connor. Absolutely. My goal is to not let things sit
    around in my office and on my desk, so, we will work
    expeditiously on that package, Congressman, and I appreciate
    the invitation. It is on the radar screen, absolutely, to get
    down in your neck of the woods. I understand the value and just
    the infrastructure, in general. So, I will look forward to
    doing that.
        Dr. Babin. That is great. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And
    General, I appreciate you coming, as well. So, thank you.
        And I will yield back, Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Babin. Thank you very much
    for your questions. And now we turn to Mr. Huffman.
        You are recognized.
        Mr. Huffman. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I
    want to thank our administration witnesses for sharing their
    priorities for this year's WRDA.
        As many others have said, it is great that WRDA is
    something that we have been able to do under Democratic and
    Republican majorities, under Democratic and Republican
    administrations, on a very consistent and timely basis. And we
    want to continue that.
        So, we have the opportunity in this year's WRDA to build on
    the successful bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
    Act and the historic $17 billion that we have invested in the
    Corps of Engineers. We are finally unlocking the Harbor
    Maintenance Trust Fund, as Chair DeFazio so eloquently talked
    about, increasing investments in our overburdened ports and
    waterways.
        And so, WRDA 2022 really offers us a great chance to put
    those dollars to good use. And in my district we see some
    examples of what happens when that Harbor Maintenance Trust
    Fund is unlocked, and those dollars are put to good use.
        The Petaluma River was silted in, pretty much unnavigable.
    The recreation even was difficult. Certainly, commercial
    navigation had ground to a halt because this channel had not
    been dredged in 17 years. And last year that dredging was
    completed, and the river came back to life. There was
    commercial navigation, there was recreation all over the place.
    We even had a lighted boat parade this holiday season on the
    Petaluma River. So, we have seen the kind of transformative
    difference it makes when these dollars get to work in our
    communities.
        And I hope for the 2022 WRDA, the Corps in my district will
    prioritize investment in projects like the feasibility study
    for raising the dam at Coyote Valley Dam at Lake Mendocino. And
    then we have got some other shallow draft dredging needs: the
    San Rafael Canal. We need to move forward with phase 2 of the
    Hamilton Wetlands restoration project at Bel Marin Keys, and
    continue to implement the section 1122 beneficial use pilot
    project on the San Francisco Bay.
        But thanks to the 2020 WRDA, these increased investments
    are really making a difference. And so, I want to focus my
    question for Secretary Connor on this.
        One of the big challenges we have, even when we unlock the
    funding for the Corps to do these projects, is the lack of
    dredging capacity on the west coast. We are uniquely dependent
    on the Corps itself, because the private fleet just hasn't
    provided the kind of assets that you see in other places like
    the east coast. The [inaudible] is in drydock getting repairs.
    If one of the other few assets that the Corps has is in some
    other part of the country, and we have a critical need, we are
    just out of luck. If you don't have the equipment, obviously,
    these projects just can't happen.
        So, Secretary Connor, congratulations on your confirmation.
    We are glad you are there, and thanks for being with us today.
    But I want to ask you if you have thoughts, now that we have
    unlocked the money from the trust fund, what can we do to
    address this critical vulnerability that we face on the west
    coast?
        Mr. Connor. Thank you, Congressman Huffman. I will just
    give you my view. In my short tenure, dredging is a new issue
    that I have dealt with. I do understand the east coast versus
    west coast distinction, the need to maintain our dredging
    fleet. Absolutely.
        As far as the details, I am going to turn it over to
    General Spellmon.
        General Spellmon. Sir, if I could just add a few details, I
    have the opportunity to meet with the six major CEOs and
    presidents of the dredge industry each year. I just met with
    them a few weeks ago, right before the holidays.
        The investment that Congress is making in our ports and
    waterways, it is forcing us to take our coordination, our
    scheduling with industry, to a new level. And we are working
    hard on that.
        Industry is also bringing on new vessels into their fleet
    this year. And over the next 5 years they all have capital
    investment strategies that they are executing.
        But I think, if they were in the room today, they would
    also tell you, each of them, that they currently have vessels
    tied up to docks around the country. And I think, once we get
    the President's budget on the street, once we see the project
    approvals for the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and
    the [inaudible] supplemental, all those [inaudible] will be
    back out in the water, working again.
        Mr. Huffman. Would you support specific funding for new
    Corps dredge assets on the west coast?
        General Spellmon. Sir, we replace our dredge assets with--
    we don't come to Congress for that. We have a revolving fund,
    our FRP fund, and we are working replacement for each of those
    vessels as we speak.
        Mr. Huffman. All right. Thank you very much.
        I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Well, thank you, Mr. Huffman, thank you
    very much.
        Ms. Johnson of Texas, you are recognized.
        Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much, and let me
    express my appreciation for you holding this meeting today.
        It has been most encouraging to have worked closely over
    the years with the Corps of Engineers in the north Texas
    district office. Texas is a massive State, and I have a
    residence in a very dry area, although we are coastal several
    hundred miles away, and so, we have to worry about flooding.
    And so, it has been encouraging, actually, to have worked
    closely over the years with the Corps of Engineers as we have
    addressed various areas at times, and areas for flooding that
    includes such projects as the Dallas Floodway, to stem the
    flooding in Lewisville Lake, and stop flooding and mudslides in
    Joe Pool Lake. So, I just wanted to express my appreciation.
        We are now also pleased about the Dallas Water Gardens, an
    outstanding flood mitigation and stormwater runoff project that
    I am working to try to get help and funding for.
        But we also have a unique study going on now, where we have
    brought all the stakeholders at every level of Government
    together to look at what we can do together to prevent
    flooding, which includes our Corps, because our Corps of
    Engineers are instructed, for the most part, to clean up after
    floods. But I am very appreciative of the north Texas staff
    making sure that they are involved, because if we can prevent
    flooding, we save a lot of money and a lot of loss.
        And so, I guess what I want to ask them today is, are they
    aware of the progress we are making in that study group?
        General Spellmon. Ma'am----
        Ms. Johnson of Texas. The flood prevention.
        General Spellmon. Ma'am, I will start. As you know, you are
    referring to the Upper Trinity watershed study.
        We know we need a New Start authority and funding to
    proceed on that formally. But what we are doing to lean ahead,
    we are using authority under our flood plain management
    services to build the models now that will allow us to do the
    analysis when we receive that New Start and funding to do the
    actual--we are not standing by, waiting. We are using the tools
    we have, and the authorities we have now to move our very
    important work, as you have described.
        Ms. Johnson of Texas. Well, thank you very much.
        I have no further questions, Madam Chair. I want to just
    express my appreciation for them staying in touch and working
    with us in this unique area. I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Ms. Johnson.
        Now, I am sorry, but I must have skipped over a couple of
    folks. Mr. Garret Graves, I am sorry. You are next, and then
    followed by Mr. Bost.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Madam Chair. I hope
    that wasn't indicative of our relationship.
        I want to thank the witnesses for testimony today. We have
    a number of issues that I wanted to try and cover. And so, I
    would just ask you if you could please try and keep answers
    concise, that would be helpful.
        So, first, we have a number of projects that I have had the
    opportunity to speak with both of you about, and I appreciate
    you all's efforts. But the Comite project, which is north of
    Baton Rouge, and the West Shore project in the river parishes
    in south Louisiana, both of these projects have had schedule
    slippage issues, some of them related to real estate
    acquisition. So, I am not saying that this is entirely the
    Corps of Engineers' fault. In some cases, this is the State of
    Louisiana's fault for land acquisition. I just want to ask both
    of you, please keep this on the front burner. These projects--
    one of them dates back to the early 1970s; the other one, the
    early 1980s. These are the types of projects that I think give
    the Corps of Engineers a bad name. They must be prioritized and
    move forward.
        I have a question related to the hurricane supplemental.
    Again, we have discussed this, but significant funds were
    provided in that legislation. We believe that a few billion
    dollars is ultimately going to be invested to address many of
    the recovery issues, like debris removal and dredging of
    navigation channels, as well as building some of the resilience
    projects. Those funds have been in the bank now for, I think,
    104 days. We have not had an allocation. I just wanted to push
    you again on getting an answer there.
        Mr. Connor. Absolutely. Real quick, Congressman, we have
    been looking at that, in conjunction with the workplan we are
    doing with IIJA, trying to manage all this. It is very much on
    the front burner now. I think you will be hearing very soon on
    the disaster supplemental and the investments in Louisiana.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Secretary, thank you. I just want
    to remind you on this one that those funds have really been
    limited in scope. And so, it is not like you are out there
    having the opportunity to do things all over the country. These
    projects are specifically tied back to Hurricane Ida. And so, I
    just remind you that there shouldn't be a ton of discretion
    that is exercised in this case.
        Another one I wanted to talk about is section 213 of WRDA
    2020. We did a Lower Mississippi River management study, and
    you all are both very familiar with the challenges we have had
    with managing water in the Mississippi River system, draining
    Montana, New York, Canadian provinces, and the challenges that
    that has caused throughout the entire Mississippi River Basin.
        The Lower Mississippi River comprehensive study--again,
    section 213 of 2020 WRDA, the way that the Corps has
    interpreted it, you now have seven non-Federal sponsors, seven
    States, from Kentucky and Missouri down to Louisiana, including
    my friend, Mr. Westerman from Arkansas.
        As you know, having one non-Federal sponsor is complex
    enough, coming up with an interpretation that requires a non-
    Federal cost share. And seven non-Federal sponsors, we know
    that that, effectively, is going to prevent this from moving
    forward. It is a critical study that is going to complement the
    upper basin. And I just wanted to ask if you all could take
    another look at this, and take ownership over this study.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will start. This is a cost-shared
    study, as we interpreted it. And talking to Colonel Murphy and
    his leadership down here, we did this twice successfully last
    year. It wasn't seven States, but it was four, on what is often
    a contentious river basin, on the Lower Missouri River Basin,
    both on a navigation study that we stepped up on, and a flood
    risk management study.
        But again, we have everyone at the table now, and that
    study is moving forward, and I think it is equally important on
    this particular study that we do the same.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, General.
        Another issue, cross crediting--and I am just going to
    combine two of them here in my last minute. There are two
    issues that I probably could go back, rewind films from
    previous hearings over the past 5 years, and replay them over
    and over and over again.
        One of them, starting back in WRDA 2007 and title 7, we did
    cross-crediting. We basically said all these projects in this
    basin, if you overpay on one, underpay on another, you can
    cross credit, because all of these projects are symbiotic.
    Language dates back to 2007. There were some perfections that
    were done to it in 2014, as I recall, and we still have been
    unable to actually utilize that provision of law dating back to
    2007.
        Similarly, nonstandard estates, this requirement by the
    Corps of Engineers that you have to buy land in fee title, when
    you may have property owners that are willing to donate a
    project easement, thereby reducing the cost and expediting the
    ability of the project to move forward.
        Both of these provisions have been stalled through
    interpretive issues. I just want to ask you all to please take
    a look at these, get these issues resolved. We need to stop
    talking about them and start turning dirt.
        Mr. Connor. Absolutely, you have my commitment. These land
    issues that are coming up, even in my short tenure in a number
    of different areas, definitely looking into that.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Mr. Secretary, thank you.
        Look, I just want to reiterate these are mostly for
    ecological restoration projects, and we have people willing to
    donate the project easement. And so, it reduces cost and
    expedites timeframes, so, I would really appreciate that.
        And I want to thank you both for your efforts.
        Madam Chair, thank you, and yield back.
        [Pause.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. I am sorry, gentlemen, I was muted.
        Mr. Graves, thank you very much.
        Mr. Bost, you are on, followed by Mr. Garamendi and then
    Mr. LaMalfa.
        Mr. Bost. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Secretary Connor, in your testimony, you mentioned the
    importance of reliance quite a bit on that much of the water
    resources that the Corps works on are in need of upgrades and
    investment. In my district, the Jerry F. Costello Lock and Dam
    is part of the Upper Mississippi River 9-foot navigation
    project, and plays a vital role in the economic competitiveness
    of the region. The area acts as a main thoroughfare for
    agriculture and manufactured goods to get to market. The local
    community estimates that an additional 3 million tons of goods
    will be shipped on the Kaskaskia River over the next 5 years.
    The lock and dam will turn 50 years old in 2024.
        In anticipation of that, to prepare for the next 50 years,
    I would like to get a commitment from you that we are going to
    work to conduct a comprehensive review of the system to look at
    the potential for economic benefit to increasing the water
    levels from the 9-foot level to the 11-foot level. Can I get
    that commitment from you?
        Mr. Connor. I am happy to work with you on analyzing that.
    That is not an issue I am familiar with, I will say really
    quickly. That was my first trip, and getting out on the inland
    waterways system, spending some time on locks and dams, I
    absolutely recognize and agree with you the importance of the
    Nation's supply chain, and particularly reliability of the
    system, maximizing its use, has many benefits. I am happy to
    jump in and work with you on that particular issue, but let me
    do some homework.
        Mr. Bost. OK, and I appreciate that.
        And the next issue I want to ask you about is also
    something that needs to be brought to the attention, and that
    is the Alton Marina, which is in the northern part of my
    district, along the Mississippi River. We have got a problem
    there that is just becoming too common.
        The area is leased by Alton for the Army Corps purposes to
    being a marina. But unfortunately, the Army Corps has conveyed
    to the local community that they will not allow the water
    levels to rise sufficiently for the area to be used as a
    marina. It has been used, and all of a sudden they have changed
    their process by which they are keeping the water levels.
        The Corps has stated that there is a concern of a minor
    flooding of the State IDNR land if the water levels are to
    rise. I believe that there can be a reasonable solution to
    allow for navigation and recreation of this area. And I would
    like to see if you can commit to work with me on that problem,
    as well.
        General Spellmon. Sir, this is General Spellmon. I am not
    familiar with this one, but I will follow up right after this
    hearing to get into the details. Yes, sir, you have our
    commitment to work with you on a solution.
        Mr. Bost. That marina is vitally important for a stop-off
    midway between people traveling from the gulf on into the Great
    Lakes area. And this is the importance of that marina.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Bost. So, at any rate, commodities transported on the
    Upper Mississippi River system come from a variety of
    industries throughout the entire system. Roughly 30 percent of
    the commodities needed to invest in our Nation's infrastructure
    travel on the inland waterways system.
        Secretary Connor, you are aware of the December letter to
    your office that was sent and received, signed by more than 50
    bipartisan Members of both the House and the Senate, urging
    immediate construction start of lock 25, not to mention
    countless other letters to support--the year since then, and
    since 2007.
        General Spellmon, can you please explain to the committee
    the impact of putting lock 25 in place, and what we can see for
    the future for moving larger amounts of goods up and down the
    Mississippi River?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. I have been out to this project
    and several more on the system, and I acknowledge the
    importance of this particular suite of projects to
    transportation in your region.
        As you know, sir, we are in design. This is part of the
    navigation-ecosystem program that we are in design for the
    improvements at lock and dam 25, as well as additional mooring
    cells, and the accompanying ecosystem restoration that goes
    along with that particular set of projects.
        Sir, I believe you know we are tracking, we need a New
    Start authority to move forward with this, but we will continue
    to do everything we can with the design dollars that you have
    given us, so that we are ready to move forward to construction
    as quickly as possible.
        Mr. Bost. I appreciate that. And the people in our area
    appreciate that, as well. We know the importance of moving
    those goods up and down the Mississippi River.
        There is another concern that I have got out there, but I
    have got a short time with that, and that is the fact that we
    still have the navigational problems that are occurring from a
    flood that blew out the levee for a system down in the deep
    southern part of my district. But I will talk to you about that
    later, because my time has expired.
        And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Mr. Bost. Next we
    have Mr. Garamendi, followed by Mr. LaMalfa, and then Mr.
    Malinowski.
        Mr. Garamendi?
        Mr. Garamendi. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. This is a
    question for Secretary Connor.
        President Biden's Executive Order 14005, ensuring the
    future is made in all of America by all of America's workers,
    directs all Federal agencies to fully implement our Nation's
    Buy America requirement for federally funded infrastructure
    projects. For Civil Works projects carried out by the Corps,
    the Buy American Act clearly applies. However, it seems that
    projects carried out under the Corps' section 1014 and section
    1043--these are the non-Federal implementation authorities for
    which the non-Federal sponsor acts as the contracting agent on
    behalf of the Corps--these, apparently and inadvertently, are
    loopholes to the Buy American Act.
        So, this is a question, Secretary Connor. Will the Army
    Corps commit to fully implementing the President's Executive
    order to apply the Buy American Act to projects carried out
    under these non-Federal implementation authorities?
        And if you do not have the authorities, please clearly
    state so, so that we might correct this in the new WRDA.
        Secretary Connor?
        Mr. Connor. Thank you, Congressman Garamendi. Yes,
    absolutely. We are going to work and move forward, consistent
    with the President's Executive order. I am not familiar with
    these two particular sections. Maybe General Spellmon is. But I
    will certainly take a look at that, in response to you raising
    the issue.
        General Spellmon. Sir, my understanding is a non-Federal
    sponsor, whether under section 1043 or a cost share agreement,
    has to follow all of the Federal acquisition regulations, but
    we will go back and doublecheck that there is not a loophole
    here on these two authorities.
        Mr. Garamendi. Please do, and thank you very much. We
    believe that this is not being implemented, and it certainly
    should be. And if you don't have the authority, well, then that
    is our job.
        Let's see, another question here to Secretary Connor.
        Secretary Connor, Congress has provided many Federal
    agencies, including the Army Corps of Engineers, other
    transactional authority, OTA, to expand the Government's access
    to innovative projects taking place in the private sector,
    overcoming some of the rigidity in the Federal acquisition
    process. The Army Corps of Engineers has OTA, other
    transactional authority, for its military missions. And I thank
    General Spellmon for the implementation of some of those
    projects in my district.
        However, the Corps has concluded it lacks the authority to
    use the OTA for its Civil Works missions. If that is the case,
    we must correct it. And so, this goes to Secretary Connor and
    to Spellmon.
        What is the situation, and what is your view?
        And if it is not your authority, then we need to correct
    that.
        General Spellmon. Sir, this is a General Spellmon. I will
    start.
        So, the DoD authority that you are referring to, the other
    transactional authority, that allows us to carry out certain
    prototype projects, certain research projects, and certain
    production projects. And there are cases, as you mentioned, in
    our MILCON program, where a project fits that category.
        I am not exactly sure of the application in the Civil Works
    program, but I will tell you we are absolutely open to this
    discussion, and any tool that allows us to deliver more
    effectively. We would like to do more research and homework on
    this one, sir.
        Mr. Garamendi. Then this is really for our committee. This
    is really an important thing. We use it extensively in the
    military construction projects for which--responsible in the
    Armed Services Committee. It really should apply for Civil
    Works, also.
        Within the Sacramento River Basin, Secretary Connor and
    General Spellmon, Congresswoman Matsui and I secured section
    209 of the 2020 WRDA to put in place the comprehensive study
    for the Yolo Bypass just west of Sacramento. That was designed
    not just for the bypass, but rather for the entire flood
    control system, giving the Corps the authority to look at the
    Sacramento River comprehensively, rather than project-by-
    project, one-off systems that have been in place for a century.
    I bring this to your attention, and I want to urge you to fully
    implement this in a comprehensive view of the Sacramento River
    flood control system.
        General Spellmon, Secretary Connor, if you would care to
    respond?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will start. We are absolutely
    open, with the non-Federal sponsor, to these discussions on
    some of the policy changes that they are asking for.
        And sir, you mentioned it, it is all about comprehensive
    benefits. We want to do that. They are asking for some upfront
    exemptions to 3x3. We can absolutely do that. We are going to
    incorporate climate change. They are asking for that and a
    couple of others.
        Sir, we are ready to step off on this. I think there is a
    lot of opportunity here and, once we have that New Start
    authority and funding, we are ready to step out on this.
        Mr. Connor. And I would just add, as you know, I am very
    committed----
        Mr. Garamendi. Very good, my----
        Mr. Connor. Go ahead, I am sorry.
        [Pause.]
        Mr. Connor. I was just going to add----
        Mr. Garamendi. Please continue.
        Mr. Connor [continuing]. Very quickly that, as you know, I
    am very familiar with the Yolo Bypass. I think a comprehensive
    look at all the benefits that can be associated with that
    traditional flood control element is the right way to go. So, I
    share General Spellmon's view that we should move forward as
    soon as we get the resources----
        Mr. Garamendi. A very, very quick comment here. The flood
    control districts in the Sacramento, from the Yolo upstream
    through the Sutter, are all looking at a comprehensive program
    to establish wetlands in those flood plains and in the rice
    fields for the benefit of the salmon and the waterfowl
    population. It is a very comprehensive program. Some 300,000
    acres would be involved in it, probably the largest wetlands
    restoration--not probably--definitely the largest wetlands
    restoration project in the Nation. I draw it to your attention.
    It is an extraordinary opportunity for the Federal Government
    and the local agencies to restore the habitat of the Sacramento
    River, and do it in a way that maintains the economic activity
    in the area.
        With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Garamendi. We will now have
    Mr. LaMalfa, followed by Mr. Malinowski, followed by Mr. Mast,
    and then Ms. Bourdeaux.
        Mr. LaMalfa, you are on.
        Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Madam Chair, I appreciate it. Thank
    you for this hearing today, and the opportunity to speak with
    the Corps.
        And first I want to commend the work with the Corps in our
    neighborhood that Mr. Garamendi and I have shared these years,
    on several projects on the Feather River, as well as on the
    Sacramento. The Hamilton City levee project has essentially
    reached its culmination here. There is still some work to be
    done, but we have got flood protection there, as well as,
    things are almost all buttoned up on the lower Feather River,
    where it flows through Butte, Sutter, and Yuba Counties. And
    so, anyway, we are very pleased to see that pretty much nearing
    its completion here.
        So, with that, Secretary Connor, I want to move over to the
    WOTUS situation, the ``waters of the United States,'' and the
    rules over that that have changed time and again over recent
    years. It has really thrown the rural communities and
    agricultural community into a big kind of a tizzy over which
    rule it is going to be, as those sectors are affected by that.
        So, Secretary Connor, in your confirmation hearings you
    talked about the need for some type of clear and enduring
    definition, and I have a quote. ``The rule[, Senator,] has
    changed so many times over the years that I am not sure the
    challenges are going to be any different. We need to have a
    clear definition of waters of the U.S., one that is protective,
    as it should be, under the Clean Water Act, but one that
    provides clarity, and I think, the goal, from what I understand
    in embarking upon a new rule is to''--and this is the really
    important line you said--``work very closely with the affected
    parties under that rule, and so my goal would be to have a
    clear rule that has enough level of input that hopefully we can
    get out of this litigation cycle and that we can move on with a
    rule that is going to be in place for a number of years. That
    should be the goal.
        ``That will do the most, I think, to help the Corps in its
    permitting ability and its responsibilities for making
    jurisdictional determinations if we have some clarity, and we
    have some longevity to the next rule, and that is going to
    require some collaboration, working with stakeholders, and I
    believe that is the game plan.''
        Then the second part of the quote is, ``Durability and
    longevity of a new rule will be a very high priority.''
        I think those are good things you laid out in your
    confirmation. And certainly, as we are looking for clarity, and
    not having the rules change again and again, as I think we move
    towards a pretty good balance these days in that the affected
    parties have input, and we are having a situation where not
    every raindrop or every mud puddle is seemingly under the
    jurisdiction of the Federal Government.
        So, please comment on that, as we have seen the 2020 rule
    that has been in place not that long, but certainly starting to
    work for rural areas. But touch on that, please, for me.
        Mr. Connor. Absolutely. I appreciate you raising this,
    Congressman LaMalfa. And, if anything, I am even more committed
    to those words that I spoke during my confirmation hearing. We
    need a durable rule. We need to calm the waters, not to use a
    pun, but with respect to this, and provide the regulatory
    certainty that folks need who are the regulated community, and
    do so that it is consistent with the protections envisioned by
    the Clean Water Act.
        And I think, going back initially--and this is the game
    plan, as you know--going back initially to pre-2015 WOTUS, the
    rules and regulations that were in place then, as modified by
    agency guidance pursuant to Supreme Court decisions that had
    come out in the early 2000s/mid-2000s, I think provides some
    structure and certainty now that people dealt with prior to the
    2015 rule, and then the navigable waters protection rule.
        So, that is a good start, and then a very methodical,
    second-step rulemaking that has been proposed by the
    administration that engages deeply with affected communities,
    obviously, preserving the agricultural exemptions that are
    statutory, but also ensuring that we are doing the right
    protections, and hopefully can withstand any litigation, which
    I hope doesn't come. That is the goal.
        And I have talked to my counterparts at the EPA,
    Administrator Regan, Assistant Administrator Fox. I think they
    are absolutely committed to that. That is most encouraging, and
    that is the reason that I am even more fully committed to those
    words that you raised.
        Mr. LaMalfa. So, how much change do you anticipate from the
    2020 rule, or the move in the direction away from pre-2015? How
    are we going to have clarity as we have it today, where, again,
    those who are mostly affected are going to see some continuity,
    instead of a whole new set of rules that might come within a
    year or so?
        Mr. Connor. Well, I think--and I need to do more homework
    on this because, as you know, it is very, very complicated,
    from a legal standpoint. But we had Supreme Court decisions. We
    had regulations in place that implemented the responsibilities
    under the Clean Water Act, and then we had Supreme Court
    decisions that had some certain clarity, and then we had terms
    that were incorporated about ``relatively permanent'' and
    ``significant nexus.'' There was agency guidance moving forward
    with those directives from the Supreme Court that the regulated
    community and the environmental community seemed to deal with.
    And that is the starting point, I think.
        And so, people understand what that is, and that is what we
    are going back to now. As we move forward in a second round
    that has been talked about, as far as the process, that is
    going to be the result of engagement. And how far we go in
    getting into further details, I think, and interpreting those
    terms is something that we are going to have to have an indepth
    dialogue about, which is what the administration is committed
    to.
        Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. LaMalfa. We now will
    proceed to Mr. Malinowski, followed by Mr. Mast, Ms. Bourdeaux,
    Mr. Westerman, Mr. Carbajal.
        Mr. Malinowski, please proceed.
        Mr. Malinowski. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to our
    witnesses.
        Lieutenant General Spellmon, it is good to see you again.
        Assistant Secretary Connor, congratulations on your
    confirmation. I look forward to working with you, as well.
        Lieutenant General Spellmon, you and I have spoken several
    times, as you know, over the years about the Rahway River flood
    risk management study in New Jersey. I represent some of the
    towns in New Jersey that were hardest hit by Tropical Storm
    Ida, which claimed the lives of 30 people in my State, and made
    clear once again the urgent need to protect the people, the
    homes, the businesses in and around the Rahway River watershed.
        You are a Jersey native. We have discussed in previous
    meetings this issue. I know that you are very familiar with
    this area. And while I am very proud of the work that we have
    done with FEMA to deliver hundreds of millions of dollars in
    assistance to more than 80,000 households in New Jersey that
    were affected by the storm, I am troubled that so much of our
    State remains vulnerable to the next inevitable big storm.
        Now, turning to WRDA, as you know, the 2020 bill nullified
    the Corps' termination of the Rahway study, and ordered the
    Corps to identify and expedite an acceptable way forward. So,
    the project should now be back on track. It is back with the
    Corps' New York District, where we think it belongs, and we are
    very grateful for that move. And in the guidance that the Corps
    issued back in August related to implementation of the Rahway
    provision in WRDA 2020, you acknowledged that you had the funds
    in place to proceed with the resumption of the study.
        So, Lieutenant General Spellmon--Assistant Secretary
    Connor, feel free to weigh in, as well--can you commit once
    again to work cooperatively with the local affected communities
    to bring about an acceptable solution, and to do so with the
    urgency that is required?
        As you know, it is not if, but when, another devastating
    storm will hit this area.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will start. This is General
    Spellmon.
        We have $800,000 on hand for the Federal portion, and we
    are ready to step out and move out on this study. We are
    working with New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
    They are lining up their dollars, sir, for the non-Federal
    portion of this. And with that we will sign a Federal cost
    sharing agreement.
        We do get the urgency, sir, given what Ida did to your
    district and that part of the region, and you have our
    commitment to work hard with the non-Federal sponsors to get to
    an acceptable solution.
        Mr. Malinowski. Thank you so much. And I know that getting
    to a solution requires all the stakeholders to be at the table,
    and to be part of that solution, that our local governments
    also need to work with you to get to that spot. But I am very
    grateful for your commitment.
        A question on a slightly different issue. Section 128 of
    WRDA 2020 created the harmful algal bloom demonstration
    program, and it directs the Corps to detect, prevent, treat,
    and eliminate harmful algal blooms. New Jersey is designated in
    the law as one of the focus areas for the program, which is, we
    think, very, very appropriate, because we have seen water
    bodies throughout New Jersey, including in the Lake Hopatcong
    and Budd Lake in my district, really badly affected by this
    phenomenon.
        So, I wanted to ask you both if you can offer any status
    update on the Corps' implementation of that specific provision.
        General Spellmon. Sir, this is General Spellmon. We
    received the Secretary's implementation guidance for this
    provision last night. We are excited.
        Again, this is opportunity. We have great work ongoing on
    this front in Florida, on Lake Okeechobee. We have it in New
    York, up on Lake Champlain. Ongoing in Ohio, on Lake Erie. I
    look forward to applying this work on the inland and coastal
    waters of New Jersey, as well.
        Mr. Malinowski. Fantastic, thank you so much.
        I yield back, Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Malinowski. Thank you very
    much.
        Mr. Mast, followed by Ms. Bourdeaux, Mr. Westerman, and Mr.
    Carbajal.
        Mr. Mast, you may proceed.
        Mr. Mast. Thank you, Chairwoman.
        Thank you both for your testimony today.
        General, we are going to continue on Lake Okeechobee,
    continue on a debate, a conversation that we were having this
    summer, and hopefully get to a place that we can work on
    something in the next WRDA bill that can help both Lake
    Okeechobee and help the soldiers and civilians that are working
    for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
        I asked you a very pointed question last summer, General.
    Are the soldiers and civilians working at Port Mayaca directly
    on top of the toxic water pictured behind me [indicating photo
    exhibit], which is off-gassing, and is toxic to a level
    sometimes 100 times greater than the threshold of toxic? Are
    those civilians and soldiers working directly on top of that,
    breathing it in 8-10 hours a day in insufferable conditions,
    are they being poisoned?
        You answered to me, emphatically, no. Would you like to
    recant that statement or change it at all at this time?
        General Spellmon. Hey, Congressman Mast, I think what I
    told you is, we are going to--I am not a doctor, right? And I
    have shared that with you. I am a civil engineer. Sir, we are
    going to follow the best advice that we get from the community,
    the Florida Department of Health.
        I agree with you. I think it is deplorable that my
    civilians, my great civilians, my military folks have to work
    in these State conditions. But we are going to work harder,
    when those conditions materialize at that Port Mayaca, to clean
    it up much quicker, much like you did in a marina in your
    district.
        Mr. Mast. In Pahokee, that is right. General, let's pause
    you there. This is important.
        You are not a doctor. You are the Chief, the sworn-in Chief
    of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a lieutenant general,
    three-star general, whose health and safety of all of those
    underneath you, that is your responsibility. The question
    isn't: Are you doing what the Florida Department of Health
    says? The question is, on the table: Are those soldiers and
    civilians being poisoned by that situation?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I would have to defer to a doctor to
    answer that question.
        Mr. Mast. Well, you guys actually sent me a letter after
    last summer, and you said the EPA indicates the highest risk
    for microcystin exposure is through ingestion. That is kind of
    like a no-shit statement, right?
        Obviously, if you drink something, it is worse than
    breathing it in, or touching it, right? You could say the same
    thing about alpha radiation, or asbestos, or something else.
    So, yes, we can figure that one out.
        It also said a direct lie. ``The EPA indicates the health
    risks associated with inhalation are very low.'' That is not
    what the EPA said. In fact, I got a letter from the EPA saying
    that what you sent to me wasn't true. They said you have got to
    take that in the right context. And here is their quote: ``The
    statement above''--that the health risks associated with
    inhalation are low--``is true if stated in the proper
    context'': comparing it to ingestion. They are not saying that
    the health risks are low. They are just saying it is lower than
    ingesting it, again, like we could say about asbestos, or
    radiation, or anything else.
        I want to ask you a question. You are going off the Florida
    Department of Health. That is what you said last summer. That
    is what you just said just now. Why is the Department of Health
    telling you to have your people wear a mask and gloves if they
    are not being poisoned?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I--well, let me back up.
        First of all, I am not familiar with the letter that you
    received from the Environmental Protection Agency. And if your
    staff would like to share that with me, I would like to go back
    on the record and correct any statement----
        Mr. Mast. Done.
        General Spellmon [continuing]. That I may have made.
        Mr. Mast. You will get it, done.
        General Spellmon. Again, I am not a doctor.
        I am sorry, sir. Can you repeat your other question? Why
    are my folks wearing masks?
        Mr. Mast. No, why--listen. If the Florida Department of
    Health said--listen, you are following their guidance--``wear a
    mask and gloves.'' You said you were following Florida
    Department of Health. Why do you have to wear a mask and
    gloves, if you are not being poisoned?
        General Spellmon. Oh, sir, I am sure it has to do with
    precautions, given the conditions that we are forced to work in
    in your State.
        Mr. Mast. Precautions for what? Don't play stupid. That is
    the definition of bureaucratic B.S. that goes on in this place.
    Again, you are a three-star general, Chief of the Corps, and
    your task is to protect your men and women, among many other
    things.
        Be protected from what? From being poisoned. Say it.
        General Spellmon. No, I am not going to say that. Sir, I
    will look at the letters you have been given. I will confer
    with the doctors and the experts that you have in the State to
    protect our workforce.
        Mr. Mast. Protect them from what? Why do they need to wear
    a mask and gloves, if they are not being poisoned?
        General Spellmon. Sir, you have smelled the algae, and you
    have read the reports. You have just quoted them yourself, from
    the harmful effects that that has to the people that have to
    live and work in these conditions.
        Mr. Mast. I didn't tell you the effects of it at all. Why
    don't you tell us the effects of it?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I----
        Mr. Mast. You are the Chief of the Corps. These are your
    people. Tell us the effects that it is having on your soldiers
    and civilians.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So, we work in these
    conditions. And as I mentioned to you last night, we are going
    to work harder to clean them up when these--when this work----
        Mr. Mast. And what is it doing to your people? What is it
    doing to your people? Answer that question.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I am not aware of it doing
    anything----
        Mr. Mast. Soldiers in uniform like you, like me,
    previously----
        Mrs. Napolitano. Time is up, Mr. Mast. Your time is up,
    sir. Please submit those questions in writing to the general,
    if you would.
        Mr. Mast. I ask to submit for the record, Chairwoman.
        Mrs. Napolitano. So ordered.
        [The information follows:]

        Letter of June 2, 2021, from Jaime A. Pinkham, Acting Assistant
        Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army,
                 Submitted for the Record by Hon. Brian J. Mast
                                Department of the Army,
                Office of the Assistant Secretary, Civil Works,
                                             108 Army Pentagon,
                                             Washington, DC 20310-0108,
                                                          June 2, 2021.
    The Honorable Brian Mast,
    United States House of Representatives,
    2182 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
        Dear Representative Mast:
        This is in response to your letter dated May 24, 2021, and our
    conversation on June 1, 2021, regarding the concerns you outlined to
    the former Acting Secretary of the Army John E. Whitley about algal
    blooms in Lake Okeechobee, Florida. As discussed during our call, I
    followed up with Major General William Graham, U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers Deputy Commanding General for Civil Works and Emergency
    Operations.
        Both Major General Graham and I share your concern for the health
    and safety of our civilian personnel working at Lake Okeechobee and the
    Okeechobee Waterway as it relates to exposure to harmful algal blooms
    (HABs). The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Jacksonville
    District, works with the best available information to protect our
    personnel who at times must work in proximity to these blooms while
    executing our navigation and flood risk management missions. The U.S.
    Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicates the highest risk from
    microcystin exposure is through ingestion, which is not likely to occur
    with our personnel. The EPA also indicates the health risks associated
    with inhalation are very low.
        Pursuant to the Central and Southern Florida project authorized
    under the 1948 Flood Control Act, the Corps operates Lake Okeechobee to
    balance multiple project purposes, including for flood risk management.
    In executing this mission, the Corps does not control the quality of
    the water, which enters or exits the Lake Okeechobee system. Instead,
    the Corps works closely with the State of Florida, the lead on water
    quality, and its agencies, the South Florida Water Management District,
    Florida Department of Environmental Protection, and Florida Department
    of Health (FDOH) to monitor algae blooms in Lake Okeechobee and the
    Okeechobee Waterway. When blooms are observed, State water quality
    sampling takes place on a weekly basis, at a minimum, but oftentimes
    sampling is done more frequently. This sampling began in early May
    2021.
        The Corps South Florida Operations Office (SFOO), which manages
    facilities and personnel associated with the lake and waterway,
    instituted a process for continual monitoring of the State of Florida
    water quality sampling, specifically for toxins exceeding the EPA's
    recommended levels for safe recreation activities. When state samples
    show an exceedance of those levels, the SFOO coordinates with the local
    county's Florida Department of Health offices to share the appropriate
    alerts with personnel and visitors using our public facilities.
        Additionally, the SFOO takes the following personnel health and
    safety precautions related to working around HABs, based upon the
    available guidance from the FDOH, EPA, and Centers for Disease Control
    and Prevention with the support of the Jacksonville District Safety and
    Occupational Health Office:
        a.  Updates our affected employee position hazard analyses to
    include exposure to HABs. The update includes the following recommended
    controls, ``Wear rubber gloves and respirator/dust mask (N95) when
    working in or near water that appears covered with scum or blue green
    algae. Wash hands after bare skin contacts algae. Corps employees
    experiencing breathing problems, rash, stomach pain, nausea, or fever
    after coming in contact or working near harmful algal blooms should
    report symptoms to their supervisor and seek medical treatment.'' This
    analysis is reviewed annually with our Corps employees and their
    supervisor, and precautions are routinely discussed during project
    safety meetings. The Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) identified is
    readily available to Corps employees.
        b.  Provides written guidance to all personnel detailing potential
    health risks associated with HABs, encouraging limit of exposure to
    mist, remaining inside of an air conditioned building when duties do
    not require them to be outside, instructing on the use of PPE, and
    practicing good hygiene (e.g., frequent hand washing).
        c.  HABs and the appropriate precautions are routinely discussed
    during project safety meetings including during the occurrence of the
    bloom on Lake Okeechobee this year.

        The Army is committed to the continued health and safety of its
    personnel. The Jacksonville District maintains awareness of the current
    best practices for limiting exposure to microcystin to ensure we meet
    that goal. We will continue to review and update work practices as
    FDOH, EPA, and CDC guidance evolves.
        Thank you for your support of the Army Civil Works Program.
            Sincerely,
                                              Jaime A. Pinkham,
                  Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works).

     Letter of August 18, 2021, from Radhika Fox, Assistant Administrator,
      Office of Water, Environmental Protection Agency, Submitted for the
                          Record by Hon. Brian J. Mast
         United States Environmental Protection Agency,
                                               Office of Water,
                                                  Washington, DC 20460,
                                                       August 18, 2021.
    The Honorable Brian J. Mast,
    House of Representatives,
    Washington, DC 20515.
        Dear Congressman Mast:
        Thank you for your July 15, 2021 letter regarding your concerns
    about the risks from inhalation of aerosolized toxins from algal blooms
    to people working on Florida's waterways, an issue you raised during my
    testimony before the Water Resources and Environment Subcommittee on
    July 14, 2021. Specifically, you requested that the U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA or agency) confirm whether the following
    statement appropriately characterizes EPA's research on inhalation risk
    from algal toxins--

            ``The [EPA] indicates the health risks associated with
            inhalation are very low.''

        The statement above is true if stated in the proper context. The
    health risks associated with inhalation of cyanotoxins in aerosols
    during recreational activities are very low when compared to ingestion.
        EPA's conclusion is restricted to our understanding of recreational
    exposure. EPA performed an analysis comparing potential oral and
    inhalation exposure during recreation (i.e., swimming). EPA previously
    published Recommended Recreational Water Quality Criteria and Swimming
    Advisories for Microcystins and Cylindrospermopsin which includes an
    analysis of the relative exposure levels between ingestion and
    inhalation of microcystins associated only with recreational
    activities. Based on this recreational exposure comparison, the amount
    of aerosolized microcystins that people are expected to inhale during
    recreation is estimated to be much lower than the amount incidentally
    ingested while swimming. This conclusion is also supported by two other
    studies that compared the exposure to aerosolized toxins during
    recreational activities like water skiing, jet skiing \1\ and
    watercraft use \2\ with exposure from ingestion of water while
    swimming. Each of these studies concluded that inhalation exposures are
    much lower than incidental ingestion resulting from swimming or limited
    contact recreational activities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Backer LC, McNeel SV, Barber T, Kirkpatrick B, Williams C,
    Irvin M, Zhou Y, Johnson TB, Nierenberg K, Aubel M, LePrell R, Chapman
    A, Foss A, Corum S, Hill VR, Kieszak SM, and Cheng YS (2010).
    Recreational exposure to microcystins during algal blooms in two
    California lakes. Toxicon, 55(5), 909-921.
        \2\ Butler N, Carlisle J, Kaley KB, and Linville R (2012).
    Toxicological Summary and Suggested Action Levels to Reduce Potential
    Adverse Health Effects of Six Cyanotoxins. California Waterboards.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In your letter, you mention the study of Jang et al. (2020) \3\
    that found that toxins, once airborne, can travel up to 10 miles and
    linger for hours. The Jang study did not investigate human exposure or
    health effects. The purpose of the Jang study was to evaluate the
    influence of environmental factors such as sunlight and relative
    humidity on the degradation of microcystin in the air. The Jang study
    was conducted under controlled conditions and not in the field. EPA
    reviewed the Jang study and notes that the spiked concentrations of
    microcystins nebulized in the air inside the apparatus used in the
    study are several orders of magnitude higher than the published ambient
    air concentrations of microcystins in field studies.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Jang, M., Berthold, D., TYu, Z., Silva-Sanchez, C.,
    Laughinghouse, H.D., Denslow, N., and Han, S. 2020. Atmospheric
    Progression of Microcystins-LR from Cyanobacterial Aerosol.
    Environmental Science and Technology Letters, 7(10), 740-745.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        EPA has identified four available published field studies (Backer
    et al., 2008, 2010; Wood and Dietrich, 2011; and Cheng et al., 2007)
    that measured recreators' exposure to aerosols containing microcystins
    from lakes with dense blooms done to assess human health impacts to
    cyanotoxins during real-world conditions. For example, Backer et al.
    (2008 and 2010) measured concentrations of toxins in air and human
    exposure to cyanotoxins in air droplets using personal air samplers and
    nasal swabs from individuals recreating in a lake with a cyanobacterial
    bloom. Although the exposures in these studies were short term (i.e., a
    few hours during recreational activities), these studies found low
    concentrations of microcystins in air, plasma, and nasal swabs and no
    health effects associated with inhalation exposure to microcystins.
        EPA shares your concern about the potential for health risks
    associated with long term inhalation of cyanotoxins in aerosols. EPA
    recognizes that microcystins can be present as aerosols in surface
    waters and there is the potential for exposure via inhalation to toxins
    in contaminated waterbodies. Unfortunately, data on the absorption,
    metabolism and distribution in the respiratory system, and elimination
    (excretion) of these toxins from the body are not well-understood.
    Furthermore, studies of longer duration exposure and health outcomes
    are lacking. Therefore, these data gaps preclude the determination of
    health risks associated with long term inhalation of cyanotoxins. EPA
    is interested in this question and will continue monitoring new
    research as it becomes available.
        Again, thank you for your letter and your interest in this
    important issue. If you have further questions, please contact me or
    your staff may contact Denis Borum in the EPA's Office of Congressional
    and Intergovernmental Relations.
            Sincerely,
                                                   Radhika Fox,
                                               Assistant Administrator.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Ms. Bourdeaux, followed by Mr. Westerman,
    Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Katko, and Mr. Stanton.
        Ms. Bourdeaux, you may proceed.
        Ms. Bourdeaux. Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking
    Member Rouzer, for holding today's hearing.
        My district is home to The Water Tower, a nonprofit
    organization committed to creating an ecosystem of water
    innovation which brings together the public and private sectors
    of the water industry, as well as academic and nonprofits to
    tackle challenges that the water industry faces. The Water
    Tower focuses on applied research, technology, innovation,
    workforce development, and community engagement to ensure
    access to safe, affordable, and resilient water services.
        General Spellmon, in your written testimony you talk about
    the Corps' continued need to invest in research and
    development, and I was hoping you could elaborate a bit on
    that.
        What are the current R&D investments that the Corps has
    made, and what are priorities for future investments in water
    technology?
        [Pause.]
        Ms. Bourdeaux. General Spellmon, can you all hear me?
        General Spellmon. I am sorry, I was on mute.
        Ma'am, when you look at the investment that the Corps is
    making in research and development, particularly in the Civil
    Works program, it is incredibly low. It is about 0.2 of 1
    percent of our overall program. And if you compare that with
    DoD that is investing 13 percent, or the Army investing 17
    percent, Apple investing 4 percent, there--and the reason I am
    putting a priority on this is there are challenges, some of our
    Nation's toughest challenges right now, that we don't have good
    construction solutions for. So, it could be whatever, it is
    harmful algal blooms that we were just referring to, it could
    be drought, it could be wildfires or the effects of wildfires.
        I just think, in order to get to good construction
    solutions, we need more investment in research and development.
    And I think we have been talking about some of them here.
    Forecast-informed reservoir operations is a great example. I
    think we have got some great opportunities with harmful algal
    blooms in a variety of corners around the country. That is why
    I made this an emphasis area, ma'am.
        Ms. Bourdeaux. Thank you. And I think that is wonderful.
        Do you currently or do you anticipate partnering with
    nonprofit organizations and academic institutions as part of
    this R&D program?
        General Spellmon. Yes, ma'am. So, the budget that we do
    receive comes to us in specific line items for very specific
    tasks. And you are right, we work with international partners,
    we work with academia, and we work with industry on all of
    those R&D projects and programs that we do have.
        Ms. Bourdeaux. OK. And I am new here, so, I am learning how
    all this works. Do these partnerships need congressional
    authorization?
        Do you need more flexibility in the types of projects that
    you all are looking at?
        General Spellmon. Ma'am, we don't need any authorizations
    for partnerships. Those are natural, and we have all of that.
        One of the things that I would like to get to is some more
    flexibility in our research and development program, where we
    can follow some early successes. Today I don't have the ability
    to move from one topic to another to reinforce success. But I
    would like to at least have conversations with the committee
    and the administration on some ways that we could go about
    doing that.
        Ms. Bourdeaux. Thank you. A question for Mr. Connor.
        In October of 2021, the Army Corps released its Climate
    Action Plan as a part of the Biden administration's ongoing
    effort to tackle the climate crisis. And one of the three topic
    areas was listed as agency efforts to enhance climate literacy
    in its management workforce, which talked about the Corps
    training its people through working groups, interagency
    partnerships, and so forth.
        Could you talk a bit about climate literacy when addressing
    infrastructure and ecosystem resiliency, and just give us a
    little bit more detail? What does this actually mean, that you
    would be implementing in terms of a curriculum for your
    workforce?
        Mr. Connor. Thank you for that question. As I mentioned,
    resiliency is at the top of the order with respect to
    priorities.
        And so, climate literacy, I think, is at every level of the
    organization we need to have programs in place to identify
    risks to our different infrastructure, our different programs
    and activities.
        We need to highlight the innovative features that we can
    integrate with our projects to address resilience to new
    information, new data that describes the risk from climate
    change, and take those lessons learned, and disseminate them
    throughout the organization.
        And then we have to incentivize our folks across the
    divisions and districts to look at climate resilience when they
    are formulating projects, et cetera. So, we have got to educate
    ourselves at the top. We have got to assess the information
    that we can gather from the projects that we are already
    undertaking. And a lot of this we are doing with our partners
    at the local level, who are demanding and wanting the Corps'
    involvement specifically to address those risks. And so, they
    bring a lot of information to the table.
        It is a whole-of-Government--and I just don't mean Federal
    Government, I mean with States and local entities--to get that
    information disseminated through the organization. It is going
    to be an ongoing effort. It is not just a one-and-done training
    program. We want to sensitize folks to the need to look at it,
    and then it is going to be a continuing education program. That
    is the way I see it playing out.
        General Spellmon, is----
        General Spellmon. Sir, I concur. Sir, I see it exactly that
    way, and I think there are--just to pile on, there are plenty
    of opportunities here.
        Ms. Bourdeaux. OK, I look forward to having more of a
    conversation on this, but I recognize I am out of time.
        So, thank you, Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Ms. Bourdeaux. We now have Mr.
    Westerman, followed by Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Katko, Mr. Stanton,
    Miss Gonzalez-Colon.
        Mr. Westerman, you are recognized.
        Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Madam Chair. It seems like it
    wasn't long ago that we were working on what I believe turned
    out to be a very good WRDA 2020, and I wish you and Ranking
    Member Rouzer all the best, and the committee, as, hopefully,
    we work together and come up with another great bipartisan WRDA
    2022, and keep the streak going.
        Mrs. Napolitano. We miss you.
        Mr. Westerman. Pardon me, Madam Chair?
        Mrs. Napolitano. We miss you,
        Mr. Westerman. I miss you, too. You will have to come back,
    and maybe we can do this in person some time.
        Mr. Connor, General Spellmon, thank you for your testimony
    today.
        And Mr. Connor, in your testimony you mentioned briefly
    about the Corps and EPA working together on the WOTUS rule. And
    I know there was a notice put in the Federal Register back in
    November, and it only gave 60 days of comment time. And we have
    got all the holidays sandwiched in with that. I think, as of
    Monday, there were only about 14 comments. And if we look back
    at the Obama administration WOTUS rule, I believe it started
    with 90 days, and was actually extended to 7 months.
        Is there any talk of extending the comment period, since
    this is a much larger, more detailed rule, and I am hearing a
    lot of people would like to have more time to comment on it?
        Mr. Connor. There has been some discussion. So, it will be
    taken under consideration, the request for additional time.
        I would note, just continuing the discussion I had earlier,
    it is a two-step process. Step 1 is going back to pre-2015
    definition of ``waters of the U.S.'' And so, this step is
    fairly familiar to folks, as far as what the goal is in
    defining ``waters of the U.S.,'' and what the activity is here.
        Obviously--and I will go back and check the statistic--I
    think I heard a little bit different, with respect to the
    number of comments, but you may indeed be right, so, I am
    interested in informing myself.
        And then the second round is the much deeper dive into a
    potential new rule, new from the standpoint of being
    promulgated from the ground up.
        So, I hear you. I assume your question is actually a
    request also for us to give strong consideration, so, I
    appreciate that, and will take it under consideration.
        Mr. Westerman. Thank you. It almost looks like the EPA may
    be driving the timeframe more than the Corps on this one.
        General Spellmon, I don't have a lot to ask you, but I do
    want to thank you for the work that you have done, and
    especially recognize some of your employees in my area, or
    other members of the Corps. Colonel Noe has been great to work
    with. Unfortunately, he has only got about a year left there in
    the Little Rock District.
        And this is an issue that--we talk about it a lot, but what
    establishes this 3-year term for colonels in the district
    commands, and has anybody ever looked at taking that out, and
    allowing longer times, or even shorter times, if needed?
        General Spellmon. Sir, yes, sir, we have allowed for
    shorter times for our colonels, because in many cases we need
    to get them out to other assignments so that they can be joint
    qualified and, of course, competitive for service in more
    senior positions.
        Sir, we haven't looked at extending beyond 3 years. We have
    a great pipeline of talented officers coming up through the
    ranks, and this is all part of their professional development.
    We keep our lieutenant colonels in for two, and our colonels in
    for three. As you know, they are commanding some of our larger
    and more complicated districts.
        Mr. Westerman. Thank you. I think that is something that
    needs to be looked at.
        One final question, a concern I have had from some land
    surveyors--and this gets back to the TORN process on, I think,
    the way you actually award final contracts. And the question is
    just has the Corps heard any complaints from contractors about
    the TORN process? Is there any discussion in the Corps about
    going back to the pre-March 2020 process?
        I know there was a letter in April of 2020, and from what I
    am hearing, this is being implemented differently across
    different districts.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will take back the consistency
    that you mentioned. We are operating differently. We have
    worked extensively with industry on this particular matter. But
    if there are recommendations from other vendors out there, we
    would like to hear them.
        Mr. Westerman. Thank you.
        And Madam Chair, I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Westerman, very kind of
    you. We have Mr. Carbajal next, followed by Mr. Katko, Mr.
    Stanton, Miss Gonzalez-Colon, Ms. Norton.
        Mr. Carbajal, you may proceed.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano.
        Thank you, Assistant Secretary Connor and Lieutenant
    General Spellmon, for being here today and testifying. I
    represent the central coast of California, where we have
    already experienced the effects of climate change, including
    intense drought, increased flooding, and severe wildfires that
    have led to a deadly debris flow in my district. We currently
    have ongoing Corps' projects that can help reduce these risks,
    better protect the environment, and, of course, increase
    economic opportunity.
        Secretary Connor, the Lower Mission Creek flood control
    project in my district began as a partnership between the
    county of Santa Barbara and the Corps in the late 1960s. The
    county has spent millions of their own dollars, local taxpayer
    self-assessments, to complete a portion of this project, but
    they have been unable to receive the Federal funds needed to
    complete this project, due to a low benefit-cost ratio.
        Federal funds have already been authorized to this project
    to complete a new general reevaluation report. Would the
    administration be supportive of transferring these funds to
    update the design cost, estimate, and economics of this
    project?
        Mr. Connor. Let me provide a kind of initial response,
    particularly given the reference to the benefit-cost aspect of
    this.
        I am not familiar with the specifics of the project. I do
    know that the level of risk that you have experienced in
    California, from all the factors that you indicated, are
    incredibly important, and we need to figure out a way to
    address that from communities, from the most affluent to the
    least affluent. And from that standpoint, the Corps is already
    moving forward in its project formulations and looking at
    comprehensive benefits that aren't just driven by a national
    economic determination that looks at strict benefit costs. We
    are looking at all the values and benefits that can be done.
        We have got, moving forward from internal guidance to
    formal rulemaking, we have direction in WRDA 2020 to move
    forward with agency-specific procedures to implement the
    principles and requirements and guidelines that will
    institutionalize the look at those benefits, so that we can
    select projects based on different factors. So, I am sensitive
    to the issue raised.
        As far as getting to your specific point, moving money and
    approving that for this particular project, I don't know if
    General Spellmon has insights on that----
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will just say, yes, Congress was
    generous in the 2021 workplan. They gave us $500K to step off
    on the Post-Authorization Change Report. We are in the
    President's budget for 2022 for another $600K that will allow
    us to advance that work.
        And then, sir, we are having some conversations with our
    non-Federal sponsor. To be frank, the NEPA on this project is
    about 22 years old, and we are confident we are going to have
    to go back and look at some of that. And we are having that
    conversation this week and next with our great partners out
    there.
        Mr. Carbajal. Great. Well, thank you very much for that. I
    really appreciate your attention to this important project in
    my district, and finally moving it to a full completion. So,
    thank you.
        Moving on to my next question, the Salinas Dam in San Luis
    Obispo County is currently owned by the Corps. It is my
    understanding that the Corps of Engineers have continued
    discussions and negotiations with the county of San Luis Obispo
    regarding the future of Salinas Dam, the associated reservoir,
    and other related infrastructure.
        It is also my understanding the questions and issues
    involved in this process are complex, and will require
    significant additional discussions between the Corps of
    Engineers and San Luis Obispo County.
        Lieutenant General Spellmon, until the county and the Corps
    have come to an agreement to transfer ownership, can the Corps
    refrain from taking actions that would adversely jeopardize the
    county taking ownership?
        And what I mean by this is, such as taking administrative
    steps associated with the General Services Administration
    stepping into the shoes of the Corps as the Federal agency
    responsible for disposing of this facility.
        General Spellmon. Sir, this is General Spellmon. So, I will
    go back and examine my authorities to do a direct transfer to
    the county from the Corps, outside of the process that is
    outlined in law where I have to work through the General
    Services Administration. Let me do some homework on that.
        My only goal here is I want to transfer a project with eyes
    wide open. I mean, the Army put this project up in 6 months, as
    you mentioned, back in 1942. It came to us a few years later. I
    just want to make sure we are clear with the county on any
    seismic concerns, any structural concerns, or dam safety
    concerns, and we hand off in a complete, transparent manner.
    But sir, I will do more homework, and we will follow up with
    your team.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. I am out of time.
        I yield back, Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Mr. Carbajal.
        Mr. Katko, you are recognized.
        Mr. Katko. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is good to see you
    again, as always, and I am glad to be here with everybody on
    the committee.
        I would also like to thank Chairwoman Napolitano and
    Ranking Member Rouzer for holding today's hearing on the
    upcoming Water Resources Development Act of 2022, and I look
    forward to working with you both in the coming months as we
    develop this legislation. The 2020 WRDA bill was a prime
    example of bipartisan cooperation. And I hope that that will be
    the case this year, as well.
        This legislation is especially important for the community
    that I represent in central New York, where we understand the
    importance of reliable investments in water infrastructure all
    too well.
        Specifically, our coastal communities on Lake Ontario have
    faced a number of challenges with sustained high water levels,
    historic flooding, and deferred maintenance resulting in
    significant damage to our aging harbor and shoreline water
    infrastructure.
        Unfortunately, despite the diligent work and sincere
    partnership of our local representatives from the Army Corps of
    Engineers Buffalo District, the significant backlog of
    maintenance in my district has been underfunded in the Corps'
    workplan in recent years. For communities in Oswego, Fair
    Haven, and Sodus Bay, the timely completion of Army Corps'
    projects can have a major impact on the local community and
    economy.
        This is one of the reasons I was proud to support the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which I think is
    critically important, and which provided significant
    supplemental funding for Army Corps. I look forward to working
    with my colleagues on this committee to ensure those resources
    are effectively mobilized to our communities in the months
    ahead.
        For Mr. Connor, I have a quick question.
        WRDA 2020 included language to advance the Great Lakes
    coastal resiliency study. This project is not only essential to
    my district, but to thousands of communities along all of the
    Great Lakes. And I also appreciate that this project was
    identified in the President's budget, and I was proud to join
    my colleagues in supporting this budget request through the
    appropriations process.
        Looking to WRDA 2022, the question I have is, are there any
    additional Federal authorities that the Corps of Engineers
    would like to see in order to help advance the Great Lakes
    coastal resiliency study?
        Mr. Connor. The short answer is, I am not aware of any new
    authorities that we need right now, with respect to the coastal
    resilience study, but I would just say that I think I
    absolutely agree with you. That is an incredibly important
    study, given the dynamics going on with respect to the Great
    Lakes necessary across the entire region.
        In my first trip to the inland waterways, I did take some
    time to spend with our Chicago District and get briefed on the
    scope of the Great Lakes coastal resilience study. We will keep
    in touch with you with respect to anything the study yields
    with respect to needs moving forward, but it is a high priority
    to move forward, and get that study up and going with all the
    non-Federal partners.
        Mr. Katko. Thank you. And as you well know, anybody who
    knows anything about the Great Lakes knows that the high water
    levels in Superior, Huron, and all those others end up finding
    their way towards Lake Ontario. They kind of all funnel their
    way there. So, the water levels are at record highs along those
    waterways. We can just anticipate them coming our way, as well.
    So, working with the International Joint Commission is really
    important, as well.
        But we have a pressing issue that, Lieutenant General
    Spellmon, I would like to talk to you about, and that is in
    Fair Haven. And I have spoken to you and others about this in
    the past, about the lack of prioritization for recreational
    areas as far as Corps of Engineers' projects. And you know in
    Fair Haven we have a major problem with one of the walls that
    is collapsing, and they did something to try and stem the
    problem a little bit, the Corps did, a couple of years ago. But
    they also realized they need to rebuild that wall and fix it
    the right way. And from what I have heard, the locals are
    saying it has collapsed. I don't know if it has or not, but it
    sounds like it is in really bad shape.
        And I just want to make sure that the Army Corps locally in
    the Buffalo area understands the importance of that wall not
    collapsing. If that wall collapses, that bay is in real
    trouble, and it is going to be hundreds of millions of dollars,
    at a minimum, of damage. So, I just hope you give it the
    priority it needs, and tell us what you need if you are not
    getting everything you need from us.
        General Spellmon. Sir, this is General Spellmon. I will
    follow up on the wall collapse, and our team will get back with
    your staff on any needs that we have.
        Mr. Katko. I would appreciate it sooner, rather than later,
    because this is--with the ice and everything, and the water
    levels where they are now, it is going to be something I hope
    we can get addressed this year. We have been trying to get the
    Corps to do it the last couple of years, and I know you have a
    tremendous backlog, and that backlog is a concern, and I am
    worried about some of the bureaucracy that comes along with
    those backlogs. But I just hope you could push through it, and
    try and get this thing done.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Katko. All right, thank you.
        I yield back, Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Katko, very much. Next will
    be Mr. Stanton, followed by Miss Gonzalez-Colon, followed by
    Ms. Norton, then Mr. Guest.
        Mr. Stanton, you are on.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you
    for holding this important hearing.
        And to Assistant Secretary Connor and General Spellmon, it
    is good to see both of you again.
        General Spellmon, you were last before this committee in
    June. And at that time I submitted a series of questions on the
    Rio de Flag project in Flagstaff, Arizona. Unfortunately,
    nearly 7 months later, we have not yet received a response on
    our questions. This is an incredibly important flood control
    project in my State. So, obviously, their frustration with the
    lack of response to our query.
        I expect the Corps to respond to me and all the other
    members of this committee in a timely manner. I just want to
    stop right here and give you an opportunity to respond.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will go track down your letter as
    soon as we adjourn here, and we will get you a response as soon
    as possible. I apologize.
        Mr. Stanton. I appreciate that greatly. It is important
    that, when Members of Congress do provide queries, particularly
    after hearings, that we get immediate or timely responses.
        Assistant Secretary Connor, I did appreciate our
    conversation last month, and one important issue that we
    discussed was the importance of Federal investment in
    environmental infrastructure to help small, rural, and Tribal
    communities address their aging water and wastewater systems.
    My top priority is to ensure that the authority I secured for
    Arizona in the 2020 WRDA receives the Federal investment it
    needs, so that communities can tackle their water
    infrastructure challenges.
        I appreciate the Corps allocating funds in the fiscal year
    2021 workplan to advance the first project under the authority,
    a very important water line project for the Pascua Yaqui Tribe.
    Great progress is being made on this project that will bring
    nonpotable water to the reservation, so the Tribe can conserve
    its precious and limited potable water.
        To date, more than a dozen communities and the Yavapai-
    Apache Nation have expressed interest in this program,
    outlining more than $70 million in needed water and wastewater
    projects. So, I look forward to working closely with you to
    ensure Federal funds are allocated to advance these critically
    important projects.
        And although Arizona is a desert State, it is no stranger
    to flooding, and there are several projects that need the
    Corps' support: the Tres Rios ecosystem restoration to help
    ensure the Salt and Gila River corridors; feasibility studies
    for the Cave Buttes Dam and Agua Fria Trilby Wash to address
    dam safety and strengthen flood protection for more than 1
    million residents in Maricopa County; and the Little Colorado
    at Winslow flood control project, where nearly one-quarter of
    residents live in poverty, and critical services, including the
    hospital and assisted-living center, emergency services, and
    schools, are directly in the 100-year flood plain.
        The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides the Corps with
    substantial resources for investigations, construction, and
    environmental infrastructure, and it is my expectation that
    Arizona, which hasn't done too well in previous workplans, will
    finally see some significant movement and support on these
    long-awaited and important projects.
        In the time I have remaining I would just open it up for
    any comments from you or General Spellmon on these critically
    important Arizona projects.
        Mr. Connor. So, I will start very quickly, and leave time
    for General Spellmon.
        As per our conversation--I enjoyed that--obviously, I
    understand the risk to Arizona from a water supply perspective,
    given your location in the Colorado River Basin and all that
    entails.
        So, I was impressed at the need and the use that you have
    identified for the environmental infrastructure activities, and
    it is great to have Arizona added to the 595 program. I was
    amazed at, when your staff sent over the list, how much there
    is pent-up demand for the use of that EI program in Arizona.
    And it just is a result of the risk that is involved in water
    supplies.
        I would just say I think there is a lot of good work here
    in Arizona teed up to get multiple benefits. You are prone to
    floods. We need to be looking at that with an eye towards water
    supply to address the wholesale risk. So, I look forward to
    working with you and your team.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I will just quickly add, on EI, we
    have 39 projects in the queue, as you said, just over $70
    million. We will make our best technical argument if we are
    offered a 2022 workplan to advance those projects.
        Sir, real quick on Tres Rios, the last time I told you we
    had some perception problems with this project. We have aligned
    with both the Gila River Indian Community and the city on a way
    forward, and we are working to report a capability of $1.8
    million next year, so we can advance that PACR and get back to
    work out there.
        We are making a lot of good progress with the commanders in
    the field, with the Federal Railroad Administration and some of
    the challenges we have had there, where our Civil Works
    projects intersect with railways. I am happy to report progress
    there.
        And then, sir, we received the Secretary's guidance on--you
    remember section 162--leveraging Federal infrastructure for
    increased water supply. And I just think, as the Secretary just
    said, there are many opportunities in the State of Arizona
    where we can put that authority to work.
        Mr. Stanton. General, Assistant Secretary, thank you very
    much for your good work now, and I look forward to working
    closely with you to advance these critically important projects
    in the future.
        I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Stanton, very much. Miss
    Gonzalez-Colon, followed by Ms. Norton, Mr. Guest, Mr.
    Lowenthal.
        Miss Gonzalez-Colon, you are recognized.
        Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you
    for holding this hearing. I want to thank Assistant Secretary
    Connor and General Spellmon for their presentation today, and
    for the work they do for the Corps of Engineers in our Nation.
        I will say that the Corps is one of the best resources I
    have counted on for Puerto Rico. The Jacksonville District,
    with support of many others, has always given us their utmost
    support, and I want to congratulate them for that and for all
    of the hard work in the past few years. In the face of
    disasters, unprecedented levels of funding were approved, and I
    am happy to be working to that end. That enabled addressing
    projects that have been pending for decades, like Rio Puerto
    Nuevo and Rio de la Plata, and immediate needs like the Ports
    of Arecibo and Mayaguez, and the coastal communities of Loiza.
        But there are still pending major priority projects that
    have completed feasibility studies and favorable Chief's
    Reports. This includes three critical projects that I was
    closely following with your predecessors.
        First is the ecosystem restoration of Cano Martin Pena,
    which is just a matter of ecological balance, but of security,
    of infrastructure, and justice for communities.
        The second one is the San Juan Harbor navigation channels
    that is strategically essential for supplies of food, fuel, and
    industrial supplies in Puerto Rico.
        And the Guayanilla flood protection project that will
    enable the protection of an entire town that has been impacted
    severely by multiple natural disasters.
        These and many other projects in towns across the islands,
    like [speaking the Spanish names of the towns] just to mention
    a few, require attention, and it is my hope that we can soon
    hear good news about them, and I look forward to receiving you
    in Puerto Rico for that purpose.
        Now I do have a couple of questions, and I want to just
    make the first of them.
        Secretary Connor, in your testimony you mentioned a
    proposed rule that will implement a new Federal credit program
    to support investment in safety projects to maintain, upgrade,
    and repair non-Federal dams. And this is a matter of great
    interest, and I will be very willing to support it.
        I do understand that you expect this to be approved and put
    in effect shortly. And what can we do to make it so?
        Mr. Connor. Yes, thank you for the question.
        In regards to the WIFIA program, Water Infrastructure
    Finance and Innovation Act authority that we have, and it has
    been proposed. We are authorized for a broader set of
    activities, but the 2021 appropriations bill specifically--and
    IIJA, believe--gives resources to move forward with the dam
    safety aspect for non-Federal dams. So, we need to move forward
    with a rulemaking.
        We are working within the administration through the
    interagency process to come out with a proposed rulemaking here
    in the near future. And so, that will start a public process to
    take input, and we will move forward and, hopefully, be able to
    finalize that some time midway or late fall this year, with
    respect to getting that program in place, and making use of
    those resources.
        And I will just say I think it is an incredible part of a
    resilience strategy that we work with non-Federal partners. The
    vast majority of dams throughout the country are non-Federal
    dams. This is an important tool as part of an overall
    resiliency agenda.
        Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Sir, I earlier mentioned some of my
    top priorities in Puerto Rico, like the Cano Martin Pena
    ecosystem restoration project, and I do know that it is waiting
    for a New Start with a local sponsor ready to go.
        In recent years we have repeatedly had an increased
    ecosystem New Starts included in authorizations and
    appropriations, but somehow it never makes the cut. With a new
    emphasis on justice for impacted communities, do you expect
    there to be more than more than the norm under the
    infrastructure plans in the new WRDA?
        Mr. Connor. Absolutely. I mean, as I discussed earlier, and
    I think it applies to the project that you referenced, Cano
    Martin Pena, we need to look at the comprehensive benefits to
    communities that will be benefited by the activity that is
    being proposed. That is definitely a screen that we are
    bringing to the process of evaluating projects for funding in
    these various workplans, whether it be what we are looking at
    in 2022, IIJA, any flexibility that we have.
        So, rest assured that we are not just talking about
    priorities, we are trying to implement them in the decisions
    that we are making now, as we move forward.
        Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Question. In deciding the use of
    infrastructure funding, will there be any preference to
    projects that are shovel-ready, and where the non-Federal
    partners have taken an initiative in moving their part forward?
        Mr. Connor. Well, we certainly want to look at, as part of
    a mix, the priorities of resilience, environmental justice, and
    supply chain issues. But those are laying on top of existing
    priorities that the Corps has for life safety, completing
    projects, activity that is already in the works. So, we are
    kind of looking through all of these historical factors, new
    priorities, and making our decisions moving forward.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Your time is up, Miss Gonzalez-Colon.
        Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much. Next, we have Ms.
    Norton, followed by Mr. Guest, Mr. Lowenthal, Mr. Weber, Mr.
    Cohen, and Ms. Wilson.
        Ms. Norton, you are recognized.
        Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair, for this really
    important hearing. My question is for both of our witnesses,
    Assistant Secretary Connor and Lieutenant General Spellmon.
        I plan to submit to the new WRDA bill three separate
    requests for projects that affect the District of Columbia,
    which, of course, is my district. And I would like the
    administration's views on each of them: one, to tap new funding
    sources for the Washington aqueduct, which produces drinking
    water for approximately 1 million people living and working and
    visiting the District and Virginia, and includes, of course,
    the Capitol and Federal buildings; secondly, to address the
    region's vulnerability to water supply loss by identifying
    alternative water sources for the customers of the aqueduct;
    and my third ask in the WRDA bill will be to address the
    flooding on the National Mall, which has suffered severe and
    costly floods that have forced Government facilities to close
    down.
        So, first, let's take tapping new funding sources for the
    Washington aqueduct, which produces the drinking water for this
    entire region. What is the administration's view on that
    project?
        General Spellmon. Ma'am, this is General Spellmon, I will
    start.
        As you know, the aqueduct and our team there, we do not
    receive any Federal funding. Our operations are funded by water
    rates that are paid by local taxpayers. And ma'am, you have
    been out there, and I think the team does a miraculous job, but
    you are exactly right, your assessment is exactly right. We
    could use some additional funding. Other funding sources would
    be greatly helpful to us to maintain what we have, but also
    to----
        Ms. Norton. So, you have only payer sources now?
        General Spellmon. Yes, ma'am. That is correct.
        Ms. Norton. Yes. Well, we will have to see if we can get
    another source, because the necessity is clear.
        And secondly, to address the region's vulnerability to
    water supply loss by identifying alternative water sources for
    the customers of the aqueduct, what is your view on that?
        General Spellmon. Ma'am, the current aqueduct provides the
    city and northern Virginia and portions of Maryland only 1 to 2
    days of supply of water. That is risky. We have done some high-
    level work, where we think we have identified other real estate
    that could supply the region upwards of 20 to 30 days of
    supply. But that is an extensive feasibility effort that we
    would have to undertake first, followed by, obviously, by
    construction to put all of the infrastructure in place.
        Ms. Norton. Is the feasibility effort underway?
        General Spellmon. No, ma'am. We would need an authority,
    feasibility study authority, to move out on that effort and, of
    course, funding to bring all the right technical folks.
        Ms. Norton. God, you don't even have the authority to do
    the feasibility study?
        General Spellmon. That is right. That is correct.
        Ms. Norton. I will make sure you get it.
        And staff is with me, so they hear me saying that.
        And third, to address the flooding on the National Mall,
    which, as you may know, has suffered severe and costly floods
    that have even forced several Government facilities close by,
    to close down. How do you expect to address that?
        General Spellmon. Ma'am, I know we have provided your staff
    some legal drafting services on how we might go about this.
    This is at the confluence of multiple Federal agencies, and
    there is really no one lead Federal agency, something that we
    would want to, obviously, designate to move forward on any
    effort like this.
        Our Baltimore District is using some authorities that we
    have under our flood plain management services to look at
    previous events that may help inform some mitigation in the
    interim before we get the authority and actual guidance to move
    forward. This one is a bit complicated, but it can be done.
        Ms. Norton. You are moving to get the multiple authority
    from--I mean, do you need any help from the Congress?
        General Spellmon. Ma'am, I think we would look to the
    Congress to appoint a lead Federal agency to step off on the
    effort to work with all of the other Federal agencies that are
    impacted by this.
        Ms. Norton. That is an important recommendation, and I will
    see to it that that is done, either through legislation or
    through administration.
        Thank you very much, Madam Chair. This has been very
    helpful to me.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Ms. Norton. We follow with Mr.
    Guest.
        You are recognized.
        Mr. Guest. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        To both of our witnesses, I want to thank you for taking
    time to be with us today as we discuss WRDA 2022, and we begin
    to look at what that legislation is going to look like going
    forward.
        I want to talk and direct this question to you, General
    Spellmon. In your written testimony you make a statement to
    which I strongly agree. On page 4, you state that, ``I feel
    strongly that in order to achieve our vision, we will need to
    continue to invest in our research and development program. We
    are working to further inform our R&D initiatives and
    strengthen our partnerships with academic institutions to
    benefit from the enormous capacity of our Nation's scientists,
    so we will know how best to meet the challenges of the 21st
    century. Investments in research and development help us find
    solutions for today's and tomorrow's challenges.''
        And so, as we talk about research and development, I want
    to talk about the Army Corps of Engineers research and
    development centers, ERDC. We know that that is an important
    part of the research and development that occurs there at the
    Army Corps of Engineers. There are actually four ERDC centers
    that are spread across the country: one in Alexandria,
    Virginia; one in Hanover, New Hampshire; one in Champaign,
    Illinois; and one in my home State of Vicksburg, Mississippi.
    And I have had a chance to visit the facility there in
    Vicksburg, and see firsthand some of the amazing things that
    they are doing.
        And so, General, I would ask first if you can kind of give
    the rest of the committee a brief overview of ERDC and their
    mission, and talk about the important role that ERDC plays in
    the Army Corps of Engineers.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. I would say ERDC, a group of
    incredibly talented folks that we have that enable us across
    all of our mission areas, not only Civil Works, but the work we
    do in the military construction, the work that we are doing for
    the combatant commanders out in the field, in deployed
    locations, as well.
        Sir, the comment in my testimony was really geared toward
    the Civil Works program, in that we are investing--I believe it
    is 0.2 of 1 percent in research and development. And I shared
    with others that there are many challenges across the country
    today where we don't have a construction solution for, and I
    use examples like drought, and harmful algal blooms, and others
    where a small investment, I believe, in research and
    development on some of these really thorny issues will help us
    immensely inform the way ahead in the future.
        Mr. Guest. And General, I want to talk a little bit about
    funding, particularly of Civil Works. We know that the Civil
    Works does not have an individual research, development, test,
    and evaluation account, an RDT&E account, but instead relies on
    funding through various Civil Works accounts to sustain its
    research.
        And so, my question is, is it Congress--as we are
    continuing to emphasize improving and repairing our aging
    infrastructure, as we look to the new challenges, some of the
    challenges that you have referred to, what are some of the
    advantages of consolidating research funding into a dedicated
    RDT&E account?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I think it would give our senior
    research scientists flexibility to pursue success.
        So, today, for example, if we have a success in a harmful
    algal bloom demonstration, say down in Florida, we can follow
    that success until that line item runs out, right?
        If I had a more centralized account, it would enable the
    team to pursue that even further, without having to wait for
    another budget cycle.
        Mr. Guest. And so, if you had a dedicated account, could we
    create that consistency of funding? Is that what you are
    saying, General?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. And, of course, it would have
    to come with some ground rules on my ability to reprogram,
    but--certainly under the oversight of the Secretary and the
    administration.
        But I just think having that tool would help us move faster
    on some of these really thorny issues that the Nation is
    wrestling with.
        Mr. Guest. And General, as it relates to increased
    transparency, if this funding again was in a dedicated RDT&E
    account, what effect would that have on transparency?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I would be open to any reporting
    requirement to the Secretary, to Congress. We would--obviously,
    our books would be wide open. But I would be completely
    transparent in our management of this particular account, were
    it to come through to fruition.
        Mr. Guest. And General, wouldn't you agree that, if all
    this money were to flow through a single account, that it would
    make tracking the spending of these dollars much easier than
    now, where this money is flowing through various Civil Works
    accounts?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir, that is correct.
        Mr. Guest. Well, General, thank you. And I am out of time.
    So, at this time I will yield back to the chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Guest, very much. Mr.
    Lowenthal, followed by Mr. Weber, Mr. Cohen, Ms. Wilson.
        Mr. Lowenthal, you are recognized.
        Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you,
    General Spellmon and Secretary Connor, for this very, very
    important hearing this morning.
        Yesterday I had the good fortune of spending the day at the
    Ports of L.A. and Long Beach with Secretary of Transportation
    Buttigieg, Secretary Pete, and State officials, Federal
    officials, local elected officials, labor, trucking interests,
    rail, everyone who is involved in the supply chain and the
    congestion at the ports.
        And you know, what has happened the last couple of months
    is the entire Nation has watched every night on the news the
    concerns about congestion at the Ports of Long Beach and Los
    Angeles and other ports also, and whether they were going to be
    able to get goods for the holiday season, and to be able to
    have access to goods this year.
        So, we all met with the Secretary to kind of assess where
    we are, and how the ports can act more efficiently, and what
    they can do. And it was a very productive meeting, because in
    many ways, although we have huge congestion problems, we dodged
    a bullet this year. Everybody working together, Federal
    resources, State, and labor coming together, expanding hours of
    operation, the ports were able to operate in a more efficient
    way, which is very positive. But there is much more to go, and
    we were all thankful.
        But the question is, how are we going to ensure that the
    ports work in an efficient way? And the Army Corps of Engineers
    has a critical role in this.
        General Spellmon, my first question is, as you know, in
    October of this year you signed a critical report which
    recommended significant navigation improvements at the Port of
    Long Beach, which is the port that I represent. Currently,
    large container vessels are unable to access the port's west
    basin, or Pier J Basin, unless they travel only at high tide,
    or do not have top cargo capacity. Easing this bottleneck is
    one of the solutions to faster operations, less idling, and
    lower emissions.
        Can you provide some additional background for the
    committee on this critical project and its benefits?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I had the opportunity to visit the
    Port of Long Beach in 2019, and the port authority and our team
    out there took me through this extensively, and it is exactly
    as you have described.
        Sir, I think next steps here, you mentioned the Chief's
    Report. That is up for Congress' consideration here in WRDA
    2022, and we are hopeful for that authorization.
        If we are offered a 2022 workplan, sir, I am going to seek
    about $1\1/2\ million, because we want to get moving on
    preliminary engineering and design, and we have got to do some
    sediment sampling so we can get ready to move to construction.
        Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, General.
        I am going to follow up, Secretary Connor, on an issue that
    had been raised originally by Chairman DeFazio, and that is
    about the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund resources. WRDA 2020
    allowed donor ports, like the Ports of Long Beach and Los
    Angeles, to use their Harbor Maintenance Trust Funds for
    expanded use, such as dredging of channels in water
    infrastructure improvements, berth maintenance, and building
    seismic resiliency. You too have seen this, what has taken
    place at the ports, and the impact upon our supply chain in the
    last few months. And if we don't invest in these critical hubs,
    the entire Nation feels the consequences.
        Can you touch on what you are doing to make sure that the
    Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund resources are invested as
    effectively as possible?
        Mr. Connor. I am going to have to get General Spellmon's
    help on this, somewhat.
        But as I mentioned in my response to the chairman,
    obviously, this new approach, with respect to incentivizing the
    use and taking it off budget, a certain portion of the trust
    fund is a critical element. So, our job is to be ready to
    expend those funds. What I have learned in my tenure here so
    far, $17.1 billion, there is a lot of need out there, more need
    than even those resources. And I will talk about the IIJA
    resources.
        So, the trust fund is an absolute critical part. I have no
    doubt that we can make use of those funds. It is an important
    part of the tools that we have.
        As far as the details for making sure we are implementing
    it as quickly as possible, I will turn to General Spellmon.
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. I would just add that the work
    that you have done in Congress is forcing that end of your
    surplus to come down. We expect it to be $8\1/2\ billion at the
    end of this year. That is a lot, but it is much lower than what
    it has been, previously. And that just means we are putting
    more money to work out in these ports and in these Federal
    navigation channels.
        And as I mentioned, industry is ready to go with the new
    vessels coming online. And certainly, the fleet that we have
    out there, even our own Corps fleet, they are ready, excited to
    get after this work, and for the opportunities that you have
    given us----
        Mr. Lowenthal. I have to yield back, as my time is up. I
    just want to remind you that I am also talking about the fact
    that the changes in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund was
    also--besides increasing revenues in the fund that the Army
    Corps can access, it also really looked at the different
    relationship between donor ports and all the receiving ports.
    And my ports are donor ports. We like being donor ports, but we
    wanted additional flexibility, and that is really what I was
    asking for.
        Thank you, and I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Lowenthal, for your
    testimony. We have Mr. Weber, Mr. Cohen, and Ms. Wilson.
        Mr. Weber, you are recognized.
        [Pause.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr. Weber?
        [Pause.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. We will go on to Mr. Cohen.
        Mr. Cohen, you are recognized.
        [Pause.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. You have got to unmute, sir.
        Mr. Cohen. Unmute. All right, we have got to unmute, so, we
    are doing pretty good. Thank you, how are you?
        Mrs. Napolitano. Fine, thank you.
        Mr. Cohen. I appreciate the opportunity for this committee
    and hearing, and I just wanted to make some remarks concerning
    our hopes for the bill.
        Firstly, in Shelby County and Memphis, the Wolf River is an
    important river downtown. In years past, it has been
    predominantly industrial. It is our hope that it will become,
    and has become, more recreational. There will be an effort--and
    we hope that you will work with us on this, of course--to dam
    up the Wolf River downtown to create a lake that will be for
    boating, and for fishing, and for swimming. And on the east
    side, it will be developed some, and it will give Memphis
    another attraction for people downtown, where we have large
    recreational and tourist priorities.
        So, that is one of the issues that will come up, and we
    know we have had input from the Army Corps Memphis office. I
    feel, as I recall, confident they want to work with us on that,
    and I look forward to working with the chairwoman and my fellow
    committee members to pursue this, which would require a
    deauthorization of part of the river to make the proposed lake
    a reality. This will be something that is really forward-
    thinking, and the kind of thinking that is making Memphis a
    great tourist town and amenity for people who live downtown,
    where they didn't in the past, but they have for the last
    couple of decades, and becoming more and more residential. So,
    that is one thing I wanted to raise, was this Wolf River
    situation.
        Now I would like to ask Lieutenant General Scott Spellmon a
    question, if you don't mind.
        The last WRDA cycle was a productive one for inland
    waterways in many ways. The committee successfully made changes
    to the cost share for new construction projects, increasing the
    Corps' ability to reduce the backlog capital investment
    projects. The benefits of the change in cost share for new
    construction projects were realized in 2018, when the Olmsted
    lock was completed 4 years ahead of schedule, and more than
    $330 million under budget.
        General Spellmon, do you believe this level of efficiency
    can be achieved with the funds provided in the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act and full funding from receipts
    deposited into the Inland Waterways Trust Fund for all the
    projects contained in that 2020 Capital Investment Strategy?
        General Spellmon. Sir, I do. I think it is going to allow
    us to put more Federal dollars to work sooner, and to get after
    some of this much-needed maintenance in your district and,
    frankly, across the country.
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you, sir. What are the most efficient cost
    and construction timelines identified?
        General Spellmon. I am sorry, sir, could you repeat the
    question?
        Mr. Cohen. What are the most efficient cost and
    construction timelines that have been identified?
        General Spellmon. The most efficient?
        Mr. Cohen. Yes, sir, cost and construction timelines.
        General Spellmon. Sir, are you referring to a specific
    project?
        Mr. Cohen. Yes, I guess.
        General Spellmon. Sir, I could follow up with your team on
    the project that you have in mind.
        Mr. Cohen. All right, I will have somebody contact you
    about that. We have talked to some folks about it, and it is a
    particular lock that we think will be important to the program.
        Assistant Secretary Connor, I was proud to join with
    Chairman DeFazio in urging the administration to reopen and
    reexamine the nationwide permits, and take into consideration
    their climate change and environmental justice impacts. While
    the Trump administration significantly broadened several of the
    nationwide permit applications, the proposed Byhalia pipeline,
    which has been withdrawn, fortunately, that was in my district,
    and a little bit in Mississippi in Trent Kelly's district,
    displayed what can happen if they aren't nearly used as
    Congress intended.
        Assistant Secretary Connor, my question is, my
    understanding is the Army Corps of Engineers recently reissued
    40 nationwide permits and 1 new nationwide permit. Can you
    describe what kind of stakeholder input and public engagement
    the Corps considered before reissuing these permits, and to
    what extent environmental justice and climate change impacts
    were considered?
        Mr. Connor. Yes, thank you, Congressman Cohen. The process
    that is involved with respect to the nationwide permits is one
    that involves an environmental review under NEPA. That is part
    of the overall--so, there is engagement there, but it is a
    broad swath of activities that are moved forward with those 40
    plus 1, as you identified, nationwide permits. They are good
    for 5 years. So, we have to undergo that process, and that
    public engagement, and our environmental review processes every
    5 years.
        But to your point, I think there are issues. There is a lot
    of good with respect to these nationwide permits. They
    incentivize the protection of ``waters of the U.S.,'' and--by
    providing clear parameters of how you can be within the
    nationwide permits. So, folks who are in--needing permits can
    undertake protective measures to try and follow within those
    categories, and reduce the impact. So, that is the good thing.
        Having said that, there are concerns about the situation
    you particularly mentioned, Byhalia, of how do we engage the
    public on activities within those nationwide permits. We are
    going to take a look at that, even as I tout nationwide permits
    because of the certainty that they provide and the protections
    that they provide. We do need to take a look at some of these
    activities, even though it does go through the public review
    process every 5 years.
        So, I am sensitive to the concern that I think you have,
    given your experience with the situation, and we will be taking
    a look at that.
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr.----
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Secretary Connor. The nationwide
    permit process, in my opinion----
        Mrs. Napolitano. Your time is up, Mr. Cohen.
        Mr. Cohen [continuing]. Was never meant to be applied to
    large projects that have far-reaching, cumulative impacts. And
    so, I appreciate working with you in the future, and I think my
    time is expired, and I thank the chairwoman for her
    graciousness in permitting me to go beyond my time and in my
    attire.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. You are very
    welcome.
        Mr. Cohen. Go, Dodgers.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Ms. Wilson, you are next.
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. Well, thank you, Madam Chair, I
    appreciate it.
        And Mr. Connor, I thank you so much for your testimony. As
    the administration prepares to release its funding priorities
    for the infrastructure bill later this week, I am hopeful for
    robust Everglades restoration funding, given its alignment with
    the administration's goals. This is a turnkey program that is
    historically--and still is today--a strong bipartisan issue
    among the Florida delegation.
        And I am chair of the Florida Ports Caucus. As a vocal
    champion for the Everglades, it is an imperative, it is very
    imperative for me, that these projects are completed for the
    benefit of Florida and the Nation.
        Mr. Connor, please share whether you expect the necessary
    administrative steps to be completed for this committee to
    consider action on project components for the Western
    Everglades restoration project, the Lake Okeechobee watershed
    restoration project, and the Indian River Lagoon-South for WRDA
    2022.
        Mr. Connor. Thank you, Congresswoman.
        I would just say really quickly I was in Florida this past
    weekend. I spoke at the Everglades Coalition conference. I am
    familiar, from my previous tenure at the Department of the
    Interior with the restoration program, but the enormity of it,
    and the Corps' involvement, and the integration with the local
    communities and the local sponsors was very impressive to me.
    So, it reenergized the interest and the need to move forward.
        With respect to your specific question, the Western
    Everglades, I think we are on track to reengage with the
    partners, to move forward with the study. I don't know that
    there are going to be results in time for WRDA 2022, because of
    the temporary delay, and working with the project sponsors, and
    moving forward, including the Miccosukee Tribe and Seminole
    Tribe. I know there is strong interest. We are going to move
    that process forward. I just am not certain that it is going to
    have results that will be ready for WRDA 2022.
        On the other two studies, Indian Lagoon and Lake
    Okeechobee, I would defer to General Spellmon.
        General Spellmon. Yes, ma'am. Just very quick, on Indian
    River Lagoon, I think you know that we are in the President's
    budget for $17 million. And what that is going to allow us to
    do is to continue the operational testing and monitoring of the
    C-44 Reservoir, which we are filling right now, and looking
    forward to continuing construction of both the stormwater
    treatment area, C-23, and C-24.
        And, ma'am, if you could, remind me of your other project
    that you mentioned.
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. The Indian River Lagoon-South?
        General Spellmon. Yes, ma'am. That is the one I just
    mentioned that we are in the budget----
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. Oh, the Okeechobee watershed.
        General Spellmon. The watershed restoration program. Yes,
    ma'am. So, we are working through a number of Tribal concerns,
    a number of concerns with South Florida Water Management
    District. And I personally have a number of technical concerns
    on these aquifer storage recharge wells.
        I want to make sure that we have incorporated an
    appropriate amount of adaptive monitoring and research and
    development before we go out and just execute 55 wells in this
    program. But I am fairly confident we will have this ready in
    time for WRDA 2022.
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. OK, thank you. That is reassuring.
        Currently, Miami-Dade County is awaiting a decision on its
    locally preferred plan for the Miami-Dade Back Bay coastal
    storm risk management feasibility study. As you are aware, this
    study began in October 2018, in response to Hurricane Irma, to
    identify ways to reduce damage from future storms. Approval of
    the waivers will allow the development of a locally preferred
    plan to ensure that local concerns on the environment, economy,
    and distressed neighborhoods are included in any final plan.
        What is the status of this decision and anticipated timing?
        Also, please share any information you have on the agency's
    position on the county's request.
        General Spellmon. Yes, ma'am. This is General Spellmon, I
    will start.
        So, our non-Federal sponsor came back to us, to be frank,
    and was looking for much more investment in natural, nature-
    based features in this plan. And we are completely supportive
    of that effort. And the non-Federal sponsor is going back now,
    and is going to come back to us with the technical piece of
    that, and we look forward to seeing the results of that good
    work.
        I think natural, nature-based features can be an important
    part of the eventual solution here for Miami. However, I don't
    think we are going to see the level of protection that we would
    like to give the city, given climate change, given sea level
    rise, and the severity of storms that you experience down in
    south Florida.
        I believe, in addition to natural, nature-based features,
    there is going to be a concrete, steel, and compacted dirt
    component to this project, as well, to provide adequate
    protection.
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. OK, thank you. This is for both Mr.
    Connor and Mr. Spellmon.
        Just north of Miami is Port Everglades, and the port has--
    --
        Mrs. Napolitano. Ms. Wilson?
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. Yes?
        Mrs. Napolitano. Your time is up. If you would, submit
    those questions to the gentlemen, please.
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you, Madam Chair. I will
    submit this question about Port Everglades, and I hope to get
    your commitment to increase this project's authorization in the
    upcoming WRDA project.
        General Spellmon. We are----
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Ms. Wilson.
        Ms. Wilson of Florida. I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr. Weber, you are recognized.
        Mr. Weber of Texas. Thank you, Madam Chair, I appreciate
    that, and I am glad to be here, and I want to say
    congratulations to Secretary Connor and General Spellmon. We
    are glad to see you again. Thank you both for being here.
        I actually have kind of a comment to start with, a note of
    thanks to both of you all for mentioning in the Chief's Report
    for the coastal protection and restoration along the Texas gulf
    coast. You all may or may not know my district is the four
    coastal counties--now that we have Orange County coming up,
    with redistricting--Orange County, Jefferson County, Galveston
    County, and the southern half of Missouri County. And so, for
    us, the coastal spine, the Ike Dike [inaudible] is extremely
    important.
        And I would also argue it is extremely important to the
    energy industry, because if we get a major hurricane direct hit
    up the Houston Ship Channel--and not just the Houston Ship
    Channel, anywhere along the area--we would severely hamper
    Texas' energy output and, therefore, the Nation's. And it could
    even be a very big, large environmental disaster, should we
    rupture an oil tank and dump that into the bay. So, thank you
    for that.
        Gentlemen, you all might be aware of a high priority for me
    in the 14th Congressional District of Texas, which is long
    overdue: completion of the Galveston Harbor Channel. For
    arcane, unknown reasons, whatever, too lengthy to explain here,
    this project has been referred to as ``an extension,'' which I
    think is an unfortunate misnomer, because we are actually
    talking about, quite literally, the last one-half mile--that is
    2,600 feet, if you will--needing to deepen the channel to
    accommodate that part of the channel where economic activity is
    actually taking place. Dredgers are there now. If we could get
    the thing funded, we could save probably half of the cost of
    the project. So, I am cautiously optimistic that the OMB, the
    administration, will see that as an easy win, if you will, for
    all parties by simply funding this completion at an extremely
    low dollar rate, relatively speaking.
        And let me just add that moving ships out of the Houston
    Ship Channel, which comes up through Galveston Bay, our
    district, moving them over quicker into the Galveston Ship
    Channel helps produce a lot better traffic flow in the Houston
    Ship Channel.
        So, a question for the two of you: Have you all
    communicated to the OMB the time sensitivity and the
    environmental mitigation that would occur from releasing funds
    now, immediately, so that this project, the last half mile of
    Galveston Channel, can be completed for half of the cost, while
    they are working, dredges are there, rather than considering
    this a new project or routine maintenance?
        If we get it done now, lots of money to be saved, lots of
    benefits. Gentlemen, your thoughts?
        I would go to you first, Mr. Secretary. Are you aware of
    it?
        Mr. Connor. I am aware of the project, in general. I
    haven't had any specific communications, but there has been a
    lot of communications back and forth as we look at these
    workplans that are coming up between the examiner's staff, et
    cetera. So, I appreciate you raising it. I just haven't had
    specific----
        Mr. Weber of Texas. How about you, General Spellmon?
        General Spellmon. Sir, what I do know is that we are 95
    percent complete with the design for this final half mile.
        I will be honest, I don't know the history of why this
    final half mile was separate from the original authorization.
        Mr. Weber of Texas. Right.
        General Spellmon. My team thinks we need a New Start, but
    let me go back and do some homework on that to confirm.
        Mr. Weber of Texas. Do that, please. I think you will find
    that you can't--there is so much bang for the buck, we have
    got--we have a very bipartisan letter coming to you all, if you
    hadn't already seen it, and Henry Cuellar and some others from
    the Texas team, group that have signed on. So, I will get that
    to you.
        Let me change gears. I have got 1 minute left. You all
    should be in receipt of a bipartisan joint delegation letter
    that I led with my Texas colleagues regarding the Brazos and
    the Colorado lock replacement project on the Gulf Intracoastal
    Waterway, which is important to me, my district, and, of
    course, the State of Texas.
        The existing structure creates navigational challenges that
    impact the safety of our mariners on the waterways. And in
    fact, these are the most hit locks on the inland waterways
    transportation system. Let that sink in. Barges, tugs,
    whatever, these locks get hit frequently. And so, to move that
    product--and we all hear about problems with supply chains, and
    everything that is going on with the economy right now--this is
    a time when we can ill afford something like that.
        I think this project should compete for the $2\1/2\ billion
    that have already been made available in the infrastructure
    bill. And furthermore, the 2020 Capital Investment Strategy
    recognizes the fact that this project is ready for a New Start,
    pending congressional authorization, which it received in WRDA
    2020.
        So, question: General, how will the Corps update the spend
    plan to incorporate projects that have recently received an
    authorization, including this one?
        General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So, I have been to this lock,
    sir, and I have seen some of the abrasions, and the contacts
    there on the structure. And you are exactly right. This is a
    great project to move forward, and we certainly want to
    continue to make our best technical recommendations to the
    administration to fund this work.
        Mr. Weber of Texas. Well, thank you for that, and I
    appreciate that. But congratulations again, both of you all,
    glad to see you.
        And I yield back, Madam Chair, thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Mr. Weber.
        I now ask unanimous consent that the record of today's
    hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses have
    provided answers to any questions that have been submitted to
    them in writing.
        And I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain
    open for 15 days for any additional comments and information
    submitted by the Members or witnesses to be included in the
    record of today's hearing.
        And without objection, so ordered.
        I would like to thank our witnesses, our two witnesses, for
    their insightful testimony, and thank our joint staff for their
    hard work.
        It was a pleasure seeing you, General and Mr. Connor. I
    hope to see you again.
        If no other Members have----
        Mr. Rouzer. Madam Chairman? Madam Chair?
        Mrs. Napolitano. Yes?
        Mr. Rouzer. Hey, it is David Rouzer here. I ask unanimous
    consent to submit for the record a statement by our colleague,
    Mr. Van Drew.
        Mrs. Napolitano. So ordered.
        [Dr. Van Drew's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Jefferson Van Drew, a Representative in
    Congress from the State of New Jersey, Submitted for the Record by Hon.
                                  David Rouzer
        Good morning, Assistant Secretary Connor and Lieutenant General
    Spellmon.
        Thank you for appearing before the House Committee on
    Transportation and Infrastructure to discuss this year's Water
    Resources Development Act.
        I represent South Jersey, which includes the Jersey Shore and the
    Delaware Bayshore. My district has over 175 miles of coastline. It is
    one of the most coastal congressional districts in the entire country.
        The coast defines my people's way of life. We depend on the shore
    for livelihood, for sustenance, for recreation, and we relish its
    natural beauty.
        My community has great interest in the projects and policies in the
    WRDA legislation.
        I work closely with the Army Corps of Engineers Philadelphia
    District. The Corps is one of the most remarkable and functional parts
    of the U.S. Government. It is a model of efficiency and effectiveness.
    It is only recently that the Congress has provided the Corps with the
    financial resources it needs to realize its full capabilities. I want
    Congress to make sure that our policies are also enabling the Army
    Corps to be the best in the world.
        I have many priorities for this year's Water Resources legislation,
    both projects and policies.
        All Army Corps projects are first studied and evaluated. There are
    many areas of the New Jersey coastal ecosystem that must be studied to
    lay the groundwork for future action. I intend to initiate many studies
    through this year's WRDA bill, including:
          A study on the deepening of the Maurice River's
    authorized depth from 7 feet to 12 to 14 feet. This would open
    incredible opportunities for the U.S. military and national economy.
          A study on restructuring the beach in Cape May, where
    there are chronic issues of head and neck injuries.
          A study on the creation of a retention basin in Cape May
    Harbor, which is home to major fishing businesses and the U.S. Coast
    Guard training center.
          A study on the construction of environmental features on
    the Great Egg Harbor River, which is designated as part of the National
    Wild and Scenic Rivers System.
          A study on the construction of a placement facility on
    Bader Field in Atlantic City. Opening this site would create beneficial
    use applications and greatly decrease the cost of navigation projects.
          Modifying the Delaware Bay DMU study to include features
    that improve environmental restoration and wildlife protection as well
    as flood risk management, such as breakwaters.
          Modifying the New Jersey Back Bay Study to include the
    creation of natural engineering features with consideration of
    environmental benefits as a coastal resilience technique.
          A study on the intense impact of erosion on the Jersey
    Shore and evaluating measures that can be used to mitigate that
    erosion, which will save millions of dollars in the long-term.

        These studies will set the stage for informed action in the coming
    years.
        This Water Resources Legislation must also include policies that
    broaden the toolset of the Army Corps to execute its core missions.
    Such policies include:
          Modification of the way we identify extraordinary storms,
    so that the Army Corps can quickly and flexibly restore communities
    following natural disasters. Many severe nor'easters do not meet the
    rigid criteria of the U.S. code extraordinary storm definition. We must
    fix this.
          We also should expand the application of beneficial use
    techniques. We must clear the way for open water placement techniques,
    which will exponentially expand beneficial use opportunities. We must
    also structure federal policies to clear the way for states and
    localities to implement their own beneficial use practices. Widespread
    beneficial use at the Federal, State, and local level will save
    billions of dollars and create tremendous environmental, commercial,
    and coastal resilience benefits.

        To conclude my remarks, I direct a question to both witnesses. I
    request a written response to this question:
          How aggressive should the Army Corps be in transitioning
    to beneficial use models, what federal policies stand in the way of
    that transition, and what can we do to remove those barriers?

        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. You are welcome. If no other Members have
    anything to add, the committee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12:43 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                           Submissions for the Record

                                  ----------

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
         from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano, and thank you to our witnesses,
    Assistant Secretary Connor and Lieutenant General Spellmon, for being
    here today.
        Two years ago, this Committee successfully passed a bipartisan,
    comprehensive WRDA bill into law.
         I look forward to continuing to build upon this important work in
    a 2022 WRDA bill.
         Ensuring effective and reliable water infrastructure is vital to
    American families, businesses, farms, and to the economic development
    of our country.
        As you know, much of my district is bordered by two of the longest
    rivers in the United States--the Missouri and the Mississippi.
        These waterways are an incredible blessing to my district and our
    country.
        These Rivers provide millions of Americans with water, provide
    thousands of farmers with irrigation for their farmland, and provide an
    extremely efficient and reliable way to move goods in and out of
    America's heartland.
        That's why a major priority of mine is ensuring our river
    navigation infrastructure on the Mississippi, Missouri, and the rest of
    our nation's waterways gets the investment it desperately needs.
        We've seen what happens when we fail to do that.
        Today, five locks on the Upper Mississippi between Canton and St.
    Louis are only 600 feet long and have only one functioning lock
    chamber.
        These locks, built in the 1930s, have long outlived their original
    design life and are creating serious bottlenecks that slow traffic on
    the Upper Mississippi.
        On the Missouri, we've had different, but equally frustrating
    problems.
        Mismanagement of the river has made flooding more frequent, damaged
    the navigation channel, and made it almost impossible for barges to
    reliably get up and down the Missouri.
        While we are lucky for the gifts these rivers can provide, we've
    also seen how these blessings can turn into a curse overnight.
        A little too much rainfall and too little of a focus on flood
    control can lead to disastrous results for people who live and work
    along our nation's waterways.
        We learned that lesson again the hard way in 2019 when flooding
    along the Missouri River devastated communities from Nebraska clear
    down through to St. Louis.
        To this day, many of my constituents are still struggling to repair
    damages to their homes, businesses, farms, and livelihoods.
        I have long been concerned that current river management practices
    prioritize fish and wildlife over the protection of people and
    property.
        And that's led to many of our tax dollars being wasted on
    supersized science experiments, such as interception-rearing complexes
    on the Missouri River, instead of being responsibly invested in
    restoring levees and increasing flood resilience.
        Fixing that will be a top priority of mine throughout the
    development of a WRDA 2022 bill.
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano. I yield back.

    Prepared Statement of the National Association of Flood and Stormwater
      Management Agencies, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Sam Graves of
                                    Missouri
        The National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management
    Agencies (NAFSMA) is an organization of public agencies whose function
    is the protection of lives, property, the environment and economic
    activity from the adverse impacts of storm and flood waters. Since its
    formation in 1978, NAFSMA's mission has been to advocate public policy,
    encourage technologies and conduct education and mentoring programs
    that facilitate and enhance the public service functions of its
    members.
        Many NAFSMA members partner with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    on flood damage reduction and ecosystem restoration projects and also
    participate in FEMA's National Flood Insurance Program while working
    closely with the agency on flood risk and hazard mitigation efforts.
    Many NAFSMA member agencies are also responsible for their region's
    National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater
    management permits. Due to these critical responsibilities of NAFSMA's
    members, the association has been closely engaged with WRDA legislation
    since cost-sharing was first initiated in 1986.
        NAFSMA appreciates the efforts of the House Water Resources and
    Environment Subcommittee to keep WRDA on its two-year reauthorization
    track and especially appreciates your work in recent years to assist
    nonfederal partners with issues to improve the relationship and process
    for carrying out much-needed flood risk management and ecosystem
    projects.
        NAFSMA also appreciates your efforts that resulted in enactment of
    infrastructure legislation this year that will help flood risk and
    water quality management agencies throughout the country address
    critical issues related to aging infrastructure and the need to
    mitigate for weather-related hazards such as flooding, wildfires and
    more.
                      NAFSMA Recommendations for WRDA 2022
        As you move forward to draft new water resources legislation,
    NAFSMA recommends the following policy issues be included as part of
    this year's WRDA bill.
    Authorize Substantial Funding Increase for USACE Continuing Authorities
                           Program (CAP) and Projects
        In an effort to move much-needed infrastructure funding that has
    already been provided to the Corps under the recently enacted
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in a timely manner to address
    critical needs throughout the nation, NAFSMA urges that Congress
    authorize substantial increases to the Corps CAP program. Local
    sponsors have found this program to be extremely beneficial, however,
    increases in both the overall program limits as well as the Individual
    per project federal limits are needed.
        NAFSMA also urges Congress to ensure that USACE moves out with a
    Federal Register notice soliciting the 10 pilot CAP projects for
    economically disadvantaged communities as authorized in WRDA 2020.
        Create New CAP Authority for Watershed (Multi-Purpose) Projects
        Local sponsors, like Congress and the federal agencies, need to
    demonstrate to their constituents that they are receiving the most for
    their hard-earned tax dollars. Maximizing public benefits through a new
    category for watershed projects that serve multi-purposes under the
    USACE CAP program would be a relatively low-cost, low-risk and high
    reward way of delivering such projects.
        The CAP authorities are generally structured to support either
    navigation, flood control or ecosystem restoration. Watershed projects
    that could cross these individual authorities have not been possible
    under a strict interpretation of the individual CAP sections.
        For example, a flood control project that uses natural channel and
    green infrastructure, and includes recreation trails, or a navigation
    project that can reduce flooding would not be eligible for funding
    under the current CAP authorities. This new watershed category could
    greatly improve the benefits of the CAP program by allowing sponsors to
    incorporate ecosystem restoration in flood control projects which will
    amplify resilience to climate change and provide societal benefits like
    head island reduction and access to nature in areas that have been
    underserved.
       Authorize a USACE-Led Interagency Study on Shelter, Flood, Water
    Quality and Public Safety Risks for Federally Partnered Flood Risk and
                       Water Resource Management Projects
        An overwhelming challenge and growing need for the water resources
    community has been the increasing use of property associated with
    critical flood risk management and water quality infrastructure as
    encampments of people experiencing homelessness (PEH). In many cases,
    these levee, channel, detention basin and lake projects have been
    constructed in partnership with the federal government and are now
    being operated and maintained at the local level. The growing national
    challenge of providing affordable housing and health care for those
    without permanent homes creates serious risks not only for those who
    are living in these encampments, but also for those living and working
    near or served behind these flood risk reduction projects due to the
    potential damage to the project or to the land around the project and
    associated spillways.
        Although local flood districts and public works agencies are
    working with their local and state housing, mental health, non-profit
    agencies and police, this critical issue which is growing nationally is
    well beyond what sponsors anticipated when assuming operation and
    maintenance responsibility for these federally partnered projects.
        As part of WRDA 2022, NAFSMA urges Congress to call for a national
    study (to be provided to Congress within a year of enactment) of
    flooding, water quality and public safety risks due to homeless
    encampments and potential management practices and tools to address
    these serious issues on or around these critical projects.
        We urge that the study be led by USACE, in cooperation with their
    federal (Federal Emergency Management Agency and U.S. Environmental
    Protection Agency), and non-federal partners, including NAFSMA. This
    growing national issue threatens resiliency efforts at local, regional
    and the federal levels.
        For example, owners and operators of flood risk management systems
    can be cited for damage caused by these encampments through the levee
    safety program during inspections. This issue needs to be acknowledged,
    and USACE needs to be directed not to penalize non-federal sponsors for
    these damages due to PEH encampments which are out of their control.
        In addition, both financial and technical resources need to be made
    available at the federal level for repairs to flood risk reduction
    systems and floodplains as a result of this issue.
      Clarify Section 404(f) Application for Routine Maintenance of Flood
                           Control System Maintenance
        NAFSMA urges Congress to clarify the existing maintenance exemption
    for flood damage reduction systems to affirm its application to routine
    maintenance for flood risk reduction systems including flood control
    channels and detention basins. This clarification is critical and could
    be achieved in WRDA 2022 Report language.
        Clean Water Act Sec. 404(f)(1)(B) identifies certain maintenance
    activities as non-prohibited discharges of dredged or fill material.
    However, some federal agency field offices have inconsistently
    interpreted this provision of the Clean Water Act. NAFSMA requests that
    Congress affirm its intent for Sec. 404(f)(1)(B) to include routine
    maintenance of channels, including removal of debris and trash, and
    vegetation management. NAFSMA urges that the following underlined
    clarifications be added to existing law.
        Clean Water Act Sec. 404(f)(1)(B): ``for the purpose of
    maintenance, including emergency reconstruction of recently damaged
    parts, of currently serviceable structures such as dikes, dams, levees,
    groins, riprap, breakwaters, causeways, flood control channels,
    detention basins and bridge abutments or approaches, and transportation
    structures identified as critical features of the flood control
    system.''
        If this issue is not clarified by Congress in WRDA 2022, NAFSMA
    urges that the length of the permit terms for operations and
    maintenance general permits be increased from five years to at least 10
    years.
      Direct USACE To Develop Section 408 National Categorical Permissions
        The use of categorical permissions throughout the nation for
    Section 408 permissions has had limited and mixed results to date.
    Although USACE headquarters has directed Districts not to require
    Section 408 permissions for normal maintenance activities of flood risk
    reduction projects, we are hearing from our members that this approach
    seems to differ throughout the Corps Districts. Also, some Districts
    have moved out on development regional categorical permissions, but
    others are behind.
        NAFSMA urges Congress to require the Corps to work in coordination
    with non-federal sponsors to develop these categorical permissions
    within 180 days of enactment of WRDA 2022.
    Direct USACE, FEMA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to go through
    Joint Rulemaking to Identify How Level of Protection and Residual Risk
                          Behind Levees Are Determined
        Due to the unclear nature of when and how USACE's risk assessments
    are applied and the potential impacts from use of these assessments in
    different manners than their original intent, a formal joint rulemaking
    is needed to provide an opportunity for communities and local sponsors
    to adequately articulate the potential consequences of using these
    assessments inappropriately and identify better assessment methodology
    for USACE, FEMA and the Department of Agriculture's programs and
    policies.
      Direct USACE to Provide Training and Increase Accessibility to the
                       Agency's Climate Adaptation Tools
        Flood control districts and public works agencies are struggling to
    adapt to recent climate change impacts such as increased storm
    intensities, wildfires and drought, because of a lack of tools and
    resources that could help in sustainable planning for capital
    investments. For small public works agencies with limited staff and
    financial resources to bring in consultants, this assistance would be
    invaluable.
        FEMA is also looking at accounting for climate changes in flood
    risk maps.
        NAFSMA urges that Congress direct USACE and FEMA to coordinate on
    this effort so that local, State and regional agencies that work with
    both federal agencies on flood risk reduction systems and floodplains
    are using consistent data and terminology.
      Indemnification Requirement Needs to Be Removed from USACE Project
                             Partnership Agreements
        Currently, the Corps requires that the non-federal cost share
    sponsor fully indemnify the federal government, based on Section
    103(j)(1) and Section 101(j) of the 1986 Water Resources Development
    Act. Indemnifying the federal government is in direct conflict with
    states' constitution and laws. The Corps requires the non-federal
    sponsor to promise financial resources for an indeterminate liability
    that might occur at an unknown time, at an unknown cost, and for an
    unknown reason. This liability is beyond the extent permitted by the
    tort law of many states. Recognizing this, the Corps already has
    allowed the removal of this provision from partnering agreements on a
    case-by-case basis, when requested by the non-federal sponsor.
        We urge this provision be removed from all future PPA's so as to
    treat the non-federal sponsors across the nation fairly and equitably
    with respect to this unknown liability. Non-federal sponsors are
    required to execute the PPAs, with the liability clause, early in the
    planning stage and before the designs are complete. The Corps then
    takes full control of the land, design of the project, and agreements
    with the construction contractors. The Corps is also the only point-of-
    contact to the construction contractors. This results in a completely
    one-sided approach to project design, implementation, and assumption of
    risk that favors the federal government.
        This one-sidedness needs to be rectified in WRDA 2022.
     Rehabilitation of Flood Control Works Under Public Law 84-99 to Allow
                     for Non-Federal Sponsor Implementation
        Enrollment in the Rehabilitation and Inspection Program under
    Public Law 84-99 (PL 84-99) provides federal repair to control works
    damaged by floods. The program is an 80-year-old partnered solution to
    flood damage that intends to quickly restore the damage reduction
    benefits provided the protected communities from their flood control
    projects.
        Active P.L. 84-99 enrollees have been made to wait several years
    after their infrastructure is damaged for the Corps to start
    construction of repairs. During those years, non-federal sponsors are
    forced to either operate damaged facilities, or bear the cost of
    repairs on their own, without any hope of reimbursement, either of
    which is detrimental to flood protection and in inconsistent with P.L.
    84-99 and its purposes. The following provision, which aligns with
    authority already granted by Congress for non-federal sponsor
    implementation under Section 1043 of the 2014 Act, 1, would allow non-
    federal sponsors to ensure that damaged flood control projects are
    repaired in a timely manner.
    Draft provision:
            SEC. __. REHABILITATION OF FLOOD CONTROL WORKS.

            (a) IN GENERAL.--Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1941
            (Public Law 77-228), as amended, commonly referred to as Public
            Law 84-99 (33 U.S.C. 701n), is further amended by inserting
            after the sentence that begins with ``The appropriation of such
            moneys . . .'', the following: ``Provided further, That moneys
            in the emergency fund shall be made available to the non-
            federal sponsor to carry out the repair or restoration of any
            flood control work threatened or destroyed by flood if
            requested by the non-Federal sponsor.''
            Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 2014
        NAFSMA also encourages Congress to emphasize and clarify the broad
    scope of projects allowed to be financed by this program since the FY
    2021 appropriations language limited the use of the Corps WIFIA program
    to only the current upgrade or repair of existing dams in the National
    Inventory of Dams.
        NAFSMA very much appreciates all you do to address the nation's
    water resources priorities and looks forward to discussing these issues
    in further detail with you and your staff in the coming weeks.
        In the meantime, please feel free to contact Susan Gilson, NAFSMA's
    Executive Director, with any questions.

                                   Appendix

                                  ----------

       Questions from Hon. David Rouzer to both Hon. Michael L. Connor,
      Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the
    Army, and Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and
                Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

        Question 1. How will the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer (Corps)
    prioritize ecosystem restoration projects against competing budget
    priorities? Will the Corps prioritize projects that protect life and
    property in addition to providing economic benefits?
        Answer. The Corps has three primary missions: commercial
    navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem
    restoration. For the aquatic ecosystem restoration mission, the Corps
    establishes priorities using performance metrics that are appropriate
    to that program. A nationwide perspective must be maintained to assure
    that available funding provides the most cost-effective restoration of
    nationally and regionally significant resources. The ranking criteria
    used to develop the aquatic ecosystem restoration budget are designed
    to assure that the available funding provides the greatest public
    benefit for the investment while continuing to investigate restoration
    opportunities and completing high performing projects in a timely
    manner so that benefits may be achieved as soon as possible.
        Where a project will address a significant risk to public safety,
    the Corps will take that into consideration in deciding whether to fund
    the project.

        Question 2. Do you think the local community also has a voice in
    determining what level of flood protection is appropriate? If not, does
    the Administration believe that the community should have a voice? What
    if a community does not want to pay the local cost share for project
    components unrelated to flood protection, but the Administration policy
    requires these components and/or the cost-share?
        Answer. In its flood and storm damage reduction studies, the Corps
    generally seeks to maximize the net economic benefits to the Nation.
    Where a local community seeks a higher or lower level of risk
    reduction, the Corps generally will develop a locally preferred plan to
    achieve that objective.
        At the request of the non-Federal sponsor of the project, the Corps
    sometimes will include recreation or aquatic ecosystem restoration
    features to a project whose primary purpose is flood risk management.
    In these cases, the non-Federal sponsor would be responsible for the
    applicable non-Federal share of the cost under current law for the
    added features.
        In other cases, a project may have more than one purpose. In these
    cases, the project cost share would be determined based upon the
    project's congressional authorization.

        Question 3. Please provide an update on the use of the Water
    Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program.
        Answer. The Army has been working with the Administration to
    develop a draft program rule for the Corps Water Infrastructure
    Financing Program (CWIFP) in accordance with WIFIA. The draft program
    rule is under interagency review per Executive Order 12866 and, upon
    its conclusion, the Corps will issue a proposed rule for public review
    and comment.

        Question 4. The Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014
    (WRRDA) Section 7001 Annual Report to Congress must be submitted each
    year on February 1st. However, for 2021, Congress did not receive the
    Report until over eight months later in November 2021.
        a.  What caused the delay?
        Answer. The report was provided to Congress once the review of the
    report was complete.

        b.  Do you expect this type of delay this year for the report due
    on February 1, 2022?
        Answer. No.

        Question 5. Please evaluate the use of the 7001 process.
    Specifically indicate if you believe the public has an adequate
    understanding of the process and that if the process is being fully
    utilized by the public.
        Answer. Since the inception of the Section 7001 process in 2014,
    the Army has sought to educate the public about the effort. In 2021,
    the Army offered public information sessions to explain the 7001
    process and answer questions. Additionally, on the Corp's 7001 webpage,
    the Army publicizes general information and a comprehensive list of
    frequently asked questions about the effort.

        Question 6. We understand that the Corps and Environmental
    Protection Agency (the Agencies) are planning to issue two regulations
    in order to revise the definition of ``waters of the United States''
    (WOTUS). The first proposed rule was published in the Federal Register
    on December 7, 2021, with a comment period that closes on February 7,
    2022. Despite a proposed release date of next month in the fall Unified
    Agenda, EPA officials are now saying the second of the two proposed
    rules is anticipated to be released `` . . . later this year.'' When do
    the Agencies plans to issue this second proposed definition? Will this
    proposed rule be issued in February of 2022?
        Answer. The agencies are weighing many considerations regarding a
    possible second rulemaking action, including timing, and are primarily
    focused at this time on crafting a durable definition of the term.

        Questions from Hon. Brian Babin to both Hon. Michael L. Connor,
      Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the
    Army, and Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and
                Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

        Question 1. It is our understanding that the Calhoun Port Authority
    was expected to receive the Advanced Funding Agreement for the
    Matagorda Ship Channel Improvement Project last year. What has been the
    reason for the delay in finalizing the Advanced Funding Agreement?
        Answer. The request and Committee notification are under review.

        Question 2. Can you provide an estimated date for when the
    Matagorda Ship Channel Improvement Project's Advanced Funding Agreement
    is to be finalized?
        Answer. No.

     Questions from Hon. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon to both Hon. Michael L.
    Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of
    the Army, and Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers
              and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

        Question 1. How will the agency seek to allocate the additional
    funding under IIJA (the Infrastructure Act)? Will there be specific
    missions either nationwide or by district that would be subject to
    priority focus?
        Answer. The Army will seek to develop its plan for the additional
    IIJA funding based on its assessment of the projects and studies that
    would qualify under the categories of funding established in that law.
        No. The priority focus will be opportunities to build innovative,
    climate resilient infrastructure to reduce risks to communities and
    ecosystems, modernize the Civil Works program to better serve the needs
    of disadvantaged communities, and upgrade the waterways and ports to
    strengthen supply chains and promote economic growth for the Nation.

        Question 2. The Spend Plans for IIJA for FY 2022 are required
    within 60 days of enactment--that is this week. Was this delivered?
        Answer. The Spend Plan for the IIJA FY 2022 funding was transmitted
    on January 19, 2022.

        Question 3. One thing we find when trying to use new funding to
    catch up on pending projects, is that the effect of time includes that
    when you do an updated price estimate it exceeds what had been
    originally authorized; this also happens to work that could have been
    carried out under the Continuing Authorities Program, or Section 205,
    where it grows to exceed the cost thresholds. Do you have suggestions
    on how to address such situations and for the Congress to incorporate
    such into WRDA?
        Answer. For projects that the Congress has specifically authorized,
    Section 902 of WRDA 1986 establishes a limit on the total project cost
    based on the last authorized total project cost, plus an additional
    cost of up to 20 percent in real terms (after accounting for
    inflation).
        The projects that the Corps studies, designs, and constructs under
    its Continuing Authorities Program (CAP) are small projects, which
    generally take less time to complete. Therefore, the Corps usually is
    able to determine before starting construction whether the project will
    exceed the applicable cost limits under the CAP program.

        Question 4. How will we address the situation of jurisdictions
    where non-federal partners who are units of local government may not
    have the resources in hand to acquire the lands and rights of way that
    they are expected to do as part of their share? Are ways to do this
    already available in current legislation, or do you have suggestions of
    alternatives that could be included?
        Answer. If a non-Federal sponsor has the funding to provide the
    real estate, but there are staffing constraints, the non-Federal
    sponsor may request that the Corps perform a portion or all of the
    required acquisition work on their behalf. Current law requires that
    the non-Federal sponsor (NFS) provide the required real estate
    interests for a project. If the non-Federal sponsor does not have
    funding to acquire the necessary real estate for the project, there are
    no options to proceed under current law.
        If a non-Federal sponsor doesn't have in-house resources to perform
    the major activities involved in the provision of real estate, the NFS
    may contract to obtain these products and services from the private
    sector or hire USACE to perform all or some of the work on their
    behalf, with appropriate justification and NFS funding.
        If a non-Federal sponsor has the funding to provide the real estate
    but there are staffing constraints, they may request that the Corps
    perform a portion or all of the required acquisition work on their
    behalf. Current law requires that the non-Federal sponsor provide the
    required real estate interests for a project. If the non-Federal
    sponsor does not have funding to acquire the necessary real estate for
    the project, there are no options to proceed under current law.
        Engineer Regulation 405-1-12 already allows for the assistance
    described above. Additionally, in some instances, a particular
    authorization may afford the NFS greater financial flexibility to fund
    the provision of real estate. For example, in the instance of projects
    authorized by the Supplemental Appropriations in the Bipartisan Budget
    Act of 2018, the Corps may reimburse on a rolling basis reasonable and
    allowable NFS administrative real property expenses incidental to
    provision of title.

        Question 5. Not all communities need a monumental multibillion
    dollar or decades long project, but in many cases even relatively small
    projects languish for years. Is there any measure that Congress could
    move forward to help the Corps address small community needs under the
    Continuing Authorities?
        Answer. The Corps is working to streamline its internal processes
    to ensure that the CAP program best serves all communities, including
    small communities.

        Question 6. Do you consider the current wait times for approvals of
    studies and ``New Starts'' to be satisfactory? Could it be made more
    efficient or timely? Is that something that could be addressed
    legislatively?
        Answer. The Army must provide a list of specific new starts that
    meet the criteria specified by Congress in the Appropriation Act.
    Simply approving more new starts without appropriations to complete the
    project will not resolve the issue of projects being constructed in a
    timelier manner.

        Question 7. Under the current ongoing budget, when could the states
    and territories count on the next upcoming project approvals and so-
    called new starts being published?
        Answer. The FY 2022 Budget included proposals for new studies and
    new construction projects. In recent years, appropriations acts have
    allowed or required the designation of additional new studies and new
    construction projects. If the FY 2022 appropriations bill follows suit,
    project lists including new starts would be submitted to the Congress
    through the annual work plan.

    Questions from Hon. Frederica S. Wilson to both Hon. Michael L. Connor,
      Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the
    Army, and Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and
                Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

        Question 1. Just north of my district is Port Everglades. The port
    has worked with the Corps on its deepening and widening project since
    1996. Recently, the port has learned that the project is expected to
    cost significantly more due to environmental monitoring and mitigation,
    thereby necessitating that this committee increase its authorization
    limit via the WRDA bill. I appreciate the Corps' work on the Port
    Everglades project.
        Mr. Connor and Mr. Spellmon: Do I have your commitment to work with
    me and this committee to increase this project's authorization in the
    upcoming WRDA bill?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 2. Mr. Connor and Mr. Spellmon, I know you have a very
    extensive background in water resources issues. I want to bring up this
    very serious issue of plastic pellet pollution. There are no
    regulations on preventing spills of plastic pellets into our waterways
    and ocean. How can the Army Corp of Engineers play a role in addressing
    this growing threat to our waterways and communities?
        Answer. The Corps provides technical and scientific support to the
    London Convention (LC) through the Scientific Group. The LC
    consultative body is considering the environmental impacts of
    microplastics in ocean waters.

    Questions from Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana to both Hon. Michael L.
    Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of
    the Army, and Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers
              and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

        Question 1. Section 213 of WRDA 2020, The Lower Mississippi River
    Study, received wide support with states, and stakeholders in both the
    environmental and business communities. Even officials in the Corps
    have stated that they're excited about how the study could serve as a
    catalyst to modernize the operation of multiple (and sometimes,
    conflicting) mission areas in the largest river in North America.
        Unfortunately, the WRDA Section 213 Guidance [https://
    usace.contentdm.oclc.org/utils/getfile/collection/p16021coll5/id/35898]
    appears to limit the practicalities of this study getting off the
    ground: requiring a non-Federal cost share of 50%. This guidance
    disregards congressional intent. This could result in limitation of the
    timeliness of this study, and potentially put the SEVEN states (IL, MO,
    KY, TN, AR, MS, and LA) in the study area at odds with one another:
    Should one nonfederal sponsor come forward to fund the study on their
    own, the resulting report could lack the confidence and trust of the
    non-participating states.
        The Corps has an opportunity with the Disaster Supplemental to move
    forward with the study and ensure the study is completed as quickly as
    possible.
        a.  CONNOR: Will you commit to taking ownership of this study and
    ensuring that it is initiated, completed, and applied according to
    congressional intent?
        Answer. My office will review your concerns and will recommend how
    best to move this study forward.

        b.  SPELLMON: Will you commit to ensuring that science dictates how
    we operate the river, not other pressures?
        Answer. Yes.

        c.  BOTH: Could you provide any guidance to the committee and to me
    to optimize the authorization for this study to ensure it has the
    greatest chance of being funded and executed at the soonest
    opportunity?
        Answer. I am committed to expeditiously completing the study and
    will continue to work with LTG Spellmon to identify opportunities that
    allow the study to be completed expeditiously. We have the necessary
    authorization and are considering this study for funding along with
    other projects and studies across the Nation.

        Question 2. Since 2007, this Committee has mandated that all water
    resources projects should be evaluated against economic, environmental,
    and social costs and benefits \1\ during the all-important ``Benefit-
    Cost Analysis'' (or BCA). As you know, the BCA process determines which
    water resource projects move from our WRDA bills to appropriations and
    implementation and, since the 1980s, economics alone has carried the
    day. In 2013, the updated Principles, Requirements, and Guidelines
    (PR&G) were finally published by the White House which, if implemented
    by Corps, would have met our 2007 mandate to you. But the Corps argued
    all the way through 2019 that appropriation riders prohibited it from
    implementing the PR&G \2\. So, in WRDA 2020, we fixed that by
    specifically directing the Corps to implement the PR&G within six
    months and to update the policy every five years \3\.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Section 2031, WRDA 2007.
        \2\ GAO Report No. GAO-19-319, (p. 29).
        \3\ Section 110, WRDA 2020.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Could you please tell us how that's coming along and what more
    needs to be done so that we have a science-based method for valuing
    economic, environmental, and social benefits?
        Answer. In evaluating a proposed water resources investment, the
    Corps considers a range of alternatives. In this analysis, the Corps
    considers both the cost and all of the benefits to the Nation. The
    Principles, Requirements and Guidelines (PR&G) reflects the overall
    policy guidance for Federal investments in water resources. The Corps
    is planning a rulemaking action to determine how specifically it will
    implementation of the Principles, Requirements, and Guidelines with a
    proposed rule expected by the end of CY 2022. The end result will be
    the Corps considering the total benefits of project alternatives,
    including equal consideration of the environmental, social, and
    economic benefits.

        Question 3. When Hurricane Ida made landfall in Port Fourchon,
    Louisiana at the peak of its strength on August 29, 2021, it hammered
    communities across Louisiana's coastline with sustained Category 4-
    strength winds and some gusts exceeding 190 miles per hour. Although
    Hurricane Ida was the most destructive storm to strike Louisiana since
    2005 and resulted in an estimated $65 billion in damage, key post-
    Katrina investments in flood prevention ensured that the losses were
    not higher. The Hurricane Storm Damage Risk Reduction System (HSDRSS)
    held Ida's storm surges at bay, protecting both life and property for
    many Louisianians. However, not all Louisianians are protected by such
    a comprehensive system of pumps, levees, floodwalls, and flood gates--
    and unfortunately, we know that there are some levees in the Corps
    inventory that may have quality or safety concerns. That's why Section
    131 of the bipartisan Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2020
    directed the Corps to do three things with individual levee sponsors
    for systems in the federal portfolio:
        i.  Identify project-specific engineering and maintenance
    deficiencies, if any;
        ii.  Describe recommended remedies and the associated costs of
    those remedies; and
        iii.  Consult closely with the non-federal sponsor throughout this
    process.
        a.  What is the status of the Corps implementation of Sec. 131?
        Answer. Where requested and subject to the availability of funding,
    the Corps is prepared to consult with non-Federal sponsors to evaluate
    their levees and identify potential remedies.

        b.  How much is the Corps spending annually under all
    appropriations accounts, including O/M, on levee safety?
        Answer. It is difficult to estimate the amount of funding that the
    Corps provides annually that contribute to the concept of ``levee
    safety.'' Across all of the Corps appropriations accounts, the Corps
    invests hundreds of millions of dollars each year in work related to
    levee systems. For example, the Lower Mississippi River Main Stem
    project is the largest levee system in the Nation. The Corps is both
    constructing this project and involved in its operation and
    maintenance. Some of the work that the Corps is constructing on this
    project addresses an identified levee safety risk. The Corps also
    supports levee safety through its PL 84-99 Rehabilitation Program for
    post-flood activities. The Corps O&M program includes Levee Safety
    Program oversight, related technology and policy development,
    assessments under 33 U.S.C. 408, and other engagement with local
    sponsors on the roughly 1,600 federally authorized levees.
    Additionally, the Corps inspects non-federal flood-risk management
    projects to verify continued eligibility for the PL 84-99
    Rehabilitation Program.

        c.  How many Corps FTEs are being committed to the levee safety
    mission? By contrast, how many Corps FTEs are committed to planning?
        Answer. The approximate number of FTEs committed to planning is
    1,100. At this time, it is difficult to estimate the number of FTEs
    associated with the levee safety mission as workload is spread across
    many FTEs, none of which are solely dedication to the levee safety
    mission.

        Question 4. Resilience was a huge focus of Congress in the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Congress placed the Army Corps
    in a leadership role to achieve that goal, particularly for coastal
    communities through protection and ecosystem restoration.
        How will you prioritize projects to achieve resilience while
    ensuring that each dollar is used responsibly for our taxpayers?
        Answer. The President has directed each federal agency to work
    within its own authorities to tackle the climate crisis at home. As
    part of this whole of government effort, the Corps is working to help
    communities to decrease their climate risk based on the best available
    science. The Corps is working on ways to integrate individual Coastal
    Storm Risk Management, Flood Risk Management, and Ecosystem Restoration
    projects at a system-scale to support the resilience of coastal
    communities. This is one of the opportunities afforded by multi-purpose
    authorizations, as prioritized by IIJA and other relevant legislation.
    In addition, the USACE Engineering With Nature Program is developing
    technical capabilities to inform the planning, design, construction,
    operation and maintenance of nature-based solutions (consistent with
    the President's priorities as set forth in EO 14072). The life-cycle
    costs and benefits of conventional flood risk management projects,
    nature-based solutions, and combinations of these, must consider the
    initial construction, ongoing operation, and long-term maintenance of
    these systems. Such life-cycle evaluations will enable planners and
    engineers to identify cost-effective projects that sustain project
    benefits into the future in order to support the resilience of coastal
    communities.

        Question 5. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has unveiled a
    new system of rating risk for homeowners in Special Flood Hazard Areas,
    called Risk Rating 2.0. However, due largely to the presence of levee-
    impacted areas in Louisiana, FEMA departed from the catastrophe models
    they applied to other states and had to create an entirely new
    formulation for future loss potential in Louisiana. These catastrophe
    models, which integrate information from existing NFIP maps, NFIP
    policies and claims data, United States Geological Survey 3-D elevation
    models, National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration storm
    surge data, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data sets, are designed to
    be more dynamic than projecting future losses based solely on
    historical data. However, this change represented a shift away from
    relying on levee accreditation to determine the amount of protection
    provided by a levee.
        a.  From the Corps perspective, can the probability of levee
    failure (not levee overtopping) be estimated with sufficient accuracy
    to integrate into the new FEMA Risk Rating 2.0?
        Answer. The Corps supports FEMA's efforts to improve levee data and
    to refine its risk assessment methodologies.

        b.  Does the Corps implementation of Sec. 131, including
    assessments of possible levee deficiencies, include providing FEMA with
    access to this data for the purposes of setting flood risk rates?
        Answer. The National Levee Database and the Levee Screening Tool
    provide FEMA access to such information.

     Questions from Hon. David Rouzer on behalf of Hon. Michelle Steel to
    both Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
        Works, Department of the Army, and Lieutenant General Scott A.
    Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of
                                   Engineers

    On behalf of Rep. Michelle Steel, I'd like to inquire about the
    following:
        Question 1. The Citizens of Southern California have a strong
    interest in finishing the federally authorized Westminster-East Garden
    Grove Flood Risk Management Project. Over the decades, urbanization of
    the Westminster watershed has increased the potential for flood related
    damages and impacts associated with the overtopping of channel systems
    during short duration, high intensity rainfall events.
        Urbanization has also increased the total amount of impermeable
    area, resulting in higher volumes of stormwater being directed to flood
    control channels due to limited infiltration opportunities.
        Spanning 11 highly urbanized cities, the project area encompasses
    approximately 40,000 at risk structures, with a potential of up to $4
    billion in damages from a 100-year event, 1 million residents and
    business owners, U.S. military operations, critical transportation
    infrastructure, including Interstate 405 connecting Los Angeles and San
    Diego, and sensitive coastal ecosystems impacted by run-off
    contaminants. It is imperative that funds for the Project be included
    in the President's Budget for FY 2023.
        Current project needs are approximately $500k to start the
    Preconstruction, Engineering and Design Phase per the Los Angeles
    District. Is this a priority for the Administration in the upcoming
    year?
        Answer. The Army will consider funding for the Westminster-East
    Garden Grove project, along with other programs, projects, and
    activities across the Nation that are competing for the available
    Federal resources.

        Question 2. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) needs
    $15.5 million to complete the current stage of the Surfside-Sunset &
    Newport Beach Replenishment Project. Funding for this critical
    infrastructure project was included when the House of Representatives
    passed a package of fiscal year 2022 appropriations on July 29, 2021.
        The Army Corps has been unable to finish this authorized and
    overdue sand mitigation project along coastal Orange County. As you
    finalize plans and reports for projects for the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), it is imperative you include $15.5
    million for this vital and overdue project.
        For many years, major floods have hit the shore causing lots of
    damage and threats to human life. Shore erosion will continue to risk
    the lives, property, economy, and infrastructure of Orange County
    residents. This project has a significant local cost-share with funds
    already provided.
        As you finalize plans and reports for projects for the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, it is imperative you include
    $15.5 million for this vital and overdue sand mitigation project.
        Coastal Orange County had another summer of king tides, local
    beaches were closed, and many residents worried about their safety.
    With the recent tsunami warning, it proves that this project is will
    provide a key protection to Seal Beach, Huntington Beach and Newport
    Beach.
        Is the Administration committed to addressing the heighten risk of
    safety and proprieties issues including loss of life and cost to
    municipalities if this project is not immediately finished?
        Answer. The Army continues to consider project benefits and costs,
    including any associated risks, in its evaluation of future funding.
    The project will continue to be considered with other programs,
    projects, and activities across the Nation that are competing for the
    available Federal resources.

     Questions from Hon. David Rouzer to Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant
         Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army

        Question 1. In your written testimony you mentioned the White
    House's ``Justice40'' initiative, which is ``a goal that 40 percent of
    the overall benefits of Federal investments flow to disadvantaged
    communities.'' How does the U.S. Army intend to implement this at the
    Corps? Do you have a plan for this implementation? How do you plan to
    adhere to this goal in cases where the law may direct funding in ways
    that do not comport with this Administration initiative?
        Answer. My office is working to establish policy guidance to
    implement the Justice40 Initiative as it relates to the Corps' Civil
    Works mission.

        Question 2. In August 2021 several Members of this Committee sent a
    letter to the Corps detailing concerns with some of the objectives
    outlined in the Corps' budget, including ``not funding work that
    directly subsidizes fossil fuels including work that lowers the cost of
    production, lowers the cost of consumption, or raises the revenues
    retained by producers of fossil fuels.'' \1\ I also sent questions for
    the record concerning this same issue in June 2021 following the
    Committee's hearing on the Corps' budget priorities. Considering recent
    issues with the supply chain and high energy prices, these policy
    statements are even more alarming now than they were last summer. To my
    knowledge, we have not received a response to this letter, nor to those
    submitted questions, so perhaps you can clear some things up for us.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Office of Management and Budget, Appendix Budget of the United
    States Fiscal Year 2022, Corps of Engineers-Civil Works, available at
    https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/coe_fy22.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        a.  When can we expect a formal response to our letter?
        Answer. We are working on the formal response.

        b.  Could you please explain how the Corps will carry out these
    objectives?
        Answer. The Army is working to determine whether and, if so how,
    the Corps program might be able to advance these objectives.

          Are there certain types of energy infrastructure projects the
    Corps will no longer be prioritizing?
        Answer. No.

          Does this goal apply to vessels that transport fossil fuels and/
    or their products?
        Answer. No.

        c.  Can the Corps assure the public that it will not be actively
    working to prevent a decrease in energy prices for American consumers?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 3. In November 2021, the Ranking Members of the
    Subcommittee and Full Committee sent a letter to the Corps asking for
    clarification on the unofficial pause for Section 404 permitting. The
    pause was extremely concerning as it was set to create immense delays
    for critical infrastructure projects at a time when billions of dollars
    in infrastructure funding had just been approved and our country faces
    a supply chain crisis. We have not received a formal response to this
    letter; however, your written testimony indicates that the pause was
    lifted.
        a.  Please explain the rationale for the permitting pause and why
    there seemed to be no official or nationwide announcement.
        Answer. The permitting pause was a result of the October 21, 2021,
    decision by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
    California to issue an order vacating and remanding the Environmental
    Protection Agency's (EPA) 2020 regulations implementing Section 401 of
    the Clean Water Act. On October 25, 2021, the Corps instituted a
    temporary pause on regulatory actions that relied on water quality
    certifications issued under the EPA's vacated 2020 rule to ensure
    consistency with the court ruling. The Corps communicated with
    individual applicants that were potentially affected by the pause. On
    November 5, 2021, the EPA determined that the vacatur applied
    nationwide and that its 1971 rule would apply until the revisions to
    the 401 regulations are finalized. Thereafter, the Corps lifted the
    temporary pause on November 18, 2021, and published a statement on its
    website on December 2, 2021. The referenced announcement is available
    at: https://www.usace.army.mil/Media/Announcements/Article/2875721/2-
    december-2021-water-quality-certifications-and-corps-permitting/.

        b.  What are the Corps' plans for these permits moving forward now
    that the pause has been lifted?
        Answer. Corps districts resumed making decisions on all permit
    applications and requests for nationwide permit verifications on
    November 18, 2021.

        c.  When can we expect a formal response to our letter from the
    Corps?
        Answer. A formal response was signed January 11, 2022.

        Question 4. The Corps' South Atlantic Coastal Study (SACS) draft
    report identified compound flooding as a significant driver of coastal
    flood risk throughout the study area that stretches from North Carolina
    to Mississippi, including Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.\2\
    In particular, storm surge, sea level rise and heavy precipitation,
    either through direct runoff or increased river discharge, occurs
    concurrently or in close succession. These factors compound the flood
    impacts on communities and cause some communities to suffer multiple
    flooding events from one storm.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ United States Army Corps of Engineers, SACS Main Report (2021),
    available at https://www.sad.usace.army.mil/Portals/60/siteimages/SACS/
    FinalDraft_SACS_MainReport_
    print.pdf?ver=z1Eom7eS96i27hDfvzVVgw%3d%3d.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Recent examples from the SACS region include Hurricane Florence
    (NC/SC, 2018), Hurricane Matthew (FL/GA/NC/SC, 2016), and Hurricane
    Sally (FL/AL, 2020). Southeastern North Carolina saw then-record storm
    tides with Hurricane Matthew and again with Hurricane Florence, which
    also dumped record-breaking rainfall amounts of as much as 30 inches on
    coastal and inland towns. The draft report also notes that under the
    coastal storm risk management (CSRM) study authority from 1955, the
    Corps does not have the authority to consider compound flooding impacts
    in CSRM studies. If the Corps is going to design projects to protect
    coastal communities, it needs to examine the full range of coastal
    flood threats.
        a.  What is the Corps doing to consider the full range of coastal
    flood threats in its studies?
        Answer. In its studies, the Corps is able to consider all
    hydrologic factors that contribute to the coastal flood risk in the
    study area. The analysis includes estimates of potential sea level rise
    and its effects on alternative plans.

        b.  Do you believe the Corps is constrained in its ability to
    consider compound flooding in CSRM studies?
        Answer. There are no constraints, by law or policy, on the Corps'
    ability to consider compound flooding. Analysis of compound flooding is
    consistent with current policy and could occur without specific
    guidance as part of sound engineering practices.

        c.  Does Congress need to update the 1955 authority to conduct CSRM
    studies to explicitly allow for consideration of compound flooding
    effects and management of risk?
        Answer. No, after an additional policy review of the draft report,
    we have determined that the authority is sufficient to consider
    compound flooding. The recommendation will be removed and will not be
    included in the final report.

        d.  How would including compound flooding in CSRM studies enable
    the Corps to better manage flood risk?
        Answer. Where compound flooding is a significant factor, the Corps
    analysis will include these effects to provide a more complete picture
    of the coastal flood risk in the study area.

     Questions from Hon. David Rouzer on behalf of Hon. Jefferson Van Drew
     to Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil
                         Works, Department of the Army

    On behalf of Rep. Jefferson Van Drew, I'd like to inquire about the
    following:
        Question 1.a. How aggressive should the Corps be in transitioning
    to beneficial use models?
        Answer. Section 125, WRDA 2020, provided new opportunities for
    investigating the beneficial use of dredged material. The Army is
    evaluating changes to its processes that could result in increased
    beneficial use. These include guidance on dredge material management
    plans, improving partnerships and public outreach to identify a full
    range of beneficial use placement opportunities.

        Question 1.a.i. What federal policies stand in the way of that
    transition?
        Answer. The Corps has not identified any federal policies that
    prevent consideration of beneficial use.

        Question 1.a.ii. What can we do to remove those barriers?
        Answer. The Corps is working to identify any potential barriers to
    beneficial use.

    Questions from Hon. John Garamendi to Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant
         Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army

        Question 1. President Biden's Executive Order 14005 (Ensuring the
    Future is Made in All of America by All of America's Workers) directs
    all federal agencies to fully implement our nation's ``Buy American''
    requirement for federally funded infrastructure projects. For civil
    works projects carried out by the Corps, the Buy America Act clearly
    applies. However, it seems that projects carried out under the Corps'
    Section 1014 and Section 1043 non-Federal implementation authorities--
    for which the non-federal sponsor acts as the contracting agent on
    behalf of the Corps--are inadvertent loopholes to the Buy American Act.
    Assistant Secretary Connor, will the Army Corps commit to fully
    implement the President's executive order by applying the Buy American
    Act to projects carried out under these non-federal implementation
    authorities? I will be submitting this question for the record so that
    the Corps please confirm for the record that ``Buy American''
    requirements do indeed not currently apply to the construction/
    rehabilitation contracts carried out by the non-federal sponsor. I aim
    to close this loophole in WRDA 2022.
        Answer. Both Section 204 of WRDA 1986, which has been amended
    multiple times including by Section 1014 of WRRDA 2014, and Section
    1043(b) of WRRDA 2014, as amended, provide that a non-Federal interest
    carrying out a project under either authority is required to comply
    with the same legal requirements that would apply if the Corps was
    carrying out the project. The Corps will commit to fully implementing
    the President's Executive Order by applying the Buy American Act to
    projects carried out by non-Federal interests under Section 204 of WRDA
    1986, as amended, and Section 1043(b), as amended.

        Question 2. Congress has provided many federal agencies, including
    the Army Corps of Engineers, ``Other Transactional Authority'' (OTA) to
    expand the government's access to the innovation taking place in the
    private sector, thereby helping overcome the rigidity of the Federal
    acquisition process. The Army Corps has ``Other Transactional
    Authority'' for its military mission (10 U.S.C. 2371) but has concluded
    it lacks authority to use it for its civil works mission. I'm out to
    correct that in WRDA 2022. Assistant Secretary Connor, can I count on
    you to work with me to help facilitate that result in the coming Water
    Resources Development Act? Given the Corps' new funding resources under
    the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-
    58) and extensive disaster-relief challenges, it seems to me the Corps
    should have every tool available.
        Answer. Yes.

       Questions from Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana to Hon. Michael L.
    Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of
                                    the Army

        Question 1. On Supplemental Appropriations--There are authorized
    projects in my district which would have mitigated a large portion of
    the damages caused by Hurricane Ida. The greatest example of this is
    the Morganza to the Gulf project which would have protected Lafourche
    and Terrebonne Parishes, the site of the hurricane's landfall and its
    greatest destruction. Morganza is within the disaster declaration, is
    the only project in the MR&T account that is eligible to receive
    construction dollars, it's not a new start, has a strong BCR
    calculation, and it's received funding as recently as last year.
        a.  Could you explain why Morganza did not receive funding in the
    Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriation Work Plan?
        Answer. The project received $378.5M in funding within the IIJA
    FY22 Work Plan issued on January 19, 2022.

          i.  Could you explain how funding the project from the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will impact the cost share of
    the non-Federal sponsor, which is already fronting significant funds to
    recovery from the 5th costliest hurricane on record?
        Answer. Funding provided under IIJA does not alter the cost share
    requirement under the executed Project Partnership Agreement (PPA).

        Question 2. Regarding Cross Crediting--Sometimes, states can move
    more quickly than the Army Corps, and contribute more resources to
    complete a project than the required cost share. This benefits our
    communities and our ecosystems because benefits are realized earlier.
    In Louisiana, as we face a land loss crisis, there are numerous
    examples of restoration projects that the state has gone ahead and
    completed. In WRDA 2014, Congress provided a mechanism for states to
    receive credit for when they go above the cost share and apply that
    extra credit to a cost share on another authorized project.
        a.  Do you support policies that allow states to obtain credit and
    apply that to other projects?
        Answer. Generally, we support that objective where the projects are
    related or part of a single integrated effort.

        b.  Will you work with Louisiana, to see that this authority is
    used to save our coast?
        Answer. The Corps will work with Louisiana in accordance with all
    applicable laws, regulations, and policies.

        Question 3. Landowners in Louisiana support restoration projects
    and are willing and eager to allow their property to support
    conservation and restoration projects, however, they are reluctant to
    give up full ownership, or ``fee title,'' in the property. Though
    official Corps guidance provides flexibility on requirements for
    acquisition of real property, in practice, the state continues to be
    required to obtain ``fee title'' for restoration projects. Not only
    does this delay projects and makes efforts to save at-risk lands more
    difficult, it undermines community support for restoration and costs
    more money! Congress addressed this in Section 1115 of WRDA 2018, which
    encouraged the Corps to use the minimum land rights necessary to allow
    for ecosystem restoration. However, we have yet to see updated guidance
    or a change in posture.
        a.  Shouldn't the Corps obtain only that level of property rights
    that protects the public values created by Corps projects, rather than
    full fee title to all private property covered by ecosystem restoration
    and beneficial use projects in coastal Louisiana?
        Answer. For ecosystem restoration and beneficial use of dredged
    material projects, full fee title is the approved standard estate
    because it is the minimum interest in land that allows construction and
    operation and maintenance project and protect the Federal investment.
    The Corps can approve a lesser or nonstandard estate, after conducting
    a fact specific analysis in order to identify what minimum rights in
    the real property are required to construct, operate and maintain the
    federal project, as well as to ensure that the estate instrument is
    legally enforceable under Federal and state law and defines any
    affirmative rights required, like public use.

        b.  Are you willing to work with the Committee, as well as non-
    federal sponsors, to address this issue and speed our efforts to
    restore our lands?
        Answer. Yes.

        Question 4. It is crucial for the Army Corps to recognize that
    ecosystem restoration and coastal protection can work hand in hand. We
    have a great example in Louisiana of how that can work in practice, as
    the state is making great progress with the Army Corps on having the
    Maurepas restoration project used as mitigation for the West Shore Lake
    Pontchartrain protection project. Louisiana's coastal master plan has
    widespread support thanks to extensive public input and strong
    foundation of science.
        Would it not make sense for the Army Corps to look to the
    restoration projects in the state's master plan to serve as mitigation
    for other Army Corps projects?
        Answer. The Corps considers all legally permissible mitigation
    alternatives.

    Questions from Hon. Michael Guest to Hon. Michael L. Connor, Assistant
         Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, Department of the Army

        Question 1. Congress and this committee have extensively discussed
    the importance of cybersecurity for our nation's critical
    infrastructure. The dams and locks that connect our commercial
    waterways are crucial to maintaining supply lines and delivering goods
    to market. The Army Corps has continued to work towards immigrating our
    nation's lock and dams into a computer operated remote control system.
        a.  Is the Army Corps addressing the cybersecurity risks associated
    with a remote-controlled system?
        Answer. Yes.

        b.  Is the Army Corps looking to utilize funds in the recently
    passed Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to implement a migration
    to remote-controlled systems?
        Answer. Yes. The Corps plans to continue exploring the costs,
    benefits, risks, and implementation procedures that may allow the Corps
    to leverage remote lock operations to maintain continuity of operations
    or improve the efficiency of our commercial navigation infrastructure.

        c.  Does the Army Corps still see manned locks and dams as the
    preferred system of operation until we can ensure a secure system?
        Answer. Yes, to the extent possible.

        d.  Does the Army Corps plan to continue manning locks and dams
    following any integration into a remote-controlled system to prevent
    any attacks against this critical infrastructure?
        Answer. The Corps intends to continue to explore and expand
    implementation of remote operations where there exists a strong
    business case to do so. Furthermore, not all sites are capable of
    remote operations at this time so those sites will continue to be
    manually operated. Where the Corps implements remote operations, it
    will maintain personnel at the lock to ensure operations under all
    conditions.

       Questions from Hon. John Garamendi to Lieutenant General Scott A.
    Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of
                                   Engineers

        Question 1. Congresswoman Matsui and I secured Section 209 of WRDA
    2020 (Division AA of Public Law 116-260) directing the Army Corps to
    complete a new, comprehensive study of the Yolo Bypass in California's
    Sacramento Valley. Congress granted the Army Corps a general authority
    to study flood control in the Sacramento River Basin under Section 209
    of the Flood Control Act of 1962 (Public Law 87-874). So, the purpose
    of our WRDA 2020 provision is not for yet another traditional Corps
    feasibility study for a one-off project, but instead to prompt the
    Corps to take a comprehensive approach for flood protection
    infrastructure in the Yolo Bypass. General Spellmon, how does the
    Corps' Sacramento District plan to implement this WRDA 2020 provision?
        Answer. The Corps develops an implementation plan for its studies
    early in the study process, once the study is underway.

        Question 2. In the third paragraph of page 65 of House Report #116-
    460 (H.R.7575), the House T&I Committee directed the Corps to compile,
    and transmit to the Committee within 90 days, a report identifying, by
    dollar value for each mission area of the Corps' Civil Works
    responsibility, the total number of awards or contracts to small
    business concerns (as such term is defined in section 3(a) of the Small
    Business Act) for each Division of the Corps over the past five fiscal
    years. General Spellmon, when does the Corps intend to make this report
    to the Committee, which should be public information?
        Answer. The Corps could provide Civil Works small business actions,
    as a whole, and dollars awarded for the previous five years. The Corps
    is not currently funded to provide a report of small business actions
    and dollars awarded for the previous 5 years detailed into work
    categories of Civil Works. When contracts are awarded and reported
    through the official contract repository, the data fields do not
    include these work categories. Therefore, to provide the report, each
    individual contract would have to be reviewed and assigned a work
    category. A detailed report could be provided in 9 months with $559,000
    funding required.

        Question 3. General Spellmon, when does the Corps expect to
    promulgate the rulemaking necessary to begin implementing the Corps
    Water Infrastructure Financing Program (CWIP) authorized under the
    Water Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (33 U.S.C. 3901 et
    seq.)?
        Answer. The Corps has been working with the Administration to
    develop a draft program rule for the CWIFP in accordance with WIFIA.
    The draft program rule is currently under interagency review per
    Executive Order 12866 and, upon its conclusion, the Corps will publish
    a proposed rule for public review and comment.

       Questions from Hon. Jared Huffman to Lieutenant General Scott A.
    Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of
                                   Engineers

        Question 1. Lake Sonoma at Warm Springs Dam, and Lake Mendocino at
    Coyote Vallely Dam, are federal facilities on federal property. They
    are critical for flood control, water supply, and through facilities on
    the properties, the preservation of endangered species that were
    jeopardized by the construction and operation of the facilities. They
    are important, as well, for their recreation and hydropower facilities.
        Both Sonoma and Mendocino Counties have been the scene of
    increasingly numerous wildfires. And, in fact, the hilly, wooded nature
    of their locations makes them particularly vulnerable. At Lake Sonoma
    in 2020, wildfires burned on the grounds that were brought under
    control with the use of a variety of commonly-used fire suppressant
    chemicals. Some commonly used chemicals can pose a hazard to drinking
    water. With 50 miles of shoreline, the waters of Lake Sonoma could have
    been impacted, with a serious deleterious impact on the system that
    provides water for 600,000 residents in Sonoma, Marin, and Mendocino
    Counties.
        Currently, 1% of the Corps O&M budget is reserved for emergency
    purposes at Corps facilities. We understand that none was utilized at
    Lake Sonoma because the fires struck during the summer months toward
    the end of the fiscal year. We have been informally advised that the
    Corps is always reluctant to request O&M funding for vegetation control
    at its facilities that could help prevent future devastation, because
    it feels the likelihood of such a conflagration in any given year is
    slim, and so a higher budget priority is always given to work that it
    knows it needs.
        a.  Are you aware of the wildfires that have devastated so much of
    my Congressional district the past few years, and the importance of the
    Corps' Warm Springs and Coyote Vallely Dams? These facilities are
    critical for water supply, flood control, and the millions of dollars
    that have been invested in hatcheries and associated facilities needed
    to restore endangered species that are jeopardized because of the
    construction and operation of the dams.
        Answer. Yes.

        b.  In the summer of 2020, wildfires did strike on the grounds of
    your Warm Springs Dam. I'm told that some typically-used fire
    suppression chemicals could pose a threat to the water quality of Lake
    Sonoma, which is critical to the region's water supply. What can the
    Corps be doing to assure that we don't have wildfires on these
    properties?
        Answer. The Corps maintains both facilities and thins fire fuels in
    high-use areas such as campgrounds and trailheads. We are working with
    local partners who have helped to reestablish fire breaks on our lands.
    The Corps also is exploring the potential and scope of prescribed burns
    with its partners at CalFire.

        c.  How much money was in the Corps' FY '22 budget request for
    vegetation control at its various properties around the country?
        Answer. The FY 2022 Budget for the Corps for forestry management
    was $5,386,000.

        d.  I'd like to hear from you, very soon, on your suggestions for
    how you can better protect these vulnerable facilities from the serious
    threat of wildfire, and also how you can better protect other Corps
    properties around the country.
        Answer. The Corps welcomes the opportunity to discuss how to better
    protect these facilities from wildfire, and the measures that we are
    taking to meet these goals.

        Question 2. Quagga mussels are being increasingly found in western
    and California watersheds. As in locations elsewhere in the country
    receiving federal assistance (ok, they're much larger watersheds and
    more nationally significant waterways) occurrences of these invasive
    species, among the most devastating to infiltrate North American fresh
    waters, are cause of great concern. The mussels create severe
    ecological and economic impacts because once established they can lead
    to: Infestation of Lake Mendocino and Sonoma's hydropower
    infrastructure; Clogged water intake and delivery pipes that supply
    drinking water to more than 600,000 residents in portions of Sonoma,
    Marin, and Mendocino Counties; clogged water intake pipes to hatchery
    operations in which the Corps has invested millions; millions of
    dollars in costs to repair infrastructure and remove the infestation.
        You may be aware of a provision I worked to include in WRDA `20,
    Section 505, adding the Russian River Basin to a list of the very few
    watersheds eligible for funding in the Corps' program for Watercraft
    Inspections and Decontamination. I understand that, unlike the few
    other authorized basins, funding for the Russian River was not
    requested for inclusion in the FY '22 budget. Now, I can understand
    that that budget was well on its way to being finalized when WRDA '20
    was enacted very late in the 2020 calendar year.
        But if Quagga Mussels that are so increasingly prevalent in western
    and California watersheds find their way into Lake Sonoma or Lake
    Mendocino, once established they could lead to: infestation of Lake
    Mendocino and Sonoma's hydropower infrastructure; clogged water intake
    and delivery pipes that supply drinking water to more than 600,000
    residents in portions of Sonoma, Marin, and Mendocino Counties; clogged
    water intake pipes to hatchery operations in which the Corps has
    invested millions; and many millions of dollars in costs to repair
    infrastructure and remove the infestation.
        I would ask that, as you continue your preparation of your FY 22
    work plan the funding for which is provided in both the House and
    Senate Appropriations bills, and also your FY '23 budget, that monies
    be included for watercraft inspection and decontamination stations in
    the Russian River Basin at Lakes Sonoma and Mendocino.
        Answer. Development of the Quagga Mussel Inspection Management Plan
    in the Russian River watershed began in fiscal year 2021 and will
    directly address the expansion of inspection stations, new
    decontamination stations, and rapid response coordination. The plan is
    undergoing review, with comments from stakeholders and resource
    agencies being addressed.

       Questions from Hon. Michael Guest to Lieutenant General Scott A.
    Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of
                                   Engineers

        Question 1. In Southwest Mississippi, continual flooding of the
    batture land has yielded farmland unplantable and denied access to
    logging tracks, school revenue lands, and oil extraction sites.
    Increase in frequency and severity of river flooding when pressure on
    the system builds has resulted in lost revenue to rural, underserved
    communities in the area and has put a significant economic burden on
    its citizens. Studies of the area have shown that siltation buildup
    along the Old River Control Structure and Dead Man's Bend have resulted
    in a higher riverbed and contributed heavily to the increased flooding.
    Similar projects have been conducted to mitigate siltation buildup
    along the MR&T, specifically the Delta Headwaters Project.
        a.  Do you see an expanded project similar to Delta Headwaters
    addressed at tributaries of the Mississippi River near the Southwest
    Mississippi batture land as an effective remedy to the siltation
    problems affecting the River?
        Answer. No, the Mississippi River Valley as a whole has seen
    increased flooding due to an unprecedented amount of rainfall in recent
    years, which has resulted in river stages that affect batture lands.

        b.  Do you see a completed Study of the Lower Mississippi River,
    authorized in WRDA 2020--Sec. 213, as necessary to addressing the
    issues present in this part of the MR&T project and what is the
    estimated cost needed to be appropriated to complete this study?
        Answer. Section 213 of WRDA 2020 authorizes a $25 million study of
    the Lower Mississippi River basin, from Cape Girardeau, Missouri, to
    the Gulf of Mexico, which could include this and other issues of
    concern in the basin.

     Questions from Hon. Garret Graves of Louisiana to Lieutenant General
    Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army
                               Corps of Engineers

        Question 1. The Army Corps has designed the Grand Isle project to
    withstand a Category 3 hurricane. Yet the project has experienced
    significant damage from run-of-the-mill tropical storms, leaving the
    community at greater risk to more serious hurricanes, which we saw
    firsthand last summer.
        a.  How can the Army Corps ensure that Grand Isle's protection
    system can rise to the level of its design?
        Answer. The Grand Isle project consists of a sacrificial vegetated
    sand dune and associated features that are designed to provide flood
    risk reduction for up to 50-year tropical events. While the project was
    significantly damaged during Hurricane Ida, it performed as designed
    and intended. To address the damage and needed repair from Hurricane
    Ida, a Project Information Report is being developed to determine post
    storm damage repair eligibility under P.L. 84-99. Funds from the
    Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 will be used to construct a 600 lineal
    foot gulf side offshore rock breakwater between the existing West Jetty
    and the recently constructed western most breakwater. The Corps
    anticipates awarding this breakwater construction contract in March
    2022. Additionally, a new start feasibility study with funding provided
    under the Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (DRSAA) will
    be conducted to consider additional features to improve flood risk
    reduction on Grand Isle.

        b.  Given the opportunity to repair Grand Isle from last year's
    disaster supplemental, are there adjustments and improvements that can
    be made?
        Answer. The Corps will use funding provided under DRSAA to conduct
    a new start Feasibility Study to evaluate potential additional risk
    reduction improvements for Grand Isle that could make the project more
    effective.

        Question 2. LG Spellmon, I want to applaud you on finalizing the
    Corps' first Research & Development Strategy [https://
    usace.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16021coll11/id/5457] last
    year. For many years, I have encouraged the Corps to ``stop solving
    yesterday's problems tomorrow.''
        Can you please share with the Committee how the Corps will
    operationalize, fund, and execute your R&D Strategy?
        Answer. The Corps is working to identify priority investments for
    the Strategic Research and Development Program.

      Questions from Hon. David Rouzer on behalf of Hon. Tim Burchett to
    Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon, Chief of Engineers and Commanding
                     General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

    On behalf of Rep. Tim Burchett (TN), I'd like to inquire about the
    following:
        Question 1. Many partners including USACE, USFWS and TVA, as well
    as other non-federal groups in Tennessee, are working to tackle the
    persistent Asian carp problem.
        a.  What is the status of the MOA authorized by section 509 of WRDA
    2020?
        Answer. The Corps is collaborating with the Tennessee Valley
    Authority and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service regarding invasive carp
    concerns in the basin.

        b.  Is USACE able to accomplish any of the objectives of that
    section under current funding levels?
        Answer. We are evaluating the authorities. The Corps has initiated
    the development of a Program Management Plan and conducted stakeholder
    engagement. Per direction in the FY2022 appropriations act Joint
    Explanatory Statement, the Corps will brief appropriation committee
    staff on how it intends to implement this program.

        c.  Is the authorized amount of $25 million appropriate for the
    scope of the project?
        Answer. It is unknown at this time.

        d.  Does USACE intend to request the full funding for the project?
        Answer. We are still evaluating the authorities.

        e.  How can non-federal entities best contribute to this effort?
        Answer. We are still evaluating the authorities.

        f.  Can USACE utilize TVA's recently-issued final programmatic
    environmental assessment to expedite USACE's own planning process?
        Answer. Yes, the information in the environmental assessment will
    be used during the development of barrier placement alternatives on the
    Tennessee River.

        g.  Do you envision any challenges related to the long-term
    operations and maintenance of the barrier projects under the pilot
    program authorized in section 509 of WRDA 2020?
        Answer. At this time, the Corps has not identified any specific
    long-term challenges.

     PROPOSALS FOR A WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2022: STAKEHOLDER
                                   PRIORITIES

                                  ----------

                           TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2022

                      House of Representatives,
       Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
                Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:01 a.m., in
    room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon.
    Grace F. Napolitano (Chair of the subcommittee) presiding.
        Members present in person: Mr. Rouzer, Mr. Webster of
    Florida, Mr. Katko, Dr. Babin, Mr. Graves of Louisiana, Mr.
    Bost, and Mr. Westerman.
        Members present remotely: Mrs. Napolitano, Mr. DeFazio, Mr.
    Huffman, Ms. Johnson of Texas, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Lowenthal,
    Mr. Malinowski, Mr. Delgado, Ms. Bourdeaux, Ms. Wilson of
    Florida, Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Stanton, Ms. Norton, Mr. Cohen, Mr.
    Weber of Texas, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Mast, Miss Gonzalez-Colon, and
    Mr. Johnson of South Dakota.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                February 4, 2022
        SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

        TO:       Members, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
        FROM:   Staff, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
        RE:       Subcommittee Hearing on ``Proposals for a Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022: Stakeholder Priorities''
    _______________________________________________________________________

                                    PURPOSE
        The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment will meet on
    Tuesday, February 8, 2022, at 11:00 a.m. in 2167 Rayburn House Office
    Building and by video conferencing via Zoom to receive testimony from
    state and local officials, Tribal groups, and other stakeholders who
    engage with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) to discuss
    priorities for a new water resources development act (or WRDA) for
    2022. This hearing is the second in a series of three planned hearings
    to inform the committee in its development of a new WRDA, which the
    committee expects to develop and approve in 2022.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, Hearing on
    ``Proposals for a Water Resources Development Act of 2022--
    Administration Priorities'' (January 12, 2022) (https://
    transportation.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/proposals-for-a-
    water-resources-development-act-of-2022-administration-priorities); the
    final Subcommittee hearing to receive testimony from Members of
    Congress on their WRDA 2022 priorities is expected in March 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   BACKGROUND
        The Corps is the federal government's largest water resources
    development and management agency. The Corps began its water resources
    program in 1824 when Congress, for the first time, appropriated funds
    for improving river navigation. Since then, the Corps' primary missions
    have expanded to address river and coastal navigation, reduction of
    flood damage risks along rivers, lakes, and the coastlines, and
    environmental restoration and protection.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://www.swl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Planning/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Along with these missions, the Corps provides water supply and
    storage opportunities to cities, agriculture and industry, aids in the
    production of hydropower, assists in national emergencies, and manages
    a recreation program. Today, the Corps is comprised of 38 district
    offices within eight divisions; operates more than 700 dams; has
    constructed 14,600 miles of levees; and maintains more than 1,000
    coastal, Great Lakes, and inland harbors, as well as 12,000 miles of
    inland waterways.\3\ To achieve its civil works mission, the Corps
    plans, designs, and constructs water resources development projects,
    typically in partnership with, and using the financial support of, non-
    federal interests (project sponsors). The Corps planning process seeks
    to balance economic development and environmental considerations as it
    addresses national, regional, and local water resources challenges.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Congressional Research Service (CRS), U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers Civil Works: Primer and Resources. (2021).https://
    crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11810.
        \4\ Congressional Research Service (CRS), Army Corps of Engineers:
    Water Resource Authorization and Project Delivery Processes (2019).
    https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45185.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    INITIATING A WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

        The first step in a Corps project is to study the
    feasibility of the project. This can be done in two ways. One,
    if the Corps has previously conducted a study in the area of
    the proposed project, the new study can be authorized by a
    resolution of either the House Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure or the Senate Committee on Environment and
    Public Works (pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 542). Two, if the area has
    not been previously studied by the Corps, then an act of
    Congress is necessary to authorize the study--usually through a
    WRDA bill.
        Typically, the Corps enters into a cost-sharing agreement
    with a non-federal project sponsor to initiate the feasibility
    study process. The cost of a feasibility study is usually split
    evenly between the federal government (subject to
    appropriations) and the non-federal project sponsor.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Section 118 of WRDA 2020 authorized a pilot program for the
    formulation of certain flood risk management and coastal storm risk
    management project studies in rural and economically disadvantaged
    communities at Federal expense. Funding to carry out this authority was
    included in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 117-
    58).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Since February 2012, the Corps' feasibility studies have
    been guided by the ``3x3x3 rule,'' which states that
    feasibility reports should, generally, be produced in no more
    than three years; with a cost not more than $3 million; and
    involve all three levels of Corps review--district, division,
    and headquarters--throughout the study process.\6\ \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/library/MemosandLetters/
    USACE_CW_Feasibility
    StudyProgramExecutionDelivery.pdf.
        \7\ The 3x3x3 process was codified in section 1001 of the Water
    Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        During the feasibility study phase, the Corps' district
    office prepares a draft study report containing a detailed
    analysis on the economic costs and benefits of carrying out the
    project and identifies any associated environmental, social, or
    cultural impacts. The feasibility study typically describes
    with reasonable certainty the economic, social, and
    environmental benefits and detriments of each project
    alternatives being considered, and identifies the engineering
    features, public acceptability, and the purposes, scope, and
    scale of each. The feasibility study also includes an analysis
    of any associated environmental effects of the project and a
    proposed mitigation plan. It also contains the views of other
    federal and non-federal agencies on project alternatives, a
    description of non-structural alternatives to the recommended
    plans, and a description of the anticipated federal and non-
    federal participation in the project. In addition, pursuant to
    section 116(b) of the Water Resources Development Act of 2020
    (WRDA 2020; 33 U.S.C. 2282 note), each feasibility study for a
    flood risk management or hurricane and storm damage reduction
    project is required to include a summary of any natural or
    nature-based feature alternative evaluated for the project that
    describes the long-term costs and benefits of the alternative
    and whether such alternative was utilized in the final
    recommended project.\8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ Division AA of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021
    (P.L. 116-260).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        After a full feasibility study is completed, the results
    and recommendations of the study are submitted to Congress in
    the form of a Report of the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Chief
    of Engineers (more commonly referred to as a Chief's
    Report).\9\ If the results and recommendations on the proposed
    project are favorable, then the subsequent step is
    congressional authorization for construction of the project,
    which is typically performed in a WRDA bill.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ See https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/library.cfm.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    UTILIZING THE SECTION 7001 ANNUAL REPORT

        The Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014
    established an additional mechanism for Corps projects and
    studies to be communicated to Congress for potential
    authorization.\10\ Section 7001 of this legislation requires
    the Secretary of the Army to annually publish a notice in the
    Federal Register soliciting proposals from non-federal project
    sponsors for new project authorizations, new feasibility
    studies, and modifications to existing Corps projects. Further,
    it requires the Secretary to submit to Congress and make
    publicly available a Report to Congress on Future Water
    Resources Development (7001 Report) of those activities that
    are related to the missions of the Corps and require specific
    authorization by law. The 7001 Report includes information
    about each proposal, such as benefits, the non-federal project
    sponsors, and cost share information.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (P.L. 113-
    121).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    GUIDING THE CORPS

        The Corps is subject to all relevant federal statutes,
    including the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the
    Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Fish and
    Wildlife Coordination Act, and prior authorization bills for
    the Corps (e.g., previous WRDAs, flood control acts, and rivers
    and harbors acts). These laws and associated regulations and
    guidance provide the legal basis for the Corps planning
    process.
        For instance, when carrying out a feasibility study, NEPA
    requires the Corps to include: an identification of significant
    environmental resources likely to be impacted by the proposed
    project; an assessment of the project impacts; a full
    disclosure of the likely impacts; and a consideration of the
    full range of alternatives, including a ``No Action
    Alternative.'' \11\ Importantly, NEPA also requires a 30-to-45
    day public review of any final document produced by the
    Corps.\12\ Additionally, when carrying out a feasibility study,
    section 401 the Clean Water Act requires an evaluation of the
    potential impacts of the proposed project or action and
    requires a letter from a state agency certifying the proposed
    project or action complies with state water quality standards.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ See https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-40/chapter-V.
        \12\ See id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        When formulating and evaluating water resources development
    project alternatives, the Corps utilizes the Economic and
    Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related
    Land Resources Implementation Studies, developed in 1983, more
    commonly known as the Principles and Guidelines (or P&G).
    However, in response to stakeholder concern about the Corps'
    over-reliance on national economic benefits as a required
    decision metric, in WRDA 2007, Congress established a new,
    national policy ``that all water resources projects should
    reflect national priorities, encourage economic development,
    and protect the environment by--(1) seeking to maximize
    sustainable economic development; (2) seeking to avoid the
    unwise use of floodplains and flood-prone areas and minimizing
    adverse impacts and vulnerabilities in any case in which a
    floodplain or flood-prone area must be used; and (3) protecting
    and restoring the functions of natural systems and mitigating
    any unavoidable damage to natural systems.'' \13\ Section 2031
    of WRDA 2007 directed the Corps to update the P&G in accordance
    with this policy.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ Pub. L. 110-114, Section 2031; see also Policy Directive--
    Comprehensive Documentation of Benefits in Decision Document, dated
    January 5, 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In 2013, the Obama administration established a framework
    to revise the P&G in accordance with the requirements of WRDA
    2007.\14\ This revised framework, now called the updated
    Principles, Requirements and Guidelines for Water and Land
    Related Resources Implementation Studies (or PR&G), is intended
    to ensure proper and consistent planning by all federal
    agencies engaged in water resources development projects and
    related activities, and ensure such projects maximize
    sustainable development, protect and restore the functions of
    natural systems, and affordably address the needs of
    economically disadvantaged communities.\15\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/ceq/
    initiatives/PandG.
        \15\ https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/
    guidance.cfm?Id=269&Option=Principles%20and
    %20Guidelines.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Corps has yet to formally adopt implementation guidance
    for the PR&G, as required by WRDA 2007. Accordingly, section
    110 of WRDA 2020 directed the Corps to issue final agency
    procedures for implementation of the PR&G and required the
    Corps to review and, as necessary, update the PR&G every five
    years.
        In addition, the Corps has issued two memorandums (January
    5, 2021 and March 6, 2021) that direct the Corps to examine
    potential benefits beyond the national economic development
    benefits for future Corps projects, including regional and
    societal benefits.\16\ These policy memorandums direct the
    Corps to include in the final array of alternatives an option
    that maximizes all project benefits, an option for flood risk
    reduction projects that utilizes a non-structural approach, and
    a locally-preferred plan, if requested by the non-federal
    project sponsor.\17\ However, any additional costs for
    implementing a locally-preferred plan are traditionally picked
    up by the non-federal project sponsor.\18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ See Policy Directive--Comprehensive Documentation of Benefits
    in Decision Document, dated January 5, 2021; and Director of Civil
    Works Memorandum--Comprehensive Documentation of Benefits in Decision
    Documents, dated March 6, 2021.
        \17\ See id.
        \18\ See e.g., section 1036 of WRRDA 2014; 33 U.S.C. 701b-15.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OUTLOOK FOR A WRDA 2022

    ANNUAL 7001 REPORTS:

        In recent years, the committee has utilized the 7001 Report
    as a guide to describe studies, projects, and modifications
    supported by non-federal project sponsors for inclusion in the
    development of a new WRDA bill. The 7001 Report for calendar
    year 2021 was submitted to Congress in November 2021, and the
    7001 Report for calendar year 2022 is expected in February
    2022. A list of all existing 7001 Reports is available at
    https://transportation.house.gov/water-resources-development-
    act-of-2022/reports.

    PENDING CHIEF'S REPORTS:

        Since enactment of WRDA 2020, the committee has received 14
    additional Chief's Reports for potential projects in:
    Fairfield/New Haven, Connecticut (coastal storm risk
    management); Elim, Alaska (navigation); Prado Basin, San
    Bernardino, Riverside and Orange Counties, California
    (ecosystem restoration); Lower Cache Creek, Yolo County,
    California (flood risk management); Portland, Oregon (flood
    risk management); Coastal Texas (coastal storm risk
    management); San Juan, Puerto Rico (coastal storm risk
    management); Monroe County, Florida (coastal storm risk
    management); Okaloosa County, Florida (coastal storm risk
    management); Selma, Alabama (flood risk management); Port of
    Long Beach, Los Angeles County, California (navigation); Folly
    Beach, South Carolina (coastal storm risk management); Pinellas
    County, Florida (coastal storm risk management); Valley Creek,
    Bessemer and Birmingham, Alabama (flood risk management); and
    Papillion Creek and Tributaries, Nebraska (flood risk
    management).\19\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ See id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    PENDING DIRECTOR'S REPORTS:

        Director's Reports, also known as Post-Authorization Change
    Reports (PACR), document necessary changes to previously
    authorized water resources development projects, such as a
    change in project purpose or a significant change in the total
    cost of the project. Since enactment of WRDA 2020, the
    committee has received three PACR's for projects in:
    Washington, D.C. (flood risk management); Lake Pontchartrain
    and Vicinity, Louisiana (coastal storm risk management); and
    West Bank and Vicinity, Louisiana (coastal storm risk
    management).\20\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ See id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ADDITIONAL CORPS AUTHORITIES:

        Congress has granted the Corps programmatic authorities--
    Continuing Authorities Programs (CAPs)--that enable the Corps
    to undertake small-scale projects with limited scope and cost
    without requiring project-specific congressional authorization.
    These projects are usually still cost-shared with a non-federal
    project sponsor. There are currently 9 CAP categories:
    streambank erosion and shoreline protection (section 14 of the
    Flood Control Act of 1946 (33 U.S.C. 701r)); beach erosion
    control (section 3 of the Act of August 13, 1946; (33 U.S.C.
    426g)); navigation improvement (section 107 of the River and
    Harbor Act of 1960; (33 U.S.C. 577)); mitigation of shore
    damage by federal navigation projects (section 111 of the River
    and Harbor Act of 1968; 33 U.S.C. 426i)); regional sediment
    management/beneficial use of dredged material (section 204 of
    WRDA 1992; (33 U.S.C. 2326)); flood control (section 205 of the
    Flood Control Act of 1948; (33 U.S.C. 701s)); aquatic ecosystem
    restoration (section 206 of WRDA 1996; (33 U.S.C. 2330));
    removal of obstructions and clearing channels for flood control
    (section 2 of the Act of August 28, 1937; (33 U.S.C. 701g));
    and project modifications for improvement of the environment
    (section 1135 of the WRDA 1986; (33 U.S.C. 2309a)).
        Congress has also provided authority for the Corps to
    assist with the planning, design, and construction of drinking
    water and wastewater projects in specified areas, known broadly
    as Environmental Infrastructure (EI) assistance. EI authorities
    are typically developed either on a project-by-project basis
    (see section 219 of WRDA 1992) or on a programmatic basis for
    specified geographic regions. The EI programs support publicly
    owned and operated facilities, such as distribution and
    collection works, stormwater collection and recycled water
    distribution, and surface water protection and development
    projects.
        The Corps is also authorized to engage in technical
    assistance for certain activities, such as flood risk
    mitigation and watershed studies. Corps district offices
    partner with state, Tribal, and local governments to provide or
    coordinate technical assistance or expertise through many of
    its programs. The primary Corps technical assistance programs
    include: Flood Plain Management Services (section 206 of the
    Flood Control Act of 1960; also referred to as Silver Jackets)
    and Planning Assistance to States (Section 22 of WRDA 1974).
    Section 111 of WRDA 2020 directed the Secretary of the Army to
    prioritize the provision of technical assistance to support
    flood risk resiliency planning efforts of economically
    disadvantaged communities or communities subject to repetitive
    flooding.

                                  WITNESS LIST

         LThe Honorable Wade Crowfoot, Secretary,
    California Natural Resources Agency, Sacramento, California
         LThe Honorable Peter Yucupicio, Chairman, Pascua
    Yaqui Tribe, Tucson, Arizona
         LThe Honorable Darrell G. Seki, Sr., Chairman, Red
    Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, Red Lake, Minnesota
         LThe Honorable Michel Bechtel, President, Gulf
    Coast Protection District, Mayor, City of Morgan's Point,
    Morgan's Point, Texas
         LMr. Mario Cordero, Executive Director, Port of
    Long Beach, California
         LMr. Jim Middaugh, Executive Director, Multnomah
    County Drainage District, Portland, Oregon
         LMs. Julie Hill-Gabriel, Vice President, Water
    Conservation, National Audubon Society, Washington, D.C.
        Mrs. Napolitano. We are here today on the Transportation
    and Infrastructure Committee hearing to discuss the formulation
    of a Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA, for 2022. Last
    month, the committee received testimony from the Biden
    administration on its priorities for the Army Corps of
    Engineers.
        Today, we will hear from State, local, and Tribal
    officials, and other interested stakeholders. Next month, we
    will hold a Member Day hearing to listen to our congressional
    colleagues on their priorities for this critical and bipartisan
    legislation.
        Let me begin by asking unanimous consent that the chair be
    authorized to declare a recess at any time during today's
    hearing.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        I also ask unanimous consent that Members of the full
    committee who are not on the subcommittee be permitted to sit
    with the subcommittee at today's hearing and ask questions.
        And without objection, so ordered.
        As a reminder, please keep your microphones muted unless
    speaking. And should I hear any inadvertent background noise, I
    will request that particular Member please mute their
    microphone.
        And, finally, to insert documents into the record, please
    have your staff email it to DocumentsT&I@mail.house.gov.
        Today, the subcommittee will receive testimony from an
    array of State, local, and Tribal leaders as well as other
    stakeholders on their priorities for the upcoming WRDA
    legislation. Most of our witnesses here today have years of
    experience in working with the Corps to address the unique
    local water resources needs of their States, their communities,
    their Tribal lands, and your input is invaluable to Congress as
    we develop a new WRDA bill.
        We will also hear about potential improvements to how the
    Corps formulates and constructs critical water resources
    development projects, especially as they relate to partnerships
    with Tribal nations. This committee, on a very healthy
    bipartisan basis, has completed work on four consecutive WRDAs
    since 2014. I am hopeful and confident that this tradition will
    continue in partnership with my good friend, the subcommittee
    ranking member, Mr. Rouzer.
        This committee is successful because all of our Members
    trust and recognize how critical the Corps' work is to meet the
    unique water resources needs in our communities, and how
    important regular, predictable authorization of WRDA is to meet
    these needs. However, as I noted at our last WRDA hearing in
    January, all of the projects and studies authorized in WRDAs
    need appropriated funds for communities to realize the full
    navigation, flood control, water supply, and environmental
    benefits that these projects provide.
        Fortunately, under the leadership of President Biden,
    Congress responded by enacting the bipartisan Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act, which provides $17.1 billion to the
    Corps to carry out critical construction, operation, and
    maintenance activities in every corner of the United States.
    How critical is this historic funding? Well, the Chief of
    Engineers testified that it provides ``a once-in-a-generation
    window of opportunity to deliver water resource infrastructure
    programs and projects that will positively impact the lives of
    our communities across the Nation.'' Let me repeat: a ``once-
    in-a-generation'' opportunity to fund the projects and studies
    that we authorize through our regular WRDA bills.
        For example, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, known as
    BIL, funds the initial elements of the Los Angeles River
    ecosystem restoration project, a critical project to the future
    of my constituents and the whole Los Angeles region. The BIL
    also provides close to $1.1 billion to restore Florida's
    Everglades ecosystem--historic funding levels that will greatly
    advance these efforts--as well as funding for the Brandon Road
    aquatic nuisance species barrier protecting the Great Lakes.
        The BIL also makes critical investments in coastal and
    inland navigation projects, ranging from the Soo locks in
    Michigan to the T.J. O'Brien lock and dam project in Illinois,
    to the Kentucky lock and dam in Kentucky, to the Norfolk Harbor
    project in Virginia. It as well provides essential investments
    to local flood protection projects ranging from Seward, Alaska,
    to Winslow, Arizona, to southwest coastal Louisiana, to the
    city of Norfolk, Virginia.
        And what is the common thread between all these projects?
    All received their authorizations through recent WRDA
    legislation, but can now, finally, proceed to construction
    because of the enactment of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
        Last month, the Biden administration presented its
    priorities for inclusion in a new WRDA. And today, we give our
    stakeholders a chance to give their perspectives on the project
    and policies that should be included.
        I am particularly honored that we will also hear from two
    respected Tribal chairmen and learn of their experiences in
    working with the Corps over the generations.
        We have all heard lingering concerns about how the Federal
    Government has failed its treaty obligations with Native
    Americans and their Tribal heritage lands. In this regard, the
    Corps has had what some Tribal leaders call a spotty
    relationship with the Tribes. To address these concerns,
    Congress included language in WRDA 2020 to require the Corps to
    promote meaningful involvement and consultation with Native
    Tribes as well as other environmental justice communities. In
    addition, with the confirmation of Assistant Secretary of the
    Army for Civil Works, Mike Connor, an old friend, and the
    appointment of his Principal Deputy, Jaime Pinkham, the Biden
    administration has chosen to incorporate Tribal voices directly
    into the decisionmaking of the Corps.
        Between these two actions, it is my hope to formally
    engrain a new culture of cooperation between the Corps and
    Native Americans in the formulation of water resources projects
    and other Corps regulatory actions.
        I want to welcome all our witnesses here this morning, and
    I am very grateful for your willingness to share your views and
    perspectives on what we should consider as we aim to complete
    the enactment of five bipartisan WRDAs in a row.
        In a bipartisan manner, I yield to my great partner in the
    formulation of a new WRDA, Mr. Rouzer, for any comments or
    thoughts he might have on this matter. And Mr. Rouzer, I
    understand ``happy birthday'' is in order. So, congratulations,
    happy birthday to you.
        [Mrs. Napolitano's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in
    Congress from the State of California, and Chair, Subcommittee on Water
                           Resources and Environment
        Today, the subcommittee will receive testimony from an array of
    state, local, and Tribal leaders, as well as other stakeholders on
    their priorities for the forthcoming WRDA legislation.
        Many of our witnesses here today have years of experience in
    working with the Corps to address the unique, local water resources
    needs of their states, their communities, and their tribal lands, and
    your input is invaluable to Congress as it develops a new WRDA bill.
        We will also hear about potential improvements to how the Corps
    formulates and constructs critical water resources development
    projects, especially as they relate to partnerships with Tribal
    nations.
        This committee, on a bipartisan basis, has now completed work on
    four consecutive WRDAs since 2014, and I am confident that this
    tradition will continue in partnership with my good friend and the
    subcommittee Ranking Member, Mr. Rouzer.
        This committee is successful because all of our members trust and
    recognize how critical the Corps' work is to meet the unique water
    resource needs in our communities--and how important regular,
    predicable authorization of WRDA is to meet these needs.
        However, as I noted at our last WRDA hearing in January, all of the
    projects and studies authorized in WRDAs need appropriated funds for
    communities to realize the full navigation, flood control, water supply
    and environmental benefits that these projects provide.
        Fortunately, under the leadership of President Biden, Congress
    responded by enacting the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
    Act, which provides $17.1 billion to the Corps to carry out critical
    construction, operation, and maintenance activities in every corner of
    the United States.
        How critical is this historic funding?
        Well, the Chief of Engineers testified that it provides ``a once-
    in-a-generation window of opportunity to deliver water resources
    infrastructure programs and projects that will positively impact the
    lives of communities across this great nation.''
        Let me repeat that--a ``once-in-a-generation'' opportunity to fund
    the projects and studies that we authorize through our regular WRDA
    bills.
        For example, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) funds the
    initial elements of the Los Angeles River Ecosystem Restoration
    project--a critical project to the future of my constituents and the
    Los Angeles region.
        The BIL also provides close to $1.1 billion to restore Florida's
    Everglades ecosystem--historic funding levels that will greatly advance
    efforts these efforts--as well as funding for the Brandon Road Aquatic
    Nuisance Species barrier protecting the Great Lakes.
        The BIL also makes critical investments in coastal and inland
    navigation projects, ranging from the Soo Locks in Michigan, to the
    T.J. O'Brien Lock and Dam project in Illinois, to the Kentucky Lock and
    Dam in Kentucky, to the Norfolk Harbor project in Virginia.
        And it as well provides essential investments to local flood
    protection projects ranging from Seward, Alaska, to Winslow, Arizona,
    to Southwest Coastal Louisiana, to the City of Norfolk, Virginia.
        And what is the common thread between ALL these projects? All
    received their authorizations through recent WRDA legislation but can
    now--finally--proceed to construction because of enactment of the
    bipartisan infrastructure law.
        Last month, the Biden administration presented its priorities for
    inclusion in a new WRDA. Today, we give our stakeholders a chance to
    give their perspectives on the projects and policies that should be
    included.
        I am particularly honored that we will hear from two respected
    Tribal Chairmen, and learn of their experiences in working with the
    Corps over the generations.
        We have all heard lingering concerns about how the federal
    government has failed its treaty obligations with Native Americans and
    their Tribal heritage lands. In this regard, the Corps has had, what
    some Tribal leaders have called, a ``spotty'' relationship with the
    tribes.
        To address this concern, Congress included language in WRDA 2020 to
    require the Corps to ``promote meaningful involvement'' and
    consultation with Native Tribes, as well as other environmental justice
    communities.
        In addition, with the confirmation of Assistant Secretary of the
    Army for Civil Works, Mike Connor, and the appointment of his Principal
    Deputy, Jaime Pinkham, the Biden administration has chosen to
    incorporate Tribal voices directly into the decision making of the
    Corps.
        Between these two actions, it is my hope to formally engrain a new
    culture of cooperation between the Corps and Native Americans in the
    formulation of water resources projects and other Corps regulatory
    actions.
        I want to welcome all our witnesses here this morning, and I am
    grateful for your willingness to share your views and perspectives on
    what we should consider as we aim to complete enactment of five
    bipartisan WRDAs in a row.
        I now yield to my great partner in the formulation of a new WRDA
    bill, Mr. Rouzer, for any comments and thoughts he might have on this
    matter.

        Mr. Rouzer. Well, thank you. It has been about a week, but
    we are going to stretch it out for a while. How about that?
    Again, thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate you holding this
    hearing. And I would also like to thank our witnesses for
    testifying today.
        This hearing marks the second hearing, as the chairman
    said, of the House of Representatives portion of the drafting
    of the Water Resources Development Act for 2022. And as I
    mentioned at our first WRDA hearing, this is one of the most
    important pieces of legislation that we do here on the
    committee. The more people hear about what is happening in
    Washington or not happening in Washington, the more they think
    it is broken and simply doesn't work. But this has been a real
    exception and a real bright spot for Congress. Every 2 years
    since 2014, we passed a WRDA bill. In addition to being on a
    consistent schedule, these bills have been bipartisan, and we
    are going to make sure that that continues. Exemplifying this,
    in 2020, the House was able to pass a WRDA by voice vote.
        I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides
    of the aisle here on the committee and in the full House to
    pass another WRDA in this 2-year cycle and for it to be a
    strong bipartisan bill as well.
        Throughout this process, we will hear from people from all
    over the country representing a wide range of interests, and we
    are seeing a sample of those here at this hearing today. You
    will hear from folks partnering with the Army Corps of
    Engineers on a variety of programs, ranging from storm surge
    protection to navigation at ports to environmental
    infrastructure. I also look forward to hearing about these
    projects and how they can help their communities and our
    country.
        Again, I would like to thank our witnesses for being here
    today. And, Madam Chair, I have a little housekeeping matter to
    take care of here, if you don't mind. I ask unanimous consent
    to enter into the record a November 29, 2021, stakeholder
    letter regarding the Columbia-Snake River system.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Without objection, so ordered.
        [The information follows:]

     Letter of November 29, 2021, from Farmers and Agricultural Businesses
      Supporting the Preservation of the Integrity of the Columbia-Snake
          River System, Submitted for the Record by Hon. David Rouzer
                                                     November 29, 2021.
    President Joseph R. Biden,
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
    Washington, DC 20500.
        Dear President Biden:
        On behalf of the undersigned organizations representing farmers and
    businesses across the agricultural value chain, we write to express our
    strong support for preserving the integrity of the Columbia-Snake River
    System, which provides tremendous value in the current operation of the
    river, including locks and dams, clean power generation, barging
    navigation, water storage, and irrigation--all of which are crucial to
    long-term viability of the agriculture sector in the Pacific Northwest.
    While we support collaborative efforts to address salmon recovery in
    the region, we write today to voice our serious concerns with recent
    calls on the Biden Administration and U.S. Congress to consider avenues
    for breaching the lower Snake River dams, which would devastate farmers
    in the region, decrease the competitiveness of home-grown agricultural
    products, and irreversibly eliminate a critical river system for the
    U.S. agriculture industry.
        America's farmers and ranchers are among the most productive in the
    world, and they depend on exports. Roughly 20 percent of U.S. farm
    income comes from agricultural exports, which help support rural
    communities across the country. Our nation's inland waterways system is
    vital to moving American goods from farms to ports for export, saving
    anywhere from $7 to $9 billion in annual shipping costs over other
    forms of transport. The Columbia-Snake River System is the third-
    largest grain export corridor in the world, transporting nearly 30
    percent of U.S. grain and oilseed exports through a sophisticated
    navigation system, which includes seven grain export terminals, 26 up-
    country grain barge loading terminals, and eight dams that lift vessels
    a combined 735 feet to deliver high value farm products safely and
    efficiently to West Coast ports and consumers worldwide.
        In addition to the transportation benefits, the Columbia-Snake
    River System is crucial to keeping carbon emissions as low as possible
    as commodities travel from farm to market. Barges move more product,
    using less fuel than trucks or rail cars. Without barge access, 39,000
    rail cars or 152,000 semi-trucks would have been needed to replace the
    cargo volume shipped on the Snake River in 2019. Barging is 40 percent
    more fuel-efficient than rail and 270 percent more fuel-efficient than
    semi-trucks. In fact, moving commodity flows from barge to rail and
    truck would result in over 1.25 million additional tons of carbon and
    other harmful emissions per year.
        We appreciate the efforts of your Administration and Congress to
    champion new investments in our nation's infrastructure, including $17
    billion for ports and inland waterways in the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act. We also support continued efforts to address major
    disruptions in the supply chain as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.
    As the Biden-Harris Administration looks to implement these important
    priorities, we strongly caution against taking any federal action that
    would lead to further disruptions in the food and agriculture supply
    chain, such as the elimination of this important navigation system.
    Further rail and trucking congestion that would occur as a result of
    removing barge access would impact farmers as far as the upper Midwest,
    as well as the major cargo ports of Seattle and Tacoma. The existence
    of barging as a transport mode helps to discipline rail and trucking
    rates, ensuring that the price of moving goods in the Pacific Northwest
    remains competitive.
        For decades, the benefits of the Columbia-Snake River System have
    contributed to thriving communities in the Pacific Northwest. We
    recognize the need for further dialogue to discuss collaborative
    approaches to aid in West Coast salmon recovery, and we strongly
    support science-based efforts to reassess mitigation strategies and
    deploy the newest technological advancements to recover endangered
    salmon populations in the Columbia-Snake River System, while ensuring
    U.S. farmers maintain access to this vital navigation system.
        As the Biden-Harris Administration considers important issues
    facing the communities, economy and resources of the Pacific Northwest,
    including the operations of the Columbia-Snake River System, we urge
    you to take into account the incredibly important role the river system
    plays for farmers and the broader agricultural community. We look
    forward to engaging in the dialogue in the months ahead.
            Sincerely,
    National Organizations:
    Agriculture Transportation Coalition.
    Agricultural Retailers Association.
    American Farm Bureau Federation.
    Farm Credit Council.
    National Association of Wheat Growers.
    National Council of Farmer Cooperatives.
    National Grain and Feed Association.
    National Oilseed Processors Association.
    North American Millers' Association.
    Pet Food Institute.
    U.S. Wheat Associates.

    Regional/State Organizations:
    Association of Washington Business.
    California Association of Wheat Growers.
    Colorado Association of Wheat Growers.
    Colorado Wheat Administrative Committee.
    Columbia Basin Development League.
    Columbia River Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association.
    Columbia River Pilots.
    Far West Agribusiness Association.
    Idaho Consumer Owned Utilities Association.
    Idaho Farm Bureau Federation.
    Idaho Grain Producers Association.
    Idaho Water Users Association.
    Idaho Wheat Commission.
    Illinois Corn Growers Association.
    Kansas Association of Wheat Growers.
    Minnesota Association of Wheat Growers.
    Minnesota Wheat Research and Promotional Council.
    Montana Agricultural Business Association.
    Montana Farm Bureau Federation.
    Montana Grain Growers Association.
    Nebraska Corn Growers Association.
    Nebraska Dry Pea & Lentil Commission.
    Nebraska Wheat Board.
    Nebraska Wheat Growers Association.
    North Carolina Small Grain Growers Association.
    North Dakota Wheat Commission.
    Northwest Agricultural Cooperative Council.
    Northwest RiverPartners.
    Oregonians for Food and Shelter.
    Oregon Seed Association.
    Oregon Wheat Growers League.
    Pacific Coast Council.
    Pacific Northwest Grain & Feed Association.
    Pacific Northwest Waterways Association.
    Snake River Multiuse Advocates.
    Texas Wheat Producers Association.
    Washington Association of Wheat Growers.
    Washington Cattlemen's Association.
    Washington Farm Bureau.
    Washington Friends of Farms & Forests.
    Washington Grain Commission.
    Washington Mint Growers Association.
    Washington Policy Center.
    Washington Potato & Onion Association.
    Washington State Dairy Federation.
    Washington State Potato Commission.
    Washington State Tree Fruit Association.
    Washington State Water Resources Association.
    Wyoming Wheat Marketing Commis-sion.

    Companies:
    Ag Association Management.
    Ag Spray Equipment.
    AgriNorthwest.
    Almota Elevator Company.
    American Plant Food, Inc.
    BioWest Ag Solutions.
    Brent Hartley Farms.
    CHS Inc.
    CHS Primeland.
    Columbia Grain International.
    Columbia River Steamship Operators' Association, Inc.
    Duane Munn and Sons Farms.
    Food Northwest.
    Grain Handling Inc.
    Great Northwest Transport.
    Grigg Farms LLC.
    Helena Agri-Enterprises.
    Highline Grain Growers, Inc.
    Hyak Maritime LLC.
    Inland Power & Light.
    International Raw Materials LTD.
    Laughlin Cartrell Inc.
    Lewis-Clark Terminal, Inc.
    McGregor Land and Livestock.
    McGregor Risk Management.
    Mid Columbia Producers, Inc.
    M&L Carstensen Farms.
    Northwest Grain Growers, Inc.
    Pacificor LLC.
    Pacific Northwest Farmers Cooperative.
    Pacific Northwest Generating Cooperative (PNGC).
    Pleasant Valley Cider Apples.
    Pomeroy Grain Growers, Inc.
    Potato Growers of Washington, Inc.
    R Munn Farms, LLC.
    Shaver Transportation Company.
    Sun Heaven Farms LLC.
    Sunset Produce.
    Temco, LLC.
    The McGregor Company.
    Tidewater Transportation and Terminals.
    Tiger-Sul Products.
    TLR--Total Logistics Resource, Inc.
    Two Rivers Terminal, LLC.
    Uniontown Cooperative Association.
    United Grain Corporation.
    U.S. Borax, Inc.
    Valley Agronomics.
    Verdesian Life Science.
    Volm Companies, Inc.
    WestLink Ag Cooperative Corporation.
    Wilbur-Ellis Company.

    Port Authorities:
    Port of Benton.
    Port of Clarkston.
    Port of Kalama.
    Port of Longview.
    Port of Pasco.
    Port of Skamania County.
    Port of Walla Walla.
    Port of Whitman County.

    cc:  Brenda Mallory, Chair, Council on Environmental Quality
        Secretary Tom Vilsack, U.S. Department of Agriculture
        Secretary Deb Haaland, U.S. Department of the Interior
        Secretary Jennifer Granholm, U.S. Department of Energy
        Secretary Gina Raimondo, U.S. Department of Commerce
        Secretary Lloyd Austin, U.S. Department of Defense

        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I yield back.
        [Mr. Rouzer's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress
     from the State of North Carolina, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
                        Water Resources and Environment
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano. I appreciate you holding this hearing,
    and I would also like to thank our witnesses for testifying today.
        Today's hearing marks the second hearing of the House of
    Representatives' portion of the drafting of a Water Resources
    Development Act (WRDA) for 2022.
        As I mentioned at our first WRDA hearing, this is one of the most
    important pieces of legislation that we do here at the Transportation
    and Infrastructure Committee.
        The more people hear about what is happening in Washington, the
    more they think it is broken and doesn't work. However, WRDA has been
    an exception to this. Every two years since 2014, Congress has passed a
    WRDA bill. In addition to being on a consistent schedule, these have
    been bipartisan. Exemplifying this, in 2020, the House was able to pass
    WRDA by voice vote.
        I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the
    aisle here on the Committee and the full House to pass another WRDA in
    this two-year cycle and for it to be bipartisan.
        Throughout this process, we will hear from people all over the
    country representing a wide assortment of interests, and we are hearing
    from some of them in this hearing. Today, we'll hear from those
    partnering with the Army Corps of Engineers on a variety of programs,
    ranging from storm surge protection to navigation at ports to
    environmental infrastructure. I look forward to hearing about these
    projects and how they can help their communities and our country.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Mr. Rouzer. It is a
    pleasure having you as my cochair. I now recognize the chair of
    the full committee, Mr. DeFazio, for any thoughts he may have.
        [Pause.]
        Mr. DeFazio. There we go, finally. Thank you Grace--Madam
    Chair, excuse me.
        Mrs. Napolitano. That is all right.
        Mr. DeFazio. Thanks, again. Happy week after your birthday,
    Mr. Rouzer. This is, as has been stated, an area of common
    ground, something which is becoming more and more difficult to
    find these days. But I am pleased that we are fully engaged in
    this endeavor, which is the biennial reauthorization of the
    Water Resources Development Act. As was noted in earlier
    testimony, we actually passed it out of the House by a voice
    vote. We had a good negotiation with the Senate. But then,
    unfortunately, the Senate could not bring it to the floor, even
    though it was noncontroversial.
        So, it finally ended up being part of the year-end budget
    omnibus appropriations. So, hopefully, we can move through more
    regular order this time with maybe even a real conference. I
    would really like to try and reestablish that tradition. I was
    hoping to do that on surface transportation, and get yet
    another bill done on a timely basis.
        In 2020, we authorized 46 Chief's Reports. That's projects
    ready for construction. We all know, and we have already had
    quite a few submissions from Members, about how important the
    Corps is to many Members, all across the country, for various
    aspects of the work that the Corps does.
        One of the most difficult problems has been the backlog
    that the Corps has. They have been chronically massively
    underfunded. And there are two things that are helping with
    that this year. Last year, we finally--after about a 25-year
    effort, which I began with Chairman Bud Shuster, not Bill--
    created a Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund to spend down the $10
    million balance from the Treasury for needed work. That takes
    some pressure off the Corps and also is going to help harbors
    around the country with dredging, jetties, and other essential
    work.
        And also, the Corps is getting a record allocation in the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of $17 billion, which
    will help them begin to move forward on many critical projects
    across the country. And I fully expect that we will be adding
    to that list this year, and then the Corps will have to work
    through prioritization of the many meritorious projects that
    are still awaiting construction.
        So, with that, I look forward to discussion from our
    witnesses, and moving forward with this bill in the not too
    distant future.
        Thank you, Madam Chair.
        [Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
          Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Today, this committee continues its bipartisan work on the next
    biennial Water Resources Development Act, the fifth since the
    successful 2014 Act passed under former Chairman Bill Shuster.
        Every two years, this committee brings together the Corps, non-
    federal project sponsors, other state and local stakeholders, Tribal
    governments, and members from both sides of the aisle to enact a new
    water resources bill. Last month, we started the process for the 117th
    Congress by holding a hearing with the Corps. Today, we hear from a
    number of stakeholders about their priorities and their experiences
    working with the Corps. In the weeks ahead, we will have a third
    hearing to hear from members of the House about their goals for WRDA
    2022.
        Enacting WRDAs through this bipartisan, predictable timeline is
    Congress at its best. It not only provides oversight of the Corps as it
    implements authorized projects, but also ensures Congress provides
    timely consideration of new Chief's Reports.
        In WRDA 2020, we authorized 46 Chief's Reports. That's 46 projects
    ready for construction. That's more projects than were authorized in
    2016 and 2018 combined, proving that if this committee can do our part
    as authorizers, the Corps can do their job in studying, planning, and
    designing projects to address the country's urgent needs in water
    infrastructure.
        Every member understands the important work that the Corps does in
    their district. We see firsthand the projects that provide enumerable
    benefits through flood risk management, hurricane and storm damage
    reduction, ecosystem restoration, water supply, and improved
    navigation. And today we will hear from a diverse range of witnesses
    highlighting these types of projects in their local communities.
        We are starting the WRDA 2022 process at a critical time. The
    global pandemic and the surge in consumer demand have shown the
    vulnerability of our overburdened ports. We must be investing more in
    our nation's ports and harbors in order to keep America competitive in
    the global economy. As with the America COMPETES Act considered by the
    House last week, WRDA 2022 will ensure we maintain a competitive edge
    in the global economy.
        As we authorize new projects, the other side of that coin, as
    always, is ensuring that the Corps has the funding necessary to
    complete the work. We all know of the $100 billion backlog of projects
    due to underfunding of the Corps for decades. Fortunately, in another
    step towards ensuring we maintain America's competitive edge, the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided over $17 billion to the Corps to
    Build Back Better ports, harbors, and inland waterways across the
    country, while creating jobs, economic opportunity, and strengthening
    our water infrastructure.
        In WRDA 2020, after decades of effort, we were able to permanently
    unlock federal investment for our nation's ports and harbors through
    changes to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. We face a critical need
    for continued investment in our water infrastructure, but we have laid
    the foundation for success through laws like WRDA 2020 and the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Now is the time for building on that
    success with a fifth-consecutive WRDA.
        For over 20 years, I have worked with members on both sides of the
    aisle for the good of our nation's water infrastructure, and this WRDA
    will be no different. I thank you, Madam Chair, for your leadership on
    this subcommittee and this important legislation. And I look forward to
    continue working with Ranking Member Graves and Ranking Member Rouzer
    in sustaining our bipartisan tradition of enacting a Water Resources
    Development Act every two years.
        I want to thank our witnesses for joining us today. Your testimony
    will remind my colleagues of the critical work the Corps is doing in
    communities across the nation. All of us represent communities like
    yours that have needs that can be met by the Corps through WRDA. As we
    work on WRDA 2022, it is particularly important that we ensure that our
    rural, Tribal, and disadvantaged communities cannot be left behind. To
    that end, the committee will hear from two Tribal witnesses on their
    work with the Corps.
        I look forward to an engaging dialogue with our witnesses on how we
    can best partner with our local communities during the formulation of
    WRDA 2022.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Well, thank you, Mr. DeFazio. Thank you so
    much for your thoughtful comments.
        I would now ask unanimous consent that the following
    documents be part of today's hearing record: a letter dated
    February 7, 2022, from the National Parks Conservation
    Association; a statement from the American Society of Civil
    Engineers; and, lastly, a statement from American Rivers.
        And without objection, so ordered.
        [The information follows:]

         Letter of February 7, 2022, from Chad Lord, Senior Director,
          Environment and Climate Policy, National Parks Conservation
       Association, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Grace F. Napolitano
                                                      February 7, 2022.
    The Honorable Grace Napolitano,
    Chair, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
    House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC
            20515.
    The Honorable David Rouzer,
    Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
    House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Washington, DC
            20515.
        Dear Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer:
        Since 1919, the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) has
    been the leading voice of the American people in protecting and
    enhancing our National Park System. On behalf of our 1.6 million
    members and supporters nationwide, I write to share with you some of
    NPCA's priorities for the next Water Resources Development Act (WRDA),
    which are important for improving the health of our national parks. We
    also appreciate that the committee continues to prioritize WRDA on a
    two-year cycle, recognizing that construction-ready projects should be
    authorized so that ecosystem benefits can be realized.
        The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) is an important
    partner in many places where NPCA works to protect and restore national
    park waterways and landscapes, the communities that surround them and
    the millions of people who visit them each year. From Gateway to the
    Grand Canyon, Everglades to Olympic, water is central to the features,
    wildlife, recreation and aesthetic of these esteemed places. However,
    national parks, once viewed as isolated and remote, are increasingly
    affected by activities occurring in their watersheds. These beyond park
    boundary activities often enhance or detract from the visitor
    experience.
        To protect, restore and enhance our national parks, NPCA requests
    you consider the following priorities as you prepare WRDA 2022.
        NPCA continues to ask Congress to require federal agencies to
    prioritize natural and nature-based features (NNBFs) in projects,
    including the Army Corps of Engineers. The Committee on Environment and
    Public Works has already accomplished a lot over the last few years in
    enacting much-needed changes to how the Army Corps includes these
    features as elements of its projects. Quickly implementing these
    changes is essential.
        When properly managed and maintained, NNBFs can offer billions of
    dollars in storm and flood protection and other services. Coastal
    wetlands, alone, have been estimated to provide over $23 billion in
    protections every year.\1\ As you know, these NNBF projects often come
    with countless co-benefits that are not seen in structural projects,
    such as improved water quality, carbon sequestration and habitat
    protection. A key component in the success of NNBF projects is ensuring
    they are well maintained. For example, healthy and intact mangrove
    systems in Florida averted an estimated $1.5 billion in storm surge
    related flood damages during Hurricane Irma.\2\ Across the country,
    many of these flood mitigating ecosystems already exist while others
    need restoration. In the Gulf Coast region, one the most vulnerable
    regions to coastal flooding, conserving and restoring coastal habitats
    and natural infrastructure could ``avert more than 45 percent of the
    climate risk over a 20-year period, saving the region $50 billion in
    flood damages.'' \3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ The Center for Clean Air Policy: The Value of Green
    Infrastructure for Urban Climate Adaptation 2011. https://
    www.cakex.org/sites/default/files/documents/The-Value-of-Green-
    Infrastructure-for-Urban-Climate-Adaptation_CCAP-Feb-2011.pdf
        \2\ The Nature Conservancy, UC Santa Cruz, Risk Management
    Incorporated: Valuing the Flood Risk Reduction Benefits of Florida's
    Mangroves. https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/
    Mangrove_Report_digital_FINAL.pdf
        \3\ Reguero, B. G., Beck, M. W., Bresch, D. N., Calil, J., &
    Meliane, I. (2018). Comparing the cost effectiveness of nature-based
    and coastal adaptation: A case study from the Gulf Coast of the United
    States. PloS one, 13(4).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Aside from standalone NNBF projects, there are examples where
    natural infrastructure can be integrated with structural projects to
    reduce operation and maintenance costs. In the Army Corps' New York
    East Rockaway Inlet to Rockaway Inlet and Jamaica Bay Reformulation
    Study, the recommended plan includes ``vegetative planning to attenuate
    wave energy action and reduce erosion,'' which would result in reduced
    maintenance costs over the course of life of the project.\4\ Additional
    consideration of NNBF integration in structural projects can be cost
    effective while simultaneously providing co-benefits of natural
    infrastructure developments.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Congressional Research Service: Flood Risk Reduction from
    Natural and Nature-Based Features: Army Corps of Engineers Authorities
    2020. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R46328.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As already noted, the Committee has enacted a series of important
    changes over the last few years. For example, last year NPCA supported
    the Committee's work in adjusting the cost share requirements for
    NNBFs, updating planning guidance related to sea level rise and Army
    Corps accountability for how it considers the use of NNBFs as part of
    flood or storm damage reduction project studies.
        Even with these reforms, the Army Corps' organizational structure
    continues to limit and undermine resiliency planning. It siloes
    resiliency planning into its different directorates, programs, business
    lines, divisions, and districts. By not integrating this work, the Army
    Corps continues to promote piecemeal planning that ultimately increases
    flood risks, flood recovery costs and habitat and other resource
    destruction.
        NPCA supports WRDA reforms that break down and build bridges across
    these siloes. One option would be to create a new Resiliency
    Directorate in the Office of the Chief of Engineers. Creating a new
    position ensures that the Army Corps takes full advantage of its
    existing programs, authorities and operations to leverage natural
    systems alone or with structural solutions. A new position focused on
    resiliency can coordinate and leverage multiple planning processes and
    infuse resilient solutions into every aspect the Army Corps' work.
    Critically, any new position must have the resources and budgetary
    authority to do its job coordinating across business lines.
        We also continue to support additional reforms for how the Army
    Corps accounts for project costs and benefits. We were pleased that
    Congress included a provision in WRDA 2020 that directed the Army Corps
    to issue final agency procedures for its Principles, Requirements and
    Guidelines. However, we continue to urge further refinement because
    current benefit-cost analyses do not always capture critical benefits
    from NNBFs, do not equitably evaluate flood damage benefits provided to
    economically disadvantaged communities and communities of color, do not
    account for the costs of lost ecosystem services, do not account for
    the cost of shifting flood risks and do not account for life-cycle
    construction costs among other problems.
        Congress should ensure that the Army Corps' benefit-cost analyses
    account for appropriate categories of project costs and benefits,
    including the benefits provided by natural systems. Congressional
    action is required to ensure that the Corps accounts for costs and
    benefits to disadvantaged and low-income communities, count lost
    ecosystem services as project costs and increases in ecosystem services
    as project benefits and include costs associated with addressing site-
    specific conditions, full life cycle needs and sub-optimal funding
    streams. Accounting for appropriate categories of costs and benefits
    will help protect taxpayers, non-federal sponsors and the services
    provided by natural systems, including flood control, water quality and
    wildlife habitat.
        Reforming how the Army Corps integrates NNBFs into its projects and
    decision making is only one set of reforms that NPCA would like to see
    in WRDA 2022. We also endorse additional changes that support how the
    Army Corps works with other federal agencies, non-federal sponsors and
    other partners. In particular, we support improving the Army Corps'
    ability to redress environmental injustices. We recommend that WRDA
    2022 ensures the Army Corps has the tools and capacity it needs to
    carry out this critical task by increasing planning assistance to
    Tribes, economically disadvantaged communities and communities of
    color. We also support establishing a position of Senior Advisor for
    environmental justice and a federal advisory committee on environmental
    justice within the Army Corps itself. We want to see more emphasis and
    support for women- and minority-owned businesses in Army Corps
    contracting. We also support expansion of the WRDA 2020 Section 118
    Pilot Program for Economically Disadvantaged Communities.
        NPCA also supports funding for restoration and resilience projects
    with a reduced or no match requirement to help rural and underserved
    communities address long-standing issues. We recommend that WRDA 2022
    consider reducing or removing the match requirement under the
    Continuing Authorities Program for restoration and resilience projects
    that are essential in the face of a change climate.
        We also support changes to how the Army Corps budgets and carries
    out projects on other federal lands. The Army Corps works in and near
    many units of the National Park System. Allowing the Army Corps to be
    able to budget for projects on other federal lands at full Army Corps
    expense would assist in moving projects that benefit parks and
    surrounding landscapes to completion more quickly and create budget
    efficiencies between federal agencies. Granting this sort of change is
    incumbent on respecting the purpose for each park and the management
    policies under which they operate.
        In addition to these policy priorities, NPCA is also tracking
    several projects across the country that could impact parks. This
    includes possible projects in the Everglades, four projects in and
    around Gateway National Recreation Area in the New York-New Jersey
    Harbor from the Hudson-Raritan Estuary Ecosystem Restoration
    Feasibility Study, additional needed changes to the project at St.
    Anthony Falls within the boundaries of the Mississippi National River
    and Recreation Area in Minnesota and additional cost-share adjustment
    for the construction of the Brandon Road invasive carp project in
    Illinois.
        Thank you for considering our priorities. We look forward to the
    committee's work and offering any additional views next year. Please do
    not hesitate to contact me with questions.
            Sincerely,
                                                     Chad Lord,
                       Senior Director, Environment and Climate Policy,
                               National Parks Conservation Association.

    Statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Submitted for the
                       Record by Hon. Grace F. Napolitano
                                  Introduction
        The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) \1\ appreciates the
    opportunity to submit our position on the importance of long-term,
    strategic investment in our nation's water resources infrastructure
    systems. We also want to thank the House Committee on Transportation &
    Infrastructure for your efforts to keep the Water Resources and
    Development Act on a biennial authorization cycle. ASCE is eager to
    work with the committee in 2022 to find ways to further improve our
    nation's vital water resources infrastructure systems.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ ASCE was founded in 1852 and is the country's oldest national
    civil engineering organization. It represents more than 150,000 civil
    engineers individually in private practice, government, industry, and
    academia who are dedicated to the advancement of the science and
    profession of civil engineering. ASCE is a non-profit educational and
    professional society organized under Part 1.501(c) (3) of the Internal
    Revenue Code. www.asce.org,
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
    provides a much needed down payment to revitalize the nation's water
    resources infrastructure, that legislation does not negate the need for
    passing a WRDA bill in 2022. Our water resources infrastructure systems
    are critical to our nation's economy, public safety, and the
    preservation and enhancement of our environmental resources. Our
    levees, dams, and other water infrastructure systems protect hundreds
    of communities, provide valuable services, support millions of American
    jobs, and generate trillions of dollars of economic activity. However,
    many of these infrastructure assets have reached the end of their
    design life, and coupled with a generations-long underinvestment, a
    large and growing investment gap has emerged; this gap must be closed
    if we hope to both repair and modernize our water resources
    infrastructure systems to be competitive in the 21st century.
                     ASCE's 2021 Infrastructure Report Card
        Infrastructure is the foundation that connects the nation's
    businesses, communities, and people, serves as the backbone to the U.S.
    economy, and is vital to the nation's public health, safety, and
    welfare. Every four years, ASCE publishes the Infrastructure Report
    Card, which grades 17 major infrastructure categories using a simple A
    to F school report card format. Last March, ASCE released its 2021
    Infrastructure Report Card \2\, giving the nation's overall
    infrastructure a grade of
    ``C-,'' and identified an investment gap of $2.2 trillion. While the
    overall GPA increased into the ``C'' range for the first time since
    ASCE began grading the nation's infrastructure in 1998, much of
    critical water resources infrastructure remains in the ``D'' range. In
    the 2021 Report Card, dams and levees each received a ``D,'' while
    inland waterways received a ``D+''. The nation's ports remain a bright
    spot in the Report Card, with a grade of ``B-'' in 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        To further raise these grades, ASCE urges Congress to prioritize
    the repair, replacement, and modernization of our existing
    infrastructure, with a focus on resilience. ASCE also urges Congress to
    ensure long-term, consistent investment in our infrastructure systems
    by passing authorization legislation like WRDA every other year.
    Dam Safety
        The nation's more than 91,000 dams provide a wide range services
    and functions including water storage, flood control, power generation,
    and irrigation. Most dams are designed for a life span of 50 to 100
    years and the average age of the nation's dams is roughly 57 years old.
    By 2030, 7 out of 10 dams in the United States will exceed 50 years of
    age. Additionally, many of the dams in the United States were not
    designed to account for the severe changes in weather and increased
    precipitation levels brought on by climate change.
        ASCE's 2021 Report Card gave the nation's dams a ``D'' grade.
    Furthermore, the Association of State Dam Safety Officials (ASDSO)
    estimates that the total cost of rehabilitating just the nation's non-
    federal dams is more than $66 billion. Investment in dam safety is
    critical to rehabilitate existing dams that pose significant threats to
    communities throughout the country, support the missions and activities
    of state dam safety programs, and protect against the loss of life and
    destruction of property that would result from dam failure. These
    efforts are greatly supported by programs such as the National Dam
    Safety Program and the High Hazard Potential Dam Rehabilitation (HHPDR)
    Grant Program. ASCE applauds Congress for making technical improvements
    to the HHPDR program in WRDA 2020. These technical changes better
    clarified technical terms and eligibility requirements, allowing the
    program to operate more effectively in the future. It is now critical
    that WRDA 2022 further support needed resources for federal dam safety
    programs, as well as needed reforms to expand the number of dams
    eligible for federal funds and protect communities.
    Levee Safety
        In the United States, nearly 17 million people live or work behind
    a levee. The National Levee Database contains nearly 30,000 miles of
    levees around the country, and current estimates identify up to another
    10,000 additional miles of levees outside of the jurisdiction of the
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
        Every state relies on levees to protect communities from flooding.
    However, the average age of the nation's levees is over 50 years old,
    with many built using less rigorous standards than those used today.
    Much like the nation's dams, the risk to the nation's levees is further
    exacerbated by increasingly severe weather patterns and heavier
    rainfall brought on by climate change. For moderate to high-risk levees
    in the Corps' portfolio, ASCE estimates that approximately $21 billion
    is required to make necessary improvements. This is of great concern
    given the fact that even well-maintained levees can be breached by
    water seeping underneath them. To address these concerns, the National
    Levee Safety Program, authorized in 2014, is tasked with establishing
    national levee safety guidelines, and establishing a levee
    rehabilitation program to support needed repairs for the nation's
    levees. Unfortunately, since the establishment of the National Levee
    Safety Program, Congress has appropriated far less than the $79 million
    authorized, with FY 2021 appropriations totaling just $15 million.
    Ports
        The country's more than 300 coastal and inland ports serve as
    significant economic drivers and places of employment. The past two
    years have demonstrated the critical role these facilities play in a
    functioning supply chain. Ports and port tenants plan to spend $163
    billion between 2021 and 2025, concentrating on investments related to
    capacity and efficiency.\3\ However, there is a funding gap of over $12
    billion for waterside infrastructure such as dredging over the next 10
    years, with additional billions needed for landside infrastructure.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/
    01/Ports-2021.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Ports earned a ``B-'' on ASCE's 2021 Report Card for America's
    Infrastructure, which recognized the positive measures included for
    ports in the 2020 WRDA legislation. Specifically, WRDA 2020 included
    full utilization of the $10 billion balance in the Harbor Maintenance
    Trust Fund (HMTF) by allowing $500 million to be appropriated in FY
    2021, with an increase of $100 million annually until it is fully
    expended by 2030. The full expenditure of the HMTF was a long-time ASCE
    priority and ASCE was pleased to see Congress finally address this
    issue in the last bill.
    Inland Waterways
        As the nation's ``water highway'', the country's inland waterway
    network spans 12,000 miles and serves an important purpose in the
    movement of a variety of goods, such as agricultural products. This
    infrastructure, which includes locks, dams, and navigation channels,
    has benefited from recent boosts in federal investment and an increase
    in user fees. However, the system still reports a $6.8 billion backlog
    in construction projects and ongoing lock closures \4\, which harm the
    industries that rely on waterways to transport goods.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/
    12/Inland-Waterways-2021.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Inland waterways, on which about 830 million tons of cargo are
    moved annually, earned a ``D+'' on the Report Card. As with ports, WRDA
    2020 included measures that ASCE considered positive for inland
    waterways. ASCE appreciated the adjustment of the Inland Waterways
    Trust Fund's (IWTF) cost share from 50% general revenue-50% IWTF to
    65%-35% for construction and rehabilitation projects. The IWTF, which
    finances construction and rehabilitation efforts, is supported by a 29-
    cents per gallon tax on barge fuel.
    U.S. Army Corps Project Financing
        The Water Infrastructure Financing and Innovation Act (WIFIA) was
    authorized under the 2014 WRDA bill to support the development of water
    infrastructure projects and encourage increased private investment.
    Through the Corps Water Infrastructure Finance Program (CWIFP), the
    Corps is authorized to provide direct loans, which allows it to support
    non-federal projects for flood damage reduction, hurricane and storm
    damage reduction, environmental restoration, coastal or inland harbor
    navigation improvement, or inland and intercoastal waterways navigation
    improvement.
        Many of these types of projects involve both a federal and non-
    federal component or cost share. Because CWIFP projects are intended
    for non-federal projects, many would not be eligible for financing by
    the Corps. This exclusion limits the number of worthwhile projects that
    are critical to states and communities. Extending eligibility would
    support the development of many more vital water infrastructure
    projects.
                               Proposed Solutions
        WRDA provides a unique opportunity to take necessary action to
    strengthen the nation's infrastructure. A biennial WRDA cycle provides
    federal agencies and communities throughout the country with the
    predictability to plan and make progress on infrastructure projects. To
    ensure the safety and extend the life of critical infrastructure such
    as dams and levees, and support more water infrastructure projects, we
    urge Congress to support the following priorities:
          Maintain a bipartisan two-year cycle and pass a Water
    Resources Development Act for 2022. This is critical in order to
    provide predictability to federal agencies for planning and review of
    projects and priorities and to be better able to respond to
    increasingly unpredictable threats such as climate change. This is also
    essential for the civil engineering community which relies on support
    from Congress, the Corps, and other agencies to ensure design,
    development, and construction of critical infrastructure moves forward
    in a timely and efficient manner. This helps to ensure infrastructure
    remains resilient in the face of increasingly evolving challenges, and
    that communities have access to needed services and protection from
    potential hazards.
          Support inclusion of the Twenty-First Century Dams Act,
    which provides increased funding authorizations and needed reforms for
    critical dam safety programs. ASCE has worked with legislators and a
    diverse coalition of industry stakeholders in support of this critical
    legislation which focuses on needed investments for retrofitting,
    rehabilitation, and removal activities for the nation's dams. ASCE
    worked closely with these stakeholders to secure a needed down payment
    for dam safety in IIJA through provisions originally written into the
    Twenty-First Century Dams Act. It is critical for Congress to build on
    this down payment by supporting the inclusion of the following in this
    year's WRDA:
          +  Reauthorizing the National Dam Safety Program for an
    additional five years at a funding level of $43,000,000 per year, and
    remove requirements that states may not receive funds in excess of 50
    percent of the cost of implementing state dam safety programs, which
    will support states with smaller state programs;
          +  Increasing the authorized annual funding level for the HHPDR
    Program by$40,000,000 for a total of $100,000,000 per year;
          +  Expanding eligibility criteria for the HHPDR program by
    removing the ``unacceptable risk to the public'' threshold to ensure
    hundreds more dams worthy of these funds are not excluded; and
          +  Establishing a new definition for ``small underserved
    communities'' and ensure that these communities are exempt from the
    program's non-federal cost share requirements. This definition reflects
    communities that own a dam or could be significantly impacted by dam
    failure and do not have sufficient resources to meet the law's cost
    sharing requirement. Many of these communities fall in downstream
    failure inundation areas, and this provision will help ensure that they
    are not placed at a greater risk of disaster caused by a dam failure.
          Fully and more equitably fund the National Levee Safety
    Program at the FY 2023 authorized level of $79 million and reauthorize
    the program beyond its FY 2024 expiration. The National Levee Safety
    Program is comprised of several key components:
          +  Committee on Levee Safety which is a voting body comprised of
    experts and officials from state, local, regional and tribal
    governments, as well as the private sector to provide advice and
    recommendation on implementation of the overall program; \5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ https://damsafety.org/levee-safety
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          +  National Levee Safety Guidelines which provide a national
    resource of best practices to ensure more consistent improvements to
    the reliability, resiliency, and overall safety of levees nationwide;
    \6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ https://usace-cwbi-prod-il2-nld2-docs.s3-us-gov-west-
    1.amazonaws.com/8327284c-f748-4aa4-998b-506450b6cd09/
    NLSPfactsheet_Guideline_FINAL122021.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          +  National Levee Database which provides an authoritative online
    inventory of the nation's levee systems, as well as a valuable tool for
    decision making regarding levees; \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/help/getting-started
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          +  Implementation Support which identifies different types of
    assistance, including financial and technical, to encourage greater
    participation in the National Levee Safety Program \8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ https://usace-cwbi-prod-il2-nld2-docs.s3-us-gov-west-
    1.amazonaws.com/36a12d72-2c9d-4838-b3a3-7b76f2577a3e/
    NLSPfactsheet_Implementation_FINAL122021.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          +  Levee Safety Action Classification which provides stakeholders
    with a tool to better identify and prioritize levee systems based on
    risks and potential hazard such levee systems pose to communities in
    the event of levee failure.\9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ https://www.mvn.usace.army.mil/LSAC/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          +  Public Education and Awareness projects which are designed to
    enhance the public's understanding of, and support for levee safety
    programs.\10\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title33/
    chapter46&edition=prelim

        In recent years, much of the federal funding for the National Levee
    Safety Program has focused on the National Levee Database. While this
    is a critical component, it is essential that funding be provided in a
    manner which ensures all components of the program receive the
    resources that are needed to better implement the National Levee Safety
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Program overall.

          Amend WIFIA to include the following definition of non-
    federal programs in order to expand eligibility for CWIFP project
    financing:
          +  Non-Federal Project--the term Non-federal project means any
    project for flood damage reduction, hurricane and storm damage
    reduction, environmental restoration, coastal or inland harbor
    navigation improvement, or inland and intercoastal waterways navigation
    improvement that is undertaken by a non-federal entity as a separable
    project or a part of the non-federal share of a federally authorized
    project for flood damage reduction, hurricane storm damage reduction,
    environmental restoration, coastal or inland harbor navigation
    improvement, or inland and intercoastal waterways navigation.
          Continue to allow for the use of the unspent balance of
    the HMTF and spend down this balance on port projects.
          Ensure the full use of the IWTF continues to be
    appropriated.

        In conclusion, ASCE believes our nation must prioritize the
    investment needs of our water resources infrastructure systems to
    ensure public safety, a strong economy, and the protection of our
    environmental resources. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
    provided a critical funding boost for dam safety, ports, and other
    infrastructure assets. However, long-term, reliable federal funding is
    key if we hope to close the growing funding gap and restore America's
    world-class infrastructure. We thank you for holding this hearing and
    look forward to working with the Committee to find solutions to our
    nation's water resources infrastructure systems investment needs.

       Statement of Eileen Shader, Director, River Restoration, American
          Rivers, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Grace F. Napolitano
        On behalf of American Rivers' 355,000 members, supporters and
    volunteers across the nation, I write today to provide recommendations
    for your consideration as you assemble the Water Resources Development
    Act (WRDA). We encourage you to include provisions that promote the
    healthy rivers and waters essential to the health and prosperity of our
    nation, and we look forward to working with you and the U.S. Army Corps
    of Engineers (USACE) to protect and restore rivers across the nation.
        American Rivers works to protect wild rivers, restore damaged
    rivers, and conserve clean water for people and nature. Since our
    founding in 1973, we have led efforts to conserve more than 150,000
    miles of rivers across the country, making us one of the most trusted
    and influential river conservation organizations in the United States.
        Today, our waters face new and substantial challenges due to our
    changing climate. Increased temperatures, frequent and intense
    precipitation events, longer hurricane seasons and more natural
    disasters can all be attributed to climate change. The impacts of
    climate change are exacerbating existing vulnerabilities in communities
    across the country. Many of these inequities fall disproportionately on
    Black, Indigenous, Latino and other people of color. We face a global
    biodiversity crisis that will have disastrous impacts on aquatic life
    stemming from loss of habitats and natural systems necessary to sustain
    life on our planet. To address these challenges our nation must evolve
    our strategies to create resilient communities suited to face these
    threats and protect vulnerable water resources.
        USACE plays a critical role in managing the nation's rivers,
    streams, and wetlands and perhaps more than any other federal agency,
    holds the tools and authorities to ensure that these vital resources
    are managed in a way that will improve the health and prosperity of our
    communities. It is imperative for Congress to direct the USACE to
    utilize its resources and staff to address the unprecedented challenges
    of climate change, inequity and loss of biodiversity.
        In the coming years, the USACE will be responsible for distributing
    tens of billions of dollars thanks to the unprecedented infrastructure
    investments of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
        American Rivers works extensively with USACE across the nation and
    engages with USACE staff on many projects and programs. WRDA 2022
    provides the opportunity to steer USACE in the right direction as it
    charts a new course for river management across the nation.
                1. Overhaul Project Planning and Decision-making
        Since 1983, USACE project planning has followed the Principles and
    Guidelines, which relies on Net Economic Development to make decisions
    regarding water resources projects design and selection. This approach
    is fundamentally flawed, resulting in directives from Congress in 2007
    to update the Principles and Guidelines to ensure that every water
    resource project protects and restores the environment. However,
    despite direction in Section 110 of the Water Resources Development Act
    (WRDA) of 2020 \1\, the USACE still has not integrated these reforms
    into project planning.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ H.R. 7575 Sec.  110. 116th Congress: Water Resources
    Development Act of 2020.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        It is imperative that the USACE develop agency-specific procedures
    including major revisions to the Planning Guidance Notebook in a manner
    that fully implements the new water resources policy consistent with
    WRDA 2007, Section 2031 \2\. This process should include:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ H.R. 1495 Sec.  2031. 110th Congress: Water Resources
    Development Act of 2007.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Opportunity for stakeholder and public engagement during
    development of the agency-specific procedures and revisions to the
    Planning Guidance Notebook;
          Improving consideration of benefits and costs to
    equitably account for costs and benefits to disadvantaged and low-
    income communities;
          Accurately account for the true costs of a project by
    considering lost ecosystem services as project costs, increases in
    ecosystem services as project benefits, full-life cycle costs in cost
    assessments including rehabilitation and removal at end of life, and
    include costs associated with addressing site-specific conditions;
          Full consideration of natural and nature-based
    alternatives.
    2. Establish a Resilience Directorate to Improve the Use of Natural and
                             Nature-Based Features
        Natural and nature-based features (NNBF) protect, restore or mimic
    natural water systems and provide services including improved water
    quality and quantity, snowpack/storm flow attenuation, aquifer
    recharge, and flood control. In the WRDAs passed in 2016, 2018, and
    2020, Congress expressed that NNBF must be integrated into the Civil
    Works program--particularly into flood risk management. WRDA 2020 also
    provided USACE with a selection of different authorizations that can
    incorporate NNBF.
        To meet the agency's statutory requirements to consider NNBF
    alternatives during project planning, USACE must build staff commitment
    to understanding the rapidly evolving body of scientific and technical
    knowledge on NNBF. As the nation's leading water resources management
    agency, it is critical that USACE staff have the knowledge and training
    to lead in this area. While the Engineering With Nature initiative has
    made fantastic progress in recent years, a companion effort to improve
    use of NNBF is necessary within USACE leadership. American Rivers
    recommends Congress instruct USACE to:
          Establish a resilience directorate tasked with ensuring
    existing Corps programs, authorities, and operations take full
    advantage of natural infrastructure and adopt modern, comprehensive
    planning approaches, and promote coordinated and consistent
    implementation of NNBF across districts, business lines, and programs
    within the USACE.
         3. Address Inequities Within Army Corps Programs and Projects
        Climate change and water-related environmental harms
    disproportionately affect communities of color, low-income and
    Indigenous communities who have been historically underserved. In 2021,
    President Biden signed Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and
    Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government \3\
    which requires federal agencies to assess whether underserved
    communities and their members face systemic barriers in accessing
    benefits and opportunities available to them, and promote equitable
    delivery of government benefits and equitable opportunities. American
    Rivers' staff regularly work with the USACE in watersheds across the
    nation. American Rivers recommends Congress instruct USACE to:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Executive Order On Advancing Racial Equity and Support for
    Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government. The White
    House. January 21, 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Seek culture change from that of a transactional
    engineering firm that benefits individual sponsors to a public agency
    that serves the public good.
          Establish a Federal Advisory Committee on Environmental
    Justice to advise senior USACE leadership.
          Reform benefit-cost analysis and cost-share structures to
    ensure equitable decision-making and distribution of resources.
          Encourage all project teams to work to repair and build
    lasting relationships and partnerships with historically marginalized,
    vulnerable, or disadvantaged communities in their areas.
          Target existing technical assistance programs to
    facilitate resilience planning for low income, minority, and
    historically marginalized communities and increased funding should be
    directed to these programs (i.e., Planning Assistance to States, Silver
    Jackets, Floodplain Management Services).
          Reform policies and procedures across the agency to
    promote more inclusive, diverse, and equitable outcomes from the USACE.
                     4. Disposal of Outdated Infrastructure
        The USACE operates more than 700 dams \4\, and partners with levee
    sponsors to manage more than 1,600 levees \5\, and maintains 12,000
    miles of inland waterways \6\. The USACE's assets are valued at over
    $238 billion \7\ and the majority of that infrastructure is over 50
    years old \8\. Even with the significant infrastructure investments
    expected in coming years, the USACE will not be able to undertake
    repairs and rehabilitation of all the assets in need. Furthermore, in
    many cases these structures no longer perform their intended purpose,
    or circumstances have changed since authorization that warrant a
    reevaluation of how the structure is managed, or whether it is
    necessary at all.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Dam Safety Program. 2021. HQ USACE. https://www.usace.army.mil/
    Missions/Civil-Works/Dam-Safety-Program/
        \5\ Levee Safety Program. HQ USACE. https://www.usace.army.mil/
    Missions/Civil-Works/Levee-Safety-Program/
        \6\ Projects by Category: Maritime Channel and Harbor Improvements.
    San Francisco District USACE. https://www.spn.usace.army.mil/Missions/
    Projects-and-Programs/Projects-by-Category/
        \7\ Sanchez, J.E. USACE Asset Management Program. http://www.all-
    llc.com/SAME-Newsletters/SAME-09-Conf/Jose%20Sanchez%20-
    %20SAME%20Conference_3SEP09.pdf
        \8\ Capital Stock: Infrastructure Age. https://
    www.iwr.usace.army.mil/Missions/Value-to-the-Nation/Fast-Facts/Capital-
    Stock/Infrastructure-Age/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The USACE's asset management strategy takes a risk-based approach
    that attempts to extend the useful life of the USACE's infrastructure.
    American Rivers urges the USACE to make a fundamental shift in its
    asset management strategy that incorporates consideration of the impact
    of the asset on the natural resource--the rivers, streams, and wetlands
    that are impacted by the existence of outdated infrastructure. WRDA
    2020 directed USACE to develop a comprehensive strategy to address the
    extensive fleet of aging projects and infrastructure that is no longer
    fulfilling its intended purpose. American Rivers recommends Congress
    instruct USACE to:
          Develop a program that is focused on restoring and
    repairing the impacts of USACE projects on rivers, streams, wetlands
    and coasts, by adapting or removing outdated and unnecessary projects.
                         5. Inventory of Low-head Dams
        Low-head dams are smaller barriers, on average less than 25 feet in
    height, with water typically flowing continuously over the crest.
    Contrary to larger dams used for flood mitigation or impoundment, low-
    head dams are used for producing hydropower, diverting irrigation water
    or sustaining municipal water supplies. Some low-head dams no longer
    provide any benefit and remain only as hazards to life and public
    safety because of strong, circulating water conditions under the
    water's surface that can trap and drown recreationalist or unaware
    persons. Low-head dams have caused more than 1,400 deaths over the past
    50 years, with most of those deaths occurring in the past 20 years \9\.
    According to American Whitewater's Accident Database, 10 percent of
    whitewater fatalities nationwide are a result of individuals getting
    caught in a low-head dam hydraulic \10\.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ Hotchkiss, R. Faculty Outreach Campaign to Promote Low Head Dam
    Safety. 2021. https://www.asce.org/communities/institutes-and-
    technical-groups/environmental-and-water-resources-institute/news/
    faculty-outreach-campaign-to-promote-low-head-dam-safety
        \10\ Whitewater Accident & Fatality. 2020. https://
    www.americanwhitewater.org/content/Accident/view/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Association of State Dam Safety Officials estimates there may
    be as many as 5,000 low-head dams, but there is no reliable inventory
    of low-head dams in the United States. There are other inventories of
    engineered structures, such as the National Inventory of Dams (NID),
    but low-head dams are typically not captured in the NID database
    because they do not impound a significant amount of water and would not
    cause life or property loss upon failure. Furthermore, it's estimated
    that only 20 percent of states have adequate data regarding the
    location of potentially harmful low-head dams, while over half of the
    United States has little or no data \11\.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ Cech, T., Shipman, N., Bartlett, H., Zimmer, S., Akens, J.,
    Wright, K. Low Head Dams--The Attractive Nuisance. 2021. https://
    storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/0406e1d232354860a55
    b4fc7a3b22b28
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Knowing where low-head dams are located, and their condition is the
    first step in mitigating the associated fatal risk. This information
    can be provided to states and the public to spread awareness and
    minimize the chance of loss of life. A low-head dam inventory could
    also provide failing and degraded dams the opportunity for
    rehabilitation by retrofitting the structures with modifications such
    as rock ramps, stepped spillways, and other physical modifications to
    enhance public safety and recreational benefits, while maintaining the
    structure's current use. American Rivers recommends Congress instruct
    USACE to:
          Establish a Nationwide Low-Head Dam Inventory and a State
    Low-Head Dam Inventory and Rehabilitation Program, to be administered
    by USACE in coordination with FEMA and the Bureau of Reclamation.
          Use the proposed inventories to provide public
    information resources regarding low-head dam hazards, generate data
    that could be used to inform state mapping of low-head dams, and
    provide information on available funding and technical resources to
    remove and rehabilitate these structures.
          Assist state natural resources agencies develop and
    implement low-head dam inventories and public education campaigns and
    provide financial and technical assistance to state and local
    governments and non-profit organizations to rehabilitate or remove
    dangerous low-head dam structures that no longer serve a functional
    purpose.
          Implement other non-structural risk management tools such
    as ``control exposure'' techniques such as the use of signage, buoys,
    and other safety measures upstream of dams.
            6. Federal Levee Assessment and Floodplain Reconnection
        Levees have served as a main component of flood risk management for
    decades, shown by the over 8,000 levee systems located across the
    country, covering over 25,000 miles; however, the average age of these
    levees is 58 years \12\. As the climate warms, floods are becoming more
    frequent and intense, and it has become evident that many of our levee
    systems were not designed to handle these more extreme floods and we
    have seen levees overtop or breach. In spring of 2019, the Midwest
    alone saw over 80 levee systems breached in severe flooding, resulting
    in over $20 billion in damages \13\. In order to safely convey larger
    floods, some flood risk management systems should be altered using
    setbacks, removals, spillways, or other alterations that will allow
    flood waters to access floodplains.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ National Levee Database. https://levees.sec.usace.army.mil/#/
        \13\ Overview of Levees. https://infrastructurereportcard.org/cat-
    item/levees/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        With climate and age beginning to impact levees, USACE must
    reevaluate existing levees to determine if they are still the optimal
    solution or are there newer and more effective means of flood risk
    reduction. In our experience working in river conservation and
    restoration, along many of our nation's most flood-prone rivers such as
    the Mississippi, Missouri, and in the Central Valley of California, we
    have encountered levees that are protecting federal land that was
    previously acquired because it experienced flood damages. As such, it
    is logical that the USACE should assess opportunities to alter levees
    that are located on federal public land such as National Wildlife
    Refuges, National Parks, National Forests, etc. using setbacks,
    removals, spillways, or other alterations that will allow flood waters
    to access floodplains.
        In many instances altering levees to reconnect floodplains provides
    environmental, ecological, and societal benefits. Floodplains offer
    natural flood and erosion control at a cost equal or less than the
    construction, operation and maintenance cost of levees. The added
    benefits of floodplains, such as water quality improvement and
    groundwater recharge provide intrinsic value not found in levees.
    Floodplains also restore and protect fish and wildlife habitats, many
    of whom are endangered species, by providing necessary breeding and
    feeding areas. Communities also benefit from floodplains that restore
    agricultural or forest lands, protection of drinking water resources,
    and safeguarding of significant cultural and historic lands, especially
    for Indigenous Tribes. American Rivers recommends Congress instruct
    USACE to:
          Identify levees that are located on federally owned land,
    or owned and operated by federal agencies.
          Determine whether the levee should be modified to
    reconnect the river to the floodplain due to significant changes to
    physical or economic conditions since the project was constructed.
          Authorize the Corps to undertake feasibility studies for
    any levees identified.
                    7. Improve the Disposition Study Process
        Dams significantly impair river ecosystems by impeding fish,
    sediment, and nutrient movement. Dams also alter water temperatures,
    disrupt the environmental flow regimes, and change the oxygen levels in
    both the reservoir and downstream flows. Dams can pose a safety hazard
    as well, especially low-head dams that form retaining waves which have
    resulted in several drownings throughout the U.S.
        Not all the structures USACE operates and maintains are serving
    their federally designated purpose; they serve only as environmental
    detriments and human safety hazards and should be reviewed. WRDA 2020
    authorized the review of USACE assets and the inventory of those
    projects, ``that are not needed for the mission of the Corps of
    Engineers.'' For a dam to be removed, explicit authorization for a
    project must be approved by Congress WRDA or ownership of the structure
    must be transferred to another party who will then take on the cost and
    logistics of the dam removal. USACE should use this authorization to
    conduct disposition studies and subsequent removal of unnecessary dams
    in their fleet.
        WRDA 2022 provides an opportunity to authorize both disposition
    studies and the subsequent removal of USACE dams. WRDA 2018 Section
    1168 gives USACE authority to consider removal of a project under a
    disposition study, but the overall trigger for, and breadth of, the
    disposition study needs to be improved \14\. To remedy this problem,
    Congress should:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ S. 3021 Sec.  1168. 115th Congress: Water Resources
    Development Act of 2018
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Authorize disposition studies for all dams not meeting
    the mission of USACE and allow for the deauthorization and removal of
    these structures for ecological, economic, and social benefit.

        We thank you for consulting with stakeholders whose work and
    livelihood will be impacted by WRDA 2022, as well as scientists and
    experts who are devoted to protecting water resources. If there are any
    questions your committee may have, please do not hesitate to contact
    us.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Well, thank you, gentlemen, for your
    input. And we will now proceed to hear from our witnesses who
    will testify. I will ask the witnesses to please turn their
    cameras on and keep them on for the duration of the panel.
        Thank you very much for being here. And we welcome the
    Honorable Wade Crowfoot, secretary of the California Natural
    Resources Agency; the Honorable Peter Yucupicio, chairman,
    Pascua Yaqui Tribe, Arizona; the Honorable Darrell G. Seki,
    chairman, Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, Minnesota; the
    Honorable Michel Bechtel, mayor of Morgan's Point, Texas, and
    president of the Gulf Coast Protection District; Mr. Mario
    Cordero, executive director of the Port of Long Beach,
    California; Mr. Jim Middaugh, executive director of Multnomah--
    did I say that right, sir--County Drainage District, Portland,
    Oregon; and Ms. Julie Hill-Gabriel, vice president for water
    conservation, National Audubon Society, Washington, DC.
        And without objection, your prepared statements will be
    entered into the record. And all witnesses are asked to limit
    their remarks to 5 minutes. And I will start with Mr. Crowfoot,
    you may proceed, sir.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. WADE CROWFOOT, SECRETARY, CALIFORNIA NATURAL
    RESOURCES AGENCY; HON. PETER YUCUPICIO, CHAIRMAN, PASCUA YAQUI
     TRIBE OF ARIZONA; HON. MICHEL BECHTEL, MAYOR, MORGAN'S POINT,
      TEXAS, AND BOARD PRESIDENT, GULF COAST PROTECTION DISTRICT;
    HON. DARRELL G. SEKI, Sr., CHAIRMAN, RED LAKE BAND OF CHIPPEWA
    INDIANS, MINNESOTA; MARIO CORDERO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PORT OF
       LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AND CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
        AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PORT AUTHORITIES; JIM MIDDAUGH,
        EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MULTNOMAH COUNTY DRAINAGE DISTRICT,
     PORTLAND, OREGON; AND JULIE HILL-GABRIEL, VICE PRESIDENT FOR
       WATER CONSERVATION AND ACTING VICE PRESIDENT FOR COASTAL
                 CONSERVATION, NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY

        Mr. Crowfoot. Well, thank you so much. Greetings from
    California, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and
    distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the
    invitation to join you today, and thank you for your
    stewardship of the critical investments we will talk about.
        As the California Natural Resources secretary in the
    administration of Governor Gavin Newsom, I help to oversee
    efforts to prepare and respond to water challenges, which
    increasingly means what we call weather whiplash of drought and
    flood. We believe that California's water challenges, worsening
    droughts, dangerous wildfires that impact our watershed, and
    intense winter flooding are a microcosm of challenges across
    the American West.
        The water infrastructure is obviously central to prosperity
    in California and the West, and the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers plays a key role. We are aligned with the Corps to
    help communities improve their resilience to this weather
    whiplash, to build capacity and partnerships with local
    communities, to enable environmental justice in underserved and
    rural communities, and to align both natural and engineering
    processes to deliver multiple benefits. We are very grateful of
    the 2020 WRDA and how it helped put Californians to work with
    big investments in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach,
    which you will be hearing more about.
        We also appreciate WRDA 2020 funding to improve long-term
    water reliability across our region. That is our focus too in
    State government. Our State's policy blueprint on water, which
    we call the water resilience portfolio, supports local
    coalitions doing the work it takes to address locally specific
    threats of more intense droughts and flood.
        In recent years, our State government has made historic
    water investments, including committing over $5 billion in last
    year's budget. But we know this is just a downpayment. The need
    is truly vast. On the flood front, we hope the WRDA that you
    develop this year continues the Corps commitment to protecting
    our Central Valley in California from flood risk. California
    made early investments in flood risk reduction projects in the
    Central Valley and generated excess credit in the process.
        Our investments were made in good faith on congressionally
    authorized projects in a transparent and cooperative way with
    the Corps. If the WIIN Act language in WRDA 2022 is not updated
    to eliminate the 2024 deadline and clarify how and when non-
    Federal sponsor credits are transferred, California risks
    stranding over $200 million of investment.
        Specifically, our State is depending on these excess
    credits to provide a portion of non-Federal cost share on key
    flood safety projects that we have underway now. Updates to the
    WIIN Act will ensure that the Federal Government and the Corps
    can continue to meet their commitments to reduce flood risk in
    the Central Valley.
        Now in WRDA 2022, we are also asking Congress to support
    and prioritize what we call nature-based solutions through the
    Corps' Engineering with Nature initiative. We have worked with
    the Corps on this approach to integrate nature into
    infrastructure, including to expand seasonal flood plains in
    many of our watersheds, which both improves flood protection
    while also sustaining agriculture and restoring habitat,
    improving water quality, and increasing opportunities for
    recreation. We feel strongly that the next WRDA should advance
    this multibenefit work.
        As you know, dredging waterways to project navigation is a
    major Corps responsibility. And we are making the case that it
    needs to fund beneficial use of dredged, uncontaminated
    sediment. Historically, the vast majority of dredge material
    gets dumped, really, in our case, in the ocean. And at a time
    when sea level rise is threatening beaches, wetlands, ports, we
    need the Corps to fund beneficial use of that sediment.
        That use of sediment and projects to increase coastal
    resilience to restore wetlands needs to be accelerated. And we
    are excited to do what we call cut the greentape, deliver
    projects more quickly and cost effectively through shared
    permit processes, utilizing joint consultation, and shortening
    permit review timeline.
        Now, new forecasting technologies in what we call FIRO,
    forecast-informed reservoir operations, have great potential to
    improve utilization of reservoirs across the West and country.
    And we are excited that the Corps is advancing this work and
    want to continue to partner with the Corps and advocate for
    funding to update the Army Corps' flood rules for reservoirs
    like Oroville and New Bullards Bar.
        Finally, we hope that 2022 WRDA continues to fund and
    support the Corps at the Salton Sea in the southern part of our
    State in the Imperial Valley. We have committed in State
    government major funding to the Salton Sea, and the Corps,
    which is the lead Federal agency to restore and stabilize the
    sea, requires the funding and priorities to continue to do that
    work in partnership with us.
        I look forward to working with this committee and its
    Members on the priorities. And, once again, Chairwoman
    Napolitano, Chairman DeFazio, and Ranking Member Rouzer, thank
    you for the opportunity to testify.
        [Mr. Crowfoot's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Wade Crowfoot, Secretary, California Natural
                                Resources Agency
        Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer and distinguished
    members of the Subcommittee, thank you for your stewardship of critical
    water and environmental investments across the county. I appreciate the
    opportunity to testify before you today to discuss California
    priorities for water infrastructure needs in the proposed Water
    Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2022.
        As the California Secretary for Natural Resources in the
    Administration of Governor Gavin Newsom, I oversee efforts to advance
    our mission to restore, protect and manage the state's natural,
    historical and cultural resources for current and future generations.
        Water is life everywhere, with a profound importance in
    California--the state with
          the biggest population;
          the largest number of plant and animal species;
          the most robust agricultural economy;
          the most variable precipitation; and
          biggest asymmetry between where our rain and snow fall
    and where most of that water is used.

        Water infrastructure is central to California's prosperity, and the
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers plays a key role.
        I am grateful that our Governor's Administration and the Corps are
    aligned in our efforts to help communities improve their resilience to
    extreme weather events; build partnerships with local communities;
    promote environmental justice in disadvantaged, underserved, and rural
    communities, and align natural and engineering processes to deliver
    environmental, economic, and social benefits.
        The 2020 WRDA will help put Californians to work, with its big
    investments in the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. We appreciate
    the WRDA 2020 resources that allow the Corps to focus on long-term
    water reliability and local water supply. That's our focus, too. A
    theme of the Newsom Administration's Water Resilience Portfolio, our
    policy blueprint, is that every region of California faces different
    water challenges, and the state and federal governments must support
    local coalitions doing the work it takes to endure more intense
    droughts and floods.
        In recent years, the state of California has made historic
    investments in water resources to support local resilience. The budget
    enacted by the Governor and Legislature last year included $5.2 billion
    in drought response and long-term water resilience investments. Last
    month, the Governor proposed additional investments of $750 million.
    These investments will go a long way toward helping the varied regions
    of California prepare for distinct challenges as global temperatures
    rise. But those billions of dollars are still just a down payment. The
    need is vast. For example, in the 400-mile-long Central Valley, where
    the rivers running out of the Sierra Nevada mountains drain, we
    estimate that it will cost more than $8 billion to achieve a 200-year
    level of flood protection for urban areas that include Sacramento,
    Stockton, and Merced. The Corps, with a potential 65 percent cost share
    through its Civil Works Program, is a crucial partner to helping us
    protect lives and property.
        In all, the state last year expended $117.5 million for Central
    Valley flood risk reduction projects in fiscal year, and the Corps has
    spent approximately $175 million in the same period. The 2022 Civil
    Works President's Budget includes $190 million for Corps' Central
    Valley flood projects, while California's budget includes an additional
    $142 million to continue strengthening flood protection. We hope the
    WRDA you develop this year continues the Corps' commitment to
    protecting the urban areas of California's Central Valley.
        There is another important but more technical request I hope you
    will consider. At stake is $200 million of investment California
    already has made to reduce flood risk in the Central Valley. California
    amassed excess credits through early investment in flood risk reduction
    projects in the Central Valley. These investments were made in good
    faith on congressionally-authorized projects in a fully transparent and
    cooperative manner with the Corps. If the WIIN Act language in WRDA
    2022 is not modified to eliminate the 2024 deadline and clarify how and
    when non-federal sponsor credits are transferred between authorized
    federal projects, California risks stranding of over $200 million of
    investments.
        Revisions to the WIIN Act will ensure that the federal government
    can meet its financial commitment to reduce flood risk for 634,000
    people and over $84.3 billion of assets in the Central Valley alone.
    The state is depending on these excess credits to provide a portion of
    the non-federal cost share on the American River Common Features 2016
    project and the Lower San Joaquin River Project. The excess credits are
    a result of the state's previous investments that accelerated projects,
    reduced risk sooner, and reduced the overall cost of the Corps
    projects, saving millions of dollars of federal funding. Staff at the
    California Department of Water Resources would be happy to work with
    you on that issue.
        In the 2022 WRDA, we also would like to see Congress encourage the
    Corps for further support for ``nature-based solutions,'' such as
    through the Corps' ``Engineering with Nature'' initiative. The
    California Department of Water Resources entered in an MOU in 2021 with
    the Corps to further collaborate on nature-based solutions. We
    appreciate the working relationship with the Corps.
        We are working together, for example, to expand the floodplains of
    the Sacramento, San Joaquin, and Pajaro rivers in order to improve
    flood protection while also improving and restoring habitat; sustaining
    agriculture; improving water quality, and increasing opportunities for
    recreation, outdoor education, and access. It is important that the
    next WRDA would advance this multi-benefit work, especially in
    communities like south Stockton and Watsonville, where many residents
    are low income.
        Governor Newsom and California have made climate resilience,
    biodiversity conservation and equitable outdoor access for all top
    policy and funding priorities. Enhanced partnerships and collaboration
    with the Army Corps are critical for these efforts.
        Dredging waterways to protect navigation is a major Corps
    responsibility. As part of the Corps funding process, they fund
    maintenance dredging, but do not routinely fund beneficial use of
    dredged, uncontaminated sediment. As a result, the vast majority of
    dredged material goes to the lowest-cost disposal option, frequently
    ocean dumping. At a time where sea level rise is increasingly
    jeopardizing beaches, wetlands, ports and communities, the Corps'
    consideration to make beneficial use of sediment a top-funded priority
    is critical. In California, this would mean increased coastal
    resilience and increased wetland acreage. For example, enlarging and
    restoring thousands of acres of wetlands along San Francisco Bay by
    beneficially using dredge sediments will protect local communities and
    numerous ports from the growing threat of sea level rise while
    enhancing carbon sequestration and the Bay's extraordinary biodiversity
    as the largest estuary on the West Coast.
        Additionally, any opportunities that support projects to increase
    coastal resilience, wetland acreage, and other habitat restoration
    should be accelerated. California wants to work closely with the Corps
    to increase the pace of project implementation by ``Cutting Green
    Tape'' through simplified joint permit processes, joint consultations,
    and agreed-upon short permit review timelines. We urge the Corps to
    make expediting these types of projects a top priority.
        We also would appreciate continued Congressional investment in the
    Corps' crucial work to update water control manuals that guide
    operators at keystone reservoirs including Oroville and New Bullards
    Bar.
        Many Corps water control manuals have not been updated in more than
    a generation. Meanwhile climate change and new forecasting technology
    create a need and opportunity for more flexibility in reservoir
    operations. In California, we especially appreciate the way the Corps
    is aligning its updates of water control manuals with use of forecast-
    informed reservoir operations, or FIRO. FIRO is a strategy that
    integrates flexibility in reservoir rules of operations and enhanced
    forecast skill, to potentially improve operations for flood control and
    water supply. DWR and the Corps continue to seek state and federal
    funding to support FIRO; the 2021-22 state budget included $10 million
    for FIRO. The research arm of the Corps has continued funding to engage
    in FIRO projects (about $5 million this year) which includes the Yuba,
    Feather, Russian, and Santa Ana rivers in California and the Howard
    Hansen dam in Washington state.
        Together, updated water control manuals and FIRO can give
    California reservoir operators the information and flexibility they
    need to adjust to warmer, flashier storms and reduced snowpack. This
    will help save lives in wet years and conserve water for dry years. It
    is, in other words, a great tool for climate adaptation.
        Finally, I hope that the 2022 WRDA continues funding and support
    for the Corps at the Salton Sea. California just committed another $220
    million over the next three years in habitat restoration and dust
    suppression at the Sea. It will take a strong partnership with the
    Corps--the lead federal agency on this work--for us to succeed in
    protecting public health and maintaining a crucial food supply for
    millions of migratory birds.
        In the coming year, I look forward to working with this committee
    and its members on priorities like these as you chart federal
    investments in water resources. Thank you, Chair DeFazio and Chairwoman
    Napolitano. This concludes my testimony, and I am happy to answer any
    questions you or other members may have.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Crowfoot. That was well
    put. And I agree with you both on Salton Sea and on the
    dredging material.
        Next, I would like to recognize Representative Stanton to
    introduce the next witness. Mr. Stanton, you are recognized.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I am pleased
    to welcome to our subcommittee Peter Yucupicio, chairman of the
    Pascua Yaqui Tribe in Arizona. For more than 20 years, Chairman
    Yucupicio has served the Pascua Yaqui Tribe at first as
    treasurer, vice chairman, and now four terms as chairman. He
    also serves on the Pima Association of Governments Regional
    Transportation Authority and is the 2022 chair of the RTA
    Board.
        Chairman Yucupicio understands the importance of managing
    and protecting the Tribe's very limited water resources. Thanks
    to his vision and leadership, the Tribe was the first recipient
    of Federal funds under Arizona's environmental infrastructure
    authority. In addition, he has been very active in pushing back
    against efforts to weaken protections under the Clean Water
    Act.
        Chairman Yucupicio is also an accomplished musician and was
    recently inducted into the Tejano Roots Hall of Fame. Thank you
    for joining us, Chairman. We look forward to your testimony.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr. Yucupicio, you are recognized; you may
    proceed.
        Mr. Yucupicio. Thank you, Madam Chair. Buenos dias. Good
    morning. Lios enchim aniavu. On behalf of all our Tribal
    members, on behalf of all the members who are up in the
    [speaking Native language], which is in heaven, a blessing from
    all our people on our reservation and throughout southern
    Arizona and the United States.
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and the members of
    the subcommittee, my name is Peter Yucupicio, and I am the
    chairman of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe. I am here today to testify
    on the Water Resources Development Act of 2022, and to urge the
    committee to increase the authorization levels for the
    environmental infrastructure authorities to help address the
    critical need for water infrastructure projects in Arizona and
    across Indian Country. I would like to acknowledge and express
    my appreciation for the opportunity to testify today.
        The Pascua Yaqui Tribe is a federally recognized Tribe with
    a reservation southwest of Tucson, Arizona. We are a historic
    Tribe with a small reservation established for the use of the
    Tribe's 22,000 members. Since our Tribal Federal recognition in
    1978, our government has focused on providing housing, public
    services, and economic opportunities for our Tribal members.
    Like many Tribes, our Tribe has limited access to potable
    water. In fact, our reservation doesn't have access to surface
    water, and our access to groundwater is extremely limited.
    Instead, we get water service from our neighbor, the city of
    Tucson.
        But the total amount we can receive is capped to less than
    1,000 acre-feet of water per year. And we are on a pace to
    exceed our water delivery limits with the city of Tucson in
    only a few years. That is why the EI program is so critical
    since it provides another resource for communities, including
    Tribal communities, to meet our water needs.
        With the support of Congressman Greg Stanton, the Pascua
    Tribe was the first Tribe in Arizona to tap into Arizona's EI
    authority.
        With funding awarded to the Tribe through the Army Corps,
    we are finally able to construct a water distribution line that
    will bring nonpotable water to our Tribal Wellness Center, to
    irrigate our ballfields, and a public park that we maintain to
    encourage the healthy lifestyle for our Tribal members.
        By building out the distribution line, we will save about
    16 million gallons of potable water, which we can use to supply
    water for 375 homes on our reservation. That means a lot to our
    small Tribe.
        As I work with Tribal leaders here in the West, I see
    firsthand a need for additional Federal investment of water
    infrastructure on Tribal lands. Unfortunately, many Tribes lack
    the financial resources needed to address their water
    infrastructure needs. And while our Tribe is grateful to have
    been able to tap into resources made available through the
    Arizona EI authority, we also are aware that only a small
    handful of Tribes across the country have applied for or
    received assistance under this program.
        The Army Corps has been an excellent partner to the Pascua
    Yaqui Tribe as we work to develop our nonpotable water line for
    the Wellness Center and our reservation, but the Tribe was
    lucky to hear about the availability of funds for the EI
    program in the first place. Since the program is not formally
    noticed to Indian Tribes, more should be done to assist Tribes
    under the EI program.
        For example, the Army Corps could develop a Tribal
    engagement plan to help bridge the gap for Tribes to
    participate in this benefit of EI resources. A Tribal
    engagement plan could ensure Tribes receive notice of funding
    about the program well in advance of any deadlines. The Corps
    could also offer individual Tribal consultations for Tribes
    interested in learning more about the EI program.
        We also recommend that the committee consider allowing
    Tribes to use available Federal funding sources to meet the 25-
    percent cost share requirements of the EI program or eliminate
    this cost share requirement for Tribes entirely.
        Finally, we hope the committee will consider the
    opportunity the WRDA presents to expand the mission of the Army
    Corps to allow it to provide much greater assistance in water
    supply projects moving forward.
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members of the
    subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I
    would be honored to answer any questions you have, and I also
    have here members of our council, which is Secretary Valencia,
    Councilwoman Buenamea, and then members of our staff, the
    attorneys general. And we are happy to answer any questions.
    But living here on the reservation, we actually live on
    bedrock, all the surface water, the sheet flooding that runs
    off this reservation, so, we can't hold it. And there are laws
    that protect that. And the Black Wash that limits us from even
    capturing any rainfall or any water. So, that is our status
    here.
        Thank you.
        [Mr. Yucupicio's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter Yucupicio, Chairman, Pascua Yaqui
                                Tribe of Arizona
        Lios enchim aniavu, Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and
    members of the Subcommittee. My name is Peter Yucupicio, and I am the
    Chairman of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe of Arizona (Tribe). I am here today
    to testify regarding the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 (WRDA)
    and to urge the Committee to increase the authorization levels for the
    environmental infrastructure (EI) authorities under Section 595 of the
    Water Resources Development Act of 1999, Public Law 106-53, as amended,
    to help address the critical need for water infrastructure projects in
    the eligible states, including in our state of Arizona. As discussed in
    greater detail below, we also recommend the Committee consider several
    other measures in WRDA, including enhancements to EI that could improve
    the ability of Indian tribes to access this important program.
        I would like to acknowledge and express our appreciation for the
    opportunity to testify today and thank the Committee for your continued
    support for EI in the biennial WRDA.
            Environmental Infrastructure and the Pascua Yaqui Tribe
        The Pascua Yaqui Tribe is a federally recognized tribe with a
    reservation southwest of Tucson, Arizona. Our Tribe was recognized by
    Congress pursuant to the Act of September 18, 1978, P.L. 95-375 (92
    Stat. 712), as amended, and the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (48
    Stat. 984) (IRA). We are an historic tribe with a small, 2,216-acre
    Reservation established for the use and benefit of the Tribe's 22,000
    members. Since our Tribe's federal recognition in 1978, our Tribal
    government has focused on providing housing, public services, and
    economic opportunities for our Tribal members on our Reservation and in
    our Tribally recognized communities in Arizona.
        Like many of our sister tribes here in the west, the Pascua Yaqui
    Tribe has limited access to potable water supplies. In the case of our
    Tribe, we do not have a surface water supply of our own on the
    Reservation and our access to groundwater is extremely limited.
    Pursuant to a 2011 Intergovernmental Agreement between the City of
    Tucson and Pascua Yaqui Tribe for Potable Water Service (Tucson IGA),
    the Tribe receives potable water service from our neighbor, the City of
    Tucson, but Tucson caps the amount of water it will deliver to the
    Tribe at 600 acre-feet + 300 acre-feet for public facilities. With the
    development of much-needed housing for Tribal members and associated
    Tribal facilities, we are on course to exceed our water delivery limits
    with Tucson in only a few years. This is why the EI authority for
    Arizona is so critical, since it provides another resource for
    communities, including Tribal communities, to meet our water
    infrastructure needs--here with the participation of the U.S. Army
    Corps of Engineers (USACE).
        With the support of Congressman Greg Stanton, the Pascua Yaqui
    Tribe was the first Tribe in Arizona to tap into Arizona's EI
    authority. With funding awarded to the Tribe through the USACE, we are
    finally able to construct a water distribution line that will bring
    non-potable water to our Tribal Wellness Center on the Reservation to
    irrigate recreational facilities, including ballfields and a public
    park, that we maintain to encourage a healthy lifestyle for our Tribal
    members.
        Importantly, this project will also result in the conservation of
    at least 50 acre-feet (16,292,550 gallons) of potable water each year
    on the Reservation, contributing to the protection of the Tribe's
    limited water resources and making it possible for the Tribe to provide
    a future potable water supply to 375 homes on our Reservation. While we
    have many more water challenges to overcome, projects like those
    supported by the EI authority and the USACE will help our Tribe achieve
    a reliable water supply for our growing Tribal population. We are
    therefore grateful for this program and urge the Committee to increase
    the authorization for the Arizona authority and expand the number of
    states (and thus tribes) that are eligible to participate.
        On the funding side of things, Indian tribes are only now learning
    about the EI program and as discussed below, tribes face barriers to
    participation in federal infrastructure programs, like the Arizona EI
    authority, that often preclude our participation in these programs.
    Without additional authorization and more resources for EI, it is
    likely that tribes will be frozen out of the benefits of EI once again,
    since this funding will be quickly secured by municipalities and other
    non-tribal beneficiaries that are more familiar with the EI program,
    despite the urgent need for water supply and water resource projects
    and technical assistance on tribal lands.
      Recommended Improvements in the Environmental Infrastructure Program
        As the Chairman of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, I frequently interact
    with tribal leaders from federally recognized Indian tribes located
    throughout the West and see first-hand the glaring need for additional
    federal investments in the development, repair, and replacement of
    water and wastewater infrastructure on Tribal lands, among other
    environmental infrastructure projects. Indeed, as tribes struggle with
    years of drought and the reality of a much hotter and drier future,
    Indian tribes, just like many of our neighboring communities, need
    increased access to financial resources and technical assistance--like
    those provided by the EI--to enhance, and in many instances retool, our
    existing water supply and wastewater systems to conserve water, offset
    potable uses, and recycle water to support the health of our
    environment and provide a more flexible water supply for our future.
        Unfortunately, many tribes simply lack the financial resources
    needed to address these infrastructure needs. Compounding these
    challenges, tribes often find that federal programs established to
    address water infrastructure needs in the Unites States are hard to
    access, require an insurmountable cost share, or have screening
    criteria that do not fit the circumstances of tribal communities. And
    while our Tribe is grateful to have been able to tap into resources
    made available through the Arizona EI authority, we are also aware that
    only a small handful of tribes in EI eligible states have applied for
    or received funding or technical assistance under this important
    program. Accordingly, on behalf of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe and our
    sister tribes her in the West, in addition to increasing the
    authorizations for these EI authorities, we respectfully urge the
    Committee to consider the following actions that would expand tribal
    access to the EI program and support important water resiliency
    projects on tribal lands.
    1. The USACE should develop a plan for tribal engagement on the EI
        The USACE has been an excellent partner to the Pascua Yaqui Tribe
    as we work to develop our non-potable water line for the Wellness
    Center on our Reservation. But our Tribe was lucky to hear about the
    availability of funds for the EI program in the first place, as the
    program is not formally noticed to Indian tribes in eligible states. In
    fact, it was only through the tribal outreach efforts of Congressman
    Stanton and his office that the Tribe became aware of its eligibility
    for EI and the potential fit between our Wellness Center project and EI
    criteria.
        Indian tribes, especially smaller and rural tribes, often lack the
    in-house resources and capacity to independently identify programs like
    the EI program as a source of technical assistance and support for
    critical water supply projects on their reservations. The development
    of a written plan for tribal engagement on EI by the USACE could help
    bridge this gap for tribes and provide a much greater opportunity for
    Indian tribes to participate in the benefit of EI resources. The tribal
    engagement plan could, among other things, require that a notice of
    funding availability be shared with eligible tribes well in advance of
    any applicable deadlines. To be effective, the notice could also
    outline, in a clear and concise way, what projects are eligible for EI
    assistance, the timelines for applying for such assistance, and the
    contact information for local USACE staff who are able to provide
    guidance on the application process. The USACE could also offer
    individual government-to-government consultation with tribes interested
    in learning more about the EI program.
    2. Cost Share and Reimbursement Requirement
        While there are several federal grant programs available to help
    tribes build critical water and wastewater infrastructure on tribal
    lands, in many instances, these programs require a non-federal cost-
    share match by the tribe, often from 50% to 75% of the total project
    cost. While the EI program is an improvement, since the non-federal
    cost share is only 25%, even this can be a significant barrier for
    participation in the program for tribes.
        As this Committee knows well, constructing and repairing water and
    wastewater facilities and other environmental infrastructure projects
    requires a substantial capital expenditure for any community. In non-
    native communities, these types of capital improvements are typically
    funded through tax-payer dollars and bonds, as well as impact fees
    assessed to private developers. However, tribal communities do not have
    the same mechanisms to generate or receive tax benefits or otherwise
    use bonding capacity. Moreover, because tribes develop and maintain
    these large water resource projects to facilitate their own economic
    development projects or to support tribal services and tribal housing,
    tribes do not have the benefit of assessing impact fees on developers
    to help fund these projects.
        Tribes' inability to tap into sources of revenue like certain
    taxes, bonds, or impact fees on par with their neighboring communities
    magnifies the difficulty presented by the EI's non-federal 25% cost
    share. First, without sufficient water and wastewater infrastructure,
    tribes are unable to engage in robust economic development projects
    that could provide a source of revenue to meet the 25% cost share
    requirement, even though the very lack of water related infrastructure
    is what makes the tribe eligible for the EI program in the first place.
    This presents a difficult chicken and egg situation for tribes. Second,
    because the 25% cost share must be non-federal, tribes are unable to
    use other sources of available federal dollars that they may have
    access to in order to fund the non-federal 25% cost share, even if cost
    share is allowable under other federal programs.
        In recognition of the unique circumstances faced by Indian tribes,
    including tribes' limits on access to revenue sources that are
    available to non-native communities and the dire need for water and
    wastewater infrastructure on tribal lands, the Tribe recommends the
    Committee consider allowing Indian tribes to use available federal
    funding sources to meet the 25% cost share requirement of the EI
    program or eliminate this cost share requirement for tribes entirely.
        In addition, the reimbursable nature of the EI program also
    presents barriers to tribal participation. Specifically, the EI program
    requires participating tribes to fund 75% of the construction costs of
    EI approved projects up front, with the USACE providing a subsequent
    reimbursement of costs to the tribe after the fact. In many instances,
    however, tribes lack the financial tools or tribal funding sources (as
    discussed above) to participate in programs like EI that only reimburse
    the tribe for construction costs after the fact. To ensure greater
    participation of tribes in the EI program, the Committee should
    consider changes to these requirements for tribal participants.
        While small, the changes to the EI program discussed in our
    testimony today would be a big step in assisting tribes to fully
    participate in this program on par with non-native communities,
    providing a federal investment on tribal lands that will assist tribes
    in meeting critical water needs now and in the future.
               Expand the Mission of the Army Corps of Engineers
        While it is our understanding that the WRDA has typically focused
    the USACE's mission on traditional civil works purposes, including
    improving navigation, reducing flood risk, and restoring aquatic
    ecosystems, there is a very strong need for the USACE to expand its
    core mission to include water supply projects generally. The need for
    assistance from the USACE in the development of these types of projects
    could not be greater for communities in the West, as we see the impacts
    of drought and ongoing aridification drastically depleting the
    availability of water resources at both a local and regional scale. The
    USACE stands in a unique and important position to assist communities,
    including our tribal communities, as we adapt to these rapidly
    developing water supply challenges in real time. We hope the Committee
    will consider the opportunity that WRDA presents to expand the mission
    of the USACE to provide much greater assistance in water supply
    projects moving forward.
                                   Conclusion
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members of the
    Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. On behalf
    of the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, we urge the Committee to consider the
    recommendations set forth in our testimony that have the potential to
    magnify the impact of the WRDA in Indian Country. We are also grateful
    for the inclusion of Arizona in the EI program and for the benefit it
    is bringing to help meet the water needs of our Tribe. I would be
    honored to answer any questions you may have.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Yucupicio, for your
    comments. And your points are well taken.
        I now recognize Representative Babin to introduce our next
    witness. Mr. Babin, you are recognized.
        Dr. Babin. Yes, ma'am. Thank you, Madam Chair, I really
    appreciate it. And I am elated to welcome my very close friend,
    the Honorable Michel Bechtel, to today's Committee on
    Transportation and Infrastructure's Water Resources and
    Environment Subcommittee hearing. I have known Mayor Bechtel
    for just shy of a decade, and in that time, I have met few
    others as dedicated or as knowledgeable as he is when it comes
    to the protection and the promotion of southeast Texas and our
    many essential ports and the valuable energy infrastructure
    that we have along our Texas coast.
        As president of the Gulf Coast Protection District, Mayor
    Bechtel provides a unique and informative perspective for
    ongoing projects in the gulf region. I am very pleased to be
    able to publicly thank him for the work and the study that he
    has put in to benefit my constituents in the 36th Congressional
    District of southeast Texas in the Greater Houston area, and
    the local relations with the Army Corps of Engineers. I really
    appreciate Mayor Bechtel.
        In addition to his work with the Gulf Coast Protection
    District, Michel serves as the mayor of Morgan's Point in my
    district as well. He has been one of the most positively
    influential community servants in Texas, and I can think of no
    one more qualified and knowledgeable to be sitting here today.
    I can also vouch for his marksmanship and his ability to take a
    duck down at any blind.
        Welcome, and we look forward to your testimony, Mayor. And
    with that, Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mayor Bechtel, you may proceed. You are
    being recognized, sir.
        Mr. Bechtel. Thank you for you kind words, Congressman. And
    Chairman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, Chairman DeFazio,
    members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
    testify before you today to discuss stakeholder priorities for
    the proposed Water Resources Development Act. My name is Michel
    Bechtel. I am the mayor of the city of Morgan's Point, Texas,
    and president of the Gulf Coast Protection District.
        In 2021, the Texas Legislature created the Gulf Coast
    Protection District to serve as a non-Federal sponsor of the
    storm surge protection system described in U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers Coastal Texas Protection and Restoration Chief's
    Report. The Chief's Report was signed on September 16, 2021.
        The district's 5-county territory, Chambers, Galveston,
    Harris, Jefferson, and Orange, is home to over 5\1/2\ million
    residents, 8 ports, and 9 congressional districts. The district
    will also be the non-Federal sponsor of the Sabine to Galveston
    projects located in the territory.
        Sabine to Galveston was fully funded in the Bipartisan
    Budget Act of 2018 and has already begun construction in some
    locations. The Coastal Texas Study presents a plan that will
    protect the upper Texas coast against hurricane storm surge
    from the Gulf of Mexico.
        The proposed components include a gate system, a nature-
    based beach and dune system, ring barriers, and gates and pump
    station systems on the mainland coast. The multiple lines of
    defense provide a delicately balanced approach to protecting
    essential human and economic infrastructure that contributes
    significantly to the Nation's economy while preserving the
    beaches and unique ecosystems on the Texas gulf coast.
        This project is not only important to the safety of the
    upper Texas coast residents, but provides vital protection for
    the economy of the States you represent and the whole Nation.
    During 2021, we witnessed a fragility of supply chains that
    resulted in monumental economic disruptions. Understanding
    supply chain perspectives when major hurricane disasters hit
    the upper Texas coast is important for recognizing the
    considerable national benefits of the Texas coastal storm surge
    protection plan.
        Following major weather events, supply chains are affected
    by storm damage to structural and human infrastructure. Reduced
    worker capacity impedes recovery work at facilities,
    exaggerating supply chain disruptions. Truckdriver shortages, a
    key component to this human infrastructure, intensified
    following storms. Trucks move the supply chain for the top 10
    commodities, including electronics, grocery and convenience
    store goods, hardware, gravel, grains, and gasoline.
    Agriculture is impacted by supply chains supporting fertilizer,
    seed, crop protection products, and machinery parts.
        In 2020, the U.S. exported over $1.2 trillion in
    manufactured goods. The Houston Port region is home to the
    largest petrochemical complex and export port in the United
    States, providing $802 billion in national economic value.
        If back-to-back hurricanes hit the Houston Ship Channel
    similar to Louisiana in 2020, critical economic activity in the
    port could be shut down for an extended period. This means no
    port activity, no cargo, no commerce, no jobs.
        Staggeringly, 96 percent of all manufactured goods are
    directly touched by the business of chemistry. Texas is the
    largest chemistry producing State in the Nation. The business
    of converting these basic chemicals into textiles, food
    packaging, automotive parts and safety glass, home furnishings,
    construction and roofing materials, paints and coatings,
    pharmaceuticals, and fertilizers occurs in other States, many
    of which are represented on this subcommittee.
        If left unprotected, major storms impacting petrochemical
    and port infrastructure would significantly disrupt
    manufacturing, retailers, and business operation supply chains
    in States across the Nation.
        If the region's chemical producers can't produce
    ingredients, manufacturers can't generate products, truckers
    and air freight can't move inventories, retailers can't stock
    shelves, and exports are halted. In addition, 80 percent of the
    Nation's military grade fuel is supplied by this region, a
    national security issue for you to consider. The deep and
    significant impact of protecting this region from catastrophic
    storm surge is evident. The security of State and national
    economies will be hugely improved with the implementation of
    the coastal Texas projects.
        In closing, I leave you with how the coastal Texas project
    could affect your jurisdictions. Import and export commodities
    moving through the Houston Port region are connected to
    manufacturing and retail supply chains in each of your home
    States. Each of your States have commodities that import
    through Port Houston.
        Thank you, again, for this opportunity. As you deliberate
    the stakeholder priorities presented to you, I urge you to
    consider authorization of the Coastal Texas Study. The projects
    represented in coastal Texas offer not only a comprehensive
    storm surge reduction plan, but a plan of undeniable return on
    investment. The Gulf Coast Protection District is ready to
    begin a long-term partnership with the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers to carry out this once in a lifetime and landscape-
    changing project. Again, thank you.
        [Mr. Bechtel's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Michel Bechtel, Mayor, Morgan's Point,
           Texas, and Board President, Gulf Coast Protection District
        Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Graves,
    Ranking Member Rouzer, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee,
    thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today to discuss
    stakeholder priorities for the proposed Water Resources Development Act
    (WRDA) of 2022.
        My name is Michel Bechtel. I am Mayor of the City of Morgan's
    Point, Texas and the President of the Gulf Coast Protection District.
    In 2021, the Texas Legislature created the Gulf Coast Protection
    District (the District) to serve as the non-federal sponsor for the
    storm surge protection system described in the Coastal Texas Resiliency
    Improvement Plan identified in the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
    Coastal Texas Protection and Restoration Chief's Report (Coastal Texas
    Chief's Report), signed on September 16, 2021. The District's five
    county territory: Chambers, Galveston, Harris, Jefferson, and Orange,
    is home to over 5.5 million residents, eight ports, and nine
    congressional districts. The District will also be the non-federal
    sponsor of the Sabine Pass to Galveston Bay Texas Coastal Risk
    Management (S2G) projects located in this territory and was fully
    funded in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018.
        The Coastal Texas Chief's Report presents a plan that will
    safeguard the upper Texas coast against hurricane storm surge arising
    from the Gulf of Mexico and Galveston Bay. Gulf defenses include a gate
    system and a nature-based beach and dune stem coupled with Bay defense
    systems involving a Galveston Island ring barrier system and gates and
    pump station systems on the mainland coast. These multiple lines of
    defense provide a delicately balanced approach to protecting essential
    human and economic infrastructure that contributes significantly to the
    nation's economy while preserving the beaches and unique ecosystems on
    the Texas coast.
        This project is not only important to the safety of upper Texas
    Coast residents but provides vital protections for the economies of the
    states you represent, and the nation. During 2021, we witnessed the
    fragility of supply chains that resulted in monumental and catastrophic
    economic disruptions. Understanding supply chain perspectives when
    major hurricane disasters hit the upper Texas coast is important for
    recognizing the considerable national benefits of a Texas coastal storm
    surge protection system.
        Following major weather events, supply chains are affected by storm
    damage to structural and human infrastructure. Reduced worker capacity
    impedes recovery work at facilities thus exacerbating supply chain
    disruptions. Truck driver shortages, a key component of this human
    infrastructure, intensify following storms. Trucks move the supply
    chain for the top 10 commodities including electronics, grocery and
    convenient store goods, hardware, gravel, grains, and gasoline.
    Agriculture is impacted by supply chains supporting fertilizer, seed,
    crop protection products, and machinery parts.
        In 2020, the U.S. exported over $1.171 trillion in manufactured
    goods, with small businesses comprising ninety-six (96) percent of all
    exporters in the U.S. The Houston Port Houston region is home to the
    largest petrochemical complex and export port in the United States,
    providing $801.9 billion in national economic value. With sequential
    major hurricanes hitting the Houston Ship Channel and direct hits 12
    miles apart (similar to Louisiana in 2020), critical economic activity
    in the Port Houston Ship Channel could be shut down for an extended
    period. This means no port activity, no cargo, no commerce, and no
    jobs.
        Staggeringly, approximately ninety-six (96) percent of all
    manufactured goods are directly touched by the business of chemistry.
    Roughly, eighty (80) percent of all primary petrochemicals are produced
    in Texas and Louisiana, with Texas being the largest chemistry
    producing state in the nation. Approximately, forty-two (42) percent of
    the nation's specialty chemical stock is required in a wide range of
    everyday products used by consumers and industry. The business of
    converting these basic chemicals into textiles, food packaging,
    automotive parts and safety glass, home furnishings, construction and
    roofing materials, paints and coatings, pharmaceuticals, and
    fertilizers occurs in other states, many of which are represented on
    this subcommittee.
        With over seventy (70) percent of the nation's freight by weight
    moved by trucking and (60) percent of the aviation fuel produced in the
    upper Texas Gulf Coast affecting air freight, major storms impacting
    petrochemical and port infrastructure would significantly disrupt
    manufacturing, retailers, and business operation supply chains in
    states across the nation. If the region's chemical producers can't
    produce ingredients, manufacturers can't generate products, truckers
    and air freight can't move inventories, retailers can't stock shelves,
    and exports are thwarted. In addition, eighty (80) percent of the
    nation's military grade fuel is supplied by this region. The deep and
    significant impact of protecting this region from catastrophic storm
    surge is evident. The security of state and national economies will be
    hugely improved with the implementation of the Coastal Texas projects.
        In closing, I will leave you with how this could affect your
    jurisdictions. Import and export commodities moving through the Houston
    Port region are connected to manufacturing and retail supply chains in
    each of your states. The following are top commodities based on tonnage
    that import through Port Houston to states represented on the
    Subcommittee:
          Machinery, Appliances and Electronics are received by
    California, North Carolina, Arkansas, Georgia, Illinois, New Hampshire,
    New Jersey, South Carolina, Tennessee, Oregon, and Missouri.
          Hardware and Construction Materials received in
    California, Oregon, Arkansas, Arizona, North Carolina, Georgia,
    Louisiana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, South Carolina, and
    Missouri.
          Automotive are the top commodities received in South
    Carolina, Tennessee, North Carolina, and Louisiana.
          Chemicals, Minerals, Resins and Plastics received in
    Arkansas, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana,
    Missouri, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Jersey, South Carolina,
    Tennessee, and New York.
          Retail Consumer Goods received in Arkansas, New York,
    Oregon, Arizona, and Puerto Rico.
          Steel and Metals received in Arizona, New Jersey, New
    York, Tennessee, Oregon, and Missouri.
          Food and Drink received in California, Arkansas, Arizona,
    Florida, District of Columbia, Illinois, New York, New Jersey, and
    Louisiana.
          Furniture received in Florida and North Carolina.

        Thank you again for this opportunity. As you deliberate the
    stakeholder priorities presented to you, I urge you to consider
    authorization of the Coastal Texas Study. The projects represented in
    Coastal Texas offer not only a comprehensive storm surge reduction plan
    but a plan of undeniable return on investment. The Gulf Coast
    Protection District is ready to begin a long-term partnership with the
    USACE to carry out this once in a lifetime and landscape-changing
    project.
                                   attachment
        [Editor's note: Mr. Bechtel submitted an attachment to his prepared
    statement which is retained in committee files and available online at
    https://
    docs.house.gov/meetings/PW/PW02/20220208/114380/HHRG-117-PW02-Wstate-
    BechtelM-20220208-SD001.pdf ]

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much for your comments,
    sir. Chairman Seki, you may proceed.
        Mr. Seki. Aaniin, distinguished members of the
    subcommittee.
        [Speaking Native language.]
        My name is Darrell G. Seki, Sr. I am the chairman of the
    Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, and I speak on behalf of the
    Tribal Council and our membership.
        Chi miigwetch to you and the other distinguished
    subcommittee members for the opportunity to testify on the
    experiences of Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians working with
    the Army Corps of Engineers.
        The Red Lake Band Indian Reservation is composed of more
    than 840,000 acres in northern Minnesota. Nearly 29 percent of
    the Red Lake Reservation is covered by water. That is 240,000
    acres. The Army Corps projects have drastically changed our
    environment, preventing fish passes and damaging 25,000 acres
    of the Zah-Gheeng Marsh, which was one of the last remaining
    extensive tracts of pristine marsh in the North Central States.
        Beginning with the passage of the Flood Control Act of
    1944, the Corps replaced the stop log structure at the outlet
    of Lower Red Lake with a new lift-gate dam, constructed a low-
    head rock dam several miles downstream from the outlet, as well
    as dredged and channelized significant portions of the Red Lake
    and Clearwater Rivers.
        After these projects were complete, significant drying of
    the marsh was observed, along with the disappearance of water
    fowl and furbearing populations that the band had relied upon
    for generations for food, culture, and economic purposes. Fish
    passage restrictions also became a huge problem.
        In 1957, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a report
    on environmental damages resulting from the flood control
    project. But some secret efforts by the Army Corps to restore
    our environment failed. The Red Lake knows that our experience
    with the Army Corps is not unique. It is apparent throughout
    Indian Country.
        The band supports the other Tribes' efforts to win redress
    concerning the Dakota Access pipeline, the Enbridge Line 5
    pipeline, and the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline. Last year, the band
    was party to a lawsuit against the Army Corps to request a
    preliminary injunction to stop construction of Enbridge Line 3.
        While Red Lake cannot say our relationship with the Army
    Corps has been cordial at all times, there are three particular
    moments in Red Lake's history where the band's relationship
    with the Army Corps has made headway. One, the restoration of
    the walleye population. Two, the construction of the fish
    passage in 2011. Three, current efforts to rehabilitate marsh
    lands surrounding the dam.
        I have discussed these all thoroughly in my written
    testimony. But today, I want to focus on our joint efforts to
    address the fish passage and the rehabilitation of Zah-Gheeng
    Marsh. We are currently conducting a feasibility study funded
    by the Corps before we begin a two-phased restoration.
        Phase 1 will address the fish migration barrier constructed
    by the Army Corps in 1958. Phase 2 will focus on restoring the
    marsh. This will allow for necessary seasonal flooding of this
    wetland and help with downstream flooding issues, because
    wetlands are very effective at holding water during high-water
    periods.
        As the subcommittee prepares for the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022, we urge you to include three critical
    provisions. First, appropriate $950,000 in construction funds
    to support phase 1 of Red Lake's fish migration and Zah-Gheeng
    Marsh rehabilitation project.
        Second, appropriate $100,000 for the Army Corps to enter
    into agreement with Red Lake to conduct biological surveys
    before and after phase 1 is complete to show the impact and
    effectiveness of the Corps' investment. Currently, Red Lake is
    home to the one of the largest concentrations of native
    freshwater mussels in the State of Minnesota. It is an area of
    special concern.
        Three, Congress should direct the Army Corps to hire a
    Tribal Liaison for each district to increase Government-to-
    Government consultation and to ensure that Tribal concerns are
    addressed in a timely manner.
        I want to say chi miigwetch for allowing me the opportunity
    to testify today. We look forward to working with your
    subcommittee to guide the Corps into a new direction. Again,
    chi miigwetch.
        [Mr. Seki's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Darrell G. Seki, Sr., Chairman, Red Lake
                      Band of Chippewa Indians, Minnesota
        Aaniin (Hello/Dear) Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, and
    Ranking Member David Rouzer,
        Chi miigwetch (many thanks) to you and the other distinguished
    Subcommittee members for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the
    Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians (Red Lake or the Band). We are
    particularly appreciative of your efforts to hold this hearing, which
    includes a voice often left out of critical conversations surrounding
    the work of the Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps)--Indian Country.
        While there have been many attempts by the federal government to
    reduce our homelands, Red Lake is proud to say our 840,000-acre
    Reservation in Northern Minnesota is held in trust by the United States
    and has never been broken apart or allotted. For those who are not
    familiar with the geography of the State of Minnesota, there is a
    reason people call it the land of 10,000 lakes--nearly 29 percent of
    Red Lake's Reservation (240,000 acres) is covered by water.
        Referred to in early treaties as the Band's ``food store,'' Red
    Lake Band members have relied on its vast bodies of water and
    associated wetlands for subsistence fishing and harvesting of animals
    and plants for food and medicine since time immemorial. As such, each
    Band Member is charged with the responsibility of sustaining and
    protecting our pristine environment and natural resources, and carrying
    on the legacy of our inheritance, our sovereignty, customs, and
    traditions.
        Despite the importance of maintaining the bodies of water within
    its boundaries for Red Lake Band members, it has taken the Army Corps
    decades to share and meet Red Lake in its goal of rehabilitating our
    environment that has been drastically changed due to past Army Corp
    projects.
        History of Red Lake Engagement with the Army Corps of Engineers
        The Flood Control Act of 1944 authorized the Army Corps to conduct
    several activities within the Red Lake reservation for the primary
    purposes of flood control, pollution abatement, and drinking water
    supply to downstream communities off the reservation. Project
    activities included the replacement of a stop log structure at the
    outlet of Lower Red Lake with a new lift-gate dam, construction of a
    low-head rock dam several miles downstream from the outlet, as well as
    the dredging and channelization of significant portions of the Red Lake
    and Clearwater Rivers.
        The Band and the Department of the Interior gave permission to
    conduct the Red Lake and Clearwater Rivers Project through a series of
    General Council Resolutions dated Oct 22, 1947, October 28, 1948, and
    April 17, 1949. Authority was also vested in the U.S. Department of the
    Army to maintain and operate the dam they were to construct. This
    permission was granted provisionally, which means that violation of the
    provisions in the resolutions is a violation of the agreement made
    between the United States and the Band to conduct the project.
    Provisions included the right of the Band to claim damages against the
    United States arising from the project, and that the Red Lake Marsh
    (Zah-Gheeng Marsh) was to remain in its natural state.
        The project began in 1950 and was largely completed in 1951. Just a
    few years later, significant desiccation of the marsh was observed,
    along with the disappearance of waterfowl and furbearer populations
    that the Band had relied upon for generations for food, cultural, and
    economic purposes. Fish passage restrictions were also a problem. Prior
    to channelization of the Red Lake River by the Army Corps, the Zah-
    Gheeng Marsh, consisting of about 25,000 acres, was considered to be
    one of the last remaining extensive tracts of pristine marsh in the
    North Central States. Early reports by visitors to this area spoke on
    the beauty of the marsh and that it was teeming with wildlife of all
    kinds. That all changed with the activities of the Army Corps, which
    resulted in the loss of 25,000 acres of pristine marsh.
        In 1957, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a report on
    environmental damages resulting from the flood control project. The
    report identified, and attempted to quantify, biological and monetary
    damages that the new dam and channelization of the Red Lake River
    caused in terms of loss of wildlife, fish passage losses, increased
    wild fires, and economic losses to the Band. One method suggested in
    the report was to partially restore the marsh by digging intake
    channels on either side of the river at the outlet, in an effort to
    reflood the marsh via gravity flow. This project was subsequently
    constructed, but never worked. Other activities and works were proposed
    throughout the decades, with some being implemented, including a fish
    passageway just below the dam in 2011, but the Zah-Gheeng Marsh remains
    in the same poor condition today.
        Red Lake knows too well that our experience with the Army Corps is
    not unique to Indian Country. The Band has been supportive of other
    tribes' efforts for redress concerning the Dakota Access pipeline, the
    Enbridge Line 5 pipeline, and the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline. Last year
    the Band was party to a lawsuit against the Army Corps, which permitted
    construction of the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline in Minnesota. The Band
    requested a preliminary injunction to stop construction, for alleged
    inadequacies in the Army Corps' climate change-related analyses. The
    Court denied the motion without addressing the Plaintiffs' argument
    concerning inadequacies in the Army Corps' climate change-related
    analyses. Despite this, Red Lake continues to stand with other Tribes
    in overcoming Army Corps' lack of regard for our homelands and natural
    resources.
    Red Lake's Current Efforts to Partner with the Army Corps of Engineers
                           for Habitat Rehabilitation
        While Red Lake cannot say our relationship with the Army Corps has
    been cordial at all times, there are three particular moments in Red
    Lake's history where the Band's relationship with the Army Corps has
    made headway--(1) restoration of the walleye population; (2)
    construction of the fish passage in 2011; and (3) current efforts to
    rehabilitate marsh lands surrounding the dam.
    1. Restoration of the Walleye Population
        In 1917, the Band began operation of the Red Lake Fishery to combat
    a regional food shortage during World War I. Subsequently, the
    Secretary of the Department of Interior established regulations at 25
    CFR Part 242 authorizing the Band to engage in commercial fishing.
        Today, the tribally owned and operated Fishery continues to play an
    important role in the life of the Band by maintaining local food
    sources and contributing to the local economy. During the peak fishing
    season, the Band supports 75 full time employees and over 700
    fishermen-and-women, distributing $60,000 to $120,000 weekly to its
    fishermen-and-women. In 2021, the Fishery caught nearly half a million
    pounds of walleye for commercial distribution. This was the 15th year
    of fishing after the walleye population was restored and the Band
    remains committed to being a good steward of their lands. In 2006 and
    2013, the Band was recognized by the Harvard Project on American Indian
    Economic Development for its multi-pronged plan to monitor, restore,
    and maintain the walleye population in which its livelihood depends.
    2. Construction of the Fish Bypass in 2011
        In 2011, the Band and Army Corps worked successfully on
    constructing a fish bypass around the Red Lake Dam, after 60 years of
    expressed concerns over the fish outmigration problem at the dam. There
    has always been distrust between the Band and the Army Corps. Red Lake
    Band members strongly believe the dam was only constructed for
    downstream agricultural and flood control interest off the reservation.
    Not for the interest of the Red Lake people. The construction of the
    fish bypass was thus an important first step in rebuilding trust
    between the Band and the Army Corps.
    3. Current Efforts to Rehabilitate Marsh Lands Surrounding the Dam
        In 2020, the Red Lake Band started the process of gathering support
    for a multi-agency effort to address the fish passage and Zah-Gheeng
    marsh degradation on the Red Lake Reservation as a result of past Army
    Corps channelization of the Red Lake River. Over the past year we have
    been able to build momentum for this project and have had meetings, and
    gained support and expertise from the Army Corps, U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. As
    such, the Army Corps has secured funds to conduct a current feasibility
    study to address fish passage and Zah-Gheeng marsh degradation, which
    is expected to be completed by September of 2022.
        The Band will then begin pursuing construction dollars to implement
    a two phased restoration approach. Phase one will address the fish
    migration barrier constructed by the Army Corps in 1958. This 80-foot
    concrete structure will be altered to allow native fish species to
    ascend past this structure and continue their migration toward Red
    Lake. The Band has been cooperatively working to restore the lake
    sturgeon population of the Red Lakes for the past 15 years. The Lake
    Sturgeon is an historically important species to the Band, but they
    were extirpated from Red Lake by 1950. This was likely a direct result
    of Army Corps' project activities, with sturgeon not being able to
    return to the Red Lakes on their spawning migrations. Sturgeon use
    rivers, as we use highways, for seasonal movements. The construction of
    dams in the Red River of the North Watershed was a major factor causing
    this species to become extinct in the watershed. If funding can be
    secured, alterations to this structure should be completed by the end
    of 2024.
        The second phase of this project will focus on restoring the marsh
    that remains in a degraded, unproductive state, since the
    channelization of this section of the river in 1951 by the Army Corps.
    The marsh restoration is being studied as part of the same feasibility
    study with a draft to be completed by September of 2022. This phase
    will be much larger and more complex than phase one and will require
    additional time to implement. To restore a functional marsh, the levees
    will have to be breached and the original river channel will have to be
    reestablished. This will allow for seasonal flooding of this wetland,
    which will make it more productive for fish, waterfowl, and furbearers
    which are important to the way of life of the Red Lake people. The
    restoration of the marsh will also help with downstream flooding
    issues, because wetlands are very effective at holding water during
    high water periods. Funding for this phase will likely be asked for in
    the 2024 Water Resources Development Act.
        To document the impact and effectiveness of these restoration
    efforts, pre- and post-biological surveys should be conducted as part
    of this effort. This will include fish and mussel surveys in the river
    above and below the dam, before and after our restoration efforts in
    phase one. Furbearer and waterfowl monitoring should also be conducted
    in the marsh area pre- and post-restoration during phase two. These
    surveys will document the success of our efforts and can be used as a
    model for future restoration effort in the United States.
                                Recommendations
        As the House Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment begins
    to prepare its Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2022, we
    encourage the Subcommittee to include funding for innovative projects
    that the Army Corps is undertaking with tribal governments, like Red
    Lake's--one of partnership, collaboration, and focused on
    rehabilitating, sustaining, and protecting our natural resources. More
    specifically, we encourage the Subcommittee to:
        1.  Provide the Army Corps with $950,000 in Construction Funds to
    Support Phase One of Red Lake's Fish Migration/Zah-Gheeng Marsh
    Rehabilitation Project. These funds will be used to alter the current
    concrete low head dam to facilitate fish movement over this structure.
    We will be using a pool riffle design, which has been shown to be very
    effective in accomplishing this objective with very little
    environmental impact. This project will help the Band in its lake
    sturgeon restoration efforts and repair the negative impacts on the
    fish and mussel communities associated with the current structure. This
    phase of the project should be completed in 2024.
        2.  Provide the Army Corps with $100,000 for a reimbursable
    agreement with the Band to Perform Biological Surveys Before and After
    Phase One of Red Lake's Fish Migration/Zah-Gheeng Marsh Rehabilitation
    Project to Show the Impact and Effectiveness of the Army Corps'
    Investment. Comprehensive fishery and mussel surveys will be conducted
    before and after the alteration of the dam to show the impacts and
    effectiveness of this project. A comprehensive fisheries survey will be
    conducted on the 12 miles of the Red Lake River within the boundaries
    of the Red Lake Reservation. This survey will be repeated once the
    modification of the dam is complete to show the positive results of
    this project. A comprehensive mussel survey will be conducted below and
    above the dam before and after the dam is modified. Fish are the main
    way that larval fresh water mussels are transported upstream, and this
    project should have positive effects on this community. The project
    site contains one of the densest concentrations of native freshwater
    mussels in the state of Minnesota, and so it is an area of special
    concern.
        3.  In order to fulfill its Trust Responsibility, the Army Corp
    should staff a dedicated Tribal Liaison for each District to increase
    government to government consultation and to ensure that tribal
    concerns are addressed in a timely manner. This liaison should, at a
    minimum, contact designated tribal staff monthly to address any ongoing
    concerns and to keep communications open and regular. Communications
    with Army Corps staff vary widely from very straight forward and
    cordial to nearly non-existent. The Army Corps, as a large bureaucracy,
    can be extremely challenging to navigate with respect to appropriate
    contacts on various issues. Examples of challenges for the Red Lake
    Band include the 404 permit process and dam operations planning. Clean
    Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permitting is a necessary and important
    part of many projects as it ensures the protection of valuable natural
    resources and prevent projects from violating the complicated
    requirements of the CWA. However, the time between application and
    approval can be extremely detrimental to tribal goals and objectives.
    In some cases, permits are taking in excess of 18 months. When projects
    are funded through grants with deadlines for expenditures this is
    unacceptable and can result in project cancellation. There is no clear
    line of communication to deal with these issues. A tribal liaison would
    provide this direct line of communication ensuring that both the proper
    tribal staff and Army Corps staff are in close contact resulting in
    accountability and timely responses from both parties. A liaison would
    also benefit both entities when cooperative projects occur, such as the
    restoration the Band is currently working on with the Army Corps or a
    new dam operations plan which will need to be discussed in the near
    future. The cost of a liaison would be minimal, requiring primarily
    monthly telephone check-ins and in person meetings only in the case of
    actual projects. This would be more than made up for by the potential
    improvement in Army Corps-Indian Country relationship.
                                   Conclusion
        Throughout the years, the relationship between the Band and the
    Army Corps may be described as one of misunderstanding and conflict. It
    has not helped matters that the Army Corps has a policy of rotating out
    its District Engineer Colonel every few years. Since the beginning of
    the Red Lake project in 1950, Red Lake Band leadership has changed five
    times and the Army Corps St. Paul District leadership has changed
    nearly two dozen times. The result of this frequent turnover is
    frustrating and results in the Band repeatedly meeting with and
    restarting our education process on the damage the Army Corp did to our
    land, effectively thwarting the government to government consultation
    process. So here we are today, with the current Army Corps feasibility
    study to examine yet again, ways that the Zah-Gheeng Marsh might be
    restored, and fish passage improvements be made.
        We are excited about the current national leadership of the Army
    Corps. Assistant Secretary Michael Connor, and Deputy Assistant
    Secretary Jaime Pinkham, both tribal citizens, have extensive
    experience in working with Indian Country. We anticipate they will make
    improvements to help ensure the Army Corps honors its trust
    responsibility to tribes and works to improve the government to
    government relationship. We also acknowledge and appreciate the efforts
    of your Subcommittee to do the same, as partially evidenced by your
    invitation for me to testify today.
        Miigwetch (thank you) for allowing me the opportunity to inform the
    Subcommittee about Indian Country's engagement with the Army Corps of
    Engineers and to identify opportunities to support improved
    collaboration between the Army Corps of Engineers and Indian Country.
    We look forward to working with your Subcommittee to guide the Army
    Corps into a new direction.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Chairman Seki. Your comments
    are well taken. And I would now like to recognize
    Representative Lowenthal to introduce our next witness. Mr.
    Lowenthal, you are recognized.
        Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano. I am
    honored to introduce Mr. Mario Cordero. Mario is the executive
    director of the Port of Long Beach which is located in my
    district and has held this position since 2017. I have been
    privileged to call Mario a friend and a partner for almost--or
    maybe even more than 40 years, we have been working together.
        Mario, during his illustrious career, has served as the
    distinguished Chair of the Federal Maritime Commission under
    President Obama, and he now serves as chair of the American
    Association of Port Authorities. He has worked tirelessly to
    make the Port of Long Beach a clean, efficient, and dynamic
    fixture in our community.
        Recently the Nation has seen the supply chain
    vulnerabilities, and the stacking of ships we watched every
    night on TV outside of the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles.
    I am proud to say that under Mario's leadership, the Port of
    Long Beach introduced policies that not only reduced this
    congestion, but also put into effect long-term policies that
    will in the future increase the efficiencies of the port, so
    this will not happen again.
        There are few people who are qualified to speak on port
    issues, and I look forward to his full testimony. Welcome to
    the committee, Mr. Cordero.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Lowenthal. Mr. Cordero, you
    may proceed.
        [Pause.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. You are muted, sir. You are muted.
        Mr. Cordero. Chairman DeFazio and Chairwoman Napolitano,
    Ranking Member Graves and Ranking Member Rouzer, it is an honor
    and privilege to testify before the distinguished subcommittee
    today to discuss the Port of Long Beach deep draft navigation
    project. My name is Mario Cordero. I am the executive director
    of the Port of Long Beach.
        Before I discuss this project, I would first like to
    commend the subcommittee for holding this hearing. Passing the
    Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA, as it is commonly
    referred to, on a biennial basis has provided the country's
    navigation community with a reliability and certainty that it
    needs to advance critical navigation projects like the one at
    the Port of Long Beach.
        The Port of Long Beach stands in strong support of
    developing the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 and
    would like to acknowledge the tremendous bicameral and
    bipartisan track record of this important infrastructure bill.
    Thank you for your leadership and commitment to this
    authorizing process.
        I would like to take a moment to acknowledge Congressman
    Lowenthal, a long-time member of this committee and ardent
    champion of the Port of Long Beach. Congressman Lowenthal, I
    cannot recall a time that this committee has held a WRDA
    hearing, and you haven't mentioned the Port of Long Beach.
    Thank you for keeping our WRDA needs front and center.
        Chairwoman Napolitano, it was around this time in 2020 that
    you led a congressional delegation to visit southern California
    that culminated in a visit to the Port of Long Beach. You and
    many of your colleagues present today had the opportunity to
    see firsthand the sheer magnitude of the operations of the Port
    of Long Beach.
        The Port of Long Beach is one of the few U.S. ports that
    can welcome today's largest vessels, serving 175 shipping lines
    with connections to 217 seaports around the world. And together
    with the Port of Los Angeles, we move more than 40 percent of
    the Nation's waterborne goods. We are quite literally the
    epicenter of where the box meets the docks.
        I appreciate the opportunity today to highlight the
    significance of the port's deep draft navigation project and
    the value that the navigation mission of the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers provides to the Nation.
        I take a moment upfront and say that, but for the shared
    goal and collaboration provided by the Corps Los Angeles
    District Office and the South Pacific Division, we would not
    have signed the Chief's Report ready for construction
    authorization in WRDA 2022. This project has been years in the
    making and is a central component of the port's master plan.
        Given the pandemic-induced supply chain challenges that
    this country faces, which the port is working in lock step with
    the administration's White House Supply Chain Disruption Task
    Force to address, not a day goes by where supply chain issues
    are not a story in the nightly news. And while this deepening
    project will improve the efficiency of waterborne cargo, it was
    actually envisioned well before the COVID-19 pandemic exposed
    the vulnerabilities of the national supply chain.
        The Port of Long Beach has long focused on making every
    aspect of operations more resilient. Deepening the port is a
    key component of the big picture. As the world's shipping fleet
    has produced larger ships, the existing channel depths and
    widths do not meet the draft requirements of these fleet
    vessels that call on the port.
        The deepening project will improve conditions for current
    and future container and liquid bulk vessel operations in
    regard to safety, reliability, and waterborne transportation
    efficiencies. This project will result in immediate and
    quantifiable national and local benefits, including reducing
    air emissions and improving vessel maneuvering. The Chief's
    Report shows that this investment has a highly favorable
    benefit to cost ratio of 3.5 to 1.
        Improving navigational efficiencies reduces emissions of
    air pollutants and greenhouse gases. Reductions in harmful air
    emissions will benefit disadvantaged and diverse communities
    surrounding the Port of Long Beach and reduce the climate
    impacts of port operations.
        When our project with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is
    conducted, these ships will call at maximum capacity under most
    all-weather and tide conditions without waiting offshore.
        In my role as chairman of the board of directors of the
    American Association of Port Authorities, I recognize the
    importance of the Corps in maintaining and improving our
    Nation's navigation assets.
        The Port of Long Beach, much like ports in our great
    country, rely on the expertise and experience of the Corps to
    ensure that our ports remain open and our economy remains
    strong.
        I want to thank this committee for prioritizing the needs
    of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund in WRDA 2020. Having a
    schedule to distribute the estimated $9.3 billion in unspent
    HMT tax collections will go a long way towards restoring the
    ``trust'' in the trust fund.
        I look forward to working with the committee through your
    oversight role to ensure that the intent of Congress is
    reflected in the Corps' development of a master plan to
    distribute the HMT funds.
        In closing, we are thrilled to have reached the Chief's
    Report milestone to be eligible for construction authorization.
    The Port of Long Beach respectfully requests this committee's
    support for including this project in WRDA 2022. Thank you for
    this opportunity to testify today, and I, of course, look
    forward to your questions.
        [Mr. Cordero's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Mario Cordero, Executive Director, Port of Long
         Beach, California, and Chairman, Board of Directors, American
                        Association of Port Authorities
        Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Graves and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, it is an honor and a privilege to testify before
    this distinguished subcommittee today to discuss the Port of Long
    Beach's (Port) Deep Draft Navigation Project. My name is Mario Cordero
    and I am the Executive Director of the Port of Long Beach. Before I
    discuss this project I would first like to commend the subcommittee for
    holding this hearing. Passing the Water Resources Development Act, or
    WRDA as it is commonly referred to, on a biannual basis has provided
    the country's navigation community with the reliability and certainty
    that it needs to advance critical navigation projects like the one at
    the Port of Long Beach. The Port of Long Beach stands in strong support
    of the development of the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 and
    we would like to acknowledge the tremendous bicameral and bipartisan
    track record of this important infrastructure bill. Thank you for your
    leadership and commitment to this authorizing process.
        I would also like to take a moment to acknowledge Congressman
    Lowenthal, a long-time member of this committee and ardent champion for
    the Port of Long Beach. Congressman Lowenthal, I cannot recall a time
    that this committee had held a WRDA hearing and you haven't mentioned
    the Port of Long Beach. Thank you for keeping our WRDA needs front and
    center.
        Chair Napolitano, it was around this time in 2020 that you led a
    congressional delegation visit to southern California that culminated
    in a visit to the Port of Long Beach. You and many of your colleagues
    present today had the opportunity to see first-hand the sheer magnitude
    of the operations at the Port of Long Beach. As the second busiest
    seaport in the country, the Port of Long Beach is the premier U.S.
    gateway for trans-Pacific trade and a trailblazer in innovative goods
    movement, safety, environmental stewardship and sustainability. The
    Port of Long Beach handles trade valued at more than $200 billion
    annually and supports 2.6 million jobs across the nation. The Port of
    Long Beach is one of the few U.S. ports that can welcome today's
    largest vessels, serving 175 shipping lines with connections to 217
    seaports around the world. And, together with the Port of Los Angeles,
    the San Pedro Bay Ports Complex moves more than 40% of our Nation's
    waterborne goods. We are quite literally the epicenter of where the box
    meets the docks. Please consider this an open opportunity to visit the
    Port when public health conditions permit. In the meantime I appreciate
    the opportunity today to highlight the significance of the Port's deep
    draft navigation project and the value that the navigation mission of
    the US Army Corps of Engineers' (Corps) provides to the nation. I'll
    get more into our partnership with the Corps later on in my testimony,
    but I just want to take a moment up front to say that but for the
    shared goal and collaboration provided by the Corps Los Angeles
    District Office and the South Pacific Division, we would not have a
    signed Chief's Report ready for construction authorization in WRDA
    2022.
        This project has been years in the making and it is a central
    component of the Port's masterplan. Given the pandemic induced supply
    chain challenges that this country faces, which the Port is working in
    lock step with the Administration's White House Supply Chain Disruption
    Task Force to address, not a day goes by where supply chain issues are
    not a story on the nightly news. And while this deepening project will
    help to improve the efficiency of waterborne cargo, it was actually
    envisioned well before the COVID-19 pandemic exposed the
    vulnerabilities of the national supply chain. The Port of Long Beach
    has long been focused on making every aspect of our operations more
    resilient. From increasing our rail capacity to reducing dwell times
    for shippers and improving air quality, we have always been focused on
    the bigger picture. And deepening the Port is a key component of that
    bigger picture.
        As the world's shipping fleet has produced larger ships, the
    existing channel depths and widths do not all meet the draft
    requirements of the fleet of vessels that call on the Port. Tide
    restrictions, light loading, lightering, and other operational
    inefficiencies result in increased transportation costs. The deepening
    project will improve conditions for current and future container and
    liquid bulk vessel operations in regards to safety, reliability, and
    waterborne transportation efficiencies. Features of the project
    include:
          Deepening the Approach Channel from -76 feet to -80 feet
          Bend easing within portions of the Main Channel to -76
    feet
          Constructing an approach channel and turning basin to
    Pier J South to a depth of -55 feet
          Deepening portions of the West Basin from -50 feet to a
    depth of -55 feet
          Deepening Pier J South and perform berth dredging within
    the Pier J South Slip to -55 feet
          Performing structural improvements to Pier J breakwaters
    to allow deepening to -55 feet
          Constructing a new electric dredge substation

        In turn, the deepening project will result in immediate and
    quantifiable national and local benefits including reducing air
    emissions and improving vessel maneuvering. The Chief's Report shows
    that this investment has a highly favorable benefit to cost ratio of
    3.5 to 1.
        Benefits that will be realized by the project include reduced
    lightering of liquid bulk vessels, and reduced light-loading of
    container vessels; reduced transportation costs; and the potential for
    beneficial reuse of dredge material.
        Improving navigational efficiencies reduces emissions of air
    pollutants and greenhouse gasses. Reductions in harmful air emissions
    will benefit disadvantaged and diverse communities surrounding the Port
    of Long Beach and reduce the climate impacts of Port operations.
        Furthermore, the project will dredge out surface sediments exposing
    the cleanest native sediments at depth, providing an enhanced habitat
    for marine organisms.
        The largest liquid bulk ships that call at the Port, call at Berth
    T121 at Pier T Echo. They are VLCCs (very large crude carriers). The
    large vessel calling at Berth T121 was I believe the Taqah (1/31/2018).
    Berth T121 is the only VLCC berth on the west coast of the U.S. VLCCs
    are approximately 300,000-325,000 metric tons dead weight and have a
    capacity of over 2 million barrels of product. Fully loaded, these
    vessels draft 70 feet. Because of their size and the manner in which
    they behave during maneuvering, if they are fully loaded and drafting
    70 feet, the approach to Queens Gate needs to be at -80, Mean Lower Low
    Water (elevation of sea floor) to ensure the ships do not touch bottom
    during nearly all weather and tide conditions. Once inside Queens Gate
    and moving through our -76, MLLW Main Channel, these ships require the
    ``bend easing'' (smoothing out the sharp corners) of our Main Channel
    to transit from Queens Gate to Berth T121 under nearly all weather and
    tide conditions. The reason these ships don't need -80, MLLW inside
    Queens Gate is that the wind and wave conditions are mitigated by our
    federal breakwater.
        Today, VLCCs calling Berth T121 are limited to a maximum draft of
    69 feet under optimal conditions and use of a sophisticated system
    called PROTIDE that analyzes wave, weather, and vessel data to predict
    whether the vessel has sufficient under-keel clearance to reach the
    berth safely. Much of the time, these vessels are limited to drafts
    less than 69 feet due to less than optimal weather and tide conditions.
    The Taqah called the Port drafting the maximum allowable 69 feet. Each
    additional foot of draft can mean an additional 35,000-40,000 barrels
    of product.
        When our project with the USACE is conducted, these ships will call
    at maximum capacity under most all weather and tide conditions without
    waiting offshore.
        Like any major infrastructure investment, the path to getting to a
    signed Chief's Report was neither straight nor narrow. But in the end,
    the process produced a project that, when built, will serve generations
    to come. There is an area of the deepening project feasibility process
    that I would like to call out as an example of collaboration and
    innovation. It could have been showstoppers for the process. However,
    through our long standing relationship with the Corps we were able to
    work through the issue as it presented itself and find common ground
    through constant communication and a trusted partnership.
        The issue we faced during the feasibility study was a misalignment
    between the timeline presented under the Corps SMART Planning process
    and the Port's own masterplan process. About two-years into the
    feasibility study process it became apparent that the Corps study was
    accelerating at a faster pace than the Port's master plan. We fully
    acknowledge that asking the Corps to go slower is an unusual request
    for this committee to hear, but that is exactly what needed to happen.
    Through a concerted effort, we secured the support of our congressional
    delegation to ask the Corps to deviate from the three-year parameters
    of SMART Planning. We remain grateful for the coordination of the
    Corps' chain of command starting at the district level all of the way
    up to the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works
    for taking into account the unique situation in Long Beach and
    adjusting the federal feasibility study timeline accordingly.
        Overall, I am also very pleased to see changes that the Corps is
    making to ensure that combating climate change and advancing equity are
    incorporated into the feasibility study process. A more comprehensive
    look at project benefits is long overdue and I applaud efforts
    undertaken by this committee in previous WRDA bills to give the Corps
    the tools and resources to modernize their policies and procedures.
        In my role as Chairman of the Board of Directors of the American
    Association of Port Authorities, I recognize the importance of the
    Corps in maintaining and improving the country's navigation assets. The
    Port of Long Beach, much like the ports around this great nation, rely
    on the expertise and experience of the Corps to ensure that our ports
    remain open and our economy remains strong.
        I thank the Committee for prioritizing the needs of the Harbor
    Maintenance Trust Fund in WRDA 2020. Having a schedule to distribute
    the estimated $9.3 billion in unspent HMT tax collections will go a
    long way towards restoring the `trust' in Trust Funds. I look forward
    to working with the Committee, through your oversight role, to ensure
    that the intent of Congress is reflected in the Corps' development of a
    master plan to distribute HMT funds to federally authorized navigation
    projects.
        In closing, we are thrilled to have reached the Chief's Report
    milestone to be eligible for a construction authorization. The Port of
    Long Beach respectfully requests the Committee's support for including
    this project in WRDA 2022. Thank you for the opportunity to testify
    today. I look forward to your questions.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Cordero, very much for your
    comments. I would like to recognize now Chairman DeFazio to
    introduce our next witness. Mr. Chairman, you are recognized.
        Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is my pleasure to
    introduce the next witness. Jim Middaugh has an extraordinary
    resume of work both at the city level, State level, and
    regional level on environmental issues and other major issues
    of concern.
        In this case, he is bringing together a comprehensive
    approach for the metropolitan region of Portland with the
    Multnomah County Drainage District and Urban Flood Safety and
    Water Quality District. It is an extraordinarily important
    organization. The threats are extraordinary, Portland Airport
    among the many, in terms of the levees. And we will hear more
    in his testimony. He also is very distinguished in having
    worked as my first press secretary many years ago. Thank you,
    Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. DeFazio, for the very fine
    comments. Mr. Middaugh, you may proceed.
        Mr. Middaugh. Thank you, Chair DeFazio, best job I ever
    had, I have to say. Except for maybe this one. This one is
    really good, too. But, Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano,
    Ranking Members Graves and Rouzer, members of the committee,
    thank you so much for the opportunity to testify today and for
    your efforts to keep our infrastructure in good shape.
        As the chair said, my name is Jim Middaugh, and I am the
    executive director of four special districts that serve as the
    non-Federal sponsor of the 27-mile federally authorized
    Portland Metro Levee System.
        Well, there are four districts responsible for Portland
    area levees. We do operate as a single system with a unified
    staff. We are currently, as the chair had mentioned,
    consolidating into a single new district to ensure we
    efficiently and effectively meet our local obligations.
        But before I get to our project, I really want to take a
    moment to highlight the Corps' important role in our region.
    From flood protection, to energy generation, to recreation, to
    dredging, to navigation, the Corps connects the Pacific
    Northwest to the world's markets and is an important part of
    our community. And Oregon and the Northwest would certainly be
    less safe and less vibrant without the Corps.
        Which brings me to our project. Our system in Portland was
    built in the 1930s to protect the region from the Columbia
    River, which is, if you don't know, the fourth largest in the
    Nation by volume. The Columbia drains parts of Canada, Montana,
    Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. It is an area roughly the size
    of Texas. And the Portland regions sits near the bottom of that
    basin.
        Simply put, the Portland region is the largest urban area
    in the Columbia River watershed. And our levees were built over
    eight decades ago to protect what was then farmland that has
    long since transformed into a dense urban landscape of
    businesses, homes, and critical infrastructure.
        We are part of the Corps rehabilitation and inspection
    program, and we work really hard to fulfill our local
    maintenance obligations. But like Lieutenant General Spellmon,
    who testified before you recently, said, due to changing
    conditions and increased risks, to keep people safe, the Corps
    needs partners. And so do we.
        Fortunately, following a series of major hurricanes,
    Congress wisely passed a storm-related supplemental
    appropriations bill during 2018. And the Portland Metro Levee
    System was among 39 projects that received Federal funds
    designed to help prevent future disasters.
        Because we have done a lot of work locally before the Corps
    study was authorized, the recommended plan was completed ahead
    of schedule and under budget. The plan provides a roadmap for
    critically needed investments to protect underserved
    communities and improve the resilience of our system in the
    face of increased river flows and extreme rain events that are
    happening across the globe.
        In short, with your partnership and support, our project
    will fulfill congressional direction to help prevent major
    disasters. The project is important because there is an at-risk
    community of 42,000 people behind our levees, and the
    protective flood plain sustains more than 59,000 jobs and $16
    billion in annual economic activity.
        Many of these jobs are in manufacturing and other
    industries that provide on-the-job training, living wages,
    benefits, and a chance for advancement for people without
    college degrees.
        The levees also protect two airports, including the award-
    winning Portland International, three interstate highways,
    multiple transit and rail lines, regional electricity
    transmission facilities, backup drinking water wells for a
    significant part of Oregon's population, a new U.S. Postal
    Service processing center, and a U.S. Air National Guard base.
    There are also more than 2,000 acres of parks and natural areas
    that provide habitat for multiple species and close-in access
    to nature for underserved people.
        But just as important, the Corps did a great job planning
    actions that avoid critical habitat, which is why Federal
    natural resource agencies found the project would have no
    significant environmental impacts.
        One of the most complex and important actions in the plan
    is replacing an old railroad embankment that is currently used
    as a key part of our system. It is the same embankment that
    breached in May 1948 and led to the destruction of the city of
    Vanport and displacement of more than 18,000 people.
        Our own work in the Corps study document the ongoing risk
    of increasingly frequent rain-on-snow events in the Northwest,
    and unprecedented rainfall events, and the severe impacts they
    will create without more investment in our system.
        Fortunately, our recommended plan will improve life safety
    behind the levees by 70 percent and significantly reduce the
    chance of flooding for decades.
        And while I have a chance to talk with you today, I also
    want to express our support for ongoing improvements in how the
    Corps projects are evaluated. We stand with our colleagues at
    the National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management
    Agencies in believing the BCR process should reflect the
    significant benefits of avoiding development and maintaining
    habitat and recreation in areas that are of significant risk of
    flooding.
        Congress and the Corps made significant investments in
    Greater Portland's flood safety infrastructure 80 years ago.
    Those investments helped our region become the great place it
    is today. Now, the livelihoods of people throughout the
    Northwest rely on the levee system's continued protection. As
    local sponsors, we are ready to pay our share and do our part
    to move this project forward.
        Therefore, it is my honor on behalf of everyone in Oregon,
    and, in fact, the entire Northwest, to ask you to authorize the
    Portland Metro Levee System project in the 2022 Water Resources
    Development Act. Thank you, again, for your time and
    consideration. I am happy to answer any questions you may have.
        [Mr. Middaugh's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Jim Middaugh, Executive Director, Multnomah
                   County Drainage District, Portland, Oregon
        Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Graves, and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, thank you for the opportunity to testify about
    the efforts to reduce flood risks for the greater Portland region.
        My name is Jim Middaugh, I am the executive director of Multnomah
    County Drainage District (MCDD) and its companion districts that serve
    as the non-federal sponsors of the 27-mile federally authorized and
    constructed Portland Metro Levee System located along the lower
    Columbia River in the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area.
        MCDD appreciates this Committee's commitment to the biannual Water
    Resources Development Act and Chairman DeFazio's steadfast support of
    the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) civil works mission, without
    which our region would be faced with a significant challenge and
    limited tangible solutions. MCDD received a signed Chief's Report for
    the Portland Metro Levee System project last summer. Passage of the
    WRDA 2022 bill is a critical step in securing greater water
    infrastructure resiliency for this important international trade
    corridor.
        For those of you who have flown into the Portland International
    Airport, you've seen, but may not have noticed the levee system I'm
    talking about. These levees, originally constructed in the late 1930s,
    are the first line of defense in holding back the Columbia River, the
    fourth largest in the nation by average discharge volume.
        Although the levees largely have performed well, as we experience
    more frequent and severe storms, the levees are showing signs of their
    age and their structural integrity is threatened along with the lives
    and livelihoods of everyone who lives and works in this vibrant region.
    We are proud partners with the Corps on a feasibility study which will
    help to ensure greater Portland will address the challenges of our
    changing climate.
        The community located behind the Portland Metro Levee System is a
    cornerstone of the regional, statewide, and national economy. It
    creates more than $16 billion in annual economic activity and $7.2
    billion in assessed property values. The levees also reduce the risk of
    flooding for:
          An at-risk population of approximately 42,000 people
    during the day and 8,000 people at night.
          59,000 jobs provided by nearly 2,500 businesses,
    including more than half of our county's manufacturing and warehouse
    jobs, which provide living wages and opportunities for advancement to
    Americans without four-year degrees.
          The Portland International Airport, which serves nearly
    20 million passengers annually and moves millions of tons of goods each
    year, and the Troutdale Airport, which houses one of the largest
    combined helicopter and airline flight schools in the country.
          Three interstate highways.
          A light rail transit line that provides service to
    thousands of riders.
          A Class 1 freight rail line.
          Critical regional electricity transmission facilities
    owned by the Bonneville Power Administration, Pacific Power, and
    Portland General Electric.
          Back up drinking water supply for more than one million
    people.
          An US Air National Guard Base that is home to the 142nd
    Fighter Wing, which provides critical 24/7 air defense for the greater
    Pacific Northwest, and to the 304th Air Force Reserve Rescue Squadron,
    a rapid response search and rescue unit.
          A new $93 million US Postal Service processing center.
          More than 2,000 acres of parks and natural spaces that
    provide habitat to multiple endangered and protected species and
    provide access to nature for underserved communities.

        I am here today on behalf of the non-federal sponsors of the PMLS
    and Levee Ready Columbia, a coalition of public, private, and nonprofit
    organizations that have come together to modernize our flood safety
    infrastructure and the way it is managed. Our goal is to ensure our
    system meets federal safety standards and the needs of the region,
    state, and nation for the next generation and beyond.
        Levee Ready Columbia completed the first comprehensive geotechnical
    assessment of the levees to determine their condition, finding several
    significant vulnerabilities that would need to be improved to meet
    FEMA's standards, as well as the safety needs of the region and the
    increasing flood safety demands created by climate change.
        Thanks to our ongoing partnership with the Corps Portland District,
    Northwestern Division and Headquarters--and the steadfast support of
    Oregon's Congressional Delegation--the PMLS was designated for a Corps'
    Feasibility Study through the Balanced Budget Act of 2018. The study
    leveraged our previous work and conducted an even more thorough
    investigation of the infrastructure. And, it created a Recommended Plan
    to increase the resilience and operability of the system.
        The study was completed early and under budget and a Chief's Report
    was signed in August 2021. I'll note that when we started this process,
    Lt. General Scott Spellmon was serving as the Commander of the Corps
    Northwestern Division. The commitment and support he provided for this
    study in its early days were reflected by his recent signing of the
    project's Chiefs Report in his current role as the Corps' Chief of
    Engineers.
        During Lieutenant General Spellmon's appearance before this
    Committee just a few weeks ago, he remarked that the Corps doesn't do
    anything alone. Just as the Corps needs its partners to tackle complex
    infrastructure challenges, the Portland region needed the expertise and
    guiding hand of the Corps during the feasibility process. We are
    grateful to have received the support of the federal government.
        The designation of a ``new start study'' and the completion of the
    Corps' SMART planning process was an important opportunity for our
    region, providing us with a much deeper knowledge of the limits and
    vulnerabilities of our current levee system; the economic benefits the
    system provides the region, state, and nation; the risks we face
    annually, and the risks posed by evolving river conditions and climate
    change.
        The Recommended Plan includes approximately $130 million in
    investments and has a benefit cost ratio of 3.7 to 1. This plan
    addresses major vulnerabilities in the system including constructing a
    real levee alongside an old railroad embankment that has served as the
    western edge of the system for more than 80 years--even though it was
    never intended or designed to be a levee. This is the same railroad
    embankment that breached on May 31, 1948, leading to the inundation and
    destruction of the city of Vanport, the death of at least 15 people,
    and the displacement of nearly 20,000 people. Even though the
    destruction of Vanport was part of the impetus for the international
    Columbia River Treaty among Canada and the United States, which is
    currently under renegotiation dozens of years later, the vulnerable
    infrastructure that failed requires our attention and our investment.
        While the benefit-to-cost ratio of our project is favorable, we
    appreciate the direction Congress provided in previous WRDA bills to
    improve how Corps projects are evaluated. A more comprehensive approach
    that incorporates climate, equity and natural areas would certainly
    yield an even more favorable BCR for this project. For example, the
    western end of our project area is largely open space.
        Following the devastation of the Vanport flood, the region made the
    conscious decision to maintain the area for recreation and habit
    instead of rebuilding neighborhoods in a vulnerable area. That decision
    has served the region well. However, we were surprised to learn that
    recreational areas carry little to no economic value when it comes to
    the Corps' benefit to cost formula.
        When it comes to reducing flood risks and wise use of floodplains,
    we think the current BCR process could better reflect the significant
    benefits of maintaining habitat and recreation in areas at significant
    risk of flooding. We hope current efforts to develop a more
    comprehensive approach to BCR calculations will be developed to help
    worthy communities nationwide meet the appropriately high bar of the
    federal system.
        While we have been working to find ways to improve the
    infrastructure at the local level, we've also been working to make
    changes to ensure we are the best possible local sponsors of the
    system. We are transforming four individual century-old drainage
    districts to one more modern and sustainable agency ready to support
    the ongoing operations, maintenance, and capital investments needed to
    meet the flood safety needs of the region.
        Thanks to the support of the Oregon legislature and the Levee Ready
    Columbia coalition, we are making great strides to complete this
    transition and we are ready to meet the local cost share requirements
    to move into the design phase with the Corps right away. Should
    Congress provide appropriations, we are also on track to advance the
    construction phase of the project by federal fiscal year 2025.
        Finally, I would like to associate MCDD with testimony submitted by
    the National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies.
    NAFSMA's WRDA 2022 priorities include creating a more responsive and
    flexible federal system to address the nation's diverse flood risk
    reduction challenges. While not every NAFSMA WRDA 2022 priority is
    directly applicable to the Portland region, we stand in support of our
    fellow NAFSMA members who are working to address the unique
    characteristics of their watersheds and changing climates.
        Congress and the Corps made significant investments in this
    infrastructure 80 years ago. Those investments helped our region become
    the economic powerhouse it is today. Now, the economic livelihoods of
    people throughout Oregon and the Pacific Northwest, and the health and
    safety of the river, are reliant on continued protection provided by
    this infrastructure. On behalf of the local sponsors and the many
    people and species that rely on it, please renew your investment by
    authorizing the Portland Metro Levee System project in the 2022 Water
    Resources Development Act.
        Thank for the opportunity to share this information with you today.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Middaugh, for your
    comments. And we now turn to Ms. Hill-Gabriel, you may proceed.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer,
    Chairman DeFazio, and members of the subcommittee, thank you so
    much for the opportunity to join you here today. I am Julie
    Hill-Gabriel, the vice president for water conservation and
    serving as the interim vice president for coastal conservation
    at the National Audubon Society.
        Audubon's mission is to protect birds in the places they
    need for today and tomorrow. But for birds, just like people,
    water is life. And that is why water conservation is the key
    focus of Audubon's work. And because advancing principles of
    equity, diversity, inclusion, and belonging is a strategic
    imperative for Audubon, we are focused on ensuring that the
    conservation programs we support complement the needs of
    underserved communities and support the need for additional
    Tribal partnerships like those highlighted by my fellow
    panelists today.
        We also recognize that climate change presents the single
    biggest challenge and threat to birds. Accelerating efforts to
    increase climate resilience must take center stage in the next
    Water Resources Development Act through things like increasing
    the use of natural infrastructure and nature-based solutions,
    while prioritizing investments in the Army Corps aquatic
    ecosystem restoration mission.
        This committee's leadership around the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act will help advance critical climate
    resilience through an unparalleled investment for ecosystem
    restoration like those in the Great Lakes and the Everglades.
        Now, the Everglades have garnered some of the most
    longstanding nonpartisan support among all conservation issues,
    especially in the State of Florida, where restoration efforts
    are essential for addressing recurrent toxic algae blooms, sea
    grass die-offs, and red tide that have plagued the State's
    coast for far too long.
        The IIJA, alongside increases in annual Federal
    appropriations, can serve as a catalyst for constructing many
    restoration projects that the subcommittee has authorized,
    going as far back as 2007.
        But while more Everglades projects come across the finish
    line, we must concurrently focus on the work that lies ahead
    like construction of the Everglades Agricultural Area
    Reservoir, the single most important project to provide
    benefits throughout that ecosystem.
        But big bold projects like the EAA Reservoir require budget
    flexibility. And budgeting tools like the use of incremental
    funding or continuing contracts clause can efficiently advance
    projects through annual appropriations rather than awarding
    piecemeal year-by-year contracts based on the partial funding
    that is available.
        Another place where bold action is needed is along the
    Nation's largest watershed in the Mississippi River.
    Restoration of the river at its delta along coastal Louisiana
    is top priority for Audubon where we have owned and managed
    over 26,000 acres for almost a century.
        Audubon supports efforts in WRDA to help address the
    ecological crisis in this region, including the confirmation
    that the lower Mississippi River comprehensive study was
    intended to be fully funded by the Federal Government. And Army
    Corps efforts can benefit from complementary initiatives like
    the Mississippi River Restoration and Resilience Initiative Act
    that is also before the Transportation and Infrastructure
    Committee.
        In addition to advancing critical ecosystem restoration
    projects, provisions in past WRDAs present important
    opportunities to incorporate the use of more resilient natural
    infrastructure to reduce the impacts of storms, flooding, or
    coastal erosion, and promote reliable water supply. These can
    include nature-based options like restoring wetlands, oyster
    reefs in coastal forests, and they can be used in place of or
    alongside traditional infrastructure, like seawalls, jetties,
    or levees.
        But despite clear statutory language in recent WRDA bills
    directing the Corps to advance the use of natural
    infrastructure, many measures are not yet being implemented.
    Some efforts, like an update to the principles, requirements,
    and guidelines have been delayed. And nature-based solutions
    are not being implemented uniformly across mission areas or
    districts. So, one option to support these approaches is to
    create a resilience directorate who can provide specific focus
    on facilitating the use of natural infrastructure across all
    areas in the Corps.
        Finally, it was heartening to hear Assistant Secretary
    Connor's comments in January about the potential for the Army
    Corps to play a greater role in addressing the unprecedented
    drought, wildfire, and water scarcity challenges in the West.
    Whether it is through a whole-of-Government approach or better
    understanding the part the Corps can play in advancing natural
    infrastructure options that address water scarcity, the Corps
    can and should be more engaged on those issues, like those
    around the Salton Sea that was also referenced by Secretary
    Crowfoot.
        Audubon stands ready to work with the Army Corps, this
    subcommittee, and other partners to find innovative and
    efficient ways to advance water infrastructure and help protect
    birds in the places they need. And at Audubon, we truly believe
    that where birds thrive, people prosper. Thank you again so
    much.
        [Ms. Hill-Gabriel's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Julie Hill-Gabriel, Vice President for Water
       Conservation and Acting Vice President for Coastal Conservation,
                            National Audubon Society
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and Members of the
    Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to represent the National
    Audubon Society (Audubon), to discuss the Water Resources Development
    Act (WRDA) of 2022. Audubon's mission is to protect birds and the
    places they need, today and tomorrow. Audubon represents 1.8 million
    members and has over 460 affiliated chapters, 23 state offices, and 41
    nature centers across the country.
        My name is Julie Hill-Gabriel, and I am Audubon's Vice President
    for Water Conservation, based in Washington, DC. I coordinate Audubon's
    water strategy across the U.S. Before beginning this role in 2018, I
    worked in Florida for 11 years as Audubon Florida's Deputy Director for
    policy, leading our Everglades restoration efforts and working closely
    with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) which is the federal
    sponsor for these restoration efforts. I am also currently serving as
    the Acting Vice President for our Coastal Conservation Program, which
    focuses on coastal stewardship, coastal resilience, marine
    conservation, and Gulf of Mexico restoration.
        Birds are telling us that urgent action is needed to increase
    climate resilience. Extreme weather events, lack of abundant and clean
    water, degraded coastal resources, and declining bird habitat are all
    threatening birds and communities across the country. Audubon's
    Survival by Degrees report shows that over 300 species of birds are at
    risk of extinction due to climate change.\1\ But, climate change is not
    just an ecological threat; last year, the country experienced 20
    weather and climate disaster events with losses exceeding $1 billion
    each. Tragically, these events resulted in the deaths of 688 Americans
    and continue to economically and ecologically impact the affected
    communities.\2\ We must act now--and quickly--to enact climate
    solutions for birds and people.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Wilsey, C, B Bateman, L Taylor, JX Wu, G LeBaron, R Shepherd, C
    Koseff, S Friedman, R Stone. Survival by Degrees: 389 Bird Species on
    the Brink. National Audubon Society: New York.
        \2\ NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) U.S.
    Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters (2022). www.ncdc.noaa.gov/
    billions.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        WRDA 2022 provides an opportunity to drive ecosystem restoration
    and climate resilience by ensuring that Army Corps policies and
    projects provide the maximum conservation and community benefits. The
    Army Corps can play a pivotal role in increasing and normalizing the
    use of natural infrastructure and nature-based solutions to address the
    challenges brought on by climate change. The Army Corps' ecosystem
    restoration efforts provide important lessons that demonstrate the
    value of replicating natural ecosystem functions. There is also an
    opportunity, and a need, to rethink flood mitigation and navigation
    projects to increase the focus on climate resilience and natural
    infrastructure in other Army Corps mission areas. While a number of new
    authorities in WRDA 2018 and WRDA 2020 enabled and encouraged the
    broader use of natural infrastructure in Army Corps projects, there is
    a need to accelerate the pace of project execution and policy
    interpretation that incorporate natural infrastructure.
        Ecosystem restoration projects can also address historic
    injustices. Chair DeFazio recently stated that ``[o]ur rural, Tribal,
    and disadvantaged communities cannot be left behind as we work to build
    and upgrade our water resources to meet the demands of the 21st
    century''.\3\ Here at Audubon, we fully support infrastructure
    investments and restoration projects that not only protect birds and
    provide wildlife habitat, but prioritize those communities at the most
    risk from climate change and who are facing economic disadvantages due
    to historic injustice.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Representative Peter DeFazio, Chair, House Transportation and
    Environment Committee. Opening Remarks for Proposals for a Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022: Administration Priorities. January
    12, 2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While my testimony today focuses on WRDA and related policies and
    projects, I want to thank this Committee for its work supporting the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). The IIJA, which provides
    additional authorizations and appropriations for a range of
    conservation and community programs, included historic amounts of
    funding for transportation networks, climate resilience and clean
    energy programs, and numerous conservation and clean water programs
    across the country. As agencies begin to release their spending plans,
    the conservation community recognizes the ongoing need to ensure these
    dollars are implemented swiftly and in line with Congressional intent.
    I note several areas below where additional IIJA dollars, supplementing
    regular appropriations, are poised to significantly accelerate the pace
    and breadth of conservation projects, benefitting local communities
    throughout the country.
        The IIJA provides historic levels of funding for a number of
    critical programs, but these programs remain dependent on receiving
    necessary baseline amounts of annual appropriations dollars. FY23
    budget requests should maintain funding levels compared to FY22 and, in
    many cases, include increases in the regular, annual appropriations
    requests to make up for previous years of funding deficits.
        Finally, I urge flexibility in budgeting tools that can enable the
    Army Corps to efficiently complete projects where relevant. By
    incrementally funding contracts with annual appropriations, rather than
    awarding year-by-year contracts based on partial funding amounts, the
    Army Corps can advance projects with the greatest impact, rather than
    breaking down projects in smaller pieces. For example, the use of a
    continuing contracts clause helped save between $50-100 million and 2-3
    years of project work on the C-44 reservoir in Florida. Without the
    ability to utilize incremental funding, the Army Corps has to execute
    smaller annual contracts, which create additional costs and delays due
    to administrative, contractual, oversight, design, and mobilization/
    demobilizations costs. These smaller annual contracts expose the Army
    Corps to additional liability.
        Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Mission of the U.S. Army Corps of
                                   Engineers
        The Army Corps aquatic ecosystem restoration activities seek to
    restore significant ecosystem function, structure, and dynamic
    processes. The Army Corps' ecosystem restoration efforts are positioned
    to provide significant climate resilience benefits for communities and
    wildlife and should be prioritized alongside flood control, navigation,
    and other Army Corps missions. Audubon supports ongoing ecosystem
    restoration activities across the U.S., including at the Everglades,
    along Coastal Louisiana, throughout the Mississippi River corridor, at
    the Great Lakes, in other vulnerable coastal areas, and throughout
    other iconic ecosystems that are globally significant for birds and
    people.
    Restoring America's Everglades
        The Everglades is a unique ecological treasure that provides
    drinking water for one in three Floridians. Clean and sufficient
    freshwater forms a critical component of Florida's tourism economy and
    is necessary to support birds like Roseate Spoonbill, Snail Kite, and
    Snowy Egret. As projected population growth and impacts from climate
    change put more pressure on South Florida's environment, Everglades
    restoration is increasingly urgent.
        WRDA 2000 authorized the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan
    (CERP), which represents the Corps' largest aquatic ecosystem
    restoration initiative. After over 20 years of progress and bi-partisan
    support, we are seeing returns on the initial investments in CERP as
    projects are completed and come online. Just this past November, we
    celebrated the ribbon cutting of the C-44 Reservoir and Stormwater
    Treatment Area, which provides, in total, 60,500 acre-feet of new water
    storage and 3,600 acres of new wetlands. This project is a component of
    the Indian River Lagoon system, which is the most biologically diverse
    estuarine system in the continental United States and is home to more
    than 3,000 species of plants and animals.
        The new investment of $1.1 billion identified in the Army Corps'
    IIJA spend plan for Everglades restoration will be a catalyst for
    accelerating a number of restoration projects, benefitting this
    economic driver for the State of Florida. While more projects cross the
    finish line and provide important lessons for ecosystem restoration
    efforts around the world, we must concurrently focus on the additional
    work that lies ahead.
        WRDA 2020 included positive additions to the ongoing work in South
    Florida, including the authorization of the Loxahatchee River Watershed
    Restoration Project and a recommitment to the Everglades Agricultural
    Area Reservoir (EAA Reservoir) as part of the Central Everglades
    Planning Project (CEPP). The CEPP provides a clear model for more
    efficient Army Corps planning. A number of smaller, but inter-related
    project components were pulled into one larger planning effort,
    providing a more comprehensive view of the projects' impacts and
    benefits. At the same time, more robust stakeholder engagement allowed
    new ideas to be incorporated during the process and helped build a
    sense of trust. Finally, the plan was developed in just 18 months.
        The EAA Reservoir is the single most important project for
    benefitting multiple parts of the Everglades. When high rainfall levels
    cause wetlands, lakes, and other water storage areas to fill to
    capacity, billions of gallons of freshwater are discharged from Lake
    Okeechobee to the St. Lucie and Caloosahatchee estuaries. When too much
    freshwater reaches the estuaries, excess nutrients and changes in the
    balance of fresh and saltwater can cause massive algae blooms, which
    harm submerged vegetation, fish, and water birds. Harmful bacteria from
    the algae blooms can make the water in some places dangerous for human
    contact, impacting the local economies and quality of life.
        At the same time that the estuaries in the northern part of the
    Everglades are often impacted by too much freshwater, massive seagrass
    die-offs have occurred in the Southern Everglades and Florida Bay
    because of insufficient freshwater. Without a source of freshwater from
    the upstream Everglades, the Southern Everglades is unable to recover
    from dry conditions that alter the delicate balance of fresh and
    saltwater, which puts drinking water supplies at risk.
        Storing water south of Lake Okeechobee in the EAA Reservoir will
    provide an outlet for water being discharged to fragile coastal
    estuaries east and west of the Lake Okeechobee while concurrently
    holding water that can be cleaned and sent south to the Southern
    Everglades and Florida Bay, while recharging the Biscayne aquifer.
        In WRDA 2022, there is the potential to continue the momentum for
    America's Everglades with the following items:
          The Lake Okeechobee Watershed Project is aimed at storing
    water north of Lake Okeechobee to attenuate water flows into the Lake.
    This project includes an important element of natural infrastructure,
    where 3,600 acres of wetlands will be restored in an area called
    Paradise Run and an additional 1,200 acres of an area called Kissimmee
    Run. As this project moves forward, Audubon encourages a continued
    focus on additional options for water storage throughout the full
    extent of the Lake Okeechobee Watershed.
          A number of Post-Authorization Change Reports will help
    to continue progress, including for the C-44 Reservoir and Adaptive
    Assessment and Management.
          Audubon also urges that a mechanism for incremental
    funding like the continuing contracts clause or similar approach be
    utilized for the EAA Reservoir. The largest and most important contract
    for that project is estimated to cost $2.1 billion, which is likely to
    rely on federal funding over a number of years. In order to allow the
    Army Corps to complete this kind of high-impact project, the
    flexibility to accommodate this kind of funding mechanisms is critical.
    It is the most efficient and safest approach to build the reservoir,
    and will save significant taxpayer dollars in the long run compared
    with other approaches.
    Coastal Louisiana Restoration
        Louisiana's coastal wetlands represent 40% of all wetlands in the
    continental U.S. and provide an essential buffer to communities and
    industries from storms. The Mississippi River Delta supports $9.3
    billion in annual ecotourism activity, along with $1.8 billion in
    recreational fishing spending. Moreover, this threatened landscape
    accounts for 30% of all commercial fishing landings in the continental
    U.S. and hosts five of the nation's 15 largest shipping ports by cargo
    volume. Additionally, coastal restoration in southeast Louisiana has
    provided 32,000 jobs with an average annual wage of $69,277 per year.
    Healthy coastal areas provide habitat for birds like Brown Pelican,
    Tricolored Heron, and Golden-crowned Kinglet.
        Unfortunately, Louisiana is facing a longstanding, existential
    land-loss crisis: the equivalent of a football field of the state's
    coastal wetlands vanishes into open water, on average, every 100
    minutes. Since the 1930s, Louisiana has lost over 2,000 square miles of
    land, an area roughly the size of Delaware. Reversing land loss in
    Louisiana is a coordinated and major priority at the federal, state,
    and local level, in support of endangered coastal communities, economic
    activity, vital natural systems, and wildlife populations.
        Audubon joined with our Restore the Mississippi River Delta
    Coalition colleagues earlier this year to highlight three important
    WRDA 2022 items related to coastal Louisiana. We urge the Committee to
    include these recommendations in the bill:
          Clarify that the Lower Mississippi River Comprehensive
    Study (Sec. 213 of WRDA 2020) be funded at full federal expense;
          Clarify that Mississippi River Gulf Outlet (MRGO)
    ecosystem restoration (Sec. 7013 of WRDA 2007) be funded at full
    federal expense; and
          Authorize the federal plan for the Southwest Coastal
    Louisiana Project.
    Mississippi River Restoration
        The Mississippi River is one of the nation's most important natural
    assets, providing drinking water to over 20 million Americans. The
    river's watershed encompasses 40% of the contiguous United States and
    spans 31 states.
        The diverse habitats along the river support over 325 species of
    birds, including rare and threatened species like King Rail,
    Prothonotary Warbler, and Brown-headed Nuthatch. Critical wetlands and
    flooded forests created by the river and its tributaries are not only
    vital to birds, but to people, from the headwaters of Lake Itasca where
    Manoomin (wild rice), the most important cultural and sacred food of
    the Anishinaabe, is harvested, to iconic cultural centers like St.
    Louis and New Orleans. The river is a national treasure and boasts
    tremendous ecological as well as economic importance for the nation.
        Unfortunately, the river is in dire need of restoration and
    recovery for the birds, wildlife, people, and communities who depend on
    it. From the headwaters to the delta, the Mississippi River suffers
    from excess pollution, invasive species, wetlands loss and destruction,
    ongoing disruption to its natural hydrology, and extreme storm events
    exacerbated by climate change.
        Water level management can produce highly effective habitat
    restoration on the Upper Mississippi River at a fraction of the cost of
    other types of restoration actions. The Corps has documented that
    modest modifications to lock and dam operations, known as growing
    season drawdowns, can produce significant and long-lasting benefits
    without any adverse impact to navigation. Reducing water levels behind
    a lock and dam by just one to two feet during the growing season can
    expose thousands of acres of mudflats, creating optimal conditions for
    aquatic plants, fish, and wildlife to flourish. The enhanced ecosystem
    can then process nutrients, trap sediment, and stabilize the shoreline
    all while maintaining the navigation channel. However, despite the
    demonstrated benefits of water level management and broad-based support
    for it, the Corps has resisted efforts to implement it more broadly in
    the Upper Mississippi River-Illinois Waterway Navigation System. To
    address this problem, Congress should provide the Corps with clear
    authority and direction to implement a routine and systemic water level
    management program while avoiding adverse impacts to navigation.
        The Army Corps' Upper Mississippi River Restoration (UMRR) program
    provides numerous opportunities to restore the waterway. The UMRR
    program includes projects that improve fish and wildlife habitat,
    providing protection, nesting, and feeding areas for a highly diverse
    set of fish, birds, mussels, reptiles, amphibians, and mammals,
    including a number of rare and endangered species. We urge the Army
    Corps to include forested floodplains ecosystems for habitat
    restoration under the UMRR program moving forward.
        In addition to UMRR, Congress now has an opportunity to support
    additional Mississippi River restoration through the Mississippi River
    Restoration and Resilience Initiative (MRRRI) (H.R. 4204). This bill,
    introduced by Rep. McCollum and falling under the jurisdiction of the
    Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, would create a voluntary
    program through the EPA to improve water quality and community
    resilience by leveraging existing programs along the river. Similar to
    the successful Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, MRRRI would protect
    and restore habitat throughout the Mississippi River corridor and
    prioritize efforts to address disproportionate impacts to communities
    of color, rural communities, and economically disadvantaged
    communities. I urge this committee to swiftly consider and pass the
    MRRRI bill.
    Addressing Asian Carp in the Great Lakes
        The Great Lakes represent 20% of the surface freshwater resources
    on Earth and are the source of drinking water for 30 million Americans.
    Threatened and declining bird species, such as Black Tern, Wood Thrush,
    and Black-crowned Night Heron depend on the Lakes and their coastal
    habitats. One of the greatest ecological threats to the health of the
    Great Lakes is the spread of invasive exotic Asian carp. This species
    poses a serious threat to the ecological health of the Great Lakes, and
    the people and economies these waters support. Right now, Asian carp
    have already wreaked havoc on the Mississippi and Illinois Rivers,
    outcompeting native fish for food and habitat, and creating a safety
    threat for people who recreate on these waterways.
        Asian carp are a real threat to the Great Lakes that demand quick
    action. The Great Lakes Mississippi River Interbasin Study-Brandon Road
    Report evaluated options to prevent the upstream transfer of Asian
    carp. We are encouraged to see that the Army Corps work plan for the
    IIJA includes $225 million for the Brandon Road project. We urge swift
    implementation of this project to stop this invasive threat and urge
    the Corps to increase the federal cost share to 100%.
        Furthermore, we were pleased to see the authorization of a Great
    Lakes coastal resiliency study in WRDA 2020 and we look forward to
    seeing this study fully funded to identify ways to safeguard coastal
    communities from erosion, flooding, and other impacts from changing
    lake levels.
    Western Water and the Salton Sea
        As the historic drought conditions, exacerbated by climate change,
    continue in the West, increasingly stark impacts are felt by
    communities, birds, fish, and other natural resources. The combination
    of drought and heatwaves can push birds to their physiological limits,
    leading to lethal dehydration. In drought times, birds may also
    congregate at the remaining dwindling water spots, causing conditions
    ripe for the spread of disease.
        As part of a Whole-of-Government approach, there are opportunities
    for the Army Corps to become more engaged in addressing drought in the
    West, especially in a changing climate. Audubon encourages the Army
    Corps to look into opportunities to address aquifer recharge, strategic
    water reuse, and other drought response activities, while coordinating
    with other federal agencies.
        One place where the impacts for birds and people are felt severely
    is in California's largest body of water: the Salton Sea. The Sea
    serves as a lifeline to millions of migratory birds along the Pacific
    flyway and is a critical piece of any effort to conserve Colorado River
    water. The communities surrounding the Sea were historically excluded
    from economic opportunities and suffer from multiple environmental
    injustices. As the Sea shrinks, the dust clouds are expanding,
    threatening public health. Audubon and our members are invested in on-
    the-ground efforts at the Sea, dedicating time and resources to
    science, education, policy, and community engagement. We are regularly
    the ``boots on the ground'' at the Sea through our conservation efforts
    and, over the years, we have been involved with the State of
    California's various pieces of legislation and plans related to the
    Salton Sea, most recently the Salton Sea Management Program (SSMP).
        Audubon supports efforts for the federal government, including the
    Army Corps, to expand its investments at the Sea and support
    California's efforts by expediting federal permit reviews and approvals
    for ongoing and future projects. The Army Corps can provide leadership
    and foster the prioritization of climate resilient strategies and
    multi-benefit infrastructure projects in priority places across the
    country, including at the Salton Sea, to provide water, habitat, and
    community benefits. At the Salton Sea, we see the need to:
          Provide stable and significant funding to allow for
    planning and implementation of climate resilience strategies with
    community involvement;
          Enhance coordination across key federal agencies (e.g.,
    the Corps, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Fish and Wildlife Service,
    the U.S. Geological Survey, the Bureau of Land Management, and the U.S.
    Department of Agriculture) to ensure durable and effective mitigation
    and restoration project implementation; and
          Enhance coordination among federal, state and local
    agencies on planning and funding with public engagement.
                 Facilitating the Use of Natural Infrastructure
        Natural infrastructure provides storm-buffering benefits that can
    be as or more effective than grey infrastructure. In addition, there
    are benefits provided by natural infrastructure that are often absent
    in grey infrastructure, making natural infrastructure an even more
    appealing approach to floodplain management. Natural infrastructure
    can:
          Provide habitat that supports the economically vital
    recreational and commercial seafood industries;
          Improve water quality;
          Be responsive to changing conditions, including sea level
    rise;
          Provide important habitat for birds and other wildlife;
    and
          Avoid negative impacts associated with grey
    infrastructure, like increased erosion.

        Provisions in WRDA 2018 and 2020 present important opportunities to
    incorporate the use of more resilient nature-based and natural
    infrastructure options to address extreme weather events including
    flood risk management projects and hurricane and storm risk reduction
    projects.
        Audubon's 2018 Natural Infrastructure Report demonstrated how
    federal investment in natural infrastructure will help increase
    preparedness of coastal communities and economies, while benefitting
    fish and wildlife, which also often provide a critical foundation for
    coastal economies.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ Natural Infrastructure Report: How natural infrastructure can
    shape a more resilient coast for birds and for people. January 2018.
    https://nas-national-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/
    audubon_infrastructure_jan192018.pdf.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Natural infrastructure alternatives can include nature-based
    systems such as restoring sand dunes, wetlands, oyster reefs and
    coastal forests in place of traditional human-built projects such as
    seawalls, jetties, levees, groins, bulkheads and riprap. This kind of
    ``grey'' infrastructure was traditionally promoted as the best long-
    term approach to flood management. But, natural infrastructure has been
    shown to provide significant, long-term and cost-competitive benefits
    for challenges such as flood reduction. For example, research published
    in the journal Ocean & Coastal Management reported that the average
    construction costs between natural and grey infrastructure are similar,
    but there are lower replacement costs with living shorelines, a form of
    natural infrastructure.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Bilkovic, Donna M., Molly Mitchell, Pam Mason, and Karen
    Duhring. 2016. The Role of Living Shorelines as Estuarine Habitat
    Conservation Strategies. Coastal Management 44(3): 161-174. https://
    www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08920753.2016.1160201.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        NOAA and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) have also
    identified several flood-reduction and resiliency benefits from a wide
    array of natural infrastructure systems. Natural features such as
    coastal marshes and wetlands, dune and beach systems, oyster and coral
    reefs, mangroves, forests, coastal rivers, as well as barrier islands,
    help minimize the impacts of storms, rising sea levels and other
    extreme events on nearby communities and infrastructure.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, ``Statement
    from NOAA Administrator Rick Spinrad on the signing of the Bipartisan
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.'' Nov. 15, 2021. https://
    www.noaa.gov/news-release/statement-from-noaa-administrator-rick-
    spinrad-on-signing-of-bipartisan-infrastructure-investment
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        WRDA 2020 included language changes to:
          Ensure that the Corps considers nature-based approaches
    for enhancing flood and storm resilience in feasibility studies and if
    a nature-based alternative is not selected, include an explanation of
    why natural infrastructure approaches are not recommended;
          Ensure consistent cost-sharing for natural infrastructure
    projects;
          Allow for development of natural infrastructure projects
    as part of the Corps continuing authorities program;
          Update planning guidance and require consideration of the
    best available science on effects of sea-level rise and inland flooding
    in the development of Corps projects and in the accounting of the long-
    term costs and benefits of a project;
          Waive cost share and provide important support to produce
    feasibility studies to assess measures to reduce flood risks in
    economically disadvantaged and rural communities;
          Require an update to the Principles, Requirements and
    Guidelines (PR&G) to ensure that the Corps is fully accounting for the
    regional economic development, environmental quality, and other social
    benefits that can be delivered by a project; and
          Provide much-needed direction to the Corps requiring
    consultation with communities of color, economically disadvantaged
    communities, and Tribal communities and requiring updates to Corps
    policies, guidance, and regulations to ensure that the Corps is
    considering the environmental justice and disproportionate impacts to
    communities from Corps projects and identifying appropriate
    alternatives to reduce or avoid impacts.

        The Committee should ensure the Corps is implementing these policy
    changes as swiftly as possible to expedite the use of natural
    infrastructure.
                       Beneficial Use of Dredged Material
        WRDA 2020 authorized 35 beneficial use of dredged materials (BUDM)
    pilot projects. Audubon has worked with the Army Corps and state
    partners to use dredged material to restore habitat that is important
    to birds and outdoor recreation economies. This work has created
    islands that provide excellent nesting habitat for birds such as Black
    Skimmer, Snowy Plover, and Least Tern, and is leading innovations in
    thin-layer dispersal of dredged sediment to protect tidal marsh habitat
    in the face of sea-level rise.
        Audubon looks forward to building upon our collaborative efforts in
    Connecticut, North Carolina, Maine, Maryland, Florida, Texas, and South
    Carolina. Audubon continues working to implement the Crab Bank project
    that was selected as a BUDM pilot project in 2019.
        In addition, Audubon supports on-going efforts within the Corps to
    develop best management practices that benefit shoreline-dependent
    species that can be incorporated into beneficial use of dredged
    material projects. More information can be found in a recent U.S. Army
    Engineer Research and Development Center Technical Note.\7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ Michael P. Guilfoyle, Jacob F. Jung, Richard A. Fischer and
    Dena D. Dickerson. Developing Best Management Practices for Coastal
    Engineering Projects that Benefit Atlantic Coast Shoreline-dependent
    Species. Technical Note developed by the U.S. Army Engineer Research
    and Development Center--Environmental Laboratory, April 2019.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Conservation Community Letter
        Finally, on January 24, Audubon joined with our conservation
    partners in sending a letter to this Committee, outlining additional
    recommendations to build additional progress to advance natural
    infrastructure in WRDA 2022 (attached). We thank the Committee for
    considering these suggestions, which include:
          Increasing Army Corps coordination on climate resilience
    and the use of natural infrastructure through a Resilience Directorate
    who can have a focus on growing this work across Army Corps mission
    areas;
          Properly Accounting for Project Costs and Benefits;
          Ensuring Compliance with Long-Standing Mitigation
    Requirements;
          Prioritizing Levee Setbacks to Advance Floodplain
    Resilience;
          Improving the Corps' Ability to Redress Environmental
    Injustice;
          Better Utilizing Federal and State Fish and Wildlife
    Expertise;
          Supporting Funding for Restoration and Resilience
    Projects with a Reduced or No Match Requirement;
          Supporting the Silver Jackets Program;
          Supporting Broad Expansion of Corps Technical Assistance
    Programs; and
          Enhancing Western Water-Related Infrastructure Resiliency
    through Natural Infrastructure.
        Audubon Opposes the One Lake Preconstruction Engineering Design
                             Demonstration Program
        Audubon has expressed opposition to any projects or activities on
    the Pearl River that involve destroying wetlands and wildlife habitat
    that will imperil birds, fish and wildlife, alter local and downstream
    river hydrology, impair water quality, or threaten public and
    environmental health. In WRDA 2018, Section 1176 sought to establish a
    demonstration program to advance a 2018 Integrated Draft Feasibility
    and Environmental Impact Statement for the Pearl River Basin,
    Mississippi, Federal Flood Risk Management Project, Hinds and Rankin
    Counties, Mississippi. The preferred alternative is known locally as
    the ``One Lake'' project.
        Audubon remains opposed to the One Lake/Pearl River project and
    urges the Army Corps to cancel this detrimental project.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify on these important
    issues. Audubon is ready to work with the Subcommittee and others to
    advance important water and coastal conservation issues looking ahead
    to the next WRDA in ways that will help protect birds and the places
    they need. We know that where birds thrive, people prosper.
                                   attachment
        [Editor's note: Ms. Hill-Gabriel submitted a letter as an
    attachment to her prepared statement which is retained in committee
    files and available online at https://docs.house.gov/meetings/PW/PW02/
    20220208/114380/HHRG-117-PW02-Wstate-Hill-GabrielJ-20220208-SD001.pdf ]

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Ms. Hill.
        Now we will move to our Members' questions.
        Thank you to all our witnesses very much.
        And we will start Member questions. Each Member will be
    recognized for 5 minutes. The votes are scheduled to start in
    about 1\1/2\ hours. We need to move the committee to be
    finished by then, we hope.
        Mr. DeFazio, you will begin. You are recognized.
        Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thanks again to
    all the witnesses.
        To Mr. Middaugh, you talked about the way the Corps is
    doing BCRs now and the fact that they are in the process of
    modernizing and updating that process with the principles,
    requirements, and guidelines. How would that benefit projects
    like the one you are working on?
        Mr. Middaugh. Thank you, Chair DeFazio. Well, just briefly,
    after the Vanport flood, the Portland region decided to set
    aside the area that had flooded for recreation and habitat
    purposes. And we were surprised in the process of working with
    the Corps that that provided almost no value in the BCR. And
    for us, that creates a really great opportunity to prevent
    future harm and to store floodwater. So, we would love to see
    projects like ours that recognize the value of protecting areas
    that frequently flood instead of only valuing those areas that
    are built out and at risk of flooding. So, we think it would
    make for safer projects across the Nation and help projects
    like ours advance in the process.
        Mr. DeFazio. That is an excellent point, and it is also an
    excellent point in terms of Federal flood insurance and
    having--you know, we are struggling with looking at chronically
    flooded areas and how we are going to deal with them and
    looking at ways to incentivize people to be bought out. In this
    case, that whole area was reserved, and that certainly is
    tremendously beneficial in terms of flood protection, storage,
    and also avoiding costs to the Federal Government.
        To Director Cordero, you have about seven specific things
    for your port that are going to increase efficiency as we all--
    anyone who has ever landed at L.A. has seen the line of ships
    out to sea. I have seen it a number of times. What is your
    timeline on those projects? And, how much will that mitigate
    the chokage we have?
        Mr. Cordero. Well, thanks for your question, Mr. Chairman.
    As you reference, our priority here at the Port of Long Beach
    is to increase transportation efficiencies. And, of course, in
    the era of COVID and the supply chain disruption that we are
    witnessing in every major container gateway, there are,
    needless to say, challenges.
        Now, with regard to the specificity here, currently, we
    have a number of vessels off the coast waiting to get into the
    port complex, which consists of Los Angeles and Long Beach. So,
    I think our timeline right now is we are working very hard with
    our stakeholders, under the leadership of the White House Port
    Envoy John Porcari. We meet two to three times a week to
    address the various issues that we need to address to mitigate
    capacity constraint at the terminals.
        So, the good news is we are making a lot of progress with
    regard to long-dwelled imported containers at the complex. And
    as to the vessels in terms of what we believe the timeline will
    be that we will get to some sense of normalcy, I think there
    are opinions that anywhere from 6 months to the end of the
    year. But on the other hand, again, I think it is fair to say
    that all this, we have to keep in mind, is COVID-based. It is a
    global supply chain issue.
        But the good news for the Nation's largest container port
    complex is we have made some headway with regard to how we are
    addressing the complaints and making sure that, again, the
    cargo moves. And on this note, I want to also emphasize our
    thanks to the men and women who work on the docks. There has
    not been a day that this port has closed. And so, these
    essential workers really have worked around the clock, so to
    speak, to make sure the Nation's commerce moves through this
    very important gateway.
        Mr. DeFazio. Now, we appreciate the efforts of all those at
    the port, going to 24/7 to help try and mitigate. And, of
    course, you are not the only chokepoint on the supply chain. We
    have tremendous inefficiencies at the distribution centers to
    which a lot of these goods are trucked. And that has only
    gotten worse over time ever since we abolished their obligation
    to pay for detention time. Because to them it is like, well, I
    don't care if you sit there for 6 hours. We don't want to put
    on another shift at night.
        So, we have to take a comprehensive approach. But I am
    pleased you are making progress, and that is good news.
        So, thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Rouzer, you are recognized.
        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mr. Bechtel, several questions, actually, I have for you.
    As we all know, communities across the country are facing
    serious supply chain challenges. And, of course, this
    underscores the importance of transportation and port
    infrastructure to the economy. What is the economic impact of
    the Houston Port region? And what threats does the region face
    from coastal storms? Then followup to that, how would the
    coastal Texas resiliency improvement plan help mitigate those
    risks?
        Mr. Bechtel. OK. I can speak--the imports through the Port
    of Houston directly impact on machinery, appliances,
    electronics: 11 States. Hardware construction materials: 12
    States. Automotive: 4 States. Chemicals, minerals, resins,
    plastics: 14 States. Retail consumer goods: 5 States. Steel and
    metals: 6. Food and drink: 9. Furniture: primarily 2 States,
    Florida and North Carolina.
        We also--the district is home to Port Beaumont, which is
    the number one military port in the United States. Obviously, a
    big part of the country is impacted by products that go through
    the Port of Houston. We need to protect the Port of Houston and
    the Houston Ship Channel area. There is no question about that.
        Did that answer your question?
        Mr. Rouzer. So, talk a little bit about how the coastal
    Texas resiliency improvement plan helps to mitigate some of
    those risks.
        Mr. Bechtel. Well, what we want to do is we want to build
    across the Houston Ship Channel at the Bolivar Roads, which is
    between the city of Galveston, Galveston Island and Bolivar
    Peninsula, ship gates across the Houston Ship Channel. The key
    component here is to prevent the presurge from coming into
    Galveston Bay. If we can do that, and we feel the gate system
    alone could supply about 65 percent of the protection that we
    need, that will go a long way to preventing the impact up the
    Houston Ship Channel, which is home to 140-plus plants,
    petrochemical plants and refineries along the Houston Ship
    Channel.
        In addition to that, the dunes and the beach improvements
    along the coast itself would do a lot to protect the
    residential areas along the upper Texas coast.
        Mr. Rouzer. So, the benefit would be pretty wide ranging,
    basically, is what you are saying?
        Mr. Bechtel. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Rouzer. Talk a little bit about some of the key
    features of the coastal Texas plan as it relates to the bay
    defense systems.
        Mr. Bechtel. Well, what we are looking at, in addition to
    the gates across the Bolivar Roads, which is about 2\1/2\ miles
    across, the in-bay, say, the mainland projects would include
    gates at Clear Lake and Dickinson Bayou, ring levee around the
    city of Galveston to protect it from the floods from the
    backside. Galveston has had protection from the Galveston
    seawall for over 100 years now, since the 1900 storm. And the
    only flooding that impacts the city of Galveston from
    hurricanes is primarily from the north side, from the bay side.
    And we need to limit the water from going into Galveston Bay,
    for as the storm moves inland, the winds change and the water
    comes into the backside of the city of Galveston. So, the ring
    levee project is going to be very important in the long range
    for the city of Galveston itself.
        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
        Mr. Cordero, can you talk just very briefly about the Port
    of Long Beach deep draft navigation project and how that will
    help alleviate supply chain issues? I have got about 15 seconds
    left.
        Mr. Cordero. Yes. Absolutely. So, essentially, we are a
    containerized gateway, but we also are a gateway that receives
    one of the largest liquid bulk vessels. So, basically, what
    that deep draft navigation study will do, it will improve
    transportation efficiencies and will improve safety and
    operations with regard to these large vessels that are coming
    into this port gateway. So, we look forward, again, to
    continuing to move forward to work with the Army Corps and
    create these transportation efficiencies that also will reduce
    costs.
        Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Madam Chair. My time has expired.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Rouzer.
        I recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        Secretary Crowfoot, thanks to your agency and other local
    water agencies in California, Congress has been working with
    the Army Corps in recent years to more effectively operate
    Corps dams for local water supplies without causing flood
    control risk.
        Climate change has exacerbated extremes in our State. Like
    right now we are going to 80; we have been in the 60s before.
    Extreme periods of storm and extreme drought. During December,
    Folsom Dam was forced to release 100,000 acre-feet even when
    there was no forecast of additional storms.
        How has your agency adapted to the new reality of drought
    and better managing our dams to retain water during storms, and
    what can the Corps do to improve operations of dams by working
    with you and local agencies?
        Mr. Crowfoot. Thanks for the question. Yeah, it is pretty
    remarkable. Here in Sacramento, our State capital, we had the
    longest period of time without any measurable rain, almost a
    year. And the storm that broke that record provided the most
    rain we ever received in 24 hours, over 5 inches, demonstrating
    this weather whiplash.
        The short of it is, we need to make better utilization of
    our dams and reservoirs to better control or protect for flood
    safety and for water supply. The good news is, thanks to the
    Army Corps' leadership and partnership with States, that dam
    and reservoir operations are being upgraded, like at Lake
    Mendocino, which is a Federal dam that now uses forecast-
    informed reservoir operations to more flexibly manage water
    supply, again, both for flood safety and water supply. We need
    to do more of that across our State and Federal dams and we
    need to do it more quickly.
        From our perspective, climate change is accelerating. We
    know this, and we are experiencing it in real time. So, we
    really do appreciate the Corps' leadership in this effort. And
    WRDA 2022 can provide critical funding to make this happen.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, sir.
        Mr. Cordero, it is great that you thanked us for being with
    you before WRDA 2020, the subcommittee. You said you had a
    problem with ships waiting off the coast for berth space. Was
    it due to the COVID labor shortage or a truck shortage? We
    know--in southern California, we have seen that for years, but
    how would this deepening project alleviate the problem of ships
    waiting offshore? Why is it beneficial from a supply chain and
    environmental perspective?
        Mr. Cordero. Well, first of all, thank you for your
    question, Madam Chair. As you have referenced, there has been a
    disruption in the global supply chain. And, again, there is not
    a port, a major port that has been immune from this disruption.
        So, as I referenced, this is all COVID-based. And by that I
    mean, in the spring of 2020, when the world really came to a
    stop in terms of the negative impacts of the virus, it provided
    some questions for us to really think about. And by that I
    mean, I think the disruption here in the supply chain really
    accelerated or elevated the conversation about how fragile the
    supply chain is here in the United States.
        One reason--there are a number of factors, but one reason,
    I guess the Secretary of Transportation, Secretary Buttigieg,
    who visited our port here last month, put it best:
    Disinvestment, the history of disinvestment in our ports and
    the move now to invest in our ports.
        So, I think it is fair to say that the more we--as ports
    across America invest in our ports--and as chairman of the
    AAPA, I will tell you that ports across the country are
    investing about $33 million a year.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Cordero.
        I think I have not enough time. But I want to recognize
    Chairmen Yucupicio and Seki, and honor them because they are
    part of the conversation to improve the partnership between the
    Corps and the Tribes in addressing historic needs. Both of you
    make valuable suggestions on improving the partnership with the
    Corps, including the potential appointment of a Tribal liaison
    for Corps districts, as well as addressing the inability of
    many Tribes to financially partner with the Corps. Can you
    summarize key changes you would recommend?
        Mr. Seki. Congresswoman, that is a great question. I don't
    have----
        Mrs. Napolitano. You have 34 seconds, sir.
        Mr. Seki. I don't have those exact details at this moment,
    but I would be more than happy to circle back with your office
    following the hearing.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Great, Chairman Seki.
        And Mr. Yucupicio.
        Mr. Yucupicio. Thank you. Yes, a true partnership, and we
    look forward to working with the Army Corps. You know, we have
    always been at a disadvantage here in the desert from bringing
    water in 55-gallon drums to the reservation way back in the
    sixties to now. We still struggle with our infrastructure and
    water needs, and it will continue. But we truly, truly want a
    great partnership with the Army Corps to figure these things
    out. And we ask the committee to do that.
        Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. You are very welcome. Thank you. Your
    point is well taken, sir.
        Now we will call on Mr. DeFazio for 5 minutes for
    questions.
        Voice. Mr. Webster.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr. Webster.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you, Chair, for putting on
    this hearing. Thank you and the ranking member. The second
    hearing about WRDA. It is good to be here.
        I have a question for Ms. Julie Hill-Gabriel about the CERP
    in the Everglades. And the plan that it is, it has been there
    for over 20 years. And then the EAA and what--we got the money
    from--getting the money from the bipartisan infrastructure
    plan, which is over $1 billion. How do you see that money
    utilized in those two areas?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you, Congressman Webster. So great
    to you see you again and having wonderful memories of
    presenting you with Audubon's Champion of the Everglades Award
    in relation to some of the great progress you helped us
    accomplish in former WRDA----
        Mr. Webster of Florida. Same here.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel [continuing]. Including authorizations of
    the central Everglades project, which is part of what the
    Everglades Agricultural Area is a component of.
        So, I think overall, when we talk about the fact that the
    Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan was authorized in
    2000, we are more than 20 years down the line now. Sometimes we
    have to remember all the different phases that it took us to
    get to where we are today. There was a lot of time spent in the
    planning effort, of planning the different projects, and then
    getting them authorized through this committee, getting them
    funded, then actually getting them under construction. And I
    think where we are today is actually seeing a number of
    projects cross the finish line. And when fully constructed,
    they are actually the point of making sure that we are
    operating them to achieve the return on investment that was
    promised.
        And I think one of the most important things that we have
    learned through that whole process is that you have to be
    moving forward in all of these fronts concurrently. If we do
    one project at a time, wait until it is finalized, this is
    going to take decades and decades more. And the urgency is
    simply too clear to let things continue to take that long to
    progress.
        So, the infrastructure funding will help advance a number
    of projects that either already were underway or other
    components, again, some of which were authorized back in 2007,
    to get those finished and across the finish line. But we
    absolutely have to maintain that focus in some of the projects
    that impact multiple parts of the ecosystem, like the central
    Everglades project and the Everglades Agricultural Area
    Reservoir that is a part of that.
        We hear a lot about the impacts to the coastal estuaries
    east and west on Florida's coast and all the devastating
    impacts that they have seen. But the reservoir doesn't just
    benefit those areas. It really also sends that freshwater
    south, which is how the system naturally works to make sure
    that all parts of the ecosystem, including the southern
    Everglades, Florida Bay, that they are also seeing restoration.
    So, it is important to make progress on projects that are
    already underway but equally important to continue moving
    forward, especially with things like the central Everglades and
    the reservoir project that will help so many parts of the
    system.
        Mr. Webster of Florida. Well, thank you so much. And good
    to see you again.
        I yield back.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you, Congressman.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Webster.
        Ms. Johnson is next, followed by Mr. Babin, and then Mr.
    Garamendi.
        Ms. Johnson, proceed, please.
        Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And
    let me thank the full committee chair and the ranking member,
    Mr. Rouzer, for holding this hearing.
        It has been most encouraging to work closely over the years
    with the Army Corps of Engineers in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
    My congressional district in the north Texas area has been
    affected by periodic flooding and related matters, problems
    which have been and will continue to be exacerbated by climate
    change and erratic temperatures, which we have just
    experienced. The Army Corps has been a tremendous partner in
    those efforts to address these issues. And I am pleased too,
    also, that the Joe Pool Lake project received money in our
    latest bill, which will go a long way in helping to avoid some
    of the sliding.
        I want to ask the first question to Mayor Bechtel. Mayor,
    as you have made evident in your testimony, the Gulf Coast
    Protection District is of critical importance, not only to
    Texas coastal communities, but to the entire Nation. And the
    International Inland Port of Dallas is a crucial connecting
    point for goods transported from the gulf coast ports as they
    pass northbound and westbound by freight and truck. So, in
    fact, the Union Pacific Dallas Intermodal Terminal in my
    district provides a tremendous amount of intermodal access to
    the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach as well.
        Can you describe how the businesses at the Dallas Inland
    Port are adversely affected by the gulf coast storms you have
    mentioned in your testimony?
        Mr. Bechtel. Certainly, Congresswoman. Thank you for the
    question.
        The Port of Houston, and we have seven other ports in the
    district also, but primarily the Port of Houston is the largest
    on the gulf coast. The products coming through the Port of
    Houston go all over both the Southwest and Southeast of the
    United States and right up the core of the central. And the
    logistics part of it onshore is, to me, the biggest bottleneck
    in current terms.
        If we have a shutdown of the port down here on the coast,
    certainly the supply chain all the way up to Dallas and then
    from the distribution centers at Dallas throughout the rest of
    the United States are going to be severely hampered just on the
    goods coming through the port.
        Ms. Johnson of Texas. OK. Now, Mr. Cordero, I am wondering
    what is the relationship between the Port of Long Beach and the
    Dallas Inland Port. And, roughly, how much business does your
    port do with the Dallas Inland Port?
        Mr. Cordero. Great question, Congresswoman. Basically, if I
    understand your question of relationship there with the Dallas
    folks. Number one, I think, clearly, moving containers by rail
    is of utmost important right now and, in fact, a priority for
    the Port of Long Beach. So, to our partnership with the Class I
    railroads, the UP and the BNSF, that corridor that leads from
    California to Texas is vital. And so, I think it is fair to say
    that we have a very good collaborative relationship with the
    railroads and the stakeholders in terms of moving the cargo
    here that comes from Asia inland. And as you may know, there is
    not a container that comes here at the Port of Long Beach that
    doesn't end up at every congressional district in the mainland.
        So, needless to say that, for us, this is a very
    significant gateway and particularly our partnerships with the
    other ports and other important regions. Texas particularly is
    very vital for us and important.
        Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much.
        Just a little bit more time. In my congressional district,
    I am proud to report that the Audubon Dallas is quite active,
    founded in 1973, and primarily responsible for managing and
    maintaining the 600-acre Cedar Ridge Preserve in southwest
    Dallas County.
        In your testimony, you mentioned the excellent work the
    Audubon Society is doing on restoration projects in the
    Everglades, the Mississippi River, and in coastal Louisiana. In
    Texas, we have serious issues related to coastal flooding along
    the gulf coast near Houston in south Texas along the Rio Grande
    Valley. We also have serious inland flooding issues in the
    Dallas-Fort Worth area.
        Can you speak to some of the work you are engaging in to
    address these issues in Texas and your work to restore----
        Mrs. Napolitano. Ms. Johnson, would it be possible for her
    to address them in writing? Your time is up and we have got a
    lot more questions.
        Ms. Johnson of Texas. Thank you very much. I will.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, ma'am.
        Mr. Babin, you are recognized.
        Dr. Babin. Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much, Madam Chair and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, for convening this hearing. I want to
    thank all you witnesses for being with us today.
        And a special welcome again to Mayor Bechtel. I am looking
    forward to working on WRDA this year, and I am optimistic about
    our ability to work together to improve upon our Nation's
    infrastructure.
        In WRDA 2020, we were successful in passing numerous
    provisions, such as an inland waterway cost share adjustment; a
    flood risk management modification in Orange County, kicking
    off a significant aspect of the coastal barrier project; and
    authorizing the expansion of the Port of Houston Ship Channel.
    As a matter of fact, we were not only successful in passing the
    authorization to dredge and widen the Houston Ship Channel, but
    we also got a project appropriated and secured as a new start
    designation all in 1 year's time. But we are still not done.
        In WRDA 2022, I will advocate for the Army Corps of
    Engineers to assume operation and maintenance of the entire
    Houston Ship Channel. In light of the Port of Houston
    Authority's recent economic reviews showing that locally
    preferred plan cost has decreased dramatically, I am confident
    that the Army Corps' assumption of maintenance is economically
    justifiable.
        I represent four ports. In addition to the Port of Houston,
    my district is also home to the Sabine-Naches Waterway Channel,
    which hosts two Department of Defense contracted commercial
    military strategic seaports and serves more than 55 percent of
    America's strategic petroleum reserves.
        We are in the midst of a channel improvement project which
    will improve and optimize the waterway, but in order to
    continue moving this project along expeditiously, we need to
    get the Army Corps' favorable decision document recommendation
    back so that we can authorize construction of additional
    navigational features.
        Finally, I will be working alongside several of my
    colleagues here today to support the project authorization of
    the Coastal Texas Study. Thank you to Mayor Bechtel for all the
    work you have done on this project and for your leadership in
    southeast Texas.
        As you have highlighted here this morning, the breadth and
    the extent of this project's implications are extraordinary.
    This will be one the Army Corps' largest infrastructure
    endeavors, but will support and bolster millions of jobs and
    have an incredible economic impact on our country.
        Madam Chairwoman, I would like to enter in the record a
    letter of support from several different industry leaders and
    stakeholders expressing their support for this project, if you
    will.
        Mrs. Napolitano. So ordered.
        [The information follows:]

    Letter of February 8, 2022, from the American Chemistry Council et al.,
                  Submitted for the Record by Hon. Brian Babin
                                                      February 8, 2022.
    The Honorable Peter A. DeFazio,
    Chairman,
    Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
    The Honorable Sam Graves,
    Ranking Member,
    Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
    The Honorable Grace Napolitano,
    Chairwoman,
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
    The Honorable David Rouzer,
    Ranking Member,
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.

    RE:  Support for Coastal Texas Resiliency Improvement Plan identified
    in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Coastal Texas Protection
    and Restoration Chief's Report (Coastal Texas Chief's Report) also
    called the Coastal Spine

        Dear Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Subcommittee
    Chairwoman Napolitano and Subcommittee Ranking Member Rouzer:
        The undersigned trade associations who represent thousands of good
    paying American manufacturing jobs across the country urge your support
    for storm surge protection infrastructure along the upper Texas coast,
    also referred to as the Coastal Spine. This important issue will be
    addressed at the Transportation & Infrastructure Water Resources and
    Environment Subcommittee Hearing titled ``Proposals for a Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022: Stakeholder Priorities.''
        This much-needed infrastructure will reduce risks to vital
    resources that hold significant implications for the nation's supply
    chains and economic security. The region that would be protected by
    this project has a high concentration of petrochemical manufacturing
    facilities, with Texas being the largest chemistry producing state. The
    Coastal Spine is also home to a majority of the refineries in Texas,
    representing almost 25 percent of all U.S. refining capacity.
        Although natural disasters vary, the impacts are all too similar.
    In 2021, the Texas gulf coast experienced unprecedented weather due to
    Winter Storm Uri, a storm that significantly impacted our continued
    operations and created a ripple effect across numerous supply chains.
    According to data from the Independent Commodity Intelligence Services,
    nearly a quarter of U.S.-based chemical and synthetic materials
    capacity was estimated to be offline. A hurricane or storm surge could
    present similar or worse impacts.
        With over 96 percent of all manufactured goods touched by the
    business of chemistry, our industries are important to every state and
    congressional district in the country. For example, our products are
    inputs for dairy bottles in California, packaging in Oregon, injection
    molded products in Missouri, and carpet and furniture in North
    Carolina. Our assets, employees, and communities where we live and work
    need this much-needed infrastructure investment to stabilize our
    nation's supply chains.
        The importance of our industries was highlighted in March 2020,
    when as part of the federal government response to COVID-19, the U.S.
    Department of Homeland Security identified our industries as Essential
    Critical Infrastructure, industrial sectors critical to public health
    and safety, economic and national security. From critical inputs for
    medical masks and personal protective equipment (PPE) to manufacturing
    hand sanitizer and disinfectants, our industries have played a critical
    role in the global battle against COVID-19.
        This project balances preserving beaches and the unique ecosystems
    of the coast while also providing multiple lines of defense to protect
    essential human and economic infrastructure in one of the most diverse
    cities in the country.
        Thank you for your attention to this important matter. We look
    forward to continuing to work with the Committee on this effort.
            Sincerely,
                                    American Chemistry Council.
                 American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers.
                 National Association of Chemical Distributors.
                                 Plastics Industry Association.

        Dr. Babin. Question 1: Mayor Bechtel, can you tell us what
    money the district has available to meet its financial
    obligations?
        Mr. Bechtel. Well, initially, the State of Texas provided
    50 percent of the funds for the Coastal Texas Study with the
    Corps of Engineers, which was approximately $10 million at the
    time. Since then, the State, in the 86th legislative session in
    2019, appropriated $200 million, primarily for local match
    funds for the projects in Orange and Jefferson County. And in
    2021, with the legislation that set up the Gulf Coast
    Protection District, the legislature appropriated another $200
    million at that time. So, $400 million from the State
    legislature in, say, direct funding.
        Dr. Babin. OK.
        Mr. Bechtel. In addition, the Gulf Coast Protection
    District was granted taxing authority, with voter approval, in
    the legislation that set us up. And the board is also exploring
    alternative funding along the lines of resilience bonds or
    something else that we can do.
        Dr. Babin. OK. And question 2, still directed to you: Some
    of the projects that make up the coastal barrier are already
    underway. For example, Orange County is expected to sign its
    PPA with the Corps next month. Can you update us on the Sabine
    to Galveston projects and what the status is on those projects?
        Mr. Bechtel. OK. The S2G, which was approved in the
    Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, impacted Orange and Jefferson
    County, which is part of our district now. The Gulf Coast
    Protection District is in negotiations currently with the Corps
    of Engineers on a PPA covering the Orange County projects.
    Jefferson County Drainage District No. 7 was the original non-
    Federal local sponsor in their area, and they signed the PPA
    with the Corps of Engineers in 2019.
        Those projects are--the Orange County project is in the--
    just really kicking off in the engineering design phase. In
    Jefferson County, the project, they are actually moving dirt.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr.----
        Mr. Bechtel. The third project, which was on the other end
    of our district, the Velasco Drainage District project, they
    signed a PPA with the Corps in 2021.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr. Bechtel, would you please give further
    information in writing, please? Time is up.
        Mr. Bechtel. Thank you.
        Dr. Babin. I will yield back. Thank you very much. Thank
    you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you.
        Mr. Garamendi, you are next, followed by Mr. Graves, then
    Mr. Lowenthal and Mr. Weber.
        Mr. Garamendi, you are recognized.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Madam Chairman. And thank you
    very much to all the witnesses. A very interesting, very useful
    discussion.
        I want to focus on California, so, Mr. Crowfoot, you are
    going to be up in a moment. I want to focus specifically on
    dredging and the San Francisco Bay area.
        In 2016, the State of California sued the Corps of
    Engineers to stop hydraulic dredging, that is suction dredging,
    claiming that it would somehow hurt the longfin smelt, thereby
    forcing the Corps to use clamshell, which is two to three times
    more expensive. The result of that was that the Corps of
    Engineers now has dredging every other year and at two to three
    times the cost. In 2019, the State sued the Corps for not doing
    enough dredging. So, we have got a problem here.
        And I really want you to focus on the use of hydraulic
    dredging and the opportunity to do real-time monitoring as to
    the extent of damage to the smelt. Are they really anywhere
    nearby? And is the hydraulic dredging more or less
    contaminating the water than the suction dredging?
        Secondly, I want you to consider the beneficial use, which
    is a high stake, a high priority for the State of California.
    The doubling and the tripling of cost makes the beneficial use
    that much more difficult.
        So, we have got an inconsistency here, and I would like you
    to focus on that. There is no doubt that we need to do more
    dredging in the bay if we are going to maintain the
    international shipping that is so important to the State of
    California.
        Secondly, in the delta, the State of California set up
    various restoration projects for the wetlands in the delta
    mostly using imported material. The State of California is not
    a sponsor of the dredging for the Port of Stockton and for the
    Sacramento River from Carquinez into the heart of the delta,
    the result of which the dredging projects have dropped, and the
    available material is not available for your restoration
    projects in the delta.
        I would like you to consider this. I would like to have
    your comments on the inconsistency of the State policies here
    that are actually preventing the goal that the State has
    observed. And do keep in mind this new green lining thing that
    you talked about.
        Mr. Crowfoot. Well, thanks so much. First of all, I am
    committed to unpacking these issues with you. I think we share
    a similar North Star, which is to ensure that enough dredging
    happens so that the ships and the boats can actually be
    involved in our economic activity that is so important,
    obviously while protecting the environment and building our
    resilience to sea level rise and then that inundation of
    saltwater into our bay delta.
        So, I am confident that we can actually balance each of
    these priorities. We do believe that the use of that beneficial
    sediment is really important to build our resilience. We
    recognize it is more expensive, and we will look forward to
    working with you and also Army Corps leaders in the region to
    explore just what projects make sense to use that beneficial
    sediment.
        And then to your point around the State's litigation around
    the Federal Government. I am committed to, again, moving beyond
    that and getting to a point where we can dredge our rivers in
    the delta as we need to for our economic activities in a way
    that is actually not harmful for the environment. So,
    complicated issues, but you have my commitment from my own
    personal time and energy on it.
        Mr. Garamendi. Very good. And do keep in mind the lawsuits
    that are holding up the water projects also.
        I do want to commend your agency for your work on Sites
    Reservoir. Moving that along, we now have to move the Federal
    Government on that, specifically the Office of Management and
    Budget. Hopefully, we will get that one done.
        And finally, with regard to the restoration projects in the
    Sacramento Valley, your commitment and participation in the
    very extensive 300,000-acre-plus restoration project that
    includes the rice fields and the bypasses, extremely important
    project, not only for flood protection, but also for
    environment and all of the various species.
        If you would like to comment on that in the closing
    moments, either Sites or the restoration projects, please do.
        Mr. Crowfoot. One hundred percent agree. And let me talk
    about the restoration project. Remarkable partnerships between
    agricultural leaders and rice growers and groups like Audubon
    to extend our seasonal flood plain. I am really bullish on our
    ability to do that, not only to recover the salmon but to
    support agriculture. So, 100 percent committed to moving
    forward on that. And thanks for your words on Sites Reservoir
    as well.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much. Thousands more
    questions. I will be in your office shortly to get all these
    things resolved. Thank you very much.
        I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Garamendi, very much for
    your on-time delivery.
        Mr. Lowenthal--I'm sorry, Mr. Mast is next, followed by Mr.
    Lowenthal. Mr. Katko is next.
        Mr. Mast, you are recognized.
        Mr. Mast. Thank you, Chairwoman. I appreciate it.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel, I have just a little bit of dialogue I
    would like to have with you. It is good to see you. I want to
    thank you for your advocacy, the Audubon Society's work, and
    everything that you all do on behalf of the Everglades. I do
    very much appreciate it.
        This summer, Audubon made--they are making statements
    constantly. I believe the Audubon made a statement about the
    threat of harmful algal blooms. Everybody knows I continue to
    work on this on the WRDA, the Water Resources Development Act,
    in subcommittee and full committee. It is plaguing my
    community, as you well know.
        So, the statement was made that exposed fish die quickly.
    And consuming contaminated fish or shellfish, it is dangerous
    for birds and dolphins and other terrestrial mammals. So, I
    guess what I am asking in talking about the statement that
    Audubon has made, are the birds the canaries in the coal mine
    here?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you, Congressman Mast. And, of
    course, as always, thank you for your passion for Everglades
    restoration and especially continuing to hold up the plight of
    the communities along the St. Lucie Estuary in particular.
        I think before getting to that, I just always have to
    share--I feel like I was able to share with the subcommittee a
    few years ago my own personal experience. It is hard to
    articulate and explain the experience of being around one of
    these toxic algae blooms. In my own experience, I lived in
    south Florida but I did not live along that estuary. And I was
    up there visiting and had really never experienced anything
    like it, that I was across the street from any body of water,
    like, where I thought was pretty far away, and opened the car
    door, and having that rush to your senses immediately--I mean,
    I thought I had parked next to a dumpster was my real
    experience with the odor, but really a feeling like your eyes
    are on fire. It is really hard to articulate until you have
    experienced it.
        So, I just want to thank you again for trying to articulate
    what those experiences are for folks who have never had that
    firsthand. And for me, it truly only strengthened my resolve
    for focusing and being an advocate for Everglades restoration.
        And we know that absolutely toxic algae blooms have an
    impact on the species that birds rely on for their food
    sources. Similarly, we know that when there is excess nutrients
    in waterways, it changes the vegetation that the birds rely on,
    and that is part of why we have been such advocates for trying
    to remove excess nutrients throughout the entire ecosystem.
    Starting in the northern Everglades, all the way down to being
    huge supporters over the years of the really monumental work
    that the State of Florida has done to clean nutrients out of
    the water before it reaches some of those places where birds
    are more prevalent and relying on that clean water source.
        And I think that some of the progress that has been made
    has focused on that, but there is still a long way to go, and
    that is part of why we keep focusing on getting projects
    finished that are in the pipeline for Everglades restoration,
    while also looking to advance the ones that are still ahead,
    like finalizing that central Everglades project and the
    Everglades Agricultural Area Reservoir. That we know will help
    hold some of the water, have it go through those filtration
    marshes, and then continue its path south into the southern
    Everglades in Florida Bay, because all of those different areas
    are important for different species of birds. And so, water
    quality is absolutely prevalent and an important issue for
    birds, but it is also things like the balance of freshwater and
    saltwater that can dramatically increase and the challenges of
    birds having finding a food source.
        And at Audubon, last thing I will say is, we have been
    lucky enough in a lot of places, like in Florida Bay, to
    actually study the fish--the forage fish that birds rely on and
    how the bird populations have changed over the years, for
    sometimes more than 100 years. So, we are able to see the
    impact of those changes as they happen and use that. And that
    really, for us, guides our positions and our advocacy in
    advancing Everglades restoration.
        Mr. Mast. All right. You described that situation of
    opening up your door. Would you work in the middle of that for
    10 hours a day?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. I will say that I went home, and as
    someone who has little children, thought about the impact of
    that, of course. We have dubbed things the lost summer, but
    truly thinking about the fact that I was able to go home,
    right, but others don't have. That is their home. And that has
    stuck with me for a long time. Would I let my kids play
    outside? No. It would be just such a hard experience to imagine
    folks who have to endure those conditions at those times when
    those blooms are so active.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Mast. Thank you, Chairwoman.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Lowenthal, you are recognized.
        Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mr. Cordero, thank you once again for your kind words and
    for highlighting the importance of Long Beach's deep draft
    navigation project both for our community and for the Nation's
    economy. This investment could not come at a more critical time
    as we work together with the administration and the private
    sector to strengthen our supply chains.
        Incidentally, I was glad to hear Chair DeFazio recognize
    the importance of your leadership and the Port of Long Beach's
    leadership in moving towards 24/7 as a way of really dealing
    with the congestion.
        This project, the deep draft navigation project, can also
    make the port operations faster, more productive, and even
    cleaner by making navigation more efficient. You have already
    highlighted the excellent cost-benefit ratio that the project
    will enjoy. And I am determined to continue to support this
    critical investment.
        This year's WRDA bill, through projects like this, can make
    a real difference for the American people and while continuing
    to advance climate resilience, nature-based solutions, and
    environmental justice. Critically important is the issue of
    environmental justice.
        Mr. Cordero, can you elaborate more on the national
    economic benefit of this project and, if you have time, also on
    the environmental benefits of this project?
        Mr. Cordero. Yes. Absolutely, Congressman. As you may be
    aware, when the Army Corps first looked into this matter, in
    collaboration with the Port of Long Beach, the overriding
    concerns were two. Number one, the national economic
    development plan, and of course, how that fits in terms of the
    navigational improvements. So, suffice to say that there are
    five areas here in terms of draft projects that need to be
    addressed: the West Basin, the Approach Channel, the Main
    Channel, and Pier J South Slip, and the Pier J Approach. In
    essence, creating more draft for the larger vessels in the
    world to visit here at the Port of Long Beach, be it container
    and be it liquid bulk.
        So, the importance in terms of the national impact on this,
    let me just end by saying in the proper context in one case of
    a liquid bulk vessel. The largest tanker to visit a North
    American port was, in fact, here at the Port of Long Beach. And
    now we are trying to address that approach here from a 76-foot
    draft to 80. How much of a difference does that make? Every 1
    foot of draft that we could create, in essence, translates to
    anywhere from 35,000 to 40,000 barrels of product. And so, that
    is a significant impact with regard to that type of commodity
    that comes in here. And, of course, the dependency of the
    Nation with regard to, on the energy front, how important that
    is.
        So, for the Port of Long Beach it is not just a question of
    container as cargo; there is also a diverse portfolio of liquid
    bulk cargo.
        Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you. In the time I have remaining, can
    you elaborate on the environmental benefits of this project,
    especially to the community surrounding the port complex?
        Mr. Cordero. Absolutely. So, what occurs in the case of
    both vessels, we have a process, what is referred to as
    lightering. And what that basically means is when a tanker
    vessel comes in and it is too large to come into the harbor, we
    have a smaller vessel that goes out there and has the economy
    transfer to the smaller vessel, which goes into the harbor as a
    second transfer. All this creates further emissions, idling,
    which again will be unnecessary if we create the proper draft
    with the bigger vessel, which, incidentally, the larger new
    bigger vessels are environmentally more friendly, not only in
    terms of the technology that they use but the fuels that they
    use. So, I think it is a very positive step of eliminating
    emission share at this harbor complex.
        Mr. Lowenthal. Thank you, Mr. Cordero. And thank you for
    your active support to the Long Beach deep draft navigation
    project.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Cordero. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Lowenthal, very much.
        Mr. Graves, you are recognized.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to
    thank the witnesses for joining us today.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel, section 213 of the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2020 includes a study of the lower
    Mississippi River system. And so, that is everywhere from Cape
    Girardeau, Missouri, all the way down to the mouth of the
    Mississippi River. As you know, the Mississippi River and
    tributaries project, of which that river is obviously part of,
    is 100 percent Federal cost for virtually everything. Yet the
    Corps of Engineers' interpretation has found that this is a
    study that is going to require a 50/50 cost share and the non-
    Federal sponsors would be seven different States.
        Do you believe, one, that this project is important in
    reassessing the management of the lower Mississippi River
    system? And, two, do you believe that that type of
    interpretation, that does seem inconsistent with MR&T, is the
    right approach?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you so much, Ranking Member Graves.
    But first I have to begin with the fact of reiterating just how
    important the study is in including just work in this area in
    general. Our own recent study with Audubon and partners have
    noted, for our purposes and our mission, that there are some
    birds where 50 percent of the North American population rely on
    the Mississippi River Delta for their breeding and habitat. So,
    it is something that's just an absolute top priority for
    Audubon and, of course, affects the largest watershed in the
    Nation.
        And I think that to have any impact in decisionmaking
    around the format that a study can take, that has the potential
    to delay its implementation, is really not addressing the
    urgency and the need of the issues to move quickly. Clearly,
    that if a study needs seven non-Federal sponsors to coordinate
    and come to the table and iron out differences and identify
    whose responsibility is whose before we advance things, that is
    going to take longer. And I think it is really imperative that
    we act with the utmost urgency to understand more about the
    river and the issues that are facing it so that we can start to
    get to the next step of undertaking more action to address the
    challenges that are being faced there.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
        Moving on to the next question. Until Texas comes in and
    totally blows the numbers out of the water with their
    authorization this year of $28 billion, coastal Louisiana has,
    I think, the largest groupings of authorizations for storm
    damage, risk reduction, hurricane protection type projects,
    navigation, ecological restoration. And as you know, Ms. Hill-
    Gabriel, these projects all work as sort of in a system in
    Louisiana. Unfortunately, the authorization is not weaved
    together sort of like in the Everglades or Great Lakes
    initiative that does put everything into one program, but,
    again, they are all related.
        Back in the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, title
    VII had a cross-crediting provision, and it allowed for you to
    develop credits on one project, move them over to another. And
    in order to sort of move this in more of a program type
    direction, Congress came in and cleaned it up again in 2014,
    because of flawed Corps interpretations. Cleaned it up again in
    2016, as we continue to play whack-a-mole with the Corps of
    Engineers.
        Have you seen, under any of the interpretations or the
    interpretive guidance coming out of the Corps of Engineers, an
    actual functional system that would allow for cross-crediting
    or allow for really functionality in implementing these
    projects?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you again, Congressman. And I think
    one thing just to put some emphasis on, of course, we always
    appreciate your leadership in highlighting these issues as it
    relates to coastal Louisiana. You may have heard, I believe
    Secretary Crowfoot mentioned a similar example in the Central
    Valley where they are having challenges of transferring non-
    Federal sponsor credits across different projects.
        I will say that in the Everglades, while the overall
    program--the overall comprehensive plan was authorized as one
    piece, there was a decision made that each individual
    component, each individual project still needs to be
    independently authorized. But what has been done there is the
    development of sort of a non-Federal sponsor and Federal, so, a
    non-Federal sponsor and Army Corps ledger where they balance
    out across the programs as a whole. And so, that----
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. And the task force that helps with
    the integration as well.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Exactly. And State and Federal task force
    to help guide some of that. And I think the lesson there is
    just, you know, we need to allow efficiency and creativity when
    there are options on the table. And there are, as you noted,
    many provisions in WRDA and discussions already ongoing. That
    is something that should be reinforced and supported.
        Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Graves.
        Next order will be Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Stanton,
    Mr. Cohen.
        Mr. Carbajal, you are recognized.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you to the
    witnesses for your time and testimony today.
        You all know better than most how these projects affect our
    communities and the role they play in environmental and human
    health and economic development. California is home to several
    ports that see billions in economic productivity annually,
    including the busy Port of Long Beach. The Water Resources
    Development Act we are currently working on and funds included
    in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for the Army Corps offer a
    great opportunity to improve the efficiency and the resiliency
    of our ports.
        Mr. Cordero, around this time 2 years ago, I had the
    opportunity to tour the Port of Long Beach with the
    congressional delegation led by my colleague, Chairwoman Grace
    Napolitano. As you mentioned in your testimony, the Port of
    Long Beach supports 2.6 million jobs across the Nation and is
    an important part of our supply chain infrastructure.
        In my role as chair of the Coast Guard and Maritime
    Transportation Subcommittee, I have heard a fair deal of
    stakeholders about supply chain issues. We have done quite a
    bit of work here in Congress to help alleviate that problem
    through investments included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure
    Law, but I know there is always more work to be done.
        Can you discuss how a bill like WRDA can help further
    support port infrastructure?
        Mr. Cordero. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. Well, we
    mentioned one of the major projects here with regard to the
    deep draft navigation study and making sure that our channels
    have enough draft or deep enough to navigate or have the
    largest vessels navigate. We talk about the large vessels but
    in terms of the width. So, I think it is fair to say that with
    regard to some of these projects that we are addressing, it
    goes a long way in making sure that these larger vessels come
    in. And with the size of the vessels that we have today,
    Congressman, 14, 16, 18; in fact, at the Port of Long Beach, we
    recently had a 20,000 TEU vessel, and last year a 24,000 TEU
    vessel.
        I think, again, the name of the game is how we continue to
    move containerized cargo here in terms of the throughput. And
    as Congressman Lowenthal and Chairman DeFazio said, that is why
    we have the concept of 24/7 vision here in terms of pilot
    projects that we are operating right now.
        But to your question, I think, again, what is important is
    to move cargo in a more efficient manner and, of course,
    environmentally more friendly. And on that last point, that is
    why we are focusing on rail investment here.
        But I hope that answers your question in terms of the
    bigger picture of what we are trying to do here at the Port of
    Long Beach as the Nation's most significant gateway.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel, communities living near ports face unique
    challenges due to sustained exposure to pollutants and toxins
    as a result of port operations and ship emissions. As a county
    supervisor, I worked on the Blue Whales and Blue Skies
    initiative to reduce ships' emissions. And in Congress, I
    introduced the Expanding the Maritime Environmental and
    Technical Assistance Program (META) Act, which was signed into
    law through the fiscal year 2022 NDAA, to support the reduction
    of air emissions from vessels by authorizing additional funds
    for the Maritime Environmental and Technical Assistance
    Program, to fund research and activities related to zero-
    emissions technology.
        What other recommendations do you have for us to tackle
    this problem and help reduce harmful emissions from port
    operations?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you so much, Congressman. And I
    appreciate all of your leadership on that issue in advancing. I
    do think the focus on technical assistance is always an
    important place to start, and I think that the more we
    understand the new innovative approaches that can take shape
    when we incorporate especially local knowledge on exactly what
    is happening. While there are overarching issues to address,
    every port issue that I have ever looked into is different,
    right? There are different impacts. There are different
    ecological factors at play. And as you noted, different
    proximity of communities to the issues.
        So, I think continuing to further find that effort of
    coordination, and whether it is formulating a different pathway
    for community engagement in a regional level related to the
    port and finding out ways to garner some of the great ideas and
    understanding of the full impacts, and then having the
    capability to raise that up to the Army Corps or other Federal
    agencies that address these issues, I think is critical.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. And I must say that the
    META Act, I was lucky enough to be able to join my good
    colleague, Representative Alan Lowenthal, who took great
    leadership with that legislation.
        With that, I yield back, Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Carbajal.
        Mr. Johnson, you are recognized.
        Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I
    appreciate that.
        I will talk a little bit to Chairman Seki and Chairman
    Yucupicio. I just think it is fantastic we have got two Tribal
    chairmen here. And I think it augers for a very good process,
    Madam Chairman, as we move forward with WRDA. It is just
    fantastic.
        And so, gentlemen, I will have questions for you. But first
    I want to talk just a minute about a South Dakota Tribe. Last
    week, I got a letter, a very detailed letter from the Standing
    Rock Sioux Tribe in South Dakota as well as North Dakota.
        And, Madam Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to enter
    that letter into the record. Your staff does have a copy of it.
        Mrs. Napolitano. So ordered.
        [The information follows:]

    Statement of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Submitted for the Record by
                       Hon. Dusty Johnson of South Dakota
      Comments on the Department of the Interior's Implementation of the
              Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Funding for Tribes
                                february 4, 2022
        Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Department of
    Interior's (DOI) implementation of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
    (BIL) and funding opportunities for tribes. The Standing Rock Sioux
    Tribe is particularly interested in the funding available through the
    Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) for irrigation projects, water
    sanitation, and dam safety. We are also interested in funding available
    through the Bureau of Reclamation for authorized rural water projects.
    This funding is needed for ongoing and long-standing infrastructure
    needs on the Standing Rock Indian Reservation.
        While these are important infrastructure investments for the health
    and well-being of our communities, the BIL overlooks and does not
    provide funding for some of the most critical infrastructure needs on
    our Reservation and across Indian Country. We have a dire need for
    healthcare facilities, schools, roads, and justice facilities. These
    basic infrastructure needs are chronically underfunded and undermine
    our ability to provide safety, security, and opportunities for our
    members.
        Much of the funding DOI is charged with implementing is dedicated
    to needs far beyond Indian Country. For example, the Bureau of
    Reclamation will be implementing billions in funding for water projects
    and infrastructure outside of Indian Country. This funding will be
    distributed according to existing laws, through competitive grant
    programs, or requires a substantial cost-share. These are all barriers
    to funding projects that will benefit Indian tribes.
        In implementing each of these programs it will be up to DOI to
    prioritize its trust responsibility and direct funding to projects that
    benefit Indian tribes. We respectfully request that the Secretary use
    any available authorities under the BIL or other laws to ensure that
    funding is directed to needs in Indian Country. This includes the
    possible reallocation of funding for the healthcare facilities,
    schools, roads, and justice facilities that we need.
                 Infrastructure Needs of Large Land Base Tribes
        The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is a large land base tribe. Our
    infrastructure needs stretch across our 2.3 million acre Standing Rock
    Indian Reservation. We have over 16,000 enrolled members and about half
    of our members live on the Reservation. Our Reservation is the size of
    a small state, yet we lack the basic infrastructure that every
    government needs to provide for its communities and promote economic
    opportunities.
        The Federal government's chronic underfunding of infrastructure
    needs on our Reservation real and lasting impacts on the lives of our
    members. Our current unemployment rate is above 50 percent and over 40
    percent of the Indian families on our Reservation live in poverty. This
    is more than triple the average poverty rate in the United States. The
    disparity is worse for our youth. On our Reservation, 52 percent of the
    population under age 18 lives below the poverty line, compared to 16
    percent in North Dakota and 19 percent in South Dakota.
        We respectfully request that the Biden Administration build on the
    effort in the BIL and take action to seek and provide the funding we
    need to meet basic infrastructure needs. The BIL will fulfill important
    needs, but much more is needed. The Federal government must honor its
    treaty and trust obligations by adequately funding reliable
    infrastructure which is the foundation for the safety, health, and
    welfare of our people.
                              Rural Water Projects
        The delivery of safe and clean drinking water to our members is of
    the highest priority for our Tribe. The vast majority of our members
    are provided with water through the Standing Rock Rural Water System,
    but many rural homes are not connected to the Rural Water System due to
    lack of funding for expansion. Currently, there are more than seven
    hundred homes which do not have access to running water and 2.3 million
    acres with agricultural lands requiring water. Our goal is to utilize
    available funding to connect as many residents of the Reservation
    currently without service to the existing Rural Water System.
        We rely on the Missouri River to supply water to our community. The
    devastating impacts of the Pick-Sloan Plan and controversial water
    policies for managing water levels in the Upper Missouri River Basin
    continue to plague our Reservation and have had severe repercussions to
    our Rural Water System. In past periods of drought, we experience a
    lack of water to our intake system leaving us completely without water
    for our homes, hospital, government, schools, and businesses, which
    required significant time and resources to address. We want to ensure
    that our infrastructure needs are addressed to avoid such issues in the
    future. The mismanagement of water on the Missouri River continually
    threatens our municipal water supply.
        DOI is mandated to construct, operate, and maintain a Municipal
    Rural and Industrial (MR&I) Rural Water System on our Reservation
    through the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). Over the past forty years, BOR
    has been working on specific rural water projects to deliver potable
    water. The Standing Rock MR&I Program works directly with BOR to plan,
    construct, and maintain our Rural Water System.
        Our rural water systems obtains raw water directly from Lake Oahe
    on the Missouri River and distributes it across the Reservation to
    provide safe drinking water to our users. The Rural Water System Water
    Treatment Plant is located on the south side of the Reservation. The
    Rural Water System treatment plant is a surface water plant with
    flocculators, sedimentation basins, and microfiltration membranes.
        The treatment plant injects finished water with chlorine and pumps
    it to our communities in Wakpala and Kenel in South Dakota and our
    Grand River Casino. From the southeast side of the Reservation, the
    distribution system branches west to serve the communities of Bear
    Soldier, Bullhead, and Little Eagle in South Dakota. Recently, the
    Rural Water System expanded to the City of McLaughlin, South Dakota.
        In October 2017, the Rural Water System was expanded to serve the
    community of Fort Yates, North Dakota through a 1.5 million gallon
    composite tank. The Rural Water System then branches west and north to
    serve the communities of Porcupine, Cannonball, and Solen in North
    Dakota and our Prairie Knights Casino. The distribution also reaches
    some rural homes scattered throughout the Reservation, but expansion is
    needed to provide rural water to all our members and residents.
        The anticipated construction costs for the Standing Rock Rural
    Water System in 2021 were $8.3 million. These funds were prioritized to
    complete five projects:
          the Selfridge Transmission Pipeline;
          the Ralph Walker Treatment Plant membrane installation;
          the Fort Yates Watermain Replacement;
          the Fort Yates storage tank; and
          the Solen Pipeline.

        All of these projects are ongoing and require additional funding
    for completion.
        The Tribe anticipates the Rural Water System construction costs in
    2022 to be approximately $26.1 million. While some of these expenses
    will be funded through the Indian Health Service, other projects rely
    on BOR funding. These projects include decommissioning the Fort Yates
    water treatment plant, lagoons, and wet well pump house. Additional
    maintenance and operation costs include making improvements to the
    water treatment plant, repairing or replacing fire hydrants, replacing
    the Luke White lightning tank to increase capacity, upgrading the
    Cannon Ball community system with new watermain, new valves and service
    connections, installing meters, replacing the watermain in Cannonball,
    and constructing secondary user extensions.
        Currently, our annual operations and maintenance budget is
    $2,191,000, but the replacement need for the annual budget is
    $4,000,000. The Tribe anticipates needing approximately $80,588,700 to
    complete ongoing projects and support new priorities for construction
    and upgrades planned through 2026.
        In addition to expansion of the current Rural Water System, we need
    funding for investments in aged water system infrastructure.
    Deteriorating water distribution infrastructure poses a risk to the
    public health on the Reservation. Our current rural water system needs
    rehabilitation and replacements to distribution mains, transmission
    lines, tanks, pumps, and meters. Aged service lines have a potential
    for contaminating our drinking water through corrosion. We have
    recently experienced numerous line breaks and water pressure loss in
    our community requiring residents to boil water and conserve water use
    for limited purposes.
        While the Tribe is grateful for the rural water projects funding
    included in the BIL, consistent and adequate funding for these projects
    is too low and varies greatly each year making it difficult to plan for
    construction. Funding levels also barely keep up with the rising costs
    of inflation and makes the projects significantly more expensive than
    originally projected.
        The continual rise in costs and limited appropriations make it
    difficult to complete our ongoing Rural Water System projects. We have
    an urgent and compelling need for substantial rural water funding due
    to the basic lack of access to potable water plaguing many of our
    residents. This creates serious public health and safety issues which
    only got worse during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Tribe requests that
    BOR give priority to funding and completing our Rural Water System.
    These investments are required by the Federal government's treaty and
    trust responsibility to the Tribe.
                          BIA Road Maintenance Program
        We were shocked that BIA's Road Maintenance Program did not get
    more funding under the BIL. Roads are critical infrastructure on our
    large Reservation. Without adequate funding for road infrastructure and
    maintenance our youth cannot get to school, we cannot support economic
    development, and providing government services is made even more
    difficult. Safe and secure roads are also vital to protect the life and
    safety of our Reservation community.
        Our Tribe was devastated in 2019 when a long-standing and
    unfulfilled road maintenance need led to injuries and the loss of life
    on our Reservation. After years on our priority list for BIA's Roads
    Maintenance Program, a 30 to 40 foot section of a BIA road on our
    Reservation collapsed from a washed out culvert. This left a 60 to 70
    foot deep drop to a creek below the road.
        This heavily traveled road is an important commuting route for
    workers on our Reservation. In the dark morning hours, the wash out was
    not visible to commuters traveling to work. We lost a nurse who was on
    her way to work at our hospital and a United States Postal Worker that
    served the Reservation. Two Tribal members were also seriously injured
    when their vehicles plummeted into the creek. The Administration must
    provide the funding needed to address these critical infrastructure
    needs.
        In FY 2022, the Administration requested just $37.4 million in
    funding for the BIA Road Maintenance Program. This is not nearly
    enough. Many of the roads and bridges within the BIA system are in fair
    to failing conditions and have safety deficiencies. Only about 16
    percent of BIA roads have sufficient maintenance to be classified as
    acceptable in terms of surface condition. And, only 62 percent of the
    BIA bridges are classified as acceptable based on the BIA Service Level
    Index.
        Due to the unmet needs in BIA's Road Maintenance Program, the Tribe
    must divert Tribal Transportation design and construction funds to
    supplement BIA funding for routine and emergency maintenance. As a
    result, we have fewer funds to plan or build new roads and bridges,
    undertake a safety improvement project, or perform environmental
    studies.
        There are approximately 500 miles of BIA roads on our Reservation
    that need critical rehabilitation and replacement. We also need funding
    to address rain, snow, and ice on BIA roads that causes treacherous and
    impassable conditions. Snow and ice removal can consume up to 65
    percent of our annual budget each winter. Road conditions on our
    Reservation impact almost every aspect of our lives. We even have
    increased maintenance costs for law enforcement vehicles and school
    buses due to poor road conditions on our Reservation.
        Finally, distribution of the $270 million provided for BIA's Road
    Maintenance Program was not discussed during the consultation sessions.
    This funding should go where it is needed most. Roads are critical
    infrastructure on our large land base Reservation. We need this funding
    to get our youth to school, promote economic development, and provide
    governmental services.
                             Tribal Justice Center
        Funding for tribal justice centers should have been a top priority
    in the BIL. We need law enforcement infrastructure funding to provide
    safety and security on our Reservation. This includes funding for
    tribal courts, detention centers, and treatment centers. Without
    investments in this basic infrastructure, we are not able to provide
    the justice services that our communities and members deserve.
        The Bureau of Indian Affairs-Office of Justice Services (BIA-OJS)
    operates an outdated 48-bed adult detention center for male and female
    inmates in Fort Yates on our Reservation. The detention center was
    built in the 1960s and has long outlived its utility. Detainees need
    facilities that will promote restitution and prepare them for return to
    our communities.
        The population in the BIA-OJS detention center is frequently two to
    three times above the rated bed capacity. To alleviate jail crowding,
    BIA-OJS contracts bed space for long-term adult inmates in a facility
    that is a 772-mile round trip from the Reservation. In addition, our
    Tribal Court is often forced to release prisoners early to alleviate
    crowding to make room for more prisoners.
        The Tribal Court system receives a small BIA allocation that is
    heavily subsidized by the Tribe. Our Tribal Courts are crowded, even
    when spread across three separate buildings. The main courthouse, which
    is located in the same dilapidated building as the BIA-OJS detention
    center, outgrew its ability to meet our needs years ago. The lack of
    space severely limits our ability to adequately handle the Tribal Court
    caseload of 2,000 to 3,000 cases per year.
        Finally, investments in law enforcement infrastructure must be
    backed up by the human infrastructure needed to keep our communities
    safe. This includes adequate law enforcement staffing, judges,
    prosecutors, and law enforcement equipment including the patrol cars
    needed to patrol our large Reservation. Currently we have 10 police
    officers for about 10,000 Reservation residents. In contrast,
    Washington, D.C. has 65 officers for every 10,000 residents. Providing
    safe tribal communities is an important federal responsibility and has
    been under funded for far too long.
                        Tribal Education Infrastructure
        We are also concerned about the lack of funding to improve and
    expand Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) infrastructure. Providing our
    youth with positive places to learn and grow is a top priority of the
    Tribe. In addition, school transportation is a challenge for large land
    base tribes. BIE should consider building dormitories to serve our
    large schools. Dormitories would provide safe environments for at-risk
    children to ensure an increase in successful graduation rates.
        We need a new school for our Rock Creek District. This is our
    school located in valley of the Hunkpapa which is Sitting Bull's home.
    The school is the heart of the community, but it is very remote. They
    have no store or gas station. The nearest grocery store 25 miles away.
    It is very remote.
        Enrollment is down because of the condition of the school. The
    school is currently in 2 sections. A portion of the school is over 100
    years old and the other is 40 years old. Basically nothing works. An
    assessment was done, but there was never any follow up. Our youth
    deserve better and DOI should commit infrastructure funding to fulfill
    the dire needs at our BIE schools.
                                   Conclusion
        The funding provided in the BIL will fulfill important
    infrastructure needs on our Reservation. In particular, we hope to
    complete our Rural Water System and make necessary repairs and upgrade.
    We ask that DOI take every possible action to ensure that funding
    provided under the BIL for national programs is directed to fulfill
    tribal projects. The Federal government must use this funding to
    fulfill its solemn treaty and trust responsibilities.
        We also ask that DOI work to make additional funding available to
    meet basic infrastructure needs on our large land base Reservation.
    After decades of chronic under funding we lack the healthcare
    facilities, schools, roads, and law enforcement facilities needed to
    provide for our members and communities. Funding this critical
    infrastructure will help us to provide safe and secure communities
    while also creating economic opportunities for our members.

        Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Very good. Thank you. Now in
    this letter, they talk about--we have got the bipartisan
    infrastructure bill that passed. It has got so much money. But
    despite that fact, they note that they didn't feel like the
    dollars were particularly well-tailored toward Indian Country.
    And that might well be because the process that the
    infrastructure package came together underneath was unusual.
    Particularly on the House side, maybe not as collaborative or
    as bipartisan as we would have liked. But I think we still have
    an opportunity, through the implementation, to make sure that
    the interests of Indian Country are well taken care of. And I
    will note in this letter they do specifically mention water
    priorities as something that will likely not be adequately
    addressed through that legislation alone.
        And to that end, Chairman Yucupicio, you recommended the
    Army Corps develop a plan for Tribal engagement on
    environmental infrastructure. And then Chairman Seki, you
    recommended that the Corps, for each of their districts, have a
    Tribal liaison. And so, I would want you each to take 1 minute
    to kind of describe to the committee some of the frustrations
    you might have had from a communication perspective in dealing
    with the Federal Government.
        Mr. Yucupicio. OK. The Pascua Yaqui Tribe, yes, we have had
    very, very few dialogues and visits here on the reservation.
    And as you know, with climate change and the drought, the
    Arizona drought and all of those problems that we are facing
    now in Arizona, it is critical, it is super critical to have
    the commitment of the Army Corps and everybody else here to
    look at the issues here with our reservation here being as dry
    as it is. And we are depending on the city of Tucson.
        And they are having all kinds of problems with trying to
    provide water to an ever-growing city. But for us, I think it
    is very critical on all the Tribes that live in the dry desert,
    like we do, to have that relationship and that communication
    and an open door, to be able to communicate with each other and
    they can really, really visit us and come here. And I think
    that is part of the issue is just initiating that dialogue, and
    the true, meaningful relationship with the Army Corps.
        Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Sir, I think that is very well
    said. And, clearly, we will do a better job, as one America at
    targeting those dollars if we have a fuller, deeper, and more
    accurate understanding of your needs; right, sir?
        Mr. Yucupicio. Absolutely. When you start looking at our
    allotment and our relationship with the city of Tucson, it is
    climbing and climbing, and the needs keep getting bigger and
    bigger for the city. And for us it just keeps shrinking and
    shrinking. So, we must find alternative ways and waterways and
    resources in how to limit our usage, use more of the tap water
    district allotment, and all that stuff.
        So, we are working on all kinds of different ways to be
    able to provide water for now and in the future for us. It
    wasn't a congressional bill actually when we got recognized to
    have land and water that was a priority. But to this day, we
    don't have anything like that yet set up.
        So, I really thank you, and I thank the committee for
    listening to us, because when you start looking at the growth
    of this Nation, the Pascua Yaqui Tribe, then we are super
    limited here in this corridor.
        Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Let's get Chairman Seki in a little bit. Sir, what are your
    thoughts?
        Mr. Seki. Thank you, Representative Johnson, for your
    question. We have great difficulty in navigating the various
    regulatory and reporting requirements that Federal agencies
    place upon us in our efforts to improve our resources and
    infrastructure. It is not just an Army Corps problem. As an
    underserved community, we don't have the capacity to manage all
    of Federal hurdles placed on us. The pandemic and the Federal
    response of burdensome grants and more regulations has only
    worsened things for us. Red Lake is a leader in Indian Country,
    but we struggle on a daily basis to keep up to date with new
    funding opportunities, reporting requirements, and the status
    of environmental permit applications.
        The Army Corps permitting process is burdensome and time-
    consuming, and the process gets stalled, leading to needless
    project delays. A Tribal liaison in each region, one who is
    dedicated solely in working with Tribes, could assist in
    resolving permitting issues, increase accountability. But there
    also needs to be change at the national level to reduce
    regulatory and reporting burdens. And I hope my testimony today
    can raise awareness of this need. [Speaking Native language.]
        Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And
    thank you, Madam Chairman. I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you sir. Mr. Stanton followed by Mr.
    Cohen, and then Mr. Huffman. Mr. Stanton, you are recognized.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. My questions
    start with Chairman Yucupicio. Thank you again for sharing your
    Tribe's experience as the first recipient in our State and the
    first Tribal recipient of funds through Arizona's environmental
    infrastructure authority. Chairman, how long has the Tribe been
    working on this important water distribution line?
        Mr. Yucupicio. It has been about 20, 30 years. But if you
    realistically look at, you know, once we came to the
    reservation, these lands here, you know, the first struggle
    was, how do we provide water? We then provided these big old
    tanks that look like oil wells in fields like that. Little did
    we know that there were not caps on top, and there were
    actually flying birds and stuff that were dead in there. And
    that was the drinking water provided at that time here. So,
    there was nothing around here in the desert.
        We then tapped into what the city water line was, and even
    then you start thinking about how much and how are we going to
    grow some day if this is our reservation? And it is being
    provided by the city, but it is not enough.
        And when I start looking at, you know, once this funding
    came--and we thank you for it--and we thank everybody that was
    responsible for it, I truly look forward to minimizing some of
    the drinking potable water from the city of Tucson and using
    our allotment to make sure that we can provide good healthy
    ballfields for our elder, our youth, and everybody else, and
    our health divisions.
        Diabetes and everything else and now COVID being like that,
    it is a hard thing to deal with right now when you start
    thinking of the water and getting water to them in their homes
    and everything else. So, for us, it is a must.
        And we thank you very, very much for being a first Tribe
    and making sure that we can alternate and use our----
        Mr. Stanton. Twenty to thirty years, and now we are able to
    actually start construction on it. It is so important for the
    people of your community and for the entire State of Arizona.
    Your testimony highlights two key issues that could pose
    barriers for other Tribes to participate in the environmental
    infrastructure authority. Cost share and the requirement that
    recipients pay for project costs upfront before getting
    reimbursed by the Corps. My office has heard similar concerns
    from smaller and more rural communities.
        Can you talk a little bit more about the importance of
    adding that flexibility to the environmental infrastructure
    program to ensure that small, rural, and Tribal communities
    with limited resources are not precluded from participating in
    this authority?
        Mr. Yucupicio. Yes. And the funding--the issue on--our
    Tribes--Tribes don't have the funding to be able to cover the
    25 percent, and even more. There are hidden costs and
    everything else once we start doing the budget. And I think the
    more and more when we look at a bigger part of the alternative
    funding sources, Federal, and everything else that can be used,
    that is what Tribes really need. They would have to take away
    like us things to educate, things for some of our housing
    needs, and all that stuff to use some of that funding and find
    Federal funding. I think that is where the key is in there is
    more funding to get these projects underway so we can conserve
    and conserve the water that is really, really sacred and needed
    here in the Southwest for all Tribes.
        Mr. Stanton. That is good. And I am an urban Congress
    Member, but I know that success of our Tribal communities are
    important for the entire State of Arizona. So, that partnership
    is incredibly important.
        I have a question for Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Given the impacts
    of drought and wildfire to Western water supplies, including
    Army Corps facilities, what are the opportunities or barriers
    to the Corps utilizing natural infrastructure and nature-based
    solutions to address these water challenges?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you for the question, Congressman
    Stanton. I think it is excellent, first off, how much
    discussion is taking place in understanding what the Corps can
    do more in addressing water scarcity issues in the West. I
    think we are already seeing progress on what have previously
    been barriers, which is really just interagency coordination,
    either at the Federal level, but also incorporating State and
    local entities.
        But as progress on that front becomes more clear, it is
    going to be important to support efforts to ensure that the
    Corps has the necessary authorities to fully analyze the
    opportunities they have, like restoring wetlands upstream of
    water storage facilities, and things of that nature, and other
    natural infrastructure options. And we would love to see the
    advancement of pilot projects that can demonstrate some of
    these benefits of natural infrastructure in the West.
        Lieutenant General Spellmon had testified back in January
    that there are additional research needs in this field. So, I
    think it is something that is going to be really helpful for us
    all to dig into together.
        Mr. Stanton. Thank you so much. My time is up. I yield
    back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Stanton.
        The order has been changed to Miss Gonzalez-Colon, then
    Cohen, and Mr. Huffman. Miss Gonzalez-Colon, you are
    recognized.
        [No answer.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon?
        [No answer.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. Gone? OK. Mr. Cohen, you are recognized,
    sir.
        Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for
    calling this hearing. This is an important hearing, as we look
    forward to our next WRDA bill. In our last WRDA bill 2020, I
    was proud to sponsor provisions that were included to update
    the Army Corps' environmental justice priorities to promote
    meaningful involvement of minority and low-income communities
    in the formulation of future projects.
        We had a pipeline here in Memphis, the Byhalia pipeline
    that proposed an oil pipeline in predominantly minority
    communities, and it was a heroic effort that led to their
    decision to not go forth with the pipeline because it went
    straight through the minority community's low-income, less
    powerful communities rather than others where it could have
    gone.
        So, just the impact at several predominantly Black
    neighborhoods--and that is the concern that I have and continue
    to have. The 45-mile pipeline would have cut through the
    historic Boxtown community, which got its name after formerly
    enslaved people used scraps of material and wood from train
    boxes to build homes there in the late 19th century. People are
    still there in Boxtown and proud of Boxtown. It is a poor
    community.
        In addition to the company choosing a location because it
    was the ``point of least resistance''--a pretty audacious,
    upfront statement--they either overlooked or ignored the fact
    that the Southwest Memphis community is already burdened by
    other industrialized facilities and possesses community cancer
    rates four times the national average. We have got an oil plant
    down there, and they spew out fumes and TVA did a lot of that,
    too.
        The pipeline was killed due to historic grassroots effort,
    but that is not always the case. It was alarming to see this
    happen, and the community get involved to take advantage and to
    be successful. And we also had help from Vice President Gore,
    and others.
        Because of this incident, I resolved to try to reform the
    nationwide permit process that gave them that opportunity, but
    also to work to ensure environmental justice issues are
    centered properly.
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel, in 2020 WRDA, Congress made some progress
    in directing the Corps to improve the agency's engagement and
    consultation with economically disadvantaged minority
    communities and Tribal communities. However, it didn't go far
    enough, I think. How can we build upon the progress of WRDA
    2020 to improve how the Corps implements work with
    environmental justice in Tribal communities?
        Ms. Hill-Gabriel. Thank you, Congressman Cohen, especially
    for your leadership and passion of these issues. I agree that
    good progress was made in WRDA 2020, but that much more remains
    to be done to improve the Corps' work with disadvantaged
    communities and Tribes.
        It was great to hear Assistant Secretary Connor focused on
    the Biden administration's Justice40 initiative and the
    emphasis on working and supporting and ensuring, you know, or
    analyzing the impacts of disadvantaged communities and
    underserved communities when he testified before the committee
    back in January.
        But I think that ensuring that systems and programs are in
    place to assist the communities with their water resources
    challenges who may not otherwise have the technical capacity to
    identify the project needs, is another place that we can move
    forward in addition to making sure that the past provisions
    that were in WRDA 2020 are actually being carried out.
        So, I thank you, again, for your focus on this issue and
    hope we can work together to keep making sure that this is a
    central focus of WRDA 2022.
        Mr. Cohen. Well, thank you, and your work at the Audubon
    Society, and all that you all do. I am pleased to work with you
    and work on these projects. And I am going to continue to move
    forward.
        In WRDA 2022, I have some additions that I would like to
    see considered in increasing opportunities for assistance by
    expanding the 10 community pilot programs for economically
    disadvantaged communities, to increase capacity and expertise
    within the Army Corps by establishing a new position of senior
    adviser for environmental justice within the Office of the
    Chief of Engineers. They need that. They need somebody that
    will tell them about environmental justice, because right now
    they kind of gloss over or don't have a charge.
        We need to establish a Federal advisory committee on
    environmental justice to better advise the Corps on these
    activities and actions that can be taken to ensure more
    equitable delivery of services and projects. And we need to
    incorporate toxic remediation and ecological restoration,
    navigation, and flood resiliency projects.
        And last but not least, we need to support minority-owned
    businesses by directing the Corps to increase collaboration in
    contracting and subcontracting of minority-owned businesses, to
    improve gender-based and race-based outcomes.
        The Mississippi River, which provides drinking water to
    over 20 million Americans, and the watershed covers 40 percent
    of the continental United States and has suffered from
    excessive pollution, invasive species, wetlands loss and
    destruction, and extreme storm events exacerbated by climate
    change.
        While the Army Corps has the upper Mississippi River
    restoration project, I believe Congress should take bold action
    and champion the transformation, sustainability, and resilience
    of the most important working river in the world.
        I think my time has expired, but if anybody wants to just
    comment on that, the Mississippi River corridor is most
    important, and we need to have something similar to the Great
    Lakes restoration to protect it.
        Thank you, and I look forward to working with members of
    the committee and the panelists on these issues.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. Miss Gonzalez-Colon,
    you are recognized.
        Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair, and all the
    witnesses, and the ranking member for holding this hearing, and
    to all the witnesses for sharing their experiences and needs
    with us. In that sense, as I said, during the last hearing, the
    Corps of Engineers projects have been critical resources I have
    counted on for Puerto Rico. And in the past few years in the
    face of disasters, unprecedented levels of funding were
    provided that enabled us to address projects that have been
    pending for decades.
        But there are still great needs and not just in Puerto
    Rico--the rest of the Nation. But just to give you an example
    of how important those water projects are: Just this weekend,
    rains of over 15 inches have caused widespread flooding across
    the island. This emphasized the need for regular programs to
    address these risks to be kept up to date, to proceed promptly,
    and not to have to need a disaster supplemental to get started.
        Every time WRDA comes around, I support the increase to the
    project limits of sections 205, 208, and 14 continuous
    authority program. Because as time passes, increasing costs of
    labor and materials makes projects that our community needs
    exceed the maximum funding available. And that is one of the
    biggest problems, I assume it is not just Puerto Rico, it is
    the rest of the Nation.
        Just recently under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
    Act, the Corps of Engineers has announced the go-ahead of
    construction in the case of the island of the ecosystem
    restoration of Cano Martin Pena for environmental balance,
    security of infrastructure, and justice for communities.
        The San Juan Harbor Navigation Channel is strategically
    essential to keep open the major port of Puerto Rico as well.
    The flood control [speaking foreign language]. We have also
    seen recent attention. There is a study starting investigation
    for the extension by a further 3 years of the Puerto Rico
    coastal risk study to consider more environmentally friendly
    protection measures. And the flood control study in
    [inaudible], a very vulnerable community that is at the
    historic landfall point for the hurricanes.
        But, again, there are still many pending major projects
    that have finished feasibility studies and Chief's Reports from
    the Army Corps. And with authorizations and the provisions,
    such as the Guanajibo flood protection project, to protect that
    entire town, that has been affected severely by multiple
    natural disasters.
        The San Juan Metro Bay coastal protection project that will
    combine structural and nonstructural measures to combat erosion
    and flooding around the area. Also, there is a need for
    attention and studies for such things as reauthorization
    projects where conditions, requirements, and costs have
    changed. And this is something that is happening with
    inflation, and many other issues.
        But in the case of Puerto Rico, there are changes on the
    cost affected in Guanajibo [Spanish names] and pending section
    205 studies like [Spanish names] just to mention a few.
        The Federal assumption of maintenance of the Port of
    [Spanish name], an important fuel terminal that was originally
    privately owned, and many others across the island. And so,
    hearing today many of the witnesses is just an example of all
    the important areas that need to be addressed. This is not the
    first hearing we've had regarding water resources and water
    projects.
        And I hope we can work together as we did in the
    infrastructure package to make it happen. Thank you, Madam
    Chair, and I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you
    for your comments. And now we turn to Mr. Huffman, you are
    recognized.
        Mr. Huffman. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for this
    hearing. And I would like to begin with Mr. Crowfoot. Mr.
    Crowfoot, I want to follow up on the exchange that you had
    earlier with my colleague from the Sacramento Valley.
        Dredging, of course, is a priority for all of us in our
    districts, but how we do it really matters, especially in
    sensitive habitats. And too often over the years, I have heard
    people talk about the ESA and CESA as if they are just a
    nuisance standing in the way of doing things. Usually the same
    kind of things that have wrecked the delta ecosystem and driven
    species like the longfin and delta smelt to the brink of
    extinction, along with our iconic salmon and steelhead runs.
        So, I know that in this case, the Army Corps' own findings
    show that their hydraulic dredging practices in these areas
    were having significant adverse impacts on the delta smelt and
    the longfin smelt. That is why they were sued. And nobody has
    argued they should not dredge. This is simply a question of how
    they do it and whether they use the latest technology to reduce
    fish mortality.
        So, I want to just see if you agree with me on that. I want
    to give you a chance to clarify that that previous exchange
    with my colleague did not reflect the, unfortunately, all too
    familiar antipathy we sometimes hear towards the Endangered
    Species Act and CESA.
        Mr. Crowfoot. Thanks so much, Congressman. Yeah, let me
    emphasize that we need to manage our rivers and our waterways
    both for economic activity and environmental quality. And we
    can and must do both. So, I think we share the same goal which
    is to enable appropriate dredging in a way that doesn't damage
    or clearly make extinct fish species.
        Mr. Huffman. Thank you for that. Another thing we would
    probably agree on is that there is plenty of dredge material to
    use for levees and for wetland restoration all over the bay
    area and in the delta if we just do a better job on beneficial
    reuse. I know that the Petaluma River in my district is a great
    example. It was finally dredged a little over a year ago after
    not being dredged since 2003. And the dredge spoils were used
    in a nearby park in wetland restoration. A lot of that could be
    used in other parts of the Petaluma Marsh and in all sorts of
    other opportunities. We have got to raise Highway 37, and there
    is going to be an enormous need for beneficial reuse so that we
    can use natural solutions to provide all sorts of priorities.
        So, amazingly, in the year 2022, the Army Corps still hauls
    huge volumes of this valuable material out to sea and just
    dumps it in the ocean. Would you agree that we could do much
    better by the environment and by the natural solutions we need
    for sea level rise and flood protection and other priorities if
    we could find a way to beneficially reuse all of this material
    and put it to work for those priorities?
        Mr. Crowfoot. Absolutely. We clearly need to build our
    climate resilience within the San Francisco Bay and our
    wetlands and on our rivers. And this dredge material is
    beneficial and, in fact, very important. So, from my
    perspective, we need to help the Corps update the approach that
    they use to actually utilize this material to build the
    resilience of both our natural systems and protecting our
    community.
        Mr. Huffman. Thank you. In the time I have left, I want to
    ask a question of Mr. Seki. I was really pleased to hear your
    testimony about how the Red Lake Band of Chippewa has worked
    with the Army Corps of Engineers, something that hasn't always
    happened in years past. That they appear to be engaging in good
    faith, Government-to-Government consultations with your Tribe.
        We have an opportunity to do something like that in the
    northern part of my district. Redwood Creek is a really
    valuable estuary where we need to do a levee setback and some
    other restoration. And, certainly, the local Tribes in that
    area want to be partners.
        Do you have any advice for us as we begin to try to forge
    the kind of partnership that you seem to have developed in your
    region?
        Mr. Seki. Thank you for your question. What we're doing,
    with the activities proposed, up to 25,000 acres of marsh will
    be restored, and water fowl and furbearers will return.
    Seasonal migrations of many fish species will be restored,
    including walleye and lake sturgeon. Our sturgeon were
    important to us for centuries, but they were lost after the dam
    was built. We are bringing the sturgeon back, but restoring the
    connection between the river and the lake is critical. We still
    practice a subsistence lifestyle at Red Lake, and all of these
    species are important to us. Our reservation is blessed with
    natural resources, and not by accident. It is a result of
    strong leadership, forethought of our ancestors, and strong
    conservation stewardship. This is what we are doing.
        Mr. Huffman. Well, congratulations on your success there,
    and I hope to learn more about it and maybe replicate some of
    it in the northern part of my district. Madam Chair, thank you
    for this hearing, and I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Huffman. And that was the
    last of our questioners.
        In closing, I ask unanimous consent that the record of
    today's hearing remain open until such time as our witnesses
    have provided answers to any questions that may be submitted to
    them in writing.
        And I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain
    open for 15 days for additional comments and for information
    submitted by Members or witnesses to be included in the record
    of today's hearing.
        Without objection, so ordered.
        I would also like to thank all our great witnesses,
    especially the Tribal chairmen, for the testimony today. And I
    also thank our Members for their participation. If no other
    Members have anything to add, the committee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 1:28 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                           Submissions for the Record

                                  ----------

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
         from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano, and thank you to our witnesses for
    being here today.
        This is our second hearing of the year in preparation for the
    Committee writing and passing our fifth consecutive bipartisan Water
    Resources Development Act (or WRDA) since 2014.
        I look forward to continuing to build upon the important work our
    Committee has done in the last four WRDA bills.
        Ensuring effective and reliable water infrastructure is vital to
    American families, businesses, farms, and the economic development of
    our country.
        My district is bordered by two of the longest rivers in the United
    States--the Missouri and the Mississippi.
        These Rivers provide millions of Americans with water, provide
    thousands of farmers with irrigation for their farmland, and provide an
    extremely efficient and reliable way to move goods in and out of
    America's heartland.
        That's why a major priority of mine is ensuring our river
    navigation infrastructure on the Mississippi, Missouri, and the rest of
    our nation's waterways gets the investment it desperately needs.
        In addition, we must prioritize flood control.
        A little too much rainfall, and too little focus on flood control,
    can lead to disastrous results for people who live and work along our
    nation's waterways.
        We learned that lesson again the hard way in 2019 when flooding
    along the Missouri River devastated communities from Nebraska clear
    down through to St. Louis.
        I have long been concerned that current river management practices
    prioritize fish and wildlife over the protection of people and
    property.
        And that's led to many of our tax dollars being wasted on
    supersized science experiments instead of being responsibly invested in
    restoring levees and increasing flood resilience.
        Addressing that will be a top priority of mine throughout the
    development of WRDA 2022.
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano. I yield back.

     Post-Hearing Supplement From Witness Hon. Darrell G. Seki, Sr. to His
     Remarks to Hon. Dusty Johnson, Hon. Jared Huffman, and Hon. Grace F.
    Napolitano, and to His Prepared Statement, Submitted for the Record by
                            Hon. Grace F. Napolitano
                                                     February 22, 2022.
    The Honorable Peter DeFazio,
    Chairman,
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
            Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
    The Honorable Grace Napolitano,
    Chairwoman,
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, U.S. House of
            Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
    The Honorable David Rouzer,
    Ranking Member,
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, U.S. House of
            Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
        Dear Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, and Ranking Member
    Rouzer,
        Chi miigwetch (thank you) again for holding the February 8, 2022
    hearing entitled, ``Proposals for a Water Resources Development Act of
    2022: Stakeholder Priorities.'' We greatly appreciate your inclusion of
    tribal governments to express their priorities and ways Congress can
    force the Army Corps of Engineers (Army Corps) to be a better partner
    in Indian Country. In response to several questions posed by
    Subcommittee members in the hearing, Red Lake respectfully submits this
    letter with additional information for the record.
        The Army Corps Routinely Fails to Properly Engage and Communicate
    with Indian Country. Representative Dusty Johnson (R-SD) said he had
    heard that some provisions of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL)
    are not tailored toward the needs of Indian Country--more specifically,
    that certain tribes, like the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, would not be
    able to address their water priorities.
        During the hearing, Red Lake Chairman Darrell Seki Sr. was asked to
    discuss how the lack of clear communication and meaningful engagement
    with tribes has, perhaps, influenced the omission of meaningful tribal
    priorities in the BIL. Chairman Seki responded: ``We have great
    difficulty in navigating the various regulatory and reporting
    requirements that federal agencies place upon us in our efforts to
    improve our resources and infrastructure, it's not just an Army Corps
    problem. As an underserved community, we do not have the capacity to
    manage all of the federal hurdles placed on us. The pandemic, and the
    federal response of burdensome grants and more regulations, has only
    worsened things for us. Red Lake is a leader in Indian Country, but we
    struggle on a daily basis to keep up to date with new funding
    opportunities, reporting requirements, and the status of environmental
    permit applications. The Army Corps permitting process is burdensome
    and time consuming, and the process gets stalled, leading to needless
    project delays.''
        Chairman Seki would like to add the following to his statement:
    ``In regard to frustrations from a communication perspective, the Red
    Lake Nation would like to provide an example that illustrates this
    issue further. In 1995, the Army Corps conducted an Environmental
    Assessment (EA) of proposed changes to its operations manual for the
    dam at the outlet of Red Lake, the primary water resource of the Red
    Lake Nation. The Army Corps proposed several changes that the Red Lake
    government felt was detrimental to the Tribe's interests. Nonetheless,
    the Army Corps issued a draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI)
    for the project, and indicated it would sign the FONSI if no
    substantive comments were received by the end of the comment period (as
    required under the National Environmental Policy Act--NEPA). Despite
    the Red Lake Nation's very reasonable request to the Army Corps
    District Engineer for additional time to comment on the EA--requested
    due to what the Tribe felt was the Corps' incomplete evaluation of
    alternatives and failure to adequately address the Tribe's expressed
    concerns--our request was only begrudgingly granted. The District
    Engineer told us that he would `reluctantly' grant the Tribe's request
    for additional time to comment, after which he said: ``I intend to
    finalize the EA, complete the manual update, and sign the FONSI.'' In
    essence, we were told that while our request for additional time was
    granted, our comments would not affect his decision to sign the FONSI
    regardless of what they were--a direct violation of NEPA and an insult
    to the Red Lake Nation as a sovereign to which the federal government
    has a trust responsibility for. On top of this, the FONSI made no
    mention of coordinating efforts with the Red Lake Nation, even though
    the project was on Red Lake land and affected Red Lake Nation
    resources. However, it did mention that ``operation of the project will
    continue to be coordinated with appropriate State and Federal
    agencies.'' While Red Lake is open to working with federal partners on
    issues affecting our lands, waters, and resources, as stated in my
    testimony, the example above illustrates that time and time again, the
    Army Corps has failed to respectfully communicate with us on matters
    that affect us.''
        Forging a New Path Forward with the Army Corps. Representative
    Jared Huffman (D-CA) asked Chairman Seki: ``I was pleased to hear how
    Red Lake worked with the Corps, something that hasn't always happened,
    and they appear to be negotiating in good faith, government-to-
    government consultation. We have an opportunity to do something like
    that in the northern part of my district, Redwood Creek Estuary
    restoration. Local tribes in the area want to be partners. Do you have
    any advice for us as we begin to forge the kind of partnership you seem
    to have developed?'' Chairman Seki responded: ``What we're doing, with
    the activities proposed, up to 25,000 acres of marsh will be restored,
    and waterfowl and furbearers will return. Seasonal migrations of many
    fish species will be restored, including walleye and lake sturgeon. Our
    sturgeon were important to us for centuries, but they were lost after
    the dam was built. We are bringing the sturgeon back, but restoring the
    connection between the river and the lake is critical. We still
    practice a subsistence lifestyle at Red Lake, and all of these species
    are important to us. Our reservation is blessed with natural resources,
    and not by accident. It is a result of strong leadership, forethought
    of our ancestors, and strong conservation stewardship.''
        Chairman Seki would like to add, ``Because leadership at the Army
    Corps changes regularly it has been very important that our technical
    staff have built relationships and continued outreach with the Army
    Corps technical staff. Without a designated tribal liaison it has been
    difficult to keep the Army Corps engaged. Regular communication with
    incoming leadership can keep the ball rolling, but will not be enough
    without staff on both sides being engaged.
        And specifically to your point of engaging with tribes in your
    district, we might suggest the following, which is based on actual
    events that we undertook a number of years ago in an effort to improve
    relations with the Army Corps. You could facilitate a meeting to
    discuss the strengthening of the estuary restoration effort to include
    all of the affected tribes, and the other key partners. One of those
    tribes will be happy to host the meeting in their community. In
    addition to yourself and other relevant stakeholders, the leader of
    each tribe would be invited, and from the Corps, you would help secure
    the attendance of the Army Corps District Commander, Deputy District
    Commander, and Deputy District Engineer. The different leadership would
    include their staff as well. The meeting would be held in government to
    government fashion, where everyone can express what's important to them
    and what they can bring to the table, and what the next steps should
    be. Another reason why it's important to have the meeting on tribal
    land, there is likely to be a very good meal provided. The importance
    of this should not be underestimated. At the similar meeting we hosted,
    it was the Corps District Commander's first visit to Indian Country,
    and he was so impressed with the meal that was served, he honored the
    actions of the cook with a Challenge Coin. The relations between Red
    Lake and this Commander remained very good until his departure from the
    District.''
        Red Lake's Recommended Changes to Improve Partnership with the Army
    Corps. Chairwoman Grace Napolitano (D-CA) commented: ``Pascua Yaqui and
    Red Lake, you're part of the conversation to improve the partnership
    between the Corps and tribes in addressing historic needs, you made
    valuable suggestions on improving partnerships, including appointing
    tribal liaisons in Corps districts, as well as addressing the inability
    of many tribes to be able to financially partner with the Corps. Can
    you summarize key changes you would recommend to improve partnership
    with the Army Corps?'' As time was short, Chairman Seki responded:
    ``That is a great question. I don't have those exact details at this
    moment but I'd be more than happy to circle back with your office
    following the hearing.''
        In his written testimony, Chairman Seki urged the Army Corps to
    utilize tribal liaisons to improve its communication and overall
    working relationships with Indian Country as well as reducing
    regulatory and reporting barriers, ``A tribal liaison in each region,
    one who is dedicated solely to working with tribes, could assist in
    resolving permitting issues, and increase accountability. But there
    also needs to be change at the national level to reduce regulatory and
    reporting burdens, and I hope my testimony today can raise awareness of
    this need.'' Additionally, Chairman Seki would like to add:
        ``Three key changes to improve partnership with the Army Corps
    includes:
        1.  The Army Corp Should Hire Tribal Liaisons. Dedicated Tribal
    liaisons in each District would be critical to helping tribal staff
    navigate the giant organization that is the Army Corps. This position
    could also keep Indian Country abreast of any current activities being
    conducted cooperatively between the Army Corps and tribes to ensure
    deadlines are met, momentum is maintained, and projects are completed
    on time. This could apply to permitting, projects, grants, or any other
    cooperative activity.
              Additionally, Tribal liaisons should be hired as full time
    positions and be required to have expertise in working with Tribes in
    its given region. Currently, many federal agencies utilize a practice
    of assigning the role of `tribal liaison' to an existing federal
    employee who already has a full slate of job duties. Their role as
    tribal liaison is usually just an honorary title that serves only to
    comply with departmental regulations or existing Executive Orders on
    consultation. However, when someone is able to fully commit to the job,
    Indian Country sees meaningful results. For example, the U.S. Fish and
    Wildlife Service (FWS) used to employ a dedicated tribal liaison in our
    region who maintained regular contact with the Red Lake Nation,
    including attending onsite meetings and providing direct technical
    assistance to tribal programs and staff. After his retirement, the FWS
    underwent a re-organization and a decision was made to transfer the
    tribal liaison duties to another FWS employee whose actual job was as a
    Wildlife Refuge Manager. While this new liaison does continue to email
    tribal contacts with information of interest, direct engagement with
    the Red Lake Nation has suffered because the employee's primary
    priority is his duties as refuge manager.
              In regard to the Army Corps efforts in working with tribes,
    there is great confusion about who is tasked with being the designated
    liaison for our region. On the Army Corp's Tribal Nations Homepage,
    there is a link to the ``Army Corps Tribal Liaisons Directory,'' but
    the link is dead. We understand that there is an employee in the
    Regulatory Division in the St. Paul District that is identified as a
    tribal liaison for regulatory matters. However, the Army Corps is a
    much broader agency than just regulatory matters. A dedicated, single
    point-of-contact liaison serving the greater range of Army Corps
    functions would better serve the intended role of such a liaison (e.g.
    maintaining contact, providing technical assistance, informing the
    tribe of changes, etc.) and would go far in re-building the trust
    between tribes and the Army Corps that has eroded over the years.
        2.  The Army Corps Must Review its Policies as it Relates to Tribal
    Consultation and Disclosing Impacts on Tribal Communities.
    Additionally, Red Lake encourages the Army Corps to revisit its
    existing policies with respect to consultation on all aspects of Army
    Corps activities that affect tribal land and resources as well as its
    failure to sufficiently analyze and failure to disclose the significant
    potential environmental and human impacts for projects such as the
    Dakota Access Pipeline, which poses a significant threat to the well-
    being of Great Plains tribes. The Army Corps must recommit to the
    tribal consultation and environmental review processes to ensure that
    it can truly carry out projects in an economically and environmentally
    responsible manner and Congress must hold them accountable.
        3.  The Army Corps Should End its Practice of Rotating Out the
    District Command Every Few Years. Red Lake believes this practice is
    hard on tribes, especially if they have long term projects with the
    Corps like we do. Every few years tribes must educate the new District
    Command on the history of project activities and problems associated
    with them. And then when progress resumes, the District Command rotates
    out again, and we're back to square one. Imagine the loss of
    institutional knowledge and progress in Congress, if each member were
    limited to one term.''

        Miigwetch (thank you) for taking the time to consider the
    priorities of Indian Country as you prepare for the 2022 WRDA package.
    We look forward to working with you to hold the Army Corps accountable
    for its work on tribal lands and paving a new pathway forward which
    leads to enhanced communication and partnership between the Army Corps
    and Indian Country.
            Sincerely,
                                          Darrell G. Seki, Sr.,
                    Tribal Chairman, Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians.

    cc:  Representative Jared Huffman (D-CA)
        Representative Dusty Johnson (R-SD)

                                    Appendix

                                  ----------

        Question from Hon. John Katko to Hon. Wade Crowfoot, Secretary,
                      California Natural Resources Agency

        Question 1. Unfortunately, despite the strong connection between
    maintaining our nation's water infrastructure and strengthening
    recreational boating economies, benefit cost ratio (BCR) calculations
    conducted by USACE and OMB fail to account for the benefits of
    recreation when prioritizing HMTF projects. In failing to consider the
    full range of costs and benefits when undertaking maintenance and
    dredging projects, USACE and OMB significantly disadvantage recreation-
    based ports, as well as harbors and marinas that host both commercial
    and recreational activities.
        With coastal communities across the United States from New York to
    California facing significant resiliency and economic challenges, while
    the recreation sector is experiencing historic demand, can you explain
    the potential benefits of HMTF funding decisions accounting for
    recreation economic impacts?
        Answer. Water infrastructure is central to the prosperity of
    California and the American West, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    plays a key role. We are grateful that the 2020 WRDA helps put
    Californians to work, with its notable investments for the Ports of Los
    Angeles and Long Beach. We acknowledge the important role of
    infrastructure projects across the country, and value the environmental
    benefits, recreational opportunities, and open space development, in
    addition to the public safety aspects of flood protection projects.
        Dredging waterways to protect navigation is a major Corps
    responsibility and appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance Trust
    Fund--often used for maintenance dredging--allows harbors to remain
    accessible not only to their customers, but also to a host of services
    and benefits that have ongoing impacts to the community and economy at
    large. In California particularly, the sediment dredged from a harbor
    is often placed on the shoreline adjacent to the harbor, which assists
    in nourishing California's beaches and protecting coastal
    infrastructure from damaging storm events and sea level rise. We
    recognize recreational water sites are often important economic drivers
    for coastal communities, for both immediate and long-term economic and
    related benefits. For example, recreational boating from harbors and
    marinas supports the local economy, as harbor aquatic centers foster a
    future generation of environmental stewards through boating programs
    for youth and school groups. Accounting for the recreational benefit of
    sediment placement could provide a more holistic analysis of the
    economic impact of an infrastructure project.

       Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Hon. Michel Bechtel,
         Mayor, Morgan's Point, Texas, and Board President, Gulf Coast
                              Protection District

        Question 1. As you made evident in your testimony, the Gulf Coast
    Protection District is of critical importance not only to Texas'
    coastal communities but to the entire nation. And the International
    Inland Port of Dallas is a crucial connecting point for goods
    transported from Gulf Coast Ports as they pass northbound or westbound
    by freight rail or truck. In fact, the Union Pacific Dallas Intermodal
    Terminal in South Dallas provides a tremendous amount of intermodal
    access to the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Can you describe how
    the businesses at the Dallas Inland Port are adversely affected by the
    Gulf Coast storms you mention in your testimony?
        Answer. Though currently there is minimal impact on containerized
    freight moving by rail from Port Houston to Dallas due to Gulf Coast
    storms, it is a priority to shift to this mode of transportation in the
    future and to significantly increase the amount of freight moved to
    Dallas by rail, particularly in light of the supply chain disruptions
    that exist in the U.S. today. Little cargo moves by rail from Port
    Houston to the Dallas Inland Port and hasn't done so for years, as it
    primarily moves by truck. This is another reason that shift would be
    beneficial--the trucking industry can be very adversely impacted by
    storm events from causes ranging from blocked roads and dangerous
    conditions to no available goods to pack or people to load them.
        Trucks move the supply chain for the top 10 commodities including
    electronics, grocery and convenient store goods, hardware, gravel,
    grains, and gasoline. With over seventy (70) percent of freight by
    weight moved by trucking, shipments to critical connection points for
    distribution such as the International Inland Port of Dallas will
    experience significant disruption. Truck driver shortages, a key
    component of the human infrastructure, and capacity affected by storm
    damage impacting supply chains, will intensify following major
    hurricanes and extend delays further.

        Question 2. How can my colleagues and I on the Transportation and
    Infrastructure Committee and the Texas congressional delegation best
    assist the Gulf Coast Protection District?
        Answer. The Gulf Coast Protection District (the District) is
    grateful for the steady support Congress has demonstrated in getting
    the Coastal Texas Study to this point in the process. Supporting
    authorization of construction of the Coastal Texas Study in the 2022
    Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) will ensure that the District is
    able to continue its mission of being the nonfederal sponsor of these
    projects. As you may know, the District is also the nonfederal sponsor
    of the projects identified in the Sabine to Galveston Study that are
    located in the District's territory, together constituting the coastal
    barrier system. We have also requested that the 2022 WRDA grant a
    suspension of interest accrual on those projects through 2025. This
    pause will allow the district to solidify funding while not adding to
    the financial burden in the complicated funding process of this new
    District.
        It is important to note that sixty (60) percent of US oil
    consumption is tied to fuel while forty (40) percent is linked to oil
    derivatives that are key to the manufacturing of consumer products.
    Major storms impacting petrochemical and port infrastructure would
    significantly disrupt manufacturing, retailers, and business operation
    supply chains in states across the nation. Approximately ninety-six
    (96) percent of all manufactured goods are directly touched by the
    business of chemistry. Roughly, forty-two (42) percent of the nation's
    specialty chemical stock required in a wide range of everyday products
    used by consumers and industry is produced from facilities along upper
    Texas coast. The business of converting these basic chemicals into
    textiles, food and beverage packaging, automotive parts and safety
    glass, home furnishings, construction and roofing materials, paints and
    coatings, pharmaceuticals, and fertilizers occurs in other states, many
    of whom are represented on this committee. Thank you again for yours
    and the Committee's commitment. We are honored to collaborate with this
    distinguished body.

        Question 3. With respect to the project, do you know if the Army
    Corps' has specific plans in place to ensure minority participation as
    it moves forward?
        Answer. Federal Executive Order 12432 directs federal agencies with
    substantial procurement or grantmaking authority promote and increase
    the utilization of Minority-Owned and Women-Owned Business Enterprises
    (M/WBEs). Following procurement guidelines under 2 CFR 200.321, the
    District must make efforts to ensure that contractors and
    subcontractors funded in whole or in part with federal financial
    assistance encourage participation in contracts and other economic
    opportunities by small and minority firms and women-owned business
    enterprises (WBEs) whenever possible. The District takes the
    responsibility of this obligation very seriously and seeks to work
    collaboratively with the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) in meeting
    the M/WBE objectives.
        The Corps will ensure that all socioeconomic categories will be
    considered for prime and subcontractor opportunities. The Corps
    conducts market research for all projects using the System for Award
    Management (SAM.gov) and will ask that all interested small businesses
    and minority businesses review the site for upcoming opportunities.
    Support is in place for businesses needing assistance with registering
    at SAM.gov, through their local Procurement Technical Assistance Center
    (PTAC) which is usually found at a local college or university. The
    Corps Galveston District is also offering free virtual industry days
    later this month to provide information including overviews on the
    entire Galveston District program: specific overviews on navigation,
    operations and maintenance, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
    (IIJA) and Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (DRSAA)
    overview, native PTAC program overview, projects of interest,
    acquisition tool updates with the architect and engineering, and the
    construction multiple-award contract actions.

     Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Mario Cordero, Executive
       Director, Port of Long Beach, California, and Chairman, Board of
              Directors, American Association of Port Authorities

        Question 1. I am wondering, what is the relationship between the
    Port of Long Beach and the Dallas Inland Port? Roughly, how much
    business does your port do with the Dallas IIPOD?
        Answer. Approximately 53,186 twenty-foot equivalent containers
    (TEUs) of imported goods are delivered to Dallas, Texas via the Port of
    Long Beach annually. Approximately 19,426 TEUs are exported from Dallas
    through the Port of Long Beach annually. These figures are Interior
    Point Intermodal (IPI) intact rail moves tracked during Commercial Year
    2021. The Port's data system, PIERS, does not track trans-loaded cargo.

        Question 2. In what ways will the dredging project at the Port of
    Long Beach benefit your relationship and the business the port conducts
    with the Dallas Inland Port? Secondly, how will the dredging project
    relieve the supply chain backlog?
        Answer. A potential outcome of the Port of Long Beach Deep Draft
    Navigation Improvement project is reduced time for vessels waiting to
    enter or exit the Port due to weather conditions or waiting for the
    right tidal conditions. The efficiency of the movement of the vessels
    into and out of the Port may be increased, and potentially reduce the
    time interval between a vessel leaving and another vessel berthing at
    the marine terminal. It will also allow for larger vessels to be served
    at the Port.
        All these improvements will result in greater efficiencies and the
    faster movement of goods moving in and out of the Port of Long Beach to
    and from Dallas and other U.S. cargo destinations

     Questions from Hon. Steve Cohen to Julie Hill-Gabriel, Vice President
         for Water Conservation and Acting Vice President for Coastal
                     Conservation, National Audubon Society

        Question 1. How is the Army Corps being engaged in the Mississippi
    River Restoration and Resilience Initiative (MRRRI)?
        Answer. The Mississippi River is a vital ecological, economic, and
    cultural resource that continuously serves the people of the United
    States, and is designated by Congress as both a nationally significant
    ecosystem and navigation system. The Mississippi River provides
    drinking water to over 20 million Americans. The diverse habitats along
    the river host a globally significant flyway supporting over 325
    species of birds. Audubon is a proud supporter of the MRRRI bill (H.R.
    4202) which will create a federal program to provide leadership,
    funding, and guidance to implement a ``whole of the river'' approach to
    restore the river.
        MRRRI is designed to fund and advance restoration that is
    complementary to activities carried out by the Army Corps on the
    Mississippi River. To help ensure that this happens, MRRRI formally
    designates the Army Corps as a relevant agency to provide input into
    MRRRI planning. Per the bill text, relevant federal agencies may enter
    agreements with the MRRRI Director, collaborate with the MRRRI Director
    to select projects and activities, provide consultation regarding
    research, monitoring and ``other efforts to promote the restoration and
    resiliency of the Mississippi River Corridor'', and engage in a MRRRI
    science forum to identify knowledge gaps and develop an integrated
    science plan.

        Question 2. I understand that the MRRRI is similar to the Great
    Lakes Restoration. There are concerns about relying too much on the
    Great Lakes example because that effort closely involved the states and
    still took over a decade. On the Mississippi River, our needs are more
    urgent and the disasters much more severe. How is MRRRI unique to the
    Mississippi River and what has been done to ensure close state
    cooperation and continued operation of commerce on the river?
        Answer. We agree that there is real urgency to restore the
    ecological health of the Mississippi River and the resilience of
    Mississippi River communities. MRRRI will establish a Mississippi River
    National Program Office, which will coordinate MRRRI programs and
    activities focused on improving water quality, building community
    resilience, protecting and restoring wildlife habitat, and preventing
    the spread of invasive aquatic species. This coordination will happen
    across federal agencies and with State agency and community
    involvement. MRRRI builds in extensive coordination and consultation
    requirements at every step of the process (from goal setting, to action
    plan development, to project selection) to ensure close state
    cooperation. MRRRI will leverage existing federal and state programs
    and utilize public input to complement efforts already underway.
        MRRRI will provide additional critical resources for achieving
    these objectives, but it will not be the only mechanism for doing so.
    For example, the Army Corps will continue to plan and carry out large-
    scale river restoration efforts and will continue to operate and
    maintain navigation on the river and construct new navigation projects
    as appropriate. Other state, federal, local, and NGO restoration
    efforts will also continue.

        Question 3. Mississippi River mayors have been working closely with
    not just ecological restoration interests throughout the Mississippi
    River Corridor, but also the eight different economies that operate on
    the Mississippi River and employ 1.5 million Americans through ten
    states and generate nearly $500 billion in annual revenue. To that end,
    the SMRT Act includes new grants to deploy natural infrastructure. How
    is MRRRI supporting natural infrastructure deployment?
        Answer. MRRRI's fundamental focus is on protecting, restoring, and
    deploying natural infrastructure to improve ecosystem and community
    resilience. MRRRI provides clear criteria and focus areas to ensure
    effective deployment of natural infrastructure solutions. These
    include, but are not limited to: projects that ``protect or restore
    naturally occurring hydrologic, geomorphic, and ecological functions
    and processes, including the restoration or rehabilitation of wetlands,
    instream habitats, living shorelines, or upland habitats'' or
    ``increase water retention and infiltration through actions that
    promote a healthy soil ecosystem, including maximizing soil cover,
    maximizing soil biodiversity, and maximizing the presence of living
    roots''.
        We are encouraged to see that natural infrastructure is one of the
    eligible uses for grant funding in the SMRT Act, in addition to a focus
    on other economic development and infrastructure investments. MRRRI and
    the SMRT Act provide complementary solutions for the multitude of
    challenges facing the Mississippi River. We look forward to working
    with Representative Cohen's office on Mississippi River restoration and
    conservation issues moving forward.

     Question from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Julie Hill-Gabriel, Vice
    President for Water Conservation and Acting Vice President for Coastal
                     Conservation, National Audubon Society

        Question 1. In my congressional district, I am proud to report that
    Audubon Dallas is quite active. Founded in 1973, the Dallas area
    Audubon is primarily responsible for managing and maintaining the 600-
    acre Cedar Ridge Preserve in southwest Dallas County, and my staff and
    I have worked closely with them over the years.
        In your testimony you mention the excellent work the Audubon
    Society is doing on restoration projects in the Everglades, the
    Mississippi River and in Coastal Louisiana. In Texas, we have serious
    issues related to coastal flooding along the Gulf Coast area near
    Houston and in South Texas along the Rio Grande Valley. We also have
    serious inland flooding issues in the Dallas-Ft. Worth area. Can you
    speak to some of the work you are engaging in to address these issues
    in Texas and your work to restore and enhance ecosystems in the state?
        Answer:

    Coastal Resilience

        Staff of the National Audubon Society in Texas continue the work of
    protecting wildlife, conserving habitat, and inspiring environmental
    stewardship through outreach and education; this body of work began on
    the Texas Coast in 1923. Today, Audubon Texas works with its coastal
    wardens and strategic partners to manage 177 islands along the Texas
    coast with islands stretching from Galveston Bay to the southernmost
    reaches of the Lower Laguna Madre. Work is currently focused on a
    subset of islands on the upper, middle, and lower Texas coast. For
    example, Audubon is working with partners and the Texas General Land
    Office to beneficially use dredge material obtained from the
    maintenance of Texas shipping channels to increase bird island habitat
    in Matagorda Bay along the middle Texas Coast. Audubon staff also
    participate on the Technical Advisory Committee for the Texas Coastal
    Resiliency Master Plan, a process managed by the Texas General Land
    Office.
        Audubon works to support expanded populations of endangered
    Whooping Cranes on the Texas Coast. Audubon Texas is working with
    partners to develop a strategic conservation framework for Whooping
    Cranes, one of the rarest North American birds, and also one of the
    largest and most magnificent. Through this project Audubon and partners
    will identify priority habitats and conservation practices that can be
    enacted with private landowners and engage coastal communities around
    conservation of this iconic species. Through this work, Audubon has the
    opportunity to connect its coastal restoration and grasslands
    conservation work.
        With the 100th anniversary of Audubon's Texas Coastal Program in
    2023, our goal is to create a roadmap for the future that will include
    working with partners to make rookery islands and other estuarine
    habitats more resilient to future stressors such as relative sea level
    rise and coastal erosion. We are appreciative of the work to make Gulf
    Restoration funds available through the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill
    Natural Resource Damage Assessment program and the Texas Trustee
    Implementation Group. We fully support the draft plan released in
    February 2022, and appreciate the opportunity to work with partners to
    make the proposed avian habitat restoration and resilience projects a
    reality.
        Audubon Texas is actively engaged on key policy issues up and down
    the Texas coast, focused especially on understanding how emerging and
    planned infrastructure may impact coastal communities, local water
    quality, and shoreline integrity. We are engaged on issues such as new
    petrochemical complex construction, community and utility-scale solar
    siting, offshore wind, private space exploration, and how we can meet
    the challenges of providing water for our communities while ensuring we
    protect the natural systems around them that provide flood attenuation,
    surge protection, and robust ecosystems that support economic
    development. According to NOAA, sea level rise projections will hit
    Texas especially hard, with parts of the coast expecting relative rise
    of nearly two feet by 2060. Future stressors such as this may
    disproportionately affect fenceline communities neighboring the
    historic and future industrial complexes that characterize key swaths
    of the Texas coast, underscoring the need for incorporating sound
    science and engagement on these issues.

    Urban Conservation Issues

        Audubon Texas is active in urban flood issues in Houston. Audubon
    Texas's Executive Director, Lisa Gonzalez, serves on the Harris County
    Community Flood Resilience Task Force and was appointed to that
    position in 2020 by Harris County Precinct 2 Commissioner, Adrian
    Garcia. Lisa's background as a coastal ecologist brings expertise to
    Task Force deliberations focused on nature-based infrastructure, and
    the unique set of issues posed by the development of inland flood
    mitigation strategies in an expanding coastal urban center.
        The National Audubon Society in Texas manages three Audubon Centers
    and one sanctuary located in Dallas-Fort Worth (Trinity River Audubon
    Center and Dogwood Canyon Audubon Center), San Antonio (Mitchell Lake
    Audubon Center), and Brownsville (the Sabal Palm Sanctuary managed in
    partnership with Gorgas Science Foundation). These properties provide
    vitally important nature-based infrastructure and are located in urban
    watersheds that experience historic environmental justice and social
    equity issues. Dogwood Canyon Audubon Center--located in Cedar Hill,
    Texas--partners with the neighboring Cedar Ridge Preserve, and Audubon
    Dallas is valued local Audubon chapter in the greater Dallas-Fort Worth
    metroplex. Audubon Centers also collaborate with local universities
    such as UT Dallas. The Trinity River Audubon Center hosts UNIV 3310, a
    class of UT Dallas students engaged in service learning about the
    environment.
        Audubon's work with local chapters may be best exemplified though
    Lights Out Texas, a campaign of education, awareness, and action that
    focuses on turning out lights at night during the spring and fall
    migrations to help protect the billions of migratory birds that fly
    over Texas annually. This program currently led by our partner, Texan
    by Nature, will come under the leadership of Audubon Texas in Fall
    2022. Lights Out Texas is a collaborative effort with local Audubon
    chapters, like Audubon Dallas and Houston Audubon, universities such as
    Texas A&M University, and other nonprofits such as the Texas
    Conservation Alliance located in North Texas. The program offers a
    unique opportunity to connect bird conservation to the issue of energy
    efficiency and conservation in Texas. Through Lights Out Texas, Audubon
    and our partners seek to work with building owners and operators across
    the state of Texas to create bird-friendly communities. Because what is
    good for birds, is good for people too. We look forward to working with
    Representative Johnson's office on additional restoration and
    conservation issues in Texas moving forward.

     PROPOSALS FOR A WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2022: MEMBERS' DAY
                                    HEARING

                                  ----------

                           WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 2022

                      House of Representatives,
       Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
                Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m. in
    room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon.
    Grace F. Napolitano (Chair of the subcommittee) presiding.

                                 March 14, 2022
        SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

        TO:       Members, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
        FROM:   Staff, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
        RE:       Subcommittee Hearing on ``Proposals for a Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022: Members' Day Hearing''
    _______________________________________________________________________

                                    PURPOSE
        The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment will meet on
    Wednesday, March 16, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. EDT in 2167 Rayburn House
    Office Building and by video conferencing via Zoom to receive Member
    testimony related to the development of a new water resources
    development act (WRDA). The purpose of this hearing is to provide
    Members with an opportunity to testify before the Subcommittee on their
    WRDA priorities related to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps).
    This testimony will help to inform the drafting of a new WRDA for 2022,
    which the committee expects to approve this year.
                                   BACKGROUND
        The Corps is the federal government's largest water resources
    development and management agency.\1\ The Corps' primary missions are
    riverine and coastal navigation, the reduction of flood damage risks
    along inland and coastal waters, and projects to restore and protect
    the environment. The Corps also participates in the generation of
    hydropower, provides water storage opportunities to cities and
    agricultural and industrial interests, participates in the construction
    of environmental infrastructure projects, assists in national
    emergencies, and manages a recreation program. To achieve its mission,
    the Corps plans, designs, and constructs water resources development
    projects which are authorized through biennial WRDA legislation, the
    last of which was enacted in 2020.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See generally, https://www.usace.army.mil/missions.
        \2\ Division AA of Pub. L. 116-260.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        A WRDA is the authorizing vehicle for Corps' policy, studies, and
    construction of projects. To date, Congress has received 15 Reports
    from the Chief of Engineers and three Director's Reports for projects.
    The Corps also submitted its 7001 Annual Report to Congress on Future
    Water Resources Development for 2021 in November 2021. The 7001 Annual
    Report for 2022, due in February of this year, has not yet been
    received. Access to these reports can be found on the Committee
    website.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ https://transportation.house.gov/committee-activity/issue/
    water-resources-development-act-of-2022.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Mrs. Napolitano. Good morning. I call this hearing to
    order. Today is the third hearing in a row for this
    subcommittee on various perspectives for a new Water Resources
    Development Act, WRDA. Importantly, today we will hear directly
    from Members of Congress on their priorities on water resources
    issues affecting their districts directly. I look forward to
    hearing this testimony from all our Members, and working with
    my colleagues on the subcommittee to address the issues today
    in our new WRDA 2022.
        Let me start by asking unanimous consent that the Chair be
    authorized to declare recess during today's hearing.
        And without objection, so ordered.
        The testimony we receive today will help to inform us on
    what matters most to our colleagues and the Nation as we move
    forward with drafting legislation. This local perspective is
    key to helping our communities achieve the desired outcomes,
    and ensuring the Corps' expertise is accessible to all those
    who seek it.
        We are currently developing our fifth consecutive
    bipartisan WRDA bill. Thank you very much. This is clear
    evidence that WRDA has become a product of its own success. Our
    constituents demand and now expect that we move forward in
    developing this legislation every Congress. This consistency
    and predictability is also essential to the Corps itself and
    stakeholders across the country.
        I look forward to working with all of my colleagues on both
    sides of the aisle in enacting a fifth consecutive WRDA for
    2022.
        Thank you to all Members who have made the time to come
    before the committee today. I look forward to your testimony
    and working with you to write another successful WRDA bill and
    continue the important work of the Corps for water resources
    projects nationwide.
        [Mrs. Napolitano's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in
    Congress from the State of California, and Chair, Subcommittee on Water
                           Resources and Environment
        This hearing is our third in a series this year to inform our
    development of a Water Resources Development Act for 2022. The Army
    Corps of Engineers are our largest water managers in the nation, and
    our resident experts on everything from flood prevention, to water
    supply, to aquatic ecosystem restoration.
        We have so far heard excellent testimony from Assistant Secretary
    of the Army for Civil Works, Michael Connor, as well as Lieutenant
    General Scott Spellmon, Chief of Engineers at the Corps.
        We've also heard from highly engaged stakeholders, who shared
    helpful insight into the impacts and policies of the Corps' work.
    Truly, every different perspective is helpful to our work here.
        Today, we welcome Members of the House to present their priorities
    for consideration in WRDA 2022. The Corps operates nationwide, with
    impacts on just about every single district in the country.
        With a reach so far and wide, we need to make sure we recognize the
    district-specific issues facing our communities. These will be totally
    different on the east coast versus the west, and even different within
    a particular state.
        The testimony we receive today will help to inform us on what
    matters most to our colleagues as we move forward with drafting
    legislation. This local perspective is key to helping our communities
    achieve their desired outcomes and ensuring the Corps' expertise is
    accessible to all those who seek it.
        We are currently developing our fifth consecutive, bipartisan, WRDA
    bill. This is clear evidence that WRDA has become a product of its own
    success. Our constituents demand and now expect that we move forward in
    developing this legislation every Congress. This consistency and
    predictability is also essential to the Corps itself, and stakeholders
    across the country.
        I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the
    aisle in enacting a fifth consecutive WRDA for 2022.
        Thank you to all Members who have made time to come before the
    Committee today. I look forward to your testimony and working with you
    to write another successful WRDA bill and continue the important work
    of the Corps for water resources projects nationwide.

        Mrs. Napolitano. And at this time I would like to yield,
    and am pleased to yield to my partner in this endeavor, ranking
    member Mr. Rouzer, for any comments and thoughts.
        Mr. Rouzer. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. And I want to
    congratulate you on your gold de Fleury medal that you received
    from the Army Corps of Engineers for your significant
    contribution to the Army Corps. I thought that was a really
    nice ceremony that we had the other day, and I was really proud
    to be a part of that with you. It is well deserved.
        I appreciate the opportunity to hear from our witnesses
    today. Today's hearing marks the third hearing of the House of
    Representatives' portion of the drafting of WRDA for 2022. And
    as I mentioned in our last two WRDA hearings, this is one of
    the most important pieces of legislation that we do here, on
    the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. And it is one
    of the best examples of Congress working the way it should.
        Since 2014, Congress has passed a WRDA bill every 2 years.
    We plan to keep that trend moving.
        In addition to being on a dependable schedule, these talks
    have been bipartisan, and it has made a big difference for all
    stakeholders, and in particular, improving our water
    infrastructure.
        In fact, the 2020 WRDA passed by voice vote in the House.
    And hopefully, we will have another such voice vote.
        I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides
    of the aisle here on the committee and the full House to pass
    another bipartisan WRDA. And in our previous WRDA hearing, we
    heard testimony from witnesses representing a cross-section of
    those partnering with Army Corps of Engineers on a variety of
    programs, ranging from storm surge protection to navigation at
    our ports to environmental infrastructure.
        Today, we will hear directly from our colleagues here in
    Congress on the priorities that are important to them and their
    districts. I look forward to hearing about these Member
    priorities and how they will be of benefit to their communities
    and our country. Thank you to our colleagues who are providing
    testimony before us today.
        [Mr. Rouzer's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress
     from the State of North Carolina, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
                        Water Resources and Environment
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano. I appreciate you holding this hearing.
        Today's hearing marks the third hearing of the House of
    Representatives' portion of the drafting of a Water Resources
    Development Act (WRDA) for 2022.
        As I mentioned in our last two WRDA hearings, this is one of the
    most important pieces of legislation that we do here on the
    Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
        WRDA is one of the best examples of Congress working the way it
    should. Since 2014, Congress has passed a WRDA bill every two years. In
    addition to being on a dependable schedule, these talks have been
    bipartisan, and it has made a big difference for all stakeholders and
    our water infrastructure. In fact, in 2020 WRDA passed by voice vote in
    the House.
        I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the
    aisle here on the Committee and the full House to pass another
    bipartisan WRDA this year.
        In our previous WRDA hearing, we heard testimony from witnesses
    representing a cross-section of those partnering with the Army Corps of
    Engineers on a variety of programs, ranging from storm surge protection
    to navigation at ports to environmental infrastructure.
        Today, we'll hear directly from our colleagues in Congress on the
    priorities that are important to them and their constituents. I look
    forward to hearing about these member priorities and how they will be
    of benefit to their communities and our country.

        Mr. Rouzer. And, Madam Chair, I yield back.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Rouzer, and from your lips
    to God's ears on the fifth WRDA.
        At this time I am pleased to yield to the chair of the full
    committee, Mr. DeFazio, for any thoughts he may have.
        Mr. DeFazio. Madam Chair, thank you. And also, again,
    congratulations on recognition of your tremendous work.
        Grace has focused and been focused on water--obviously,
    being from California sharpens your focus--since the day I met
    her. So, she has been a tremendous advocate for WRDA bills, for
    the Corps, and these necessary projects.
        As was stated earlier, this was a tradition reinstated
    after years of lapse by former Chairman Bill Shuster. And we
    have continued it, and fully intend to continue it again this
    year. And as the ranking member pointed out, we passed the bill
    unanimously in the House not once, not twice, but three times,
    with some modifications, because the Senate can't legislate. So
    we passed a bill. I negotiated with then-Chair Wicker. We came
    to an agreement on some changes. We passed it again. Then I
    don't remember why we had to pass it the third time.
        And finally, we only got it passed by melding it into the
    giant year-end omnibus, which required a new set of
    negotiations with Senator Shelby, who wanted further changes,
    somewhat diluting what we wanted to do, which was spend down
    the accumulated balance of taxes collected from the American
    people of $10 billion that was dedicated to harbor maintenance,
    starting under the Reagan administration.
        And I had twice passed bills out of this committee when the
    Republicans controlled the House, but Paul Ryan hated the idea
    personally and had it taken out in the rule each time, even
    though it had come out of committee unanimously. And then, when
    we took over, we finally were able to move legislation. But the
    first bill we couldn't get done, and the second bill we did.
        So, we finally freed up the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund,
    $10 billion. Instead of spending it out in 5 years, which I had
    proposed, it will be 10. But this is money that will be well
    spent. I mean, the Corps of Engineers, if you look at all of
    their obligations and duties across the United States of
    America, has a critical asset backlog of about $40 billion. So,
    even with the major amounts of money in the IIJA, and freeing
    up the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, the Corps is still going
    to have to choose and set priorities among its projects.
        That is why we are here today, to hear from Members for
    critical needs in their district so we can help the Corps,
    which is now better funded but not totally adequately funded,
    to best divine where to put these limited resources to help
    communities all across the Nation deal with changes, with
    deteriorating dams, or levees, jetties, breakwaters, harbors,
    or new threats that come with sea level rise, severe weather
    events, climate change.
        It is good to hear from our colleagues. We restored
    earmarks in the appropriations process, community development,
    community-oriented projects. We restored them through a very
    lengthy process in our INVEST Act. Unfortunately, it got blown
    off by the Senate. Members of Congress often know the needs of
    their district better than some bureaucrat in Washington, DC,
    or a bureaucrat in the State capital controlling the money. So,
    I fully support this process, and I am looking forward to
    hearing from our colleagues and helping to set priorities in
    the next WRDA bill.
        [Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
          Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano, for holding this hearing and welcome
    to our colleagues who have joined us today to talk about their
    priorities for a new Water Resources Development Act for 2022.
        WRDAs are an important component of this committee's ongoing
    efforts to modernize our nation's infrastructure systems--an effort
    that has been marked with significant and bipartisan success.
        In the past 14 months, this committee has helped pass the single-
    largest investment in our nation's infrastructure in generations.
    Enactment of the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will
    be remembered as the historic turning point from talk to action on
    serious investment in our nation's economic future.
        Why? Because the bipartisan infrastructure law provided once-in-a-
    generation investment in transportation--the highways, bridges,
    transit, rail, aviation, and maritime corridors that are so critical to
    our national, regional, and local economies--and supports the hard-
    working Americans who build, maintain, and repair our infrastructure.
    The benefits of the bipartisan infrastructure law will be felt by
    everyday Americans for decades--in safer roads and bridges, in greater
    mobility and less traffic, in clean, safe and reliable water and
    wastewater services, in reduced costs for goods and services, and in
    countless other ways.
        The bipartisan infrastructure law also built upon prior successes
    of this committee to combat climate change in ways we've never done
    before and to ensure that future infrastructure investment is both
    climate resilient and more affordable to rural, Tribal, and
    economically disadvantaged communities across the nation.
        Many of these themes can also be found in last Congress' bipartisan
    Water Resources Development Act of 2020, and upon which we continue to
    build in the development of a new WRDA for 2022. That's why enacting a
    WRDA bill every two years is important and a priority of this
    committee.
        I am proud to have worked with former-Chairman Shuster to restore
    this committee's tradition of moving a water resources development act
    every Congress. These bipartisan efforts have resulted in this
    committee enacting four consecutive WRDA bills since 2014.
        Today, we take another step in continuing that tradition for the
    117th Congress, with the goal of enacting a fifth-consecutive WRDA--
    something this committee has not achieved in decades.
        Madam Chair, as we all know, WRDA bills provide the opportunity for
    communities and local sponsors to partner with the Corps on critical
    navigation, flood protection, and ecosystem restoration projects.
        Earlier this year, we had the opportunity to hear both from the
    Biden administration and Corps' stakeholders and non-Federal partners,
    including representatives of Tribal governments, on their priorities
    for the forthcoming WRDA bill.
        Today, we provide our congressional colleagues the opportunity to
    present to the committee their local priorities and how the Corps may
    be able to assist their districts, their constituents, and the nation.
        One of our greatest successes in WRDA 2020 was one that I had been
    working on for over two decades--to finally unlock federal investment
    in our nation's ports and harbors. This provision--which has become
    even more important as our nation cautiously emerges from the global
    pandemic--ensures that funds already collected from importers and
    domestic shippers using coastal and inland ports is used to provide the
    Corps with sufficient annual revenues to keep our ports in a good state
    of repair, and to sustain our local, regional, and national economies
    that rely on the movement of goods and services through our commercial
    ports.
        Similarly, this committee had great success in WRDA 2020 in
    requiring the Corps to make greater use of natural and nature-based
    alternatives to address coastal and inland flooding issues; in
    requiring the Corps to provide additional assistance to local sponsors,
    especially economically-disadvantaged communities, rural communities,
    and Tribal communities, in the development of future WRDA projects; and
    in addressing WRDA project affordability concerns. The committee
    continues to follow the Biden administration's implementation of all
    these critical provisions.
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano, as well as Ranking Member Sam Graves,
    and Subcommittee Ranking Member Rouzer, for your continued partnership
    in developing what I hope is a record-breaking fifth WRDA in a row.
        Thank you again for joining us today, and I look forward to working
    with all of you in passing a new WRDA for 2022.

        Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. DeFazio. But you should
    also be aware that you received the 20th Bertholf Award from
    the Coast Guard this year. So, congratulations for the work you
    have done for the Coast Guard, sir. It is very much deserved.
        Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, that was a great
    honor to receive that award. Yes.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Well, congratulations, sir.
        I don't know if Mr. Graves is available.
        No? We will proceed. Thank you very much.
        We will proceed to address our Members that are remote to
    please turn their cameras on and keep them on until their
    testimony is complete.
        Thank you for being here, and welcome.
        And given the number of Members appearing before the
    subcommittee today, and out of consideration for our
    colleagues' time, I ask unanimous consent that members of the
    committee be given 2 minutes each to question our Member
    witnesses following their statements.
        And without objection, so ordered.
        Members appearing before the committee today will have 5
    minutes to give their oral testimony.
        Without objection, our witnesses' full statements will be
    included in the record.
        I would like to recognize our first witness. Mrs. Fletcher,
    I recognize you, the gentlewoman from Texas, for 5 minutes. You
    are recognized, ma'am.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. LIZZIE FLETCHER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                        FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

        Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano, and thank
    you, Ranking Member Rouzer.
        As a former member of this committee, I am proud and
    excited of the work we did together in the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2020, and I appreciate the opportunity to
    testify before the committee today about our community's
    priorities for water infrastructure investment in Houston and
    Harris County, Texas, for the benefit of our entire region in
    the Water Resources Development Act of 2022.
        I have submitted to the committee several priorities,
    including project-specific authorizations and policy changes
    that will build on the important work of this committee and on
    the historic bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
    There are two main drivers for our priorities, and I know they
    are the priorities of this committee and of this Congress:
    first, to support economic growth through infrastructure
    investment, facilitating that investment and partnerships in
    that effort; and second, to make our communities safer and more
    resilient through infrastructure investment.
        In the first category, I have asked for important policy
    modifications to the Houston Ship Channel improvement project
    benefit-cost ratios, and an O&M cost sharing for ports and
    waterways that operate in depths greater than 50 feet, and
    mechanisms through which private industry can provide user fees
    to support projects like the Houston Ship Channel improvement
    project.
        I would be glad to discuss any of these commonsense policy
    changes with the committee at any time.
        In the second category, I--along with, I am certain, my
    colleagues from across our region--have asked the committee to
    authorize the project outlined in the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers Coastal Texas Study Chief's Report. I previously
    shared some of the background on this project with this
    committee.
        Texans have spent more than a decade imagining, designing,
    and working to address the historic events that we have
    experienced in our recent past, from Hurricane Ike to Hurricane
    Harvey, with an eye toward the future, with an understanding of
    the challenges that face us. And what that means to us is
    building infrastructure that is resilient to floods, storms,
    and other threats, and that is not fragile in the face of these
    increasing risks.
        The result of that work is the Coastal Texas Study, and the
    time to authorize it is now.
        The project was developed as a result of a comprehensive
    study led by the Corps, in partnership with the Texas General
    Land Office, to identify feasible projects that would reduce
    risks to public health and the economy, restore critical
    ecosystems, and advance coastal resiliency. The Coastal Texas
    Study is a critical project that would stop storm surge at the
    coast, protecting our region and our Nation from catastrophic
    damage. It protects the Texas coast, including the Houston
    region, home to more than 7 million people, and home to the
    Houston Ship Channel and the Port of Houston, the busiest port
    in the country by total tonnage, and the home to one of the
    largest, if not the largest, concentration of refining and
    petrochemical complexes in the world.
        The economic damage to the United States in the event of a
    catastrophic storm surge up the Houston Ship Channel would have
    dire consequences, not just for our region, but for our
    country. Essential products like gasoline, jet fuel, plastics,
    fertilizers, and cleaning chemicals are all made at the Port of
    Houston.
        The Texas gulf coast is responsible for 32 percent of the
    refining capacity for our entire country, including an
    estimated 40 percent of our country's jet fuel that we rely on
    for our national security. The consequences of the loss of that
    capacity cannot be overstated as it relates to our national
    security. And with recent events around the world, as well as
    our need for energy independence and growth, as well as the
    protection of our supply chains, it is more important than ever
    that we invest in this protection.
        Authorizing the Coastal Texas Study and the Port of Houston
    policy request is in our national security interest and in our
    national economic interest. It is smart, it is timely, and it
    is what we need now for Texas and for the entire country.
        Thank you for your consideration of these important
    requests. I look forward to working with the committee on these
    projects and much more, and I yield back.
        [Mrs. Fletcher's prepared statement follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Hon. Lizzie Fletcher, a Representative in
                        Congress from the State of Texas
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        As a former member of this Committee, I am proud of and excited
    about the work we did together in the Water Resources Development Act
    of 2020, and I appreciate the opportunity to testify today about my
    community's priorities for water infrastructure investment in Houston
    and Harris County for the benefit of our entire region in the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022.
        I have submitted to the Committee several priorities, including
    project-specific authorizations and policy changes that will build on
    the important work of this committee and on the historic, bipartisan
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
        There are two main drivers for our priorities, and I know they are
    the priorities of this Committee and of this Congress: (1) to support
    economic growth through infrastructure investment, facilitating that
    investment and partnerships in that effort and (2) to make our
    communities safer and more resilient through infrastructure investment.
        In the first category, I have asked for important policy
    modifications to the Houston Ship Channel Improvement Project Benefit/
    Cost Ratios and an O&M cost-sharing for ports and waterways that
    operate in depths greater than 50 feet, and mechanisms through which
    private industry can provide user fees to support projects like the
    Houston Ship Channel Improvement Project. I would be glad to discuss
    any of these common-sense policy changes with the committee at any
    time.
        In the second category, I have asked the Committee to authorize the
    project outlined in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal Texas
    Study Chief's Report.
        I have previously shared some background on this project with this
    Committee. Texans have spent more than a decade imagining, designing,
    and working to address the historic events we have experienced in the
    recent past--from Hurricane Ike to Hurricane Harvey--with an eye toward
    the future, which means infrastructure resilient to floods, storms, and
    other threats--and not fragile in the face of these increasing risks.
        The result of that work is the Coastal Texas Study. And the time to
    authorize it is now.
        The project was developed as a result of the Texas Coastal Study--a
    comprehensive study led by the Corps in partnership with the Texas
    General Land Office to identify feasible projects that would reduce
    risks to public health and the economy, restore critical ecosystems,
    and advance coastal resiliency.
        The Coastal Texas Study is a critical project that would stop storm
    surges at the coast, protecting our region--and our nation--from
    catastrophic damage.
        It protects the Texas coast, including the Houston region, home to
    more than seven million people, and home to the Houston Ship Channel
    and the Port of Houston--the busiest port in the country by total
    tonnage and home to one of the largest, if not the largest,
    concentration of refining and petrochemical complexes in the world.
        The economic damage to the United States in the event of a
    catastrophic storm surge up the Houston Ship Channel would have dire
    economic consequences not just in the Houston region, but across our
    country.
        Essential products like gasoline, jet fuel, plastics, fertilizers,
    and cleaning chemicals are all made at the Port of Houston.
        The Texas Gulf Coast is responsible for 32 percent of the refining
    capacity for our entire country, including an estimated 40 percent of
    our country's jet fuel that we rely on for our national security.
        The consequences of loss of that capacity cannot be overstated as
    it relates to our national security.
        And with recent events happening around the world, our need for
    energy growth and independence--as well as protection for our supply
    chains--is more important than ever.
        Authorizing the Coastal Texas Study and the Port of Houston policy
    requests is in our national security interest and our national economic
    interest.
        It is smart. It is timely. And it is what we need now--for Texas
    and for the entire country.
        Thank you for your consideration of these important requests. I
    look forward to working with the Committee on these projects and much
    more.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you for your testimony, Mrs.
    Fletcher. And now we turn to recognize our next Member, the
    gentleman from Virginia--remotely--Mr. Wittman, for 5 minutes.

       TESTIMONY OF HON. ROBERT J. WITTMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
               CONGRESS FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

        Mr. Wittman. Well, thank you, Chairman Napolitano and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, and I want to thank you for allowing me
    to testify before you today, and I am honored to highlight some
    of the needs facing Virginia as you consider the upcoming water
    resources development package.
        The Water Resources Development Act is necessary
    legislation that provides for improvements to the Nation's
    ports, inland waterways, flood protection, ecosystem
    restoration, and other water resources infrastructure and
    policy. Water infrastructure is vital to moving goods
    throughout the country, from products we all use every day in
    our lives and to crops and goods we produce domestically and
    send abroad. And I hope this committee and the House upholds
    its duty to authorize nationally important water infrastructure
    improvements that are more locally driven.
        Furthermore, I would like to thank the Corps of Engineers
    as they work hard to manage more than 1,500 water resource
    development projects, many of them in Virginia. The Army Corps
    of Engineers is critical to our Commonwealth, from the Norfolk
    Harbor Channel widening and deepening project to the public
    waterways restoration projects across Virginia.
        As a proud Representative of the Commonwealth of Virginia,
    home of the Port of Virginia, one of the largest and busiest
    ports on the eastern seaboard, advancing the work being done by
    the Port of Virginia to improve and expand its operations is
    critical. The port manages cargo that is shipped to all 48
    contiguous States. The Port of Virginia is a national gateway
    for commerce, supporting business across the country. Moreover,
    in Virginia's First Congressional District, 334 businesses
    utilize the services of the Port of Virginia. As a catalyst for
    commerce, the port is attracting growth, fostering development,
    and creating jobs. On the State level, cargo moving through the
    port supports more than 530,000 jobs statewide, and generates
    in excess of $90 billion in annual economic impact in Virginia.
        I would also like to take this time to highlight some WRDA
    priorities the subcommittee should look at in deliberating this
    bill.
        Anchorage F is currently designed as a 3,000-foot circle
    for free-swinging bow anchoring. This is in the Norfolk Harbor
    and channels. The anchorage in its current design is used
    primarily as an emergency anchorage in inclement wave weather
    in the harbor, or in situations of unexpected delays. For
    vessels to effectively utilize the anchorage, it is imperative
    and common sense for the anchorage and approach depths to match
    that of the Federal channel. A deeper and wider anchorage will
    allow further use of the anchorage beyond the primary function,
    and permit use by larger vessels calling on our port.
        Additionally, an improved anchorage and anchorage approach
    could provide passing vessels safe harbor during storm
    conditions.
        The proposed modification includes widening the Anchorage F
    beyond its currently authorized diameter of 3,620 feet to a
    diameter of 3,840 feet, and deepening the anchorage to 55 feet,
    consistent with the 1986 authorization and the project depth of
    the Federal channel project. These costs have been developed to
    a planning stage level of confidence, and remain within the
    project's section 902 cost limit.
        Also, I request for coastal resiliency funding for the
    Hampton Roads area. I request legislative language to allow the
    United States Corps of Engineers to include Federal property in
    their feasibility studies for the Norfolk-Hampton Roads area.
    By allowing the Corps to include Federal properties for an
    upcoming coastal storm risk management study of the peninsula
    and Greater Hampton Roads, it would solve the restriction
    problem in incorporating those installations and facilities
    into the Civil Works planning and construction process.
        The intent of this language is narrowly focused on the CSRM
    study on the peninsula. It is intended only to assure that the
    United States Corps of Engineers studies are comprehensive and
    holistic. The language is not intended to indicate that the
    Corps of Engineers has a responsibility for carrying out Civil
    Works projects on Federal installations. I believe this
    commonsense language will ultimately produce a better report
    for action and range of actors in the region, and will make
    sure that we coordinate across a variety of different uses,
    including Federal facilities and military facilities.
        I want to thank the chairwoman and ranking member and
    members of the committee for the opportunity to testify before
    you today, and I look forward to working with the committee and
    the Corps as we move forward towards finishing WRDA 2022.
        [Mr. Wittman's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert J. Wittman, a Representative in
                   Congress from the Commonwealth of Virginia
                                  Introduction
        Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer,
        Thank you for allowing me to testify before you today. I am honored
    to highlight some of the needs facing Virginia as you consider the
    upcoming Water Resources Development package.
        The Water Resources Development Act is necessary legislation that
    provides for improvements to the Nation's ports, inland waterways,
    flood protection, ecosystem restoration, and other water resources
    infrastructure and policy. Water infrastructure is vital to moving
    goods throughout the country, from products we all use in our everyday
    lives, to crops and goods we produce domestically and send abroad. I
    hope this committee and the House upholds its duty to authorize
    nationally important water infrastructure improvements that are more
    locally driven.
        Furthermore, I would like to thank the Army Corps of Engineers as
    they work hard to manage more than 1,500 water resource projects with
    many of them in Virginia. The Army Corps of Engineers is critical to
    our commonwealth, from the Norfolk Harbor Channel Widening and
    Deepening Project to the public waterways restorations projects across
    Virginia.
                                Port of Virginia
        As a proud representative of the Commonwealth of Virginia, home of
    the Port of Virginia--one of the largest and busiest ports on the
    eastern seaboard--advancing the work being done by the Port of Virginia
    to improve and expand its operations is critical. The Port manages
    cargo that is shipped to all 48 contiguous states.
        The Port of Virginia is a national gateway for commerce, supporting
    businesses across the country. Moreover, in Virginia's 1st District 334
    businesses utilize the services of the Port of Virginia.
        As a catalyst for commerce, the Port is attracting growth,
    fostering development, and creating jobs. On the state level, cargo
    moving through the Port supports more than 530,000 jobs statewide and
    generates in excess of $90 billion in annual economic impact for
    Virginia.
                            WRDA Proposals Submitted
        I would like to take this time to highlight some WRDA priorities
    the subcommittee should look at while deliberating the bill.
    1. Norfolk Harbor and Channels: Anchorage F Expansion
        Anchorage F is currently designed as a 3,000-foot diameter circle
    for free-swinging bow anchoring. The anchorage in its current design is
    used primarily as an emergency anchorage in inclement wave weather in
    the harbor or in situations of unexpected delays. For vessels to
    effectively utilize the anchorage, it is imperative--and common-sense--
    for the anchorage and approach depths to match that of the Federal
    Channel.
        A deeper and wider anchorage will allow further use of the
    anchorage beyond the primary function and permit use by larger vessels
    calling on our port. Additionally, an improved anchorage and anchorage
    approach could provide passing vessels safe harbor during storm
    conditions.
        The proposed modification includes widening the Anchorage F beyond
    its currently authorized diameter of 3,620-feet to a diameter of 3,840-
    feet and deepening the anchorage to 55-feet consistent with the 1986
    authorization and the project depth of the Federal Channel. Project
    costs have been developed to a planning stage level of confidence and
    remain within the project's Section 902 cost limit.
    2. Language Request: Coastal Resilience Feasibility Study, Norfolk-
            Hampton Roads
        Furthermore, I request legislative language to allow the USACE to
    include Federal property in their feasibility studies for the Norfolk-
    Hampton Roads, Virginia area.
        By allowing the USACE to include Federal properties for an upcoming
    Coastal Storm Risk Management (CSRM) study of the Peninsula and greater
    Hampton Roads area, it would solve the restriction problem in
    incorporating these installations and facilities into the Civil Works
    planning and construction processes.
        The intent of this language is narrowly focused on the CSRM study
    on the Peninsula. It is intended only to ensure that these USACE
    studies are comprehensive and holistic.
        The language is not intended to indicate that the USACE has a
    responsibility for carrying out civil works projects on Federal
    installations. I believe this is common sense language that will
    ultimately produce a better report for action by a range of actors in
    the region.
                                   Conclusion
        I want to thank the Chairwoman, Ranking Member, and the Members of
    the Committee for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to
    working with the Committee and the Corps as we move forward towards
    finishing WRDA 2022.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Wittman.
        Are there any questions of the Member?
        Hearing none, thank you, sir.
        Mr. Wittman. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. I would like to recognize the next
    witness, the gentlewoman from Texas, Ms. Garcia, for 5 minutes.

        TESTIMONY OF HON. SYLVIA R. GARCIA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                    CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

        Ms. Garcia of Texas. Thank you, Madam Chair, and Ranking
    Member Rouzer and Chairman DeFazio. Good morning, and thank you
    for allowing me to come by this morning to speak with the Water
    Resources and Environment Subcommittee of your full committee.
        Houston sits at the epicenter of global trade, our Nation's
    supply chain is insourced by cities like Houston, home to the
    busiest deep-draft waterway in the Nation, Port Houston. The
    port has as many ship calls annually as the next three largest
    U.S. ports combined, and it provides $801.9 billion in national
    economic value. But it is imperative that the port, like its
    counterparts in the world's busiest trade routes, keep up with
    increased shipping activity, larger barges, and the need for
    deeper waterways.
        I come before you to request that the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers take up our delegation's request for taking on the
    assumption and maintenance of Project 11, the port's large-
    scale project to widen, deepen, and dredge the port so that it
    remains a viable center of commercial trade for our Nation.
        We must also ensure that Port Houston is fully supported in
    project financing through operations and maintenance. This can
    be done through your support of policy requests that I and
    several of my Houston colleagues have submitted, which modifies
    the O&M cost sharing for ports deeper than 50 feet. These
    project priorities, which were made possible for consideration
    by this act, garner enormous benefits not only for Texas, but
    for the entire Nation.
        The port is a keystone of American critical infrastructure,
    whose value is especially critical in times of great national
    security threat, and threats posed to our Nation's energy
    supply, as it does today.
        Then we also ask for support for our Ike Dike.
    Additionally, it is imperative that we discuss the need for
    full-fledged support for the gulf coast seawall barrier,
    commonly known as the Ike Dike. Prior to this meeting, I have
    led an effort with my colleagues in the Houston delegation to
    request support for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Coastal
    Texas Study Chief's Report to authorize the construction of a
    coastal seawall that would protect millions of families across
    the Greater Houston and Galveston area.
        We must ensure that our area has the resources it needs to
    protect the Greater Houston and Galveston regions'
    manufacturing, retail, agriculture, business, energy, and
    military supply chains in Texas and in the Nation.
        More importantly, we must also protect the millions of
    lives who depend on our full embrace of all forms of disaster
    prevention and resilience. Studies show similar barrier systems
    to the one we are requesting have an almost immediate return on
    investment. Hurricane Ida tested a similar barrier system in
    New Orleans. The system prevented a Hurricane Katrina-level
    surge, but it also more than paid for itself in prevented
    damages.
        I personally know far too well the devastating effects that
    hurricanes and large-scale flooding have on local economies and
    communities. These project priorities requested by myself, and
    equally supported across the aisle by my colleagues and the
    Greater Houston region delegation, benefit Texans in our home
    State, and deliver major improvements to our Nation.
        I thank the subcommittee and the full committee for their
    work on these critical issues, and I look forward to working
    with you through this process. I urge my colleagues on the
    committee to include these priorities in the passage of the
    Water Resources Development Act of 2022. Thank you for your
    time and consideration, and have a great day.
        [Ms. Garcia's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Sylvia R. Garcia, a Representative in
                        Congress from the State of Texas
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and Members of the Water
    Resources Subcommittee, thank you for having me here on Member Hearing
    Day.
        Houston sits at the epicenter of global trade. Our nation's supply
    chain is insourced by cities like Houston, home to the busiest deep-
    draft waterway in the nation, Port Houston. The Port has as many ship
    calls annually as the next three largest U.S. ports combined, and it
    provides $801.9 billion in national economic value. But it is
    imperative that the Port, like its counterparts in the world's busiest
    trade routes, keep up with increased shipping activity, larger barges,
    and the need for deeper waterways.
        I come before you to request that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    take up our delegation's request for taking on the Assumption of
    Maintenance on Project 11, the port's large-scale project to widen,
    deepen, and dredge the port, so that it remains a viable center of
    commercial trade for our nation.
        We must also ensure that Port Houston is fully supported in project
    financing through Operations and Maintenance. This can be done through
    your support of the policy request that I--and several of my Houston
    colleagues--submitted, which modifies the O&M cost sharing for ports
    deeper than 50 feet.
        These project priorities, which are made possible for consideration
    by this Act, garner enormous benefits. Not only for Texas residents,
    but for the entire nation. The port is a keystone of American critical
    infrastructure, whose value is especially critical during times of
    great national security threat and threats posed to our nation's energy
    supply.
        Additionally, it is imperative that we discuss the need for full-
    fledged support for the Gulf Coast's seawall barrier.
        Prior to this hearing, I led an effort with my colleagues in the
    Houston delegation to request support for the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers' Coastal Texas Study Chief's Report, to authorize the
    construction of a coastal seawall that would protect millions of
    families across the greater Houston and Galveston area. We must ensure
    that our area has the resources it needs to protect the greater Houston
    and Galveston region's manufacturing, retail, agriculture, business,
    and military supply chains in Texas and the nation.
        More importantly, we must also protect the millions of lives who
    depend on our full embrace of all forms of disaster prevention and
    resilience. Studies show similar barrier systems to the one we are
    requesting have an almost immediate return on investment. Hurricane Ida
    tested a similar barrier system in New Orleans. The system prevented a
    Hurricane Katrina-level surge, but it also more than paid for itself in
    prevented damages. I personally know far too well the devastating
    effects that hurricanes and large-scale flooding have on local
    economies and communities.
        These project priorities requested by myself, and equally supported
    across the aisle by my colleagues in the greater Houston Congressional
    delegation, benefit Texans in our home state and deliver major
    improvements to our nation. I thank the subcommittee and the full
    committee for their work on these critical issues.
        I urge my colleagues on the committee to include these priorities
    in the passage of the Water Resources Development Act of 2022.
        Thank you for your time and consideration.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Representative Garcia.
        Are there any questions of Ms. Garcia?
        Hearing none, thank you very much for your testimony, and--
    --
        Ms. Garcia of Texas. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano [continuing]. We will move on to the next
    Member of Congress. I would like to recognize our next witness,
    the gentlewoman from California, Ms. Porter, for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Porter, you are on.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. KATIE PORTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Ms. Porter. Thank you very much, Chair Napolitano and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, for providing us with this opportunity
    to share our districts' priorities for the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022.
        I am here today to support the authorization of the Prado
    Basin ecosystem restoration project, which is part of the dual-
    purpose Prado Basin feasibility study. This project would
    benefit Riverside County, San Bernardino County, and my home,
    Orange County, by reducing reliance on imported water from the
    Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and Colorado Rivers. It
    would reduce risk of wildfires, restore critical habitats for
    endangered species, create local jobs, and save money for
    consumers.
        The Prado Basin ecosystem restoration project specifically
    targets the removal of an invasive plant species known as
    arundo donax, commonly known as giant reed. The giant reed
    outcompetes native plant species, and is not edible for native
    wildlife. It consumes a substantial amount of water compared to
    native flora, which reduces water supplies.
        Additionally, the giant reed plays a significant role in
    the ignition and rapid spread of wildfires during droughts, due
    to its rapid growth and substantial water requirements.
        The Prado Basin ecosystem restoration project will remove
    the giant reed and replace it with natural flora. This will
    reduce wildfire risk, increase water supplies, and help native
    species thrive. If this project were to be authorized, it would
    restore 606 acres of land along the Santa Ana River, Chino
    Creek, and Mill Creek, where endangered species such as the
    southwestern willow flycatcher live. The U.S. Forest Service
    listed the southwestern willow flycatcher as a federally
    endangered species in 1995, after years of dwindling population
    numbers due to the loss of their native riparian habitat.
        The Prado River Basin ecosystem restoration project would
    restore habitats not only for the southwestern willow
    flycatcher, but for other endangered species, as well.
        This restoration project would also create good jobs in my
    community. A report has estimated that, for every $1 million
    spent on watershed restoration and management, we can create
    anywhere from 6.8 to 31.5 well-paying jobs. Based on the
    average of these numbers, Orange County Water District has told
    me that this project could create around 931 direct, indirect,
    and induced jobs.
        In addition to creating jobs, the Prado Basin feasibility
    project would help our community reduce our carbon emissions.
    Importing water from the Colorado River and from northern
    California is an energy-intensive process. Pumping the water
    over the Tehachapi Mountains requires a substantial amount of
    energy, which also increases the cost of water when it reaches
    consumers in southern California.
        The restoration of natural flora and the removal of the
    giant reed will save energy by significantly reducing our
    reliance on imported water. The average annual energy savings
    is 15 gigawatt hours, which translates to a reduction of 11,000
    metric tons of carbon dioxide.
        The Environmental Impact Report was certified in May 2021,
    and that report concluded that this was the most efficient and
    most cost effective plan compared to any proposed alternative.
        The Prado Dam feasibility study conducted by the U.S. Army
    Corps of Engineers, in cooperation with the Orange County Water
    District, has similarly concluded that this project will
    provide ratepayers with net savings of $7.5 million.
        Now is the time for Congress to do our part and authorize
    this project. Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
    I urge my colleagues to support the authorization of the Prado
    Basin ecosystem restoration project, and I would like to thank
    the Orange County Water District for their leadership and
    Senator Padilla for his work introducing companion legislation
    through the Senate.
        I yield back.
        [Ms. Porter's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Katie Porter, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of California
        Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer, for
    providing us this opportunity to share our district's priorities for
    the Water Resources Development Act of 2022. I am here today to support
    the authorization of the Prado Basin Ecosystem Restoration Project,
    which is part of the dual-purpose Prado Basin Feasibility Study. This
    project would benefit Riverside County, San Bernardino County, and my
    home--Orange County--by reducing reliance on imported water from the
    Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta and Colorado Rivers. It would reduce
    risk of wildfires, restore critical habitats for endangered species,
    create local jobs, and save money for consumers.
        The Prado Basin Ecosystem Restoration Project specifically targets
    the removal of an invasive plant species known as arundo donax,
    commonly known as giant reed. The giant reed outcompetes native plant
    species and is inedible to native wildlife. It consumes a substantial
    amount of water compared to native flora, which reduces water supplies.
    Additionally, the giant reed plays a significant role in the ignition
    and rapid spread of wildfires during droughts due to its rapid growth
    and substantial water requirements. The Prado Basin Ecosystem
    Restoration Project will remove the giant reed and replace it with
    natural flora. This will reduce wildfire risk, increase water supplies,
    and help native species thrive.
        If this project were to be authorized, it would restore 606 acres
    of land along the Santa Ana River, Chino Creek, and Mill Creek, where
    endangered species, such as the southwestern willow flycatcher, live.
    The US Forest Service listed the southwestern willow flycatcher as
    federally endangered in 1995 after years of dwindling population
    numbers due to the loss of their native riparian habitat.\1\ The Prado
    River Basin Ecosystem Restoration Project would restore habitats for
    not only the southwestern willow flycatcher, but other endangered
    species as well.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. National Park Service (October
    5, 2016) Retrieved at: https://www.nps.gov/articles/southwestern-
    willow-flycatcher.htm
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This restoration project would also create good jobs in my
    community. A report estimated that for every one million dollars spent
    on watershed restoration and management, we can create anywhere from
    6.8 to 31.5 well-paying jobs.\2\ Based on the average of these numbers,
    Orange County Water District estimated that this project could create
    around 931 direct, indirect, and induced jobs.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ BenDor T, Lester TW, Livengood A, Davis A, Yonavjak L (2015)
    Estimating the Size and Impact of the Ecological Restoration Economy.
    PLoS ONE 10(6): e0128339. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0128339
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In addition to creating jobs, the Prado Basin Feasibility Study
    Project would help our community reduce our carbon emissions. Importing
    water from the Colorado River and from Northern California is an energy
    intensive process. Pumping imported water over the Tehachapi Mountains
    requires a substantial amount of energy, which also increases the cost
    of water when it reaches consumers in Southern California. The
    restoration of natural flora and removal of the giant reed will save
    energy by significantly reducing our reliance on imported water. The
    average annual energy savings is 15 Gigawatt-hours, which translates to
    a reduction of 11,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide.
        The Environmental Impact Report for this project was certified in
    May 2021. That report concluded that this was the most efficient and
    cost-effective plan compared to proposed alternatives.\3\ The Prado Dam
    Feasibility Study, conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in
    cooperation with the Orange County Water District, similarly concluded
    that the Prado Basin Feasibility Study Project will provide ratepayers
    with net savings of $7.5 million. Now it is time for Congress to do our
    part and authorize this project.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Prado Basin Ecosystem Restoration and Water Conservation Study.
    FINAL Environmental Impact Report. Retrieved at: https://www.ocwd.com/
    media/9750/prado-basin-ecosystem-restoration-and-water-conservation-
    project-final-eir.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Thank you for your consideration on this matter. I urge my
    colleagues to support the authorization of the Prado Basin Ecosystem
    Restoration Project. I'd like to thank the Orange County Water District
    for their leadership in spearheading this important project. And I'd
    like to thank Senator Padilla for his work introducing companion
    language in the Senate. I yield back my remaining time.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Ms. Porter. As you know, the
    West is facing serious water supply challenges due to the
    drought. I have asked the Corps to consider engaging more on
    water supply issues at Corps projects. Why is this important?
        Ms. Porter. Well, what we are going to--this project is
    really important to the entire ecosystem of southern
    California. And one of the things about this project is that
    projects that we develop in southern California will have the
    ability to also help preserve species and create water supply
    further upstream.
        So, to the extent that we can remove this invasive species,
    we can reduce its water reliance on southern California,
    preserving more of our water for ourselves. We are also going
    to have an upstream effect on our neighbors in the Colorado
    River and in northern California.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much. I find that quite
    interesting, because I am interested also in Whittier Narrows,
    which faces almost the same problem. And we are trying to get
    the Corps to finish the infrastructure damage in Whittier
    Narrows.
        Thank you very much, Ms. Porter. Next I would like to
    recognize our next Member, the gentlewoman from Michigan, Ms.
    Tlaib, for 5 minutes.
        You are on, ma'am.
        Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much, Chairwoman. I really
    appreciate [inaudible].
        Mrs. Napolitano. Microphone.
        Ms. Tlaib. Oh, sorry, it has been a while.
        [Laughter.]

     TESTIMONY OF HON. RASHIDA TLAIB, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

        Ms. Tlaib. Thank you so much, Chairwoman. I really
    sincerely appreciate the opportunity to bring my residents, my
    district into the room and to Congress. This opportunity to try
    to prioritize some of the important work I think the Water
    Resources Development Act can do for frontline communities like
    mine is critical.
        The communities I represent, Chairwoman, in southeast
    Michigan, communities like Detroit, Romulus, Inkster, and
    Dearborn Heights, they are frontline communities of this
    climate crisis. Last summer these communities faced
    unprecedented flooding. We didn't merely experience 100-year
    rainfalls, we experienced a 1,000-year rainfall.
        Our communities didn't even have the projections for these
    events at all. Some homes flooded repeatedly, some even up to
    four times within 2 months. Raw sewage flowed through the
    streets in my communities. The flood maps and projections
    within our communities that we rely on are inaccurate, and
    don't account for our rapidly warming climate. And they are
    simply just simply out of date. And the water infrastructure in
    these communities is woefully inadequate, as you know.
        Now extreme weather events are here, and many, many just
    don't want to do anything about it. I refuse to accept this as
    an option, Chairwoman. As the weather events increase with
    frequency, communities need the tools to be prepared.
        This year's WRDA presents an opportunity for our neighbors
    to better understand the threats that we face due to climate
    change, and it can equip us with a resilient water
    infrastructure.
        First, I encourage the committee to please offer support
    for the Detroit Division of the Army Corps of Engineers and
    their planning and identifying flood resilience for communities
    like those around Ecorse Creek. Ecorse Creek impacts nine
    communities in Wayne County, Michigan, which is the largest
    populated county in the State.
        I also encourage the Army Corps to conduct a feasibility
    study for flood risk management in southeastern Michigan. This
    is essential, Chairwoman.
        Third, I encourage the committee to broaden environmental
    assistance for Michigan by committing $35 million for projects
    like wastewater treatment, water supply, environmental
    restoration, and surface water resource protection.
        I am so incredibly grateful to be joined by my good friend
    and neighbor, Congresswoman Debbie Dingell, in these three
    asks. Many of our communities are intertwined and connected.
        Finally, while I applaud the committee for their work on
    the 2020 bill, I encourage the committee to truly incorporate
    the environmental justice components into drafting of the 2022
    bill. The most daunting water infrastructure challenges our
    Nation faces are borne directly by many of the Nation's most
    vulnerable communities, neighborhoods like the one I grew up
    in. I don't want the kids in that community--and again, the
    same neighborhood--to think that it is not normal to have clean
    water come through their faucet. That means doing even more,
    Chairwoman, to ensure that the Army Corps of Engineers has the
    tools and capacity to advance community-supported solutions as
    they are, again, experiencing these impacts.
        We should also increase capacity and expertise within the
    Army Corps, and give the public more meaningful opportunities
    to weigh in on the projects that affect their communities.
        We should continue increasing opportunities for assistance
    by building on and expanding the pilot program for economically
    disadvantaged communities. Please extend that pilot program,
    very essential.
        Finally, we must maximize toxic remediation in ecological
    restoration, navigation, and flood resilience projects. We
    must--must--support minority-owned businesses, and we must
    continue developing and advancing, again, environmental justice
    innovation.
        I thank Congressman Steve Cohen for joining me in this
    request, as well, and for just a great ally in fighting for
    environmental justice.
        I appreciate the opportunity, Chairwoman, and all our
    committee members, to share the priorities before this
    committee, and respectfully request their inclusion in the 2022
    Water Resources Development Act. Thank you so much.
        [Ms. Tlaib's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Rashida Tlaib, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Michigan
        Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today, and share
    four WRDA priorities that are critical to the communities I represent.
        The communities I represent in Southeast Michigan--communities like
    Romulus, Inkster, and Dearborn Heights--are on the front lines of the
    climate crisis.
        Last summer, these communities faced unprecedented flooding.
        We didn't merely experience 100-year rainfalls. We experienced a
    1,000-year rainfall--our communities didn't even have projections for
    an event like this.
        Some homes flooded repeatedly over the span of just a few months.
    In some of these communities, raw sewage flowed through the streets.
        The flood maps and projections our communities rely on don't
    account for our rapidly warming planet and are simply out of date. And
    the water infrastructure in these communities is woefully inadequate
    for the extreme weather events we now face.
        I refuse to accept this as our new normal.
        As these catastrophic weather events increase in ferocity and
    frequency, our communities need the tools to be prepared. This year's
    WRDA presents an opportunity for my neighbors to better understand the
    threats that we face due to climate change, and to be equipped with
    resilient, modern water infrastructure.
        First, I encourage the Committee to offer support to the Detroit
    Division of the Army Corps of Engineers in planning and identifying
    flood resilience for communities along Ecorse Creek.
        I also encourage the Army Corps to conduct a feasibility study for
    flood risk management in Southeast Michigan.
        Third, I encourage the Committee to broaden environmental
    assistance for Michigan by committing 35 million dollars for projects
    like wastewater treatment, water supply, environmental restoration, and
    surface water resource protection.
        I'm very grateful to be joined by my good friend and neighbor
    Congresswoman Dingell in these three requests.
        Finally, while I applaud the Committee for their work on the 2020
    WRDA bill, I encourage the Committee to truly incorporate environmental
    justice into the drafting of the 2022 WRDA bill.
        The most daunting water infrastructure challenges our nations faces
    are borne directly by so many of the nation's most vulnerable
    communities--including so many of the ones I represent.
        That means doing even more to ensure that the Army Corps of
    Engineers has the tools and capacity to advance community-supported
    solutions to these challenges.
        We should increase capacity and expertise within Army Corps, and
    give the public more meaningful opportunities to weigh in on the
    projects that affect their communities.
        We should continue increasing opportunities for assistance by
    building on and expanding the Pilot Program for Economically
    Disadvantaged Communities.
        Finally, we must maximize toxic remediation in ecological
    restoration, navigation and flood resilience projects; we must support
    minority-owned businesses; and we must continue developing and
    advancing environmental justice innovation.
        I thank Congressman Steve Cohen for joining me in this request, and
    for being a stalwart ally in the fight for environmental justice.
        I appreciate the opportunity to share my priorities before this
    Committee, and respectfully request their inclusion in the 2022 Water
    Resources Development Act. Thank you.

        Mrs. Napolitano. You are very welcome, Ms. Tlaib, it was
    very well put. Thank you for your testimony.
        Ms. Tlaib. Thank you, ma'am.
        Mrs. Napolitano. I would like to recognize the next Member,
    the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Allen, for 5 minutes.
        By the way, are there any questions of Ms. Tlaib?
        Hearing none, you are on, Mr. Allen.
        Thank you, ma'am.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. RICK W. ALLEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

        Mr. Allen. Thank you, Chairwoman, and thanks to the
    committee for allowing me to provide this testimony and
    highlight water issues that are critical to the 12th
    Congressional District of Georgia, namely the issues we have
    experienced with the Corps of Engineers regarding the New
    Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam.
        This project, which is required for environmental
    mitigation as part of the Savannah Harbor expansion project, or
    SHEP, is an issue with which my community has been at odds with
    the Corps of Engineers for more than 6 years.
        The Corps' insistence on removing or replacing the lock and
    dam with a rock weir that will significantly lower the existing
    pool would be catastrophic to our community. This historic lock
    and dam's importance to the Augusta River region cannot be
    overstated. Two States, both Georgia and South Carolina, are
    affected, and businesses and municipalities rely on the pool of
    water maintained by this dam.
        If the dam were to be removed, the quality of life for our
    entire region of the country would be negatively impacted.
    Flooding, which is normally mitigated using the lock and dam,
    could affect multiple cities on both sides of the river in
    times of heavy rain. And when the Corps conducted a simulation
    of their selected alternative, the effect on water level was so
    drastic that boats were marooned, businesses had issues being
    able to draw the water necessary to run their businesses, and
    the banks of the river were unstable to the point where they
    were falling in, resulting in the simulation being abandoned
    earlier than planned because of the damage.
        As the world gets a glimpse at Augusta in a few weeks as
    home of the prestigious Masters Golf Tournament, to cause the
    view from beautiful downtown Augusta to be that of areas of dry
    mud and silt instead of a flowing river would be
    unconscionable.
        In 2019, an independent peer review was conducted, and the
    report highlighted that there had been inconsistencies in cost
    analysis, lack of consideration of other mitigation
    alternatives that would not lower the pool, and lack of
    information on whether or not the leading alternatives would
    successfully pass fish overall. We should not spend taxpayer
    dollars on a rock weir that this report says may even kill the
    fish that we are trying to protect.
        The Corps and local stakeholders are now in court-ordered
    mediation after a Federal judge ruled that the Corps was not
    following the word of the law in the 2016 WIIN Act when it
    comes to maintaining that pool. The WIIN Act states that, with
    modifications to accommodate fish passage, ``the structure is
    able to maintain the pool for navigation, water supply, and
    recreational activities, as in existence on the date of
    enactment of the Act.'' This ruling was a win for our local
    communities, and I am hopeful for a positive outcome that
    maintains the pool and the required lock and dam.
        I ask the members of this committee to work with me and my
    colleague, Congressman Joe Wilson, to ensure that the interests
    of our local communities are protected when it comes to the New
    Savannah Lock and Dam. I appreciate your attention to this
    important priority for our home States of Georgia and South
    Carolina, and look forward to working with you through this
    process.
        [Mr. Allen's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick W. Allen, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Georgia
        Thank you, Chairwoman, and thank you to the committee for allowing
    me to provide this testimony and highlight water issues that are
    critical to the 12th Congressional District of Georgia--namely the
    issues we have experienced with the Corps of Engineers regarding the
    New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam.
        This project, which is required for environmental mitigation as
    part of the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project, or SHEP, is an issue
    with which my community has been at odds with the Corps of Engineers
    for more than six years. The Corps' insistence on removing and
    replacing the Lock and Dam with a rock weir that will significantly
    lower the existing pool would be catastrophic for my community.
        This historic lock and dam's importance to the Augusta River Region
    cannot be overstated. Two states--both Georgia and South Carolina--are
    affected; and businesses and municipalities rely on the pool of water
    maintained by the dam. If the dam were to be removed, quality of life
    for an entire region of the country would be negatively impacted.
    Flooding, which is normally mitigated using the Lock and Dam, could
    affect multiple cities on both sides of the river in times of heavy
    rain. And when the Corps conducted a simulation of their selected
    alternative, the effect on water level was so drastic that boats were
    marooned, businesses had issues being able to draw water and banks were
    unstable to the point where they were falling in, resulting in the
    simulation being abandoned earlier than planned. As the world gets a
    glimpse at Augusta in a few weeks as home of the beautiful Masters golf
    tournament, to cause the view from beautiful downtown Augusta to be
    that of areas of dry mud and silt instead of a flowing river would be
    unconscionable.
        In 2019, an Independent Peer Review was conducted, and the report
    highlighted that there have been inconsistencies in cost analysis, lack
    of consideration of other mitigation alternatives that would not lower
    the pool, and lack of information on whether or not the leading
    alternatives would successfully pass fish overall. We should not spend
    taxpayer dollars on a rock weir that this report says may even kill the
    fish we're trying to protect!
        The Corps and local stakeholders are now in court-ordered mediation
    after a federal judge ruled that the Corps was not following the word
    of the law of the 2016 WIIN Act when it comes to maintaining the pool.
    The WIIN Act states that with modifications to accommodate fish
    passage, ``the structure is able to maintain the pool for navigation,
    water supply and recreational activities, as in existence on the date
    of enactment of this Act.'' This ruling was a win for our local
    communities and I am hopeful for a positive outcome that maintains the
    pool and the lock and dam.
        I ask the members of this committee to work with me and my
    colleague, Congressman Joe Wilson, to ensure that the interests of our
    local communities are protected when it comes to the New Savannah Bluff
    Lock and Dam. I appreciate your attention to this important priority
    for our home states of Georgia and South Carolina and look forward to
    working with you throughout this process.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Representative Allen.
        Are there any questions of Mr. Allen?
        Seeing and hearing none, thank you, sir.
        Mr. Allen. Yes, ma'am.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr. Soto, you are recognized.
        I would like to recognize our next Member, the gentleman
    from Florida, Mr. Soto, for 5 minutes.
        You are on, sir.

      TESTIMONY OF HON. DARREN SOTO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

        Mr. Soto. Thank you, Madam Chair and Members.
        Florida's Ninth Congressional District is home to the
    northern Everglades, starting just north of us, going all the
    way down through the Kissimmee chain of lakes in our district,
    through Lake Okeechobee and the Kissimmee River, and out to
    what we know as the river of grass, the Everglades. It is home
    to bald eagles, snail kites, championship bass fishing, and
    boating. And my district also happens to be the fastest growing
    district in the Nation. We grew 40 percent over these last 10
    years, according to the census.
        So, there have been huge growth challenges with protecting
    the Kissimmee chain of lakes, which is why, first and foremost,
    we have worked on getting the Army Corps of Engineers to
    address issues with removal of aquatic growth, more
    specifically hydrilla, an issue that has continued to be a
    problem for both fishing and quality of life, for quality
    water, and for boating, as well as to help protect water
    flowing through the Everglades. And we appreciate the
    opportunity to be able to discuss that today.
        I have the honor of living right on Lake Tohopekaliga in
    the Kissimmee chain of lakes, and see it firsthand, along with
    my neighbors.
        In addition, we have project requests for the Lake
    Okeechobee watershed restoration project, which would help with
    freshwater releases to the Caloosahatchee and Saint Lucie
    Estuaries, as well as helping with the Kissimmee River channel.
    Not only is this critical for the Everglades, but also for
    endangered species like the manatee, which, because of the flow
    of nutrients out of Lake O, we have seen it be in jeopardy.
        In addition, we have the North Lake Toho restoration and
    water quality project to help remove legacy sediments. For many
    years, north of us in Orange County, we saw many sediments flow
    into the Kissimmee chain of lakes. Thank God that stopped
    decades ago. But the legacy of that is still there. And so
    removing certain sediments for flood storage and flow through
    Mill Slough and East City Ditch are critical. We faced flooding
    there during Hurricane Irma back in 2017.
        Then there is the Lake Runnymede restoration project, which
    also deals with vegetative growth, protecting ecological
    functions and fish habitat and wading birds. The nutrient load
    in--excuse me--in East Lake Toho due to sediment flows from
    Lake Runnymede is also an issue facing the northern Everglades.
    But we can stop it. We can fix it with WRDA funding to protect
    both the quality of life in our district and critical species.
        In addition, the Lake Tohopekaliga-Kissimmee Lakefront
    restoration and water quality improvement project helps with
    the north shore area of Lake Tohopekaliga to allow ecosystems
    to flow through, a similar theme throughout with hydrilla, with
    nutrient and sediment flows in the upper Kissimmee Basin.
        And then, of course, the Lancaster Park flood plain
    improvement project to help Shingle Creek, the headwaters of
    the Everglades, and also a key water body flowing through
    Disney.
        And finally, we have the Polk County Derby Ditch drainage
    improvement project to help out another fast-growing area in
    Auburndale and Winter Haven, Florida--that is citrus country
    out there--and improve flooding that happened during Hurricane
    Irma.
        And Orange County's aquifer storage reservoir chemical
    addition project would help improve clean drinking water in the
    Orange County area--again, part of the fastest growing areas in
    central Florida.
        And with that I want to yield back the remainder of my
    time, and I am happy to answer questions, Madam Chairwoman.
        [Mr. Soto's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Darren Soto, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Florida
        Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, thank you for allowing me
    to testify before the Committee about my priorities for the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022.
        Among the requests I made is to allow the Army Corp of Engineers to
    use cooperative agreements with Florida to execute work under the
    Removal of Aquatic Growth (RAG) program. The Cooperative Agreement adds
    flexibility and efficiency both fiscally and technically to project
    execution.
        My project requests include:
          The Lake Okeechobee Watershed Restoration Project, which
    has a Chief's report on the way and would improve the quantity, timing
    and distribution of water entering Lake Okeechobee, provide for better
    management of Lake Okeechobee water levels, reduce large freshwater
    releases to the Caloosahatchee and St. Lucie estuaries, improve system-
    wide operational flexibility, and restore portions of the historic
    Kissimmee River Channel and floodplain.
          The North Lake Toho Restoration and Water Quality
    Project, which would remove legacy sediments within the north lobe of
    Lake Tohopekaliga to improve flood storage and reduce sediment within
    Mill Slough and East City Ditch.
          The Lake Runnymede Restoration Project, which would
    restore the lake to pre-development status and return appropriate
    vegetative cover within the lake to support appropriate ecological
    functions including essential fish habitat, wading bird foraging, and
    reduction of nutrient loading to East Lake Tohopekaliga due to sediment
    flows from Lake Runnymede.
          The Lake Tohopekaliga-Kissimmee Lakefront Restoration and
    Water Quality Improvement Project, which would restore parts of the
    north shore of Lake Tohopekaliga to allow ecosystem restoration and
    reduction of nutrient and sediment flow to the Upper Kissimmee Basin of
    the Lake Okeechobee Watershed. It would improve essential fish habitat
    and improve foraging and nesting habitat for the Everglades Snail Kite.
          The Lancaster Park Floodplain Improvement Project would
    restore and expand Shingle Creek to allow for flood storage and reduced
    floodway stages while retaining the historic character of the creek.

        In terms of environmental infrastructure requests, I'd like to
    advocate for:
          Polk County's Derby Ditch Drainage Improvement Project,
    which would consist of the design, permitting, right-of-way/easement
    acquisition and construction of a drainage improvement to pipe an
    existing 1.36 miles of open drainage channel that conveys stormwater
    from a watershed that extends from Main Street in Auburndale to Lake
    Jessie in Winter Haven.
          Orange County's Aquifer Storage Reservoir (ASR) Chemical
    Addition Project which includes the design and construction of drinking
    water infrastructure improvements through a chemical feed system to
    reduce the dissolved oxygen in the potable water prior to injection
    into the Aquifer Storage Reservoir (ASR). The reduction in dissolved
    oxygen will eliminate arsenic leaching into the storage reservoir and
    will allow OCU to optimize the facility. The benefits include
    flexibility to meet peak and maximum day demands and increased water
    quality for customers.

        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Graves, I look forward to working with
    you to advance my priorities in this bill and I welcome any questions
    you may have. Thank you and I yield back.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Mr. Soto.
        Any questions of Mr. Soto?
        Hearing and seeing none, thank you very much for your
    testimony, and we will recognize our next Member, Mr. Higgins
    from New York.
        You are on for 5 minutes, sir.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. BRIAN HIGGINS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

        Mr. Higgins of New York. Thank you very much, Madam Chair
    and Chairs DeFazio and Napolitano, Ranking Members Graves and
    Rouzer, members of the committee. Thank you for giving me the
    opportunity to advocate on behalf of my community to make sure
    that our freshwater sources in the Great Lakes continue to be
    preserved long into the future.
        One way this Congress can protect the health of the Great
    Lakes and Lake Erie is by proactively addressing the growing
    threat of harmful algal blooms, and promoting clean drinking
    water infrastructure in this year's Water Resources Development
    Act.
        Harmful algae blooms are caused by nonpoint source
    pollution like nutrient runoff. They create dead zones where
    plants and animal life cannot survive. These toxic blooms emit
    damaging chemicals into bodies of water, and they are dangerous
    to humans.
        In 2014, an algal bloom in western Lake Erie near Toledo,
    Ohio, shut down the city's drinking water system for 2 complete
    days.
        Algal blooms have been spotted in eastern Lake Erie, as
    well, near Presque Isle and Erie, Pennsylvania, 90 miles from
    Buffalo.
        The Army Corps has conducted pilot projects to fight algal
    blooms in Florida, as well as smaller lakes across New York
    State, but we need to take seriously the threat algal blooms
    pose to the health of one of our continent's largest sources of
    freshwater.
        This committee and this Congress should take this threat
    seriously, and put forth resources to proactively address it. I
    have proposed language to begin this work at Lake Erie, and I
    respectfully request this committee include that proposal in
    your bill.
        I also urge this committee to fortify the infrastructure
    that our communities rely on to deliver clean drinking water.
    As water infrastructure ages, maintenance becomes a larger
    component of local government budgets.
        For example, the Colonel Ward Pumping Station and
    Filtration Plant is a critical piece of the city of Buffalo's
    drinking water system. A historic engineering achievement at
    the time of its construction in the early 20th century, the
    pumping station's tunnels were the largest of their kind in all
    of the Great Lakes. Lake Erie's waves and ice have damaged the
    seawall protecting the pumping station and the adjacent Ralph
    C. Wilson, Jr. Centennial Park, which is undergoing a
    renaissance of its own.
        The Army Corps has done good work to repair the north
    section of the seawall. I hope their work can continue at the
    southern piece to reinforce protection to the pumping station
    and park.
        I urge my colleagues to support these efforts to reinforce
    the progress we have made on the Great Lakes, and protect our
    drinking water infrastructure.
        Thank you, and I yield back.
        [Mr. Higgins' prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Brian Higgins, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of New York
        Chairs DeFazio and Napolitano, Ranking Members Graves and Rouzer,
    Members of the Committee,
        Thank you for giving me the opportunity to advocate on behalf of my
    community to make sure our fresh water sources in the Great Lakes
    continue to be preserved long into the future.
        One way this Congress can protect the health of Lake Erie by
    proactively addressing the growing threat of harmful algal blooms and
    promoting clean drinking water infrastructure in this year's Water
    Resources Development Act.
        Harmful algal blooms are caused by non-point source pollution, like
    nutrient runoff. They create dead zones where plant and animal life
    cannot survive.
        These toxic blooms emit damaging chemicals into bodies of water.
    And they are dangerous to humans.
        In 2014, an algae bloom in western Lake Erie near Toledo, Ohio,
    shut down the city's drinking water systems for two days.
        Algae blooms have been spotted in eastern Lake Erie as well, near
    Presque Isle and Erie, Pennsylvania--90 miles from Buffalo.
        The Army Corps has conducted pilot projects to fight algal blooms
    in Florida, as well as in smaller lakes across New York State.
        But we need to take seriously the threat algal blooms pose to the
    health of one of our continent's largest sources of fresh water.
        This committee, and this Congress, should take this threat
    seriously and put forth resources to proactively address it.
        I have proposed language to begin this work at Lake Erie, and I
    respectfully request this committee include that proposal in your bill.
        I also urge this committee to fortify the infrastructure that our
    communities rely on to deliver clean drinking water.
        As water infrastructure ages, maintenance becomes a larger
    component of local government budgets.
        For example, the Colonel Ward Pumping Station and Filtration Plant
    is a critical piece of the city of Buffalo's drinking water system.
        A historic engineering achievement, at the time of its construction
    in the early twentieth century, the pumping station's tunnels were the
    largest of their kind in the Great Lakes.
        Lake Erie's waves and ice have damaged the seawall protecting the
    pumping station and the adjacent Ralph C. Wilson Jr. Centennial Park,
    which is undergoing a renaissance of its own.
        The Army Corps has done good work to repair the north section of
    the seawall. I hope their work can continue at the southern piece to
    reinforce protection to the pumping station and park.
        I urge my colleagues to support these efforts to reinforce the
    progress we've made on the Great Lakes and protect our drinking water
    infrastructure. Thank you and I yield back.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you so much, Mr. Higgins, for your
    testimony.
        And are there any questions for Mr. Higgins?
        Hearing and seeing none, thank you, sir. You are very
    welcome to any more comments you may have.
        I now would like to recognize our next Member, the
    gentleman from New Jersey, Mr. Gottheimer, for 5 minutes.
        You are on, sir.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. JOSH GOTTHEIMER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

        Mr. Gottheimer. Thank you, Chairwoman and Ranking Member. I
    greatly appreciate you hosting this important hearing, and for
    having us here today. I appreciate you seeking input as you
    prepare a new Water Resources Development Act, and I am here
    today to advocate for several water resource and water
    infrastructure priorities important in North Jersey.
        I have submitted five requests to the committee, and I am
    hopeful they will include them in the final WRDA we enact this
    year. My requests include the following.
        First, to create an authority for the Army Corps of
    Engineers to be able to perform the design and construction of
    necessary remediation of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive
    waste contamination projects as part of the construction of a
    project. We must take steps to protect our water, air, and our
    open spaces for our children and grandchildren, and pragmatic,
    commonsense action in our fight for the future of our
    communities and our planet.
        Second, to create an authority that will allow
    reimbursement to homeowners for the costs of relocation and
    required upgrades as part of nonstructural measures. Just look
    at Hurricane Ida, what it did in my State, from flooding homes
    and, sadly, taking so many lives. Every time we have another
    bad storm, it is costing insurers, taxpayers, and families a
    fortune.
        Third, along with Representative Tonko, and as a cosponsor,
    I have submitted the text of the New York-New Jersey Watershed
    Protection Act to the committee. This bill would include the
    adoption of a watershed-wide restoration strategy in
    consultation with the Corps of Engineers to coordinate, fund,
    and provide technical assistance for conservation and
    restoration activities that strengthen flood controls, restore
    outdated dams, improve water quality, and increase public
    access to these vital water resources. The New York-New Jersey
    watershed is home to more than 20 million people, more than 200
    fish species, and some of the most endangered rivers in the
    United States due to the high levels of PCPs.
        Fourth, along with Representative Pascrell's office, I have
    submitted a request for the Corps of Engineers to partner with
    several North Jersey municipalities, including Lodi, Maywood,
    and Rochelle Park to conduct a feasibility study regarding
    flood controls. According to these local communities, flooding
    from Hurricane Ida caused significant damage, resulting in
    evacuations of hundreds of residents and seniors, with many
    still in temporary housing. We desperately need the Federal
    Government to step in and help residents, families, and local
    governments mitigate the problem before more disasters occur.
        Finally, I submitted a policy request to the committee
    granting the Corps of Engineers authority to study and address
    the impact of sea level rise on projects. Currently, sea level
    rise is only studied when its impacts are incorporated into
    coastal storm risk features that are authorized for
    construction. Sea level rise by itself is not examined if it is
    not related to a storm risk feature being authorized. This is
    problematic, because an area where no coastal storm risk
    features are recommended may, in fact, be impacted by sea level
    rise in the future. But the Corps does not include that without
    a specifically recommended project feature.
        We are in the middle of a major climate crisis, as we all
    know. Look at the last few years--the unprecedented wildfires,
    record high temperatures, shorter winters, and rising water
    levels off the Jersey shore. For New Jersey and for our whole
    planet, we must take action that will help us tackle climate
    change now and not later, so that our country and State will
    have clean air and water for future generations.
        In addition to these priorities, I would be remiss if I
    didn't highlight the critical water investments made in our
    historic once-in-a-century bipartisan infrastructure bill last
    November, now being implemented across the country.
        Back home in Jersey, we have 350,000 lead service lines,
    according to the American Water Works Association. That is a
    lead pipe that connects a water main to premises like a home or
    school. We know that lead can have nefarious and terrible
    impacts on children, on their health, and on families. Overall,
    nationwide, our bipartisan infrastructure bill will make a $55
    billion investment in clean drinking water and clean water,
    which represents the largest investment in American history to
    help our children and families.
        New Jersey will expect to claw back $1 billion over 5 years
    from the bipartisan infrastructure bill to improve water
    infrastructure across our State and to ensure that clean, safe
    water is a right for our kids and families. Investments will go
    toward the replacement of lead service lines and toward
    emergencies involving lead in drinking water, assistance for
    small communities like those in Sussex and Warren Counties and
    across North Jersey and, of course, help for schools across the
    Fifth Congressional District.
        I have been helping lead the fight to make sure investment
    from the infrastructure bill goes to projects in North Jersey,
    including water infrastructure projects in Fair Lawn, and flood
    mitigation in Hillsdale, New Milford, and Westwood.
        Making the investment we need to deliver clean drinking
    water to every American is a bipartisan issue that can bring
    everyone and must bring everyone together.
        Thank you so much for holding this important hearing and
    allowing me to discuss these critically important projects and
    issues facing our families and small businesses and communities
    in northern New Jersey. I am confident that, if we work
    together, we can mitigate flooding, combat climate change, and
    ensure we have clean drinking water for our communities. Thank
    you so much.
        I look forward to continuing to work with you on these
    important issues here in the greatest country in the world. I
    yield back. Thank you.
        [Mr. Gottheimer's prepared statement follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Hon. Josh Gottheimer, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of New Jersey
        Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Subcommittee
    Chairwoman Napolitano, Subcommittee Ranking Member Rouzer, and to the
    members of the Committee, I greatly appreciate you hosting this
    important hearing and for having us here today. I appreciate you
    seeking input as you prepare a new Water Resources Development Act, and
    I am here today to advocate for several water resources and water
    infrastructure priorities important for North Jersey. I have submitted
    five requests to the Committee, and I'm hopeful they will be included
    in the final WRDA we enact this year.
        My requests include the following.
        First, to create an authority for the Army Corps of Engineers to be
    able to perform the design and construction of necessary remediation of
    hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste contamination on projects as
    part of the construction of a project. The cost will remain a non-
    federal sponsor's responsibility and the federal government will not
    bear responsibility for liability in the clean-up of any hazardous,
    toxic, and radioactive waste necessary for the construction of a
    project.
        We must take steps to protect our water, air, and our open spaces
    for our children and grandchildren--pragmatic, commonsense action in
    our fight for the future of our communities and our planet.
        Second, to create an authority that will allow reimbursement to
    homeowners for the costs of relocation and required upgrades as part of
    non-structural measures. Under current practice, if a project
    recommends elevation of a home, the homeowner is responsible for any
    relocation costs. My proposal would allow reimbursement to homeowners
    for those costs. It could also allow the costs of required upgrades to
    be reimbursed to homeowners as part of the non-structural measures--
    such as required sewer upgrades or other required measures.
        Just look at Hurricane Ida and what it did in my state--flooding
    homes and, sadly, taking many, many lives. Every time we have another
    bad storm, it is costing insurers, taxpayers, and families a fortune.
        Third, along with Representative Tonko and as a cosponsor, I have
    submitted the text of the New York-New Jersey Watershed Protection Act
    to the Committee. This bill would include the adoption of a watershed-
    wide restoration strategy in consultation with the Corps of Engineers
    to coordinate, fund, and provide technical assistance for conservation
    and restoration activities that strengthen flood controls, restore
    outdated dams, improve water quality, and increase public access to
    these vital water resources.
        The New York-New Jersey Watershed is home to more than 20 million
    people, more than 200 fish species, and some of the most endangered
    rivers in the U.S., due to high levels of polychlorinated biphenyls
    (PCBs).
        Fourth, along with Representative Pascrell office, I have submitted
    a request for the Corps of Engineers to partner with several North
    Jersey municipalities--including the Borough of Lodi, Township of
    Saddle Brook, Township of Rochelle Park, the Borough of Maywood, the
    City of Garfield, the Township of South Hackensack, and the Borough of
    Wallington--to conduct a feasibility study regarding flood control.
        According to these local communities, flooding from Hurricane Ida
    caused significant damage, resulting in evacuations of hundreds of
    residents--with many still in temporary housing. We desperately need
    the federal government to step in and help residents, families, and
    local governments mitigate the problem before more disasters occur.
        Finally, I submitted a policy request to the Committee granting the
    Corps of Engineers authority to study and address the impact of sea
    level rise on projects. Currently, sea level rise is only studied when
    its impacts are incorporated into coastal storm risk features that are
    authorized for construction. Sea level rise by itself is not examined
    if it is not related to a storm risk feature being authorized. This is
    problematic because an area where no coastal storm risk features are
    recommended may in fact be impacted by sea level rise in the future,
    but the Corps does not include that without a specifically recommended
    project feature.
        We are in the middle of a major climate crisis. Just look at the
    last few years--the unprecedented wildfires, record high temperatures,
    shorter winters, and rising water levels off the Jersey shore.
        For New Jersey and for our whole planet, we must take action that
    will help us tackle climate change now and not later, so that our
    country and state will have clean air and water for future generations.
        In addition to these priorities, I'd be remiss if I didn't
    highlight the critical water investments made in our historic
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill last November, now being implemented
    across the country.
        Back home in New Jersey, we have 350,000 lead service lines,
    according to the American Water Works Association. That's a lead pipe
    that connects a water main to premises like a home or school.
        Overall, nationwide, our Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill will make a
    $55 billion investment in clean drinking water--which represents the
    largest investment in American history.
        New Jersey will expect to claw back $1 billion over five years from
    the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill--to improve water infrastructure
    across our state and to ensure that clean, safe drinking water is a
    right for our kids and families.
        Investment will go toward the replacement of lead service lines,
    and toward emergencies involving lead in drinking water, assistance for
    small communities, like those in Sussex and Warren Counties and across
    North Jersey, and of course, help for schools across the Fifth
    Congressional District.
        I've been helping lead the fight to make sure investment from the
    infrastructure bill goes to projects in North Jersey, including water
    infrastructure improvements in Fair Lawn, and flood mitigation in
    Hillsdale, New Milford, and Westwood.
        Making the investment we need to deliver clean drinking water to
    every American is a bipartisan issue that can bring everyone together.
        Thank you for holding this important hearing, and allowing me to
    discuss these critically important projects and issues facing our
    families, small businesses, and communities. I am confident that if we
    work together we can mitigate flooding, combat climate change, and
    ensure we have clean water for our communities. I look forward to
    continuing to work with you on these important issues.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you for your testimony, sir. Mr.
    Gottheimer, it is very good to hear all of the things that you
    have mentioned. I think all of us have the same problems.
        Mr. Gottheimer. Thank you, Chair.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you.
        Mr. Gottheimer. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Next I would like to recognize a gentleman
    from California, Mr. Costa, for 5 minutes. He is online.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. JIM COSTA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
                        THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Costa. Thank you very much, Madam Chairperson, for your
    leadership and this important hearing that your subcommittee is
    holding.
        And let me also take a moment to congratulate you on the
    award that you recently received from the Army Corps of
    Engineers and other water agencies, well deserved, for your
    countless efforts over the years on trying to address water
    needs not only in California, but throughout our country. And
    congratulations, well deserved. And thank you.
        Madam Chairperson, Ranking Member, I want to provide
    members of the committee what I think are priorities and
    projects that obviously [inaudible] my constituency that I
    think have good best management practices for water use not
    only in California, but throughout the country.
        Last year, Democrats and Republicans in Congress came
    together to pass a very, very important bipartisan
    infrastructure package. I continue to say and advocate for
    investments in our infrastructure that we have been living off
    the--those investments our parents and grandparents have made a
    generation or two ago. This passage of this important
    legislation last year signed by the President gives us an
    opportunity to begin making those investments that are long
    overdue.
        We have that opportunity to leverage this not only with
    Federal funds, but in many cases with State and local dollars.
    This infrastructure that we have throughout our Nation is
    aging. We know that. We absolutely have to continue to invest,
    I believe, in clean drinking water and watersheds to protect
    water quality.
        At the same time, we need to invest in California,
    particularly, but elsewhere to improve our water supply, a
    reliable water supply, to protect communities in terms of the
    need to produce food. Food is a national security issue. Every
    day, putting food on America's dinner table is really a
    national security issue, and we should treat it as such. But we
    also have flood control issues that we have to deal with, as
    well.
        The reality of climate change, I think, has made supporting
    more reliable water reserves even more critical. We all know
    Western States are again experiencing severe, severe drought
    conditions. According to some experts, this year was merely a
    continuation of the so-called mega-drought that has been
    happening for now 20 years. I believe it is the new normal. We
    average waterfall and rainfall and water supply in California
    on 10-year averages. And when you look at the 10-year averages,
    we don't have the infrastructure that tries to provide the
    balance on years when we have above average rainfall and snow,
    on years where we have below average. And we are in one of
    those times.
        California in 2021 was the second driest year recorded,
    spanning more than 100 years since we have been keeping
    records. Let me repeat that: 2021 was the second driest year in
    recorded history in California. More frequent and the more
    intense droughts caused by climate change requires us to plan,
    to adapt, and to rethink how we manage our infrastructure and
    utilize our resources for our food, for our cities, and for the
    environment.
        I want, with that in mind, to highlight a couple of
    proposed resources in my district to reoperate the Redbank and
    Fancher Creek projects. These are reservoirs, originally
    designed primarily for flood control purposes, but local water
    managers are now rethinking, and have a proposal that would
    reoperate these not only to provide for flood control, but to
    maximize groundwater recharge in wet years.
        I know the chairwoman has done really remarkable things in
    the southern California basin in her efforts to deal with
    recharge. This is a similar example. It is critical for
    improving long-term sustainability of depleted groundwater
    basins, and for improving water supply rate reliability by
    having more water on hand in the dry years. And man, we are in
    those dry years.
        With ongoing drought and limited surface water supplies, we
    must use every tool in our water toolbox, every tool in our
    water toolbox to get much-needed infrastructure in place.
        We also have the opportunity to use the Army Corps programs
    to enhance critical habitats for listed species, make ecosystem
    improvements to rivers and watersheds, such as efforts that we
    have been able to do in California. If done carefully in
    collaboration with impacted stakeholders, we have the
    opportunity to not only provide greater water reliability, but
    also to improve and sustain our agriculture, our food, which
    is, obviously, impacted by these drought conditions and the
    lack of investments.
        We also have an opportunity to deal with threatened and
    endangered species. In California, we are on the verge of
    trying a new approach to adaptive management in our water
    system known as voluntary agreements. If successful, these
    voluntary agreements give us an opportunity to create more
    collaborative management structure to compare current
    regulatory efforts.
        This strategy would also avoid costly and time consuming
    litigation. Being engaged in battles in courts do not resolve
    our water supply. The strategy would also avoid costly and time
    consuming litigation, and it would also kickstart ecosystem
    restoration efforts that benefit some of the iconic rivers and
    improve our Bay-Delta restoration.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Mr. Costa, your time is up.
        Mr. Costa. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and I
    look forward to working with you and the subcommittee as we
    deal with the importance of all of these issues. Thank you.
        [Mr. Costa's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Jim Costa, a Representative in Congress from
                            the State of California
        Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member. I want to
    thank this committee for providing the opportunity for Members to
    present on our priorities and projects as you work to write the Water
    Resources Development Act.
        Last year, Democrats and Republicans in Congress came together to
    pass the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. By passing this historic
    legislation, we are investing in a better future for America--one
    focused on an equitable future, rather than restoring the past.
        I have long said that we are living off the investments that our
    parents (and our grandparents) made a generation (or two) ago. Now,
    with the funding provided through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, we
    are finally making long-needed investments of our own.
        Now, we have the opportunity to leverage the investments in the
    Bipartisan Infrastructure Law through advancement of the WRDA bill.
        Our water infrastructure is aging. We absolutely need to continue
    investing in clean drinking water and improving watersheds to protect
    water quality. At the same time, we also need to invest in our overall
    water supply and to protect communities threatened by flooding. The
    food on American tables every night depends on a reliable water supply.
        The reality of climate change has made supporting more reliable
    water reserves even more critical. We all know the Western United
    States is once again experiencing severe drought conditions. According
    to some experts, this year was merely the continuation of a so-called
    ``megadrought'' happening over the last 20 years across the west.
        In California, 2021 was the second driest year in a record spanning
    more than 100 years. The more frequent and more intense droughts caused
    by climate change require us to plan, adapt, and rethink how we manage
    our infrastructure and utilize our resources.
        With that in mind, I want to highlight a proposal in my district to
    reoperate the Redbank and Fancher Creeks Project. These reservoirs were
    originally designed primarily for flood control but local water
    managers are proposing it be reoperated to maximize groundwater
    recharge in wet years.
        This is critical for improving the long-term sustainability of
    depleted groundwater basins and for improving water supply reliability
    by having more water on hand in dry years. With ongoing drought and
    limited surface water supplies, we must use every tool in our water
    toolbox to maximize our water supply by getting the most out of our
    water infrastructure.
        We also have the opportunity to utilize Army Corps programs to
    enhance critical habitats for listed species and make ecosystem
    improvements to rivers and watersheds. Such efforts in California--if
    done carefully and in collaboration with impacted stakeholders--have
    the opportunity to not only provide greater water supply reliability
    for the largest agricultural economy in the United States, but to also
    improve conditions for threatened and endangered species.
        In California, we are on the verge of trying a new approach to
    adaptively manage our water system, known as Voluntary Agreements. If
    successful, the Voluntary Agreements give us the opportunity to create
    a more collaborative management structure compared to current
    regulatory efforts. This strategy would also avoid costly and time-
    consuming litigation, make progress on developing a more reliable water
    system in California, and kickstart ecosystem restoration efforts that
    would benefit iconic rivers, species, and the Bay-Delta.
        Successfully implementing the Voluntary Agreements requires a
    collaborative partnership between local stakeholders, the State of
    California, and the federal government to restore the reliability of
    domestically produced food supply and to restore nationally important
    ecosystems.
        I hope to work with this committee, and the Army Corps, to make
    federal investment and technical assistance available to successfully
    implement these game-changing efforts.
        Mr. Chairman, I look forward to working with you on this critical
    legislation to ensure it maximizes the benefits to my constituents in
    California's San Joaquin Valley and to our nation.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much for your testimony,
    sir. And now I will turn it over to Mr. Rouzer to introduce the
    next Member.
        Mr. Rouzer [presiding]. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. I
    would like to recognize our next witness, the gentlewoman from
    Illinois, Mrs. Miller, for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. MARY E. MILLER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

        Mrs. Miller of Illinois. Thank you for the opportunity,
    Chairman Napolitano, to address this committee on behalf of the
    constituents of the Illinois 15th Congressional District.
        On behalf of my constituents, I would like to highlight the
    need to improve our Nation's traditional infrastructure, such
    as revitalizing our bridges and dams and facilitating commerce.
    This is why I wish the infrastructure bill was passed fully
    focused on traditional infrastructure.
        I especially want to emphasize the need for continued work
    on lock and dam 25 in my district. Illinois' economy is
    diverse, as it is supported by agriculture, energy, and
    manufacturing. These industries require a robust transportation
    network to get products to market. Nearly every bushel of
    soybeans, corn, and other grain transported along the
    Mississippi River from Illinois will pass through lock and dam
    25.
        I appreciated President Trump's support for traditional
    infrastructure and, specifically, for the upper Mississippi
    locks 20 through 25. Completing lock and dam 25 is critically
    important to grain handlers and agricultural exporters in my
    district, and will increase U.S. agricultural competitiveness
    as a whole.
        I ask that the committee bear these priorities in mind when
    developing the Water Resources Development Act, and keep
    radical Green New Deal priorities out of the bill, especially
    as we face $5 per gallon gasoline.
        Again, I thank you for your consideration and the chance to
    speak to you today. As a member of the Agriculture Committee, I
    look forward to working with your committee to address these
    issues, which are critically important to my fellow farmers.
    Thank you.
        [Mrs. Miller's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Mary E. Miller, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Illinois
        Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves: thank you for the
    opportunity to testify on behalf of Illinois' 15th District.
        On behalf of my constituents, I would like to highlight the need to
    improve our nation's traditional infrastructure--such as revitalizing
    our bridges and dams and facilitating commerce. This is why I wish the
    infrastructure bill was passed, fully focused on traditional
    infrastructure.
        I especially want to emphasize the need for continued work on Lock
    and Dam 25 in my district.
        Illinois' economy is diverse, as it is supported by agriculture,
    energy, and manufacturing. These industries require a robust
    transportation network to get products to market. Nearly every bushel
    of soybeans, corn, and other grain transported along the Mississippi
    River from Illinois will pass through Lock and Dam 25.
        I appreciated President Trump's support for traditional
    infrastructure, and specifically, for the Upper Mississippi Locks 20-
    25. Completing Lock and Dam 25 is critically important to grain
    handlers and agricultural exporters in my district and will increase
    U.S. agricultural competitiveness as a whole.
        I ask that the Committee bear these priorities in mind when
    developing the Water Resources Development Act and keep radical, Green
    New Deal priorities out of the bill, especially as we face $5 per
    gallon for gasoline.
        Again, I thank you for your consideration and the chance to speak
    to you today. As a member of the Agriculture Committee, I look forward
    to working with your committee to address these issues that are
    critically important to my fellow farmers.

        Mr. Rouzer. Now I would like to recognize our next witness,
    the gentleman from California, Mr. Issa, for 5 minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. DARRELL ISSA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Issa. Good morning and thank you, Chair Napolitano and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, for the leadership that you are
    supplying here today, and for your giving me this opportunity.
        As the Chair knows, as Californians, we have a phenomenon,
    which is the further north you go in California, the more rain
    you get; the further south you go, the less rain you get. I am
    as far south as you can go, and if we get 7 inches in a good
    year, it is a really good year. That is one of the reasons
    that, when I have reviewed the dozens of requests for specific
    programs, I looked at those that particularly would help us
    with the limited amount of water we have.
        My first request is the Padre Dam Municipal Water District,
    which is a key partnership for all of San Diego County. So even
    though it is in the East County Advanced Water Purification
    Program, it is actually a project uphill from all of the rest
    of San Diego County, and will bring 15 million gallons per day
    of what is now discharged wastewater. This project of
    reinjection and reuse is the kind of program that has zero new
    water, and yet brings those 15 million gallons a day. I am told
    that the support for the region will represent 30 percent of
    the region's drinking water demand. This project is supported
    by my partner downstream, Sara Jacobs, and myself.
        My second project is one that my predecessors have worked
    on for many years, but we are really at a point where this
    final funding can make the final difference to complete this
    program. It is called the Escondido Creek flood control
    project, and I am doing this jointly. Currently, this is my
    entire district. But under the presumption of redistricting in
    California, Mr. Peters and myself will share this flood area.
        The project is right in the center, if you will, of
    Escondido, which is the second largest city in San Diego
    County. Currently groundwater infiltration creates a flood for
    450 single and multifamily homes. By implementing this project,
    not only will we save the water for other use, but we will
    eliminate the flood insurance premiums paid for by these
    individuals. And this would conclude the project with the
    matching funds coming from other sources.
        Third is one that is particularly near and dear. Although I
    had many applications, only one matured sufficient to ask for
    it. As you may know, the 50th Congressional District enjoys
    more federally recognized Tribes than almost all other
    districts combined, with 18 Tribal communities. In this case,
    the Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians is seeking approximately 1
    mile of water distribution line, which they are providing the
    additional funds for, for reclaimed water. Currently the Tribe
    relies entirely on well water, and this discharge recapture
    will, literally, create new water where it otherwise wouldn't
    be.
        One of the advantages of this Tribe's application is that
    they have fully funded their portion of it, and it is supported
    by the surrounding communities. All of these projects are
    supported by local funding matches and recognized by the Army
    Corps of Engineers as appropriate for designation as
    environmental infrastructure under the Water Development
    Resources Act.
        Again, I am in the driest part of the State. Each one of
    these represents not new sources of water, but new uses of
    water in our dry area. So, I hope that you will see these as
    particularly noteworthy.
        Again, there were many more applications that we did not
    forward because we felt that we should focus on the ones that
    had the most immediate benefit to the area, and ones where you
    could look and say, you do this, you dramatically improve water
    quality for the people of San Diego and Riverside County.
        I want to thank you for your indulgence and yield back my 6
    seconds.
        [Mr. Issa's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Darrell Issa, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of California
        Good morning and thank you to Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member
    Graves for your leadership on the important issue of water resources
    development.
        My office has submitted funding requests for three projects.
        First, the Padre Dam Municipal Water District is a key partner in
    the East County Advanced Water Purification Program. This collaborative
    program is helping to drought-proof San Diego County by providing a new
    source for drinking water and eliminate 15 million gallons per day of
    treated wastewater discharge. All told, this will support approximately
    30 percent of the region's drinking water demand. This project is
    supported by our colleague Ms. Jacobs and myself.
        Second, the Escondido Creek Flood Control Project will help provide
    design and construction services in a city split between our colleague
    Mr. Peters and myself. This project will help the City of Escondido
    manager stormwater, expand groundwater infiltration, improve water
    quality, and importantly--benefit more than 450 single- and multi-
    family homes along and around the creek that are currently paying for
    flood insurance. This project will reduce if not eliminate that need
    and benefit a diverse and vital part of the city.
        Third, as you may know, the 50th Congressional District is home to
    more federally-recognized tribes than almost all other districts in the
    country--18 tribal communities in total. The Rincon Band of Luiseno
    Indians is seeking approximately one mile of water distribution lines,
    and approximately one mile of reclaimed water pipeline to better
    facilitate sewer processing and support groundwater recharge. Because
    the community relies exclusively on groundwater for supplies, this
    project will help ensure economical and conscientious management of
    precious water resources and meet conservation objectives.
        Each of these projects is supported with robust local funding
    matches and is recognized by the Army Corps of Engineers as appropriate
    for designation as Environmental Infrastructure under the Water
    Development Resources Act.
        Thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to present to
    you today.
        I yield back.

        Mr. Rouzer. We thank our friend from California. Are there
    any questions for our friend from California?
        Seeing none, we will move to our next witness. I would like
    to recognize the gentlewoman from Florida, Ms. Wasserman
    Schultz, for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                   CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA

        Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you so much, Madam Chair and
    Ranking Member, for the chance to share how vital the Water
    Resources Development Act is for Florida.
        And a special thanks to Chairman DeFazio for his leadership
    on this committee over the years. His knowledge and expertise
    will be sorely missed by everyone in Congress. Chairman DeFazio
    was critical in developing the bipartisan Water Resources
    Development Act, which authorizes Army Corps of Engineers Civil
    Works activities.
        From restoring the Everglades and investing in our ports,
    to fighting rising seas by nourishing beaches and managing
    flood risk, Florida engages with the Army Corps of Engineers on
    so many urgent fronts. Few are more critical than the deepening
    and widening of Port Everglades in my congressional district, a
    project that will dramatically improve supply chain
    efficiencies and port operations.
        And while I could spend an hour on the ups and downs of
    this project, I am going to bottom line it for you. In an
    effort to protect vital coral reef and other environmental
    assets, the cost of the Port Everglades deepening and widening
    project rose significantly well above the authorized limit
    approved by this committee in WRDA 2016.
        Typically, the Corps would produce what is known as a Post-
    Authorization Change Report to substantiate their increased
    cost. However, my colleagues from Florida and I ask that the
    increased cost be approved through this WRDA bill, as was done
    for previous projects as recently as the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2020, because without the language now, the
    port will be on the hook for the entire increased cost of the
    project, or it will stop while we wait for WRDA 2024. As
    America wrestles with supply chain issues, neither option is
    acceptable.
        One reason for the increased costs is because we learned
    lessons from other widening and deepening projects. Our port
    professionals and the Army Corps learned from experiences that
    we must take time to understand potential impacts this could
    have on our cherished coral reefs.
        Despite the cost increases and setbacks, we have made
    substantial progress already. The revised supplemental EIS is
    currently open for public comment, and the reconfiguration of
    the Coast Guard Station Fort Lauderdale, the first construction
    portion of this project, is scheduled to break ground next
    spring. This will be a brandnew, state-of-the-art facility for
    our Coast Guard, which is badly needed and long overdue--
    finally.
        It is hard to believe that the Port Everglades project,
    Madam Chair, began in 1996. That is 26 years ago. Under ideal
    circumstances, including this authorization being included in
    this WRDA bill, construction won't be complete before 2032,
    another 10 years from now. We cannot wait any longer for the
    Port Everglades deepening and widening project to begin.
        I look forward to working with you further on this and
    getting the project authorization increase approved in this
    WRDA bill.
        Another issue I want to bring to your attention is related
    to the extension of two beach renourishment projects in Broward
    County, both of which expire soon. The recently introduced
    SHORRE Act would reauthorize both projects, as well as other
    projects in Florida and elsewhere for an additional 50 years. I
    support reauthorizing these projects in this WRDA bill, and
    appreciate your ongoing attention to the extension of shore
    protection projects that will expire soon.
        And finally, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the
    importance of the Everglades, which many of us refer to as the
    river of grass--not the port I just referred to. But thanks to
    the Biden administration, we secured $1.1 billion in funding
    for Everglades restoration through the bipartisan
    infrastructure bill. To continue this recent historic progress,
    we must continue to advance projects that remove barriers to
    sending water south, and restore the historic flow paths of the
    Everglades. To do this, the Army Corps needs flexibilities to
    fund large-scale projects.
        For example, the Army Corps could fund larger CERP projects
    by utilizing an incremental funding approach. We can help
    advance these projects by providing this flexibility in the
    WRDA bill. And I look forward to working with the committee on
    this and your leadership.
        Thank you for your efforts to develop and pass a new WRDA
    bill in the 117th Congress. I appreciate the work that you put
    into this legislation. I look forward to helping you pass this
    bill this year.
        Thank you so much, Madam Chair and Ranking Member.
        [Ms. Wasserman Schultz's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Representative
                     in Congress from the State of Florida
        Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves, thank you for this
    chance to share how vital the Water Resources Development Act is for
    Florida.
        And a special thanks to the Chairman for his leadership on this
    committee over the years. His knowledge and expertise will be sorely
    missed by everyone in Congress.
        Chairman DeFazio was critical in developing the bipartisan Water
    Resources Development Act which authorizes Army Corps of Engineers
    civil works activities.
        From restoring the Everglades and investing in our ports, to
    fighting rising seas by nourishing beaches and managing flood risk,
    Florida engages with the Army Corps of Engineers on so many urgent
    fronts.
        Few are more critical than the deepening and widening of Port
    Everglades in my district, a project that will dramatically improve
    supply chain efficiencies and port operations.
        And while I could spend an hour on the ups and downs of this
    project, here's the bottom line:
        In an effort to protect vital coral reef and other environmental
    assets, the cost of the Port Everglades deepening and widening rose
    significantly, well above the authorized limit approved by this
    Committee in WRDA 2016.
        Typically, the Corps would produce what's known as a Post
    Authorization Change Report to substantiate their increased cost.
        However, my colleagues and I ask that the increased cost be
    approved through this WRDA bill--as was done for previous projects, as
    recently as the Water Resources Development Act of 2020.
        Because without the language now, the Port will be on the hook for
    the entire increased cost of the project, or it will stop while we wait
    for WRDA 2024.
        As America wrestles with supply chain issues, neither option is
    acceptable.
        One reason for the increased costs is because we learned lessons
    from other widening and deepening projects.
        Our port professionals and the Army Corps learned from experiences
    that we must take the time to understand potential impacts this could
    have on our cherished coral reefs.
        Despite the cost increases and setbacks, we have made substantial
    progress already.
        The revised supplemental EIS is currently open for public comment
    and the reconfiguration of the Coast Guard Station Fort Lauderdale--the
    first construction portion of the project--is scheduled to break ground
    next spring.
        This will be a brand new, state of the art facility for our Coast
    Guard. It's badly needed and long overdue.
        It's hard to believe that the Port Everglades project began in
    1996. That's 26 years ago!
        Under ideal circumstances--including this authorization being
    included in this WRDA bill--construction won't be complete before 2032,
    another ten years from now.
        We cannot wait any longer for the Port Everglades deepening and
    widening project to begin.
        I look forward to working with you further on this and getting the
    project authorization increase approved in this WRDA bill.
        Another issue I want to bring to your attention is related to the
    extension of two beach renourishment projects in Broward County, both
    of which expire soon.
        The recently introduced SHORRE Act would reauthorize both projects
    as well as other projects in Florida and elsewhere for an additional 50
    years.
        I support reauthorizing these projects in this WRDA bill and
    appreciate your ongoing attention to the extension of shore protection
    projects that will expire soon.
        And finally, I would be remiss if I didn't mention the importance
    of the Everglades, which many of us refer to as the River of Grass.
        Thanks to the Biden Administration--we secured $1.1 billion in
    funding for Everglades restoration through the bipartisan
    infrastructure bill.
        To continue this recent historic progress, we must continue to
    advance projects that remove the barriers to sending water south and
    restore the historic flow paths.
        To do this, the Army Corps needs flexibilities to fund large scale
    projects.
        For example, Army Corps could fund larger CERP projects by
    utilizing an incremental funding approach.
        We can help advance these projects by providing this flexibility in
    WRDA. I look forward to working with you on this.
        Thank you for your efforts to develop and pass a new WRDA bill in
    the 117th Congress.
        I appreciate the work you put into this legislation and look
    forward to helping you pass the bill this year.

        Mr. Rouzer. We thank the gentlelady. Are there any
    questions for the gentlelady from Florida?
        Mrs. Napolitano. Good work.
        Ms. Wasserman Schultz. Thank you.
        Mr. Rouzer. Seeing none, now I take the opportunity to
    introduce our good friend from Washington, Mr. Newhouse, for 5
    minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. DAN NEWHOUSE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

        Mr. Newhouse. Well, thank you very much, Chair Napolitano
    and Ranking Member Rouzer, as well as members of the committee.
        First I want to thank you for hosting this Members' Day
    hearing. It is certainly my honor to be here representing my
    district in the State of Washington.
        For more than 30 years, misinformed interest groups have
    held central Washington and the Pacific Northwest hostage by
    threatening to drain the lifeblood of our region. So, I am
    going to ask you to not include something in this legislation.
    These groups, in my opinion, are driven by a singular
    ideological goal: breaching the Snake River dams. They have
    placed a bull's-eye on our river system and this critical
    infrastructure, which provides clean, carbon-free energy
    throughout the region. It provides water for our crops and
    transportation to move our goods to export markets.
        Millions in taxpayer dollars have been spent funding
    Federal scientists, engineers, and fish experts in the Obama
    administration to develop a years-long analysis, fine-tuning
    the operations of the Federal river power system. Putting this
    plan to work, our region continued to harness the power of our
    rivers for clean, carbon-free hydroelectric power, while
    balancing the needs of our native salmon species.
        However, for organizations fixated on free-flowing rivers
    as the only means for achieving environmental success, it has
    not been enough. They have sued the Obama administration, they
    sued the Trump administration, and they continue today by suing
    the Biden administration.
        So, members of the committee, Washington Governor Jay
    Inslee, as well as Senator Patty Murray, are now looking at
    your bill as a vehicle to waste taxpayer dollars by forcing
    another duplicative study in order to seek their own desired
    outcome.
        Dam-breaching advocates have blinded themselves to the
    countless other benefits our dams provide for our region, not
    to mention the great strides our salmon populations have made
    over the last several years, even amidst the rising ocean
    temperatures and record levels of pollution in Puget Sound. If
    these interest groups were truly concerned with our river
    system, they would look at the science. They would acknowledge
    the millions of tons of carbon these dams prevent from entering
    our atmosphere. They would acknowledge our dams utilize world-
    class technology and engineering to support the most efficient
    production of carbon-free hydroelectricity, while also
    improving fish passage rates between 93 and 96 percent.
        While I could list data point after data point outlining
    the vast strides that have been made in preserving and
    restoring our native salmon populations, it can be better
    summed up by the 4-year Federal environmental study released in
    2020 that advised against breaching the lower Snake River dams,
    which explicitly stated that the dams are not likely to
    jeopardize the continued existence of the ESA-listed species.
        I would be remiss if I did not mention how our dams and the
    rivers provide a sustainable and efficient way to transport our
    Nation's crops. Barging in the Columbia and Snake Rivers keep
    700,000 semi trucks off the roads and their emissions out of
    the air every year. The rivers alone barge more than 50 percent
    of U.S. wheat destined for export.
        It is clear that many of these dam-breaching proponents
    have long since stopped caring about the salmon or the benefits
    of the river system. The fact that the Department of Justice
    announced a settlement to stay the most recent legal attack on
    the river until July of this year--coincidentally, the same
    date Senator Murray and the Governor announced they would
    release their plans--demonstrates a predetermined back-door
    deal is in the works, and they intend to weaponize WRDA in
    order to achieve their desired outcome.
        For those of us who truly care about our region, these
    actions are deeply disturbing. Breaching our dams is simply not
    an option, and endless cycles of litigation and continued
    studies only put our region at risk. In central Washington, we
    are all actively working toward a clean energy future,
    strengthening our Nation's supply chain, feeding the world, and
    protecting our native wildlife. The river dams are at the
    center of it all, serving as an example for the rest of the
    world.
        As I have said for years, dams and fish can coexist. And I
    will continue to fight for our dams. And I call on these
    misguided groups to stop playing politics and pay attention to
    the science, which clearly states we are making advancements in
    the right direction.
        So, I urge the committee to reject any proposal to insert
    yet another duplicative study in this bill, which will only
    lend more uncertainty for our way of life in central Washington
    and throughout the Pacific Northwest.
        I thank you very much for your time. Thank you.
        [Mr. Newhouse's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Dan Newhouse, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of Washington
        Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the
    Committee,
        Thank you for hosting today's Member Day hearing. It is my honor to
    be here representing my district in Washington state.
        For more than 30 years, misinformed interest groups have held
    Central Washington and the Pacific Northwest hostage by threatening to
    drain the lifeblood of our region.
        These groups are driven by a singular, ideological goal: breaching
    the Snake River dams. They have placed a bullseye on our river system
    and this critical infrastructure, which provides clean, carbon-free
    energy throughout the region, water for our crops, and transportation
    to move our goods to export markets.
        Millions spent in taxpayers' dollars funded federal scientists,
    engineers, and fish experts in the Obama Administration to develop a
    years-long analyses fine-tuning the operations of the federal river
    power system. Putting this plan to work, our region continued to
    harness the power of our rivers for clean, carbon-free hydroelectric
    power while balancing the needs of our native salmon species.
        However, for organizations fixated on ``free-flowing'' rivers as
    the only means for achieving environmental success, it wasn't enough.
    They sued the Obama Administration, then they sued the Trump
    Administration, and they continue today by suing the Biden
    Administration.
        Members of the Committee: Washington Governor Jay Inslee and
    Senator Patty Murray are now looking at your bill as a vehicle to waste
    taxpayers' dollars by forcing another duplicative study in order to
    seek their own desired outcome.
        Dam-breaching advocates have blinded themselves to the countless
    other benefits our dams provide for our region--not to mention the
    great strides our salmon populations have made over the last several
    years, even amidst rising ocean temperatures and record levels of
    pollution in the Puget Sound.
        If these interest groups were truly concerned with the river
    system, they would look at the science. They would acknowledge the
    millions of tons of carbon these dams prevent from entering our
    atmosphere. They would acknowledge our dams utilize world-class
    technology and engineering to support the most efficient production of
    carbon-free hydroelectricity while also improving fish passage to rates
    between 93 and 96 percent.
        While I could list data point after data point outlining the vast
    strides that have been made in preserving and restoring our native
    salmon populations, it can be better summed up by the four-year,
    federal environmental study released in 2020 that advised against
    breaching the four Lower Snake River Dams, which explicitly stated that
    the dams ``are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the
    ESA-listed species.''
        I would be remiss if I did not mention how our dams and the rivers
    provide a sustainable and efficient way to transport our nation's crop
    exports. Barging on the Columbia and Snake Rivers keeps 700,000 semi-
    trucks off the roads--and their emissions out of the air--each year.
    The Columbia River alone barges more than 50% of U.S. wheat destined
    for export.
        It is clear that many of these dam-breaching proponents have long
    since stopped caring about the salmon nor the benefits of the river
    system. The fact that the Department of Justice announced a settlement
    to stay the most recent legal attack on the river system until July of
    2022--coincidentally, the same date Senator Murray and Governor Inslee
    announced they would release their dam-breaching plans--demonstrates a
    predetermined backdoor deal is in the works, and they intend to
    weaponize WRDA in order to achieve their desired outcome.
        For those of us who truly care about our region's survival, these
    actions are deeply disturbing.
        Breaching our dams is simply not an option, and endless cycles of
    litigation and continued studies only put our region at risk.
        In Central Washington, we are actively working toward a clean
    energy future, strengthening our nation's supply chain, feeding the
    world, and protecting our native wildlife--and the Columbia and Snake
    River dams are at the center of it all, serving as an example for the
    rest of the world.
        As I have said for years, dams and fish can--and do--coexist.
        I will continue to fight for our dams, and I call on these
    misguided groups to stop playing politics and pay attention to the
    science, which clearly states that we are making advancements in the
    right direction.
        I urge the Committee to reject any proposal to insert yet another
    duplicative study in this bill, which will only lend more uncertainty
    for our way of life in Central Washington and throughout the Pacific
    Northwest.
        Thank you, and I yield back.

        Mr. Rouzer. I thank the gentleman from Washington. Are
    there any questions for the gentleman from Washington?
        If not, I believe the gentleman from Washington has a
    letter that he wanted to submit for the record.
        Do you want to ask unanimous consent to enter it into the
    record, a March 8, 2022, letter to the EPA Administrator and
    the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works regarding
    the ``waters of the United States'' rulemaking process?
        Mr. Newhouse. I appreciate that very much, Mr. Rouzer.
        Mr. Rouzer. So ordered.
        [The information follows:]

        Letter of March 8, 2022, from Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member,
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure et al. to Hon. Michael
    S. Regan, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and Hon.
      Michael L. Connor, Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works,
       U.S. Department of the Army, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Dan
                                    Newhouse
                                                         March 8, 2022.
    The Honorable Michael S. Regan,
    Administrator,
    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,
            Washington, DC 20004.
    The Honorable Michael L. Connor,
    Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works,
    U.S. Department of the Army, 108 Army Pentagon, Washington, DC 20310-
            0108.
        Dear Administrator Regan and Assistant Secretary Connor:
        We write to you today regarding the United States Supreme Court's
    most recent announcement to grant certiorari to Michael Sackett, et
    ux., Petitioners v. Environmental Protection Agency, et al.
    (Sackett).\1\ For almost two decades, rural communities, businesses,
    and industries who rely on clean water have been trapped in political
    and legal limbo, surrounded by a shroud of legal opinions and faulty
    federal regulations. On June 9, 2021, the United States Environmental
    Protection Agency (EPA) and the United States Army Corps of Engineers
    (Corps) (collectively, the ``Agencies'') announced their intent to
    revise the definition of ``waters of the United States,'' (WOTUS).\2\
    Any decision by the Supreme Court on Sackett will have profound impacts
    on the Agencies' rulemaking process. Therefore, we urge the EPA and the
    Corps to halt its current rulemaking.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Sackett v. EPA, Case No. 21-454.
        \2\ Press Release, EPA, Army Announce Intent to Revise Definition
    of WOTUS (June 9, 2021), available at https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/
    epa-army-announce-intent-revise-definition-wotus.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has
    improperly held that federal jurisdiction for WOTUS should follow the
    ``significant nexus'' test laid out in Justice Kennedy's concurring
    opinion in Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715 (2006), rather than a
    more narrow approach based on the areas the Kennedy opinion and the
    plurality opinion authored by Justice Scalia have in common.\3\ The
    Obama Administration's 2015 WOTUS rule also followed this flawed
    ``significant nexus'' approach, resulting in an unprecedented expansion
    of the definition of WOTUS.\4\ This rule asserted federal jurisdiction
    over typically dry channels and a variety of intrastate non-navigable
    isolated waters.\5\ It is expected that a decision in Sackett would set
    forth a clearer and more appropriate test to define WOTUS and deliver
    certainty to the farmers, ranchers, private landowners, and industries
    who face the burden of this federal overreach.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Sackett v. EPA, No. 19-35469, 8 F.4th 1075, (9th Cir. 2021),
    available at https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2021/08/
    16/19-35469.pdf?utm_medium=email&_hsmi=
    2&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8X1_eQE4an2yYyXY-F5JnWEob7pRRCNyWE_WNPGvKmaVzQkTU4X
    G3g86yXMmLSbFrQziJUOdjVuALPH_zKcqfxO7MQ3Q&utm_content=2&utm_source=hs_
    email.
        \4\ Clean Water Rule: Definition of ``Waters of the United
    States'', 80 Fed. Reg. 37053, (Aug. 28, 2015), available at https://
    www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/06/29/2015-13435/clean-water-
    rule-definition-of-waters-of-the-united-states.
        \5\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Any future rulemaking must be based on fully informed legal
    guidance. The Agencies' goal of developing a lasting rule can only be
    achieved if appropriate legal standards are met, and it is premature to
    develop a new rule until the Court's Sackett opinion is issued. The
    Agencies themselves have stated that their rulemaking will take into
    account ``updates to be consistent with relevant Supreme Court
    decisions.'' \6\ We hope the Agencies' regulatory activities remain
    consistent with these statements. If the Agencies move ahead with their
    current rulemaking, and the Court instructs the use of a more limiting
    test like Justice Scalia's plurality opinion, the Agencies would be
    forced to implement a new rulemaking process once again post-Sackett.
    Unfortunately, not only would this be a misuse of agency resources and
    taxpayer dollars, it would only serve to leave the regulated community
    with prolonged uncertainty regarding regulations and enforcement.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Press Release, EPA and Army Announce Next Steps for Crafting
    Enduring Definition of Waters of the United States (July 30, 2021),
    available at https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-and-army-announce-
    next-steps-crafting-enduring-definition-waters-united-states.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Confusion, unpredictability, and litigation have surrounded the
    scope of federal authority of our nation's navigable waterways for
    decades. Currently, the Administration's plan to revise the definition
    of WOTUS will be the sixth change in ten years; despite the
    Administration's statements that the new regulation would only be a
    return to the regulatory definition used before the 2015 WOTUS rule
    updated in conformance with judicial decisions.\7\ In reality, the rule
    takes a new and expansive approach to the definition of WOTUS, creating
    additional costs and burdens for regulated stakeholders.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Further, the Agencies certified that the new regulation would not
    have a significant effect on small businesses.\8\ However, the United
    States Small Business Administration's Office of Advocacy, meant to
    serve as an independent voice for small business, disagreed with this
    assessment,\9\ specifically finding that the ``Agencies have improperly
    certified the proposed rule under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
    because it would likely have direct significant impacts on a
    substantial number of small entities.'' \10\ The Office of Advocacy
    asked that the Agencies hold the rule in abeyance while it conducts a
    Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) panel, in accordance with the
    RFA.\11\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ Revised Definition of ``Waters of the United States,'' 86 Fed.
    Reg. 69372 (Dec. 7, 2021), available at https://
    www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/07/2021-25601/revised-
    definition-of-waters-of-the-united-states.
        \9\ Letter from Major L. Clark, III, Dep. Chief Counsel, Off. of
    Advoc., SBA, to Hon. Michael S. Regan, Admin., EPA, and the Hon.
    Michael L. Connor, Assistant Sec'y of the Army for Civil Works, Dep't
    of the Army (Feb. 7, 2022), available at https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/
    wp-content/uploads/2022/02/08152154/Comment-Letter-Proposed-WOTUS-
    Definition-2022.pdf.
        \10\ Id.
        \11\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Rural communities across the country are dedicated to clean water,
    and they do not deserve to be punished by constant regulatory
    uncertainty. Any further rulemaking prior to the Supreme Court's
    decision will jeopardize Americans' best interests and fail to ensure
    our communities will not be subject to further uncertainty and
    government overreach. A premature rulemaking will also hinder efforts
    in communities across the country to build out and improve our Nation's
    infrastructure, as the regulatory definition of WOTUS has a direct
    impact on agencies' ability to authorize and complete infrastructure
    projects in a timely and efficient manner. This is especially troubling
    timing as Congress recently approved billions of dollars in funding for
    critical infrastructure.\12\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, P.L. 117-58.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We urge the EPA and the Corps to halt all current rulemaking
    actions surrounding the WOTUS definition as the United States Supreme
    Court takes up this landmark case. The Agencies should instead use this
    time to continue meaningful engagement with stakeholders, including
    convening an SBAR panel. This would allow the Agencies to fully
    understand and account for the impacts to small businesses, farmers,
    rural communities, and countless other stakeholders that will result
    from any regulatory change to the definition of WOTUS. We look forward
    to working with you on this important issue. If you have questions,
    please contact Ryan Hambleton, Republican Staff Director of the
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
            Sincerely,
    Sam Graves,

      Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

    Dan Newhouse,

      Chairman, Congressional Western Caucus.

    David Rouzer,

      Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.

    Kevin McCarthy,
      Member of Congress.
    Steve Scalise,
      Member of Congress.
    Elise M. Stefanik,
      Member of Congress.
    Nancy Mace,
      Member of Congress.
    Jefferson Van Drew,
      Member of Congress.
    David B. McKinley, P.E.,
      Member of Congress.
    Scot DesJarlais,
      Member of Congress.
    Doug Lamborn,
      Member of Congress.
    Tim Walberg,
      Member of Congress.
    Diana Harshbarger,
      Member of Congress.
    Tedd Budd,
      Member of Congress.
    Tracey Mann,
      Member of Congress.
    Bob Gibbs,
      Member of Congress.
    Mike Johnson,
      Member of Congress.
    Brian Babin, D.D.S.,
      Member of Congress.
    Clay Higgins,
      Member of Congress.
    Ralph Norman,
      Member of Congress.
    Don Young,
      Member of Congress.
    David G. Valadao,
      Member of Congress.
    Earl L. ``Buddy'' Carter,
      Member of Congress.
    Lauren Boebert,
      Member of Congress.
    Bruce Westerman,
      Member of Congress.
    Mary E. Miller,
      Member of Congress.
    Jason Smith,
      Member of Congress.
    Michael Cloud,
      Member of Congress.
    Yvette Herrell,
      Member of Congress.
    Rodney Davis,
      Member of Congress.
    Ashley Hinson,
      Member of Congress.
    Blake Moore,
      Member of Congress.
    Ken Buck,
      Member of Congress.

    Michael Simpson,
      Member of Congress.
    Chris Jacobs,
      Member of Congress.
    Fred Keller,
      Member of Congress.
    August Pfluger,
      Member of Congress.
    Ann Wagner,
      Member of Congress.
    Andy Harris, M.D.,
      Member of Congress.
    Steve Womack,
      Member of Congress.
    Michelle Steel,
      Member of Congress.
    Mike Gallagher,
      Member of Congress.
    Michael Burgess, M.D.,
      Member of Congress.
    Dan Crenshaw,
      Member of Congress.
    Markwayne Mullin,
      Member of Congress.
    Ron Estes,
      Member of Congress.
    Guy Reschenthaler,
      Member of Congress.
    Doug LaMalfa,
      Member of Congress.
    David P. Joyce,
      Member of Congress.
    Randy Feenstra,
      Member of Congress.
    Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford,
      Member of Congress.
    Cathy McMorris Rodgers,
      Member of Congress.
    Dusty Johnson,
      Member of Congress.
    Rick W. Allen,
      Member of Congress.
    Michael Guest,
      Member of Congress.
    David Kustoff,
      Member of Congress.
    Kat Cammack,
      Member of Congress.
    Mariannette Miller-Meeks,
      Member of Congress.
    Mike Bost,
      Member of Congress.
    Carol D. Miller,
      Member of Congress.
    Tim Burchett,
      Member of Congress.
    Jack Bergman,
      Member of Congress.
    James Comer,
      Member of Congress.

    Julia Letlow,
      Member of Congress.
    Dan Meuser,
      Member of Congress.
    Jerry L. Carl,
      Member of Congress.
    Bill Huizenga,
      Member of Congress.
    Beth Van Duyne,
      Member of Congress.
    Kelly Armstrong,
      Member of Congress.
    Greg Steube,
      Member of Congress.
    Scott Perry,
      Member of Congress.
    Richard Hudson,
      Member of Congress.
    Adrian Smith,
      Member of Congress.
    Tom Tiffany,
      Member of Congress.
    Adam Kinzinger,
      Member of Congress.
    Jeff Duncan,
      Member of Congress.
    Mo Brooks,
      Member of Congress.
    Pete Sessions,
      Member of Congress.
    Maria Elvira Salazar,
      Member of Congress.
    Michelle Fishbach,
      Member of Congress.
    Blaine Luetkmeyer,
      Member of Congress.
    Austin Scott,
      Member of Congress.
    Bill Posey,
      Member of Congress.
    Dan Bishop,
      Member of Congress.
    Glenn Grothman,
      Member of Congress.
    Robert E. Latta,
      Member of Congress.
    Fred Upton,
      Member of Congress.
    Vicky Hartzler,
      Member of Congress.
    Liz Cheney,
      Member of Congress.
    Louie Gohmert,
      Member of Congress.
    Billy Long,
      Member of Congress.
    John Rose,
      Member of Congress.
    Pete Stauber,
      Member of Congress.
    Jim Banks,
      Member of Congress.
    Debbie Lesko,
      Member of Congress.
    David Schweikert,
      Member of Congress.

    Virginia Foxx,
      Member of Congress.
    H. Morgan Griffith,
      Member of Congress.
    Garret Graves,
      Member of Congress.
    Ronny L. Jackson,
      Member of Congress.
    Bill Johnson,
      Member of Congress.
    Trent Kelly,
      Member of Congress.
    Greg Pence,
      Member of Congress.
    Paul A. Gosar, D.D.S.,
      Member of Congress.
    Brad Wenstrup,
      Member of Congress.
    Warren Davidson,
      Member of Congress.
    Scott Fitzgerald,
      Member of Congress.
    Larry Bucshon, M.D.,
      Member of Congress.
    Gregory F. Murphy, M.D.,
      Member of Congress.
    Thomas Massie,
      Member of Congress.
    Roger Williams,
      Member of Congress.
    Jake LaTurner,
      Member of Congress.
    Jodey C. Arrington,
      Member of Congress.
    Tom Emmer,
      Member of Congress.
    Mark Amodei,
      Member of Congress.
    Darrell Issa,
      Member of Congress.
    Lloyd Smucker,
      Member of Congress.
    Russ Fulcher,
      Member of Congress.
    Jackie Walorski,
      Member of Congress.
    Stephanie Bice,
      Member of Congress.
    Matthew Rosendale, Sr.,
      Member of Congress.
    Alex X. Mooney,
      Member of Congress.
    John R. Moolenaar,
      Member of Congress.
    Brett Guthrie,
      Member of Congress.
    Ben Cline,
      Member of Congress.
    Daniel Webster,
      Member of Congress.
    Troy E. Nehls,
      Member of Congress.
    James R. Baird,
      Member of Congress.
    Ken Calvert,
      Member of Congress.

    Andy Biggs,
      Member of Congress.
    Cliff Bentz,
      Member of Congress.
    Robert J. Wittman,
      Member of Congress.
    Frank Lucas,
      Member of Congress.
    Steve Chabot,
      Member of Congress.
    Glenn ``GT'' Thompson,
      Member of Congress.
    Randy Weber,
      Member of Congress.
    Michael T. McCaul,
      Member of Congress.
    Nicole Malliotakis,
      Member of Congress.
    Byron Donalds,
      Member of Congress.
    Claudia Tenney,
      Member of Congress.
    Bryan Steil,
      Member of Congress.
    Chris Stewart,
      Member of Congress.
    Mario Diaz-Balart,
      Member of Congress.
    Troy Balderson,
      Member of Congress.
    Carlos Gimenez,
      Member of Congress.
    Steven M. Palazzo,
      Member of Congress.
    Trey Hollingsworth,
      Member of Congress.
    Mike Kelly,
      Member of Congress.
    Lance Gooden,
      Member of Congress.
    Gary Palmer,
      Member of Congress.
    John Katko,
      Member of Congress.
    Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
      Member of Congress.
    Kevin Hern,
      Member of Congress.
    Tom McClintock,
      Member of Congress.
    Kay Granger,
      Member of Congress.
    Andy Barr,
      Member of Congress.
    Drew Ferguson,
      Member of Congress.
    Barry Loudermilk,
      Member of Congress.
    Neal P. Dunn, M.D.,
      Member of Congress.
    Jaime Herrera Beutler,
      Member of Congress.
    William Timmons,
      Member of Congress.
    Mike D. Rogers,
      Member of Congress.

    Scott Franklin,
      Member of Congress.
    Jay Obernolte,
      Member of Congress.
    Kevin Brady,
      Member of Congress.
    Amata Coleman Radewagen,
      Member of Congress.
    Tom Rice,
      Member of Congress.
    John Carter,
      Member of Congress.
    Lisa McClain,
      Member of Congress.
    Robert B. Aderholt,
      Member of Congress.
    John Joyce,
      Member of Congress.
    Chip Roy,
      Member of Congress.
    Burgess Owens,
      Member of Congress.
    Darin LaHood,
      Member of Congress.
    Don Bacon,
      Member of Congress.
    Young Kim,
      Member of Congress.
    Peter Meijer,
      Member of Congress.
    Bob Good,
      Member of Congress.
    French Hill,
      Member of Congress.
    Victoria Spartz,
      Member of Congress.
    Jim Jordan,
      Member of Congress.
    Matt Gaetz,
      Member of Congress.
    Tom Cole,
      Member of Congress.
    John H. Rutherford,
      Member of Congress.
    Pat Fallon,
      Member of Congress.
    Hal Rogers,
      Member of Congress.
    Andrew Garbarino,
      Member of Congress.
    Lee Zeldin,
      Member of Congress.
    Chuck Fleischmann,
      Member of Congress.
    Jake Ellzey,
      Member of Congress.
    Anthony Gonzalez,
      Member of Congress.
    Andrew S. Clyde,
      Member of Congress.
    Michael Waltz,
      Member of Congress.
    Mark Green,
      Member of Congress.
    Joe Wilson,
      Member of Congress.

    Mike Carey,
      Member of Congress.
    Barry Moore,
      Member of Congress.
    Mike Garcia,
      Member of Congress.
    Michael Turner,
      Member of Congress.
    Gus M. Bilirakis,
      Member of Congress.
    Jody Hice,
      Member of Congress.

        Mr. Newhouse. Thank you.
        Mr. Rouzer. Next, I would like to recognize our good friend
    from Oregon, Mr. Schrader, for 5 minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. KURT SCHRADER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                        FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

        Mr. Schrader. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman,
    Ranking Member, and the rest of the Transportation and
    Infrastructure Committee members, for hosting this event.
        The success that WRDA has had during these divided times is
    a testament to the committee's willingness to work across the
    aisle. I hope this work will be just as successful for WRDA
    2022.
        With the passage of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, our
    definition of what constitutes infrastructure has grown. This
    paradigm shift is most notable in the water project funding we
    included in the law, which has been allocated for districts
    across the country. I am actually very hopeful the committee's
    work here will build on that success, and tackle the many
    backlogged projects that are sadly still unfunded, even with
    increased investments.
        With IIJA passed and having fully funded the Harbor
    Maintenance Trust Fund, we should have extraordinary
    opportunity to meet the needs of all our districts. One such
    project that crosses these jurisdictional boundaries is the
    Newport Big Creek Dams improvement project. I mentioned this
    project during WRDA Members' Day in 2020, and would like to
    highlight it again as a project that has a real, critical
    impact on my constituents.
        With an estimated total cost of $80 million, this project
    is far too large for the small city of Newport, Oregon, to
    tackle on its own. The goal here is to replace the woefully
    outdated Big Creek Dam, which holds Newport's municipal water
    supply. The current dams were originally built in 1958--1958.
    Today, they have deteriorated to the point where they could
    completely fail in the event of an earthquake registering just
    a 3.5 or higher. Should these dams fail, the flows would breach
    Highway 101, the only transportation road on the Oregon coast,
    and destroy much of downtown Newport without warning.
        The city is currently investigating multiple money sources,
    including State funding and the Federal Emergency Management
    Agency High Hazard Potential Dams grant program funding, since
    the full cost is too great to be borne solely by a local bond.
        Your staff has been very helpful--thank you--in finding
    Federal solutions to this problem. And I hope that will
    continue during this process.
        Failure of this dam due to an earthquake would be
    devastating for a variety of reasons: loss of life, impact on
    local economy, and loss of critical water supply. Without this
    dam, 10,000 year-round residents and nearly 2.5 million
    tourists would be without water for at least a year, and the
    economic cost could grow to nearly $2 billion if left
    unattended for the next 5 years.
        Currently, the city has stepped up and invested $6 million
    between Government grants and water revenue. The State of
    Oregon has stepped up and is investing $14 million across 2022
    and 2023 to complete the design and permitting phases. But the
    State still needs to raise another $60 million in construction
    funds, an amount too great for a small city like Newport.
        On a separate note, I have also represented this Oregon
    coast for the past 10 years, and one of the top issues that I
    keep hearing about from all my folks back home is dredging, the
    lifeblood of a lot of small ports on the Oregon coast--I
    daresay the Gulf of Mexico and east coast, as well.
        Unfortunately, our small communities are often left out of
    the dredging discussion. We need to offer a more consistent way
    of providing this critical service to all our small ports.
    Undredged ports and harbors limit economic activity, and force
    operators to forgo important upgrades to their facilities that
    could improve the well-being of their community.
        So, thank you again for the opportunity to testify about my
    priorities in Oregon's Fifth Congressional District. I look
    forward to working with the committee staff in the productive
    way we have done so far and seeing the committee's final work
    product. Thank you very, very much.
        [Mr. Schrader's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Kurt Schrader, a Representative in Congress
                            from the State of Oregon
        Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and the rest of
    the Transportation and Infrastructure committee members for hosting
    this opportunity. The success that WRDA has had during these divided
    times is a testament to the committee's willingness to work across the
    aisle and I hope that work will be just as successful for WRDA 2022.
        With the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, our
    definition of what constitutes as infrastructure has grown
    tremendously. This paradigm shift is most notable in the water project
    funding we included in the law, which has been allocated for districts
    across the country. I am hopeful that the committee's work here will
    build on that success to tackle the many backlogged projects that are
    sadly still unfunded even with increased investments. With IIJA passed
    and having fully funded the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, we should
    have ample opportunity to meet the needs of all our districts.
        One such project that crosses these jurisdictional boundaries is
    the Newport Big Creak Dams Improvement Project. I mentioned this
    project during the WRDA Member Day in 2020, and I would like to
    highlight it again as a project that has a real impact for my
    constituents. With an estimated total cost of between $67 and $83
    million dollars, this project is far too large for the City of Newport
    to tackle on its own. The goal here is to replace the woefully outdated
    Big Creek Dam, which holds Newport's municipal water supply. The
    current dams were originally built in 1958. Today, they have
    deteriorated to the point where they could completely fail in the event
    of an earthquake registering at 3.5 or higher. Should these dams fail,
    the flows would breach Highway 101 and destroy roughly 20 homes without
    warning. The city is currently investigating multiple money sources,
    including state funding and the Federal Emergency Management Agency
    (FEMA) High Hazard Potential Dam Grant Program, but the full cost is
    too great to be borne solely by a local bond. Your staff have been very
    helpful in finding federal solutions to this problem and I hope that
    will continue during this process.
        Failure of this dam due to an earthquake would be devastating for a
    variety of reasons: loss of life, impact on the local economy, and loss
    of critical water supply, just to name a few. Without this dam, 10,000
    year-round residents and nearly 2.5 million tourists would be without
    water for at least a year. And the economic cost could grow to nearly
    $2 billion if left unattended for 5 years.
        Currently, the city has invested $3.8 million of their limited
    dollars towards this project for dam design and environmental
    permitting. They need an additional $5.8 to finish that work and stay
    on schedule for a 2025 completion target.
        One final note: I have represented my portion of the Oregon coast
    for many years. And one of the top things my folks back home tell me is
    that the feds need to do a better job of staying on schedule when it
    comes to dredging our facilities. Unfortunately, we are often left out
    of the conversation when it comes to dredging. That is why I want to
    bring this up with the committee to use this opportunity to offer a
    more consistent way of providing this critical service to our ports.
    Undredged ports and harbors limit economic activity and force operators
    to forego important upgrades to their facilities.
        Thank you again for this opportunity to testify about my priorities
    for Oregon's fifth district. And thank you again to your committee
    staff for working with my office on these issues. I look forward to
    seeing the committee's final product.

        Mr. Rouzer. We thank the gentleman from Oregon. Are there
    any questions for the gentleman from Oregon?
        Seeing none, good to have you here with us.
        Now I would like to recognize our next witness, the
    gentleman from New York, Mr. Tonko, for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. PAUL TONKO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
                         THE STATE OF NEW YORK

        Mr. Tonko. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Napolitano, Ranking
    Member Rouzer, and members of the committee. Thank you for the
    opportunity to testify on behalf of projects of critical
    importance in my district in New York's capital region as you
    consider a reauthorization of the Water Resources Development
    Act.
        My constituents reside at the confluence of the mighty and
    historic Hudson and Mohawk Rivers that helped shape America
    centuries ago by powering factories and mills and supporting
    the Erie Canal that transported goods from the coast to the
    rest of the Nation, inspiring a westward movement. The region
    is part of the New York-New Jersey watershed, an economic
    engine home to 20 million people, 6 major rivers, and more than
    200 fish species.
        For too long, our watershed has faced extreme pressures
    from sea level rise and flooding, hundreds of outdated dams,
    and legacy pollutants. The deaths of dozens of residents from
    Hurricane Ida and $100 billion of damage from Superstorm Sandy
    remain fresh in our minds, and must compel us to take action to
    prevent such tragic and costly events in the future. If we do
    not, sea level rise is expected to impact 9,000 acres of
    riverfront lands this century in the Hudson Valley alone.
        It is also estimated that 40 dams in the region will need
    to be targeted for removal each year, costing some $20 million
    annually. I am indeed proud to have worked closely with a
    coalition of more than 50 community groups and State and local
    governments to replicate successful Federal programs, such as
    the Delaware River Basin Conservation Program signed into law
    in the 2016 WRDA, to fill a critical conservation gap in our
    region.
        The requested bill language will coordinate restoration
    activities to improve water quality, remove obsolete dams,
    improve critical flood controls, and promote healthy
    ecosystems. Like the Delaware River program, our watershed
    program would be housed in the Fish and Wildlife Service.
    However, I have ensured that consultation with the Army Corps
    will be a central component. This language has bipartisan
    support, and it advanced successfully through a hearing and
    markup in the Natural Resources Committee earlier this year. I
    am continuing conversations with my colleagues across the aisle
    to expand this bipartisan support even further and address any
    remaining concerns.
        Given the critical role of the Army Corps in these
    restoration activities, I respectfully urge the committee to
    consider this request, as well as a targeted study of the
    Mohawk River Basin to make recommendations for the protection
    of its water and cultural resources. Our watershed must be
    considered amongst our Nation's most significant water bodies,
    and receive the same Federal support so that it can remain a
    vital water resource and national economic engine for
    generations to come.
        In addition, I am grateful for the work the Army Corps is
    doing not just to protect our shores and waterways, but also to
    make use of these treasured resources to produce clean energy,
    drive down costs, and combat climate change. To strengthen
    these efforts, I urge the committee to incorporate floating
    solar energy in this year's WRDA reauthorization. Floating
    solar offers tremendous opportunity to expand our renewable
    energy deployment, while benefiting threatened water systems.
        Ten percent of America's electricity needs could indeed be
    met by deploying solar on our country's human-made reservoirs,
    many of which are owned and operated by the Army Corps. I
    acknowledge that not every Army Corps facility will be
    appropriate, but I believe it is important that the Corps begin
    to consider the possibility of these projects, which can take
    advantage of existing grid infrastructure and complement
    existing hydropower resources.
        I urge the committee to adopt language I was proud to
    submit with my colleague, Congressman Huffman, that would
    identify promising reservoirs and launch a demonstration
    project.
        This technology is already emerging as a promising
    industry. I am thrilled to report that a community in my
    district, Cohoes, New York, received funding in the fiscal year
    2022 appropriations package to install floating solar panels on
    a municipal reservoir. This effort should serve as a model for
    the Army Corps and communities across our Nation as we scale
    this technology, implement smart, clean energy systems, and
    drive down those consumer costs.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify and for your
    continued work to strengthen and protect our Nation's vital
    water resources.
        With that, I yield back, and thank you again for the
    opportunity.
        [Mr. Tonko's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Paul Tonko, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of New York
        Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Chair Napolitano, Ranking
    Member Rouzer, and members of the Committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to testify. As the Committee considers a reauthorization of
    the Water Resources Development Act, I am pleased to appear before you
    to highlight projects and studies of critical importance to my district
    in New York's Capital Region.
        My constituents reside at the confluence of the mighty and historic
    Hudson and Mohawk Rivers that helped shape America centuries ago by
    powering factories and mills and supporting the Erie Canal that
    transported goods from the coast to the rest of the nation. The region
    is part of the New York-New Jersey Watershed, an economic engine home
    to 20 million people, six major rivers, and more than 200 fish species
    and several endangered and threatened species.
        For too long, our watershed has faced extreme pressures from sea-
    level rise and flooding, hundreds of outdated and obsolete dams, and
    legacy pollutants. The deaths of dozens of New York and New Jersey
    residents from Hurricane Ida and $100 billion of damage to our coastal
    areas from Superstorm Sandy remain fresh in our minds and must compel
    us to take action to prevent such tragic and costly events in the
    future. If we do not, sea level rise is expected to impact 9,000 acres
    of riverfront lands and more than 19,000 people this century in the
    Hudson Valley alone. It is also estimated that 40 dams in the region
    will need to be targeted for removal each year, costing $20 million
    annually.
        I am proud to have worked closely with a coalition of more than 50
    community organizations, state and local governments, and a bipartisan
    coalition of Members spanning the Watershed to learn from and replicate
    successful federal programs--such as the Delaware River Basin
    Conservation program signed into law in the 2016 WRDA--to fill a
    critical conservation gap here in New York and New Jersey. The
    requested bill language will coordinate and fund restoration activities
    to improve water quality, restore or remove obsolete dams, improve
    critical flood controls, promote healthy ecosystems, and support
    research.
        Our watershed must be considered among our nation's most
    significant waterbodies and receive the same federal support and
    critical cooperation between the Army Corps, the Fish and Wildlife
    Service, and other entities so that it can remain a vital water
    resource and national economic engine for generations to come. I
    respectfully urge the Committee to consider this request as well as a
    targeted study of the Mohawk River Basin to make recommendations for
    the protection of its water and cultural resources.
        In addition, I am grateful for the work the Army Corps is doing not
    just to protect our shores and waterways, but also to make meaningful
    use of these treasured resources to produce clean energy and combat
    climate change. There is so much more we can and must do in this area
    for the health of our ecosystems and communities, and for that reason,
    I respectfully urge the Committee to incorporate floating solar energy
    in this year's WRDA reauthorization.
        Floating solar offers tremendous opportunity to expand our
    renewable energy deployment while benefitting threatened water systems,
    including preventing harmful algal blooms and reducing evaporation.
    According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 10 percent of
    America's electricity needs could be met by deploying floating solar on
    our country's human-made reservoirs. The Army Corps owns and operates
    reservoirs across the country. I acknowledge that not every Army Corps
    facility will be appropriate to host a floating solar array, but I
    believe it is important that the Corps begin to consider the
    possibility of these projects, which may be able to take advantage of
    existing grid infrastructure and complement existing hydropower
    resources. I urge the Committee to adopt language that I was pleased to
    submit alongside my colleague, Congressman Jared Huffman, to identify
    promising reservoirs and launch a demonstration project.
        This technology is already yielding impressive benefits in other
    countries, and is beginning to emerge as a promising industry at home.
    I am thrilled that a community in my district, Cohoes, New York,
    received funding in the Fiscal Year 2022 Omnibus Appropriations package
    to install floating solar panels on a municipal reservoir. This effort
    should serve as a model for the Army Corps and communities across the
    nation as we scale this technology, implement smart, clean energy
    systems, and drive down consumer costs.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify and for your
    continued work to strengthen and protect our nation's vital water
    resources. I am happy to provide additional information to the
    Committee about these requests, and I look forward to working with you
    throughout the WRDA process.
                                                             Appendix A
        [Appendix A (letter of support of H.R. 4677, New York-New Jersey
    Watershed Protection Act) to Hon. Tonko's prepared statement is
    retained in committee files and available online at https://
    docs.house.gov/meetings/PW/PW02/20220316/114497/HHRG-117-PW02-Wstate-
    T000469-20220316.pdf.]

        Mr. Rouzer. We thank the gentleman. Are there any questions
    for the gentleman?
        Seeing none, we will move on to our next witness----
        Mr. Tonko. Thank you, Mr. Rouzer.
        Mr. Rouzer [continuing]. Our good friend--thank you. Our
    next witness I would like to recognize is the good gentleman
    from Georgia, Mr. Carter, for 5 minutes.
        [Pause.]
        Mr. Rouzer. Buddy, you are up. Can you hear us? You are
    muted. You are muted.
        Mr. Carter of Georgia. I am sorry. They got me in timeout
    over here.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. EARL L. ``BUDDY'' CARTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                   CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

        Mr. Carter of Georgia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
    you for the opportunity to testify before the committee today.
        I have the honor and privilege of representing the First
    Congressional District of Georgia. We have over 100 miles of
    pristine coastline, two major seaports, tourism, seafood, and
    more. The coastline is integral to our economy and to the
    quality of life. But like most of the east coast, our area has
    been hit by many hurricanes in the last few years.
        The city of Tybee Island in Chatham County is taking these
    natural disasters very seriously, and is a model for cities
    across the country that are trying to prepare for these weather
    crises. Among other things, the city is working on a major
    beach renourishment project that uses Federal funds authorized
    through the Water Resources Development Act.
        However, the Corps of Engineers, in its latest cost-benefit
    analysis study, jeopardizes the project's future beyond 2023.
    Because of language in WRDA, the Corps is forced to use an
    outdated cost-benefit model, which, in Tybee's case, can only
    look at damages that might occur within the next 15 years.
    Tybee, though, won't see damages until 2060, which is largely
    due to the hard work and financial investments they have been
    putting into the island in order to protect itself from weather
    events.
        My staff has discussed this issue with the Army Corps of
    Engineers, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee staff,
    and other Member offices, and we believe we have some
    legislative language that would fix this situation. The
    language specifically authorizes the Secretary to recommend
    that Congress authorize up to 50 years of nourishment to begin
    on the date of construction, and adds general study authority
    to extend the period of nourishment for up to an additional 50
    years after expiration of the original authorized period of
    nourishment.
        I have submitted the necessary language to this committee
    for your consideration, which also includes a request that the
    Corps include an area's tourism impact into its national
    economic development assessment for a beach renourishment
    project's cost-benefit ratio. I would strongly encourage you to
    include my language in this year's version of WRDA.
        Simply put, we need to ensure that our communities are
    becoming more resilient in the face of these storms. But with
    WRDA's current language and cost-benefit analysis, we are
    punishing communities who are trying to take those steps.
        In addition to the great need of Tybee, I have also offered
    language in this year's WRDA, along with my friend and
    colleague, Representative Sanford Bishop. The language requests
    a study which would determine the feasibility of widening the
    Savannah Harbor in the First Congressional District. This
    widening would accommodate a greater throughput of larger
    vessels that would, in turn, ensure the South's busiest port
    can keep pace with the ever-growing demand for maritime
    shipping.
        Over the years, large vessels transporting containerized
    cargo have increased in both length and width since design of
    the existing project. In fact, there are multiple locations
    within the Federal channel where vessels experience
    navigational challenges due to vessel size. Larger container
    vessels are experiencing transportation cost inefficiencies due
    to these restrictions at targeted areas within the confined
    Federal channel. As a result, the current channel conditions
    limit the available operating times for large vessels, and
    contribute to ship delays and supply chain restrictions.
        If this study were included, it would investigate the
    possible harbor improvements to the Savannah Harbor expansion
    project, and I believe would increase transportation efficiency
    and improve vessel safety and handling in the harbor.
        This optimization is important, since the existing Federal
    channel was designed to accommodate a vessel fleet dominated by
    those with an 8,500 TEU capacity. Furthermore, the design
    revision would allow the project to serve a fleet dominated by
    vessels with nearly twice that capacity, which more accurately
    represents the vessels currently calling on the Port of
    Savannah.
        I know that modifying the harbor to accommodate these
    larger vessels will help to expand the channel's capacity,
    accommodate increasing cargo volume demands, and significantly
    enhance global connectivity for American businesses and
    consumers.
        As mentioned earlier, our district is blessed to have so
    much opportunity for economic growth and increased quality of
    life along the coast. We must make the necessary investments
    which will not only help many of my constituents, but also so
    many throughout our country as our seaport continues to grow.
        Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and committee members, for
    the opportunity to speak here today, and I yield back.
        [Mr. Carter's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Earl L. ``Buddy'' Carter, a Representative
                     in Congress from the State of Georgia
        Good morning and thank you for the opportunity to testify before
    the committee today.
        I have the honor and privilege of representing the First
    Congressional District of Georgia, which contains all 110 miles of the
    State's beautiful coastline.
        Between our two Georgia ports, tourism, seafood, and more, the
    coastline is integral to our economy and quality of life.
        But like most of the east coast, our area has been hit by many
    hurricanes in the last few years.
        The City of Tybee Island is taking these natural disasters very
    seriously and is a model for cities around the country that are trying
    to prepare for these weather events.
        Among other things, the City is working on a major beach re-
    nourishment project that uses federal funds authorized through the
    Water Resources Development Act (WRDA).
        However, the Corps of Engineers, in its latest cost/benefit
    analysis study, jeopardizes the project's future beyond 2023.
        Because of language in WRDA, the Corps is forced to use an outdated
    cost/benefit model which, in Tybee's case, can only look at damages
    that might occur within the next 15 years.
        Tybee, though, won't see damages until 2060, which is largely due
    to the hard work, and financial investments, they have been putting
    into the island in order to protect itself from weather events.
        My staff has discussed this issue with the Army Corps of Engineers,
    T&I Committee staff, and other Member offices and we believe we have
    some legislative language that would fix this situation.
        The language specifically authorizes the Secretary to recommend
    that Congress authorize up to 50 years of nourishment to begin on the
    date of construction and adds general study authority to extend the
    period of nourishment for up to an additional 50 years after expiration
    of the original authorized period of nourishment.
        I have submitted the necessary language to this committee for your
    consideration, which also includes a request that the Corps include an
    area's tourism impact into its NED (national economic development)
    assessment for a beach nourishment project's Cost Benefit Ratio (CBR).
    I would strongly encourage you to include my language in this year's
    version of WRDA.
        Simply put, we need to ensure that our communities are becoming
    more resilient in the face of these storms, but with WRDA's current
    language on cost/benefit analyses, we are punishing communities who are
    trying to take those steps.
        In addition to the great need on Tybee, I have also offered
    language to this year's WRDA, along with my friend and colleague, Rep.
    Sanford Bishop. The language requests a study, which would determine
    the feasibility of widening the Savannah Harbor in the 1st District.
    This widening would accommodate a greater throughput of larger vessels
    that would in turn ensure the South's busiest port can keep pace with
    the ever-growing demand for maritime shipping.
        Over the years, large vessels transporting containerized cargo have
    increased in both length and width since design of the existing
    project.
        In fact, there are multiple locations within the Federal channel
    where vessels experience navigational challenges due to vessel size.
    Larger container vessels are experiencing transportation cost
    inefficiencies due to these restrictions at targeted areas within the
    confined Federal channel.
        As a result, the current channel conditions limit the available
    operating times for large vessels and contribute to ship delays and
    supply chain restrictions.
        If this study were included, it would investigate the possible
    harbor improvements to the Savannah Harbor Expansion Project (SHEP)
    and, I believe, would increase transportation efficiency and improve
    vessel safety and handling in the harbor.
        This optimization is important since the existing Federal channel
    was designed to accommodate a vessel fleet dominated by those with an
    8,500 TEU capacity.
        Furthermore, the design revision would allow the project to serve a
    fleet dominated by vessels with nearly twice that capacity, which more
    accurately represents the vessels currently calling on Savannah's
    Harbor.
        I know that modifying the harbor to accommodate these larger
    vessels will help to expand the channel's capacity, accommodate
    increasing cargo volume demands and significantly enhance global
    connectivity for American businesses and consumers.
        As mentioned earlier, our District is blessed to have so much
    opportunity for economic growth and increased quality of life along the
    coast. We must make the necessary investments, which will not only help
    many of my constituents, but also so many throughout our country as our
    seaport continues to grow.
        Thank you, again, for the opportunity to speak today.

        Mr. Rouzer. We thank the gentleman from Georgia. Are there
    any questions for the gentleman?
        Hearing none, we will move on to our next witness. I would
    like to recognize the gentlewoman from Washington, Ms. Schrier,
    for 5 minutes.

      TESTIMONY OF HON. KIM SCHRIER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

        Dr. Schrier. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and
    Ranking Member. I am delighted to have the opportunity to talk
    with you today about two issues of real importance to me. One
    is fish passage at the Howard Hanson Dam, and also language
    from the Twenty-First Century Dams Act.
        Let me tell you the story of Howard Hanson Dam and our
    Federal obligation to provide downstream fish passage. Howard
    Hanson Dam is an earthen dam that was constructed in 1961. It
    sits along the Green River, and provides essential flood
    control that protects thousands of homes, businesses, and
    industries, particularly in Auburn and nearby cities in the
    Green River Valley. It also provides safe drinking water to the
    city of Tacoma and surrounding communities, including
    underserved areas. Like many dams, though, it was built at a
    time when not much consideration was given to fish passage. But
    this river provides critical habitat for endangered salmon
    species and, therefore, is also critical to the species that
    rely on the Chinook, such as the Southern Resident orca.
        Now, the Army Corps is required to create fish passage at
    the dam to improve the recovery of salmon and steelhead listed
    under the Endangered Species Act, and to uphold the Federal
    Government's treaty and trust responsibility to Native American
    Tribes. Work on this project was authorized in 1999, but the
    Army Corps work stopped 10 years later, when costs exceeded
    expectations. In the meantime, local governments, including the
    city of Tacoma, utilities, and Tribes have all fulfilled their
    part of the deal, putting millions of dollars into upstream
    fish passage.
        I want to emphasize here that there are few projects out
    there that have such a broad base of support. There is
    virtually no opposition to finishing the fish passage project
    at Howard Hanson Dam. In fact, all Members of our Washington
    delegation, Democrats and Republicans, signed on to my letter
    calling for completion of the fish passage study and the
    project itself. State, local, Tribal entities all concur. The
    public concurs.
        The reason that restoring upstream and downstream fish
    passage in this river--well, it is so important--is that it
    opens up over 100 miles of pristine spawning habitat in areas
    that are inaccessible to people. And it stands to do more for
    Chinook salmon recovery and our orca population than any other
    project to date, even the Elwha Dam removal. It is a very big
    deal.
        Of note, the upstream passage is done. It was completed by
    local stakeholders. But we can't send salmon upstream to spawn
    if there is no downstream passage for the smolts. Budget
    information and funding are really the only thing standing in
    the way.
        Last night my staff received word that the Corps has been
    able to push up their schedule significantly in order to meet
    funding deadlines. So the project is in a much better position
    to make this year's WRDA. I respectfully request that full
    consideration be given to this project in this year's WRDA.
    According to the biological opinion, they have only until 2030
    to complete the downstream fish passage facility, and we can't
    afford to wait any longer, and must collectively act as our
    delegation has, and as local stakeholders have, towards seeing
    this project through to completion.
        In my remaining time, I just want to take a moment to touch
    on the Twenty-First Century Dams Act. There is a theme here.
    There are provisions in this act that are critical all over
    this country, but particularly for the Northwest.
        I submitted language which included a suite of
    infrastructure investments in the Nation's more than 90,000
    dams to improve public safety, enhance clean energy output, and
    restore the health of our Nation's rivers and ecosystems. This
    request provides needed investment, as well as improvements to
    critical dam safety programs, easier access to funding for
    smaller State programs, and it exempts small, underserved
    communities from cost sharing requirements. So, please give
    consideration to that, as well.
        Thank you very much for your attention to these two very
    important issues.
        [Dr. Schrier did not submit a prepared statement.]
        Mr. Rouzer. We thank the gentlelady. Are there any
    questions?
        Seeing none, we will move on to our next witness, the
    gentlewoman from Massachusetts, Mrs. Trahan, for 5 minutes.

      TESTIMONY OF HON. LORI TRAHAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                 FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

        Mrs. Trahan. Hello, Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding
    today's hearing, and for the opportunity to testify today.
        By including these priorities as we reauthorize the Water
    Resources Development Act, we will be able to undertake
    critical water development projects that benefit communities
    across our country.
        In my district in Massachusetts, combined sewage overflows,
    or CSOs, are an all-too-familiar issue. In fact, many of my
    colleagues have come to know me as the sewage lady here in
    Congress, because of how much I talk about the need to stop
    sewage overflows. So, I don't think it was a surprise for
    anyone when I used the five environmental infrastructure
    requests that each Member was allotted to request
    authorizations of $20 million each to fix the CSOs in Lowell,
    Lawrence, Haverhill, Methuen, and Fitchburg.
        CSOs are an issue that have plagued my district for as long
    as I can remember. It was an issue when I toured Lowell's
    Regional Wastewater Utility's facility as part of my first
    infrastructure tour after being elected to the Congress just 3
    years ago, and it remains an issue to this day. In fact, I was
    just at that same facility again a few weeks ago.
        Each year, hundreds of millions of gallons of waste are
    dumped into the Merrimack River from Manchester, New Hampshire,
    to Lowell, and all the way out to the mouth of the river in
    Newburyport. And honestly, that is probably a conservative
    estimate, based on some of the heavy rain years that we have
    had recently.
        In addition to polluting the treasure that is our river,
    the human health effects from CSOs are also cause for alarm:
    600,000 people rely on the Merrimack as their main drinking
    water supply, and our gateway cities are continuing to grow.
    The same is true with the Nashua River, where Fitchburg's
    sewage overflows.
        So Lowell, Lawrence, Haverhill, Methuen, and Fitchburg have
    each taken a number of steps to drive down the amount of sewage
    that must be discharged each year. And I certainly commend
    their leadership on that. But each of us knows that this
    doesn't get fixed without a serious course correction at the
    Federal level.
        Now, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is an excellent
    start. Already the EPA has provided $188 million this year
    alone for water infrastructure projects, including CSOs in
    Massachusetts. But still, fixing CSOs is not cheap. Over the
    last 15 years, Lowell has invested $150 million in CSO control
    projects, resulting in a 60-percent reduction in annual volume
    of CSO discharges. Even so, an average of 300 to 450 million
    gallons of raw sewage are released into the river each year.
        Overall, the city estimates it will cost roughly $400
    million to eliminate all CSO discharges from its sewer systems.
    Lawrence, Haverhill, Fitchburg, and Methuen also face the
    daunting prospect of multimillion-dollar projects to fix their
    CSOs.
        The same is true for Manchester, New Hampshire, which is
    further upstream along the Merrimack. In fact, Manchester dumps
    221 million gallons in CSOs into the Merrimack each year. And
    that is why my good friend, Mr. Pappas, a member of this
    committee, also requested a $20 million authorization to help
    Manchester fix its sewage system.
        I strongly support this request, and I thank him for making
    it. After all, we are all part of the Merrimack River
    ecosystem, and sewage in the river in Manchester eventually
    works its way to Lowell, to Methuen, to Lawrence, and to
    Haverhill.
        So Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, my colleagues
    on the committee, I am not asking for an authorization to fix
    all of the sewage systems in my district, but I am asking for
    your help to make a dent: $20 million authorizations for each
    of these five cities will go a long way to cleaning up our
    drinking water and improving the health of hundreds of
    thousands of people in my district.
        So, thank you again for the opportunity to testify today
    and for considering my requests. I look forward to working with
    all of you as we craft WRDA and find ways to help the
    communities we serve.
        Thank you, I yield back.
        [Mrs. Trahan's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Lori Trahan, a Representative in Congress
                     from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding today's hearing and for the
    opportunity to testify today.
        By including these priorities as we reauthorize the Water Resources
    Development Act, or WRDA, we'll be able to undertake critical water
    development projects that benefit communities across the country.
        In my district, combined sewage overflows, or CSOs, are an all too
    familiar issue.
        In fact, many of my colleagues have come to know me as the sewage
    lady because of how much I talk about the need to stop sewage
    overflows.
        So, I don't think it was a surprise for anyone when I used the five
    environmental infrastructure requests that each Member was allotted to
    request authorizations of $20 million each to fix the CSOs in Lowell,
    Lawrence, Haverhill, Methuen, and Fitchburg.
        CSOs are an issue that have plagued my district for as long as I
    can remember.
        It was an issue when I toured Lowell's Regional Wastewater
    Utility's facility as part of my first infrastructure tour after being
    elected to Congress three years ago.
        And it remains an issue to this day. In fact, I was just at that
    facility again a few weeks ago.
        Each year, hundreds of millions of gallons of waste are dumped into
    the Merrimack--from Manchester to Lowell and all the way out to
    Newburyport--and honestly, that's probably a conservative estimate
    based on some of the heavy rain years we've had recently.
        In addition to polluting the treasure that is the river, the human
    health effects from CSOs are also cause for alarm.
        600,000 people rely on the Merrimack as their drinking water
    supply--and our gateway cities are continuing to grow. The same is true
    with the Nashua River, where Fitchburg's sewage overflows.
        Lowell, Lawrence, Haverhill, Methuen, and Fitchburg have each taken
    a number of steps to drive down the amount of sewage that must be
    discharged each year--and I commend their leadership on that.
        But each of us knows that this doesn't get fixed without a serious
    course correction at the federal level.
        Now, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is an excellent start.
    Already, the EPA has provided $188 million this year alone for water
    infrastructure projects, including CSOs, in Massachusetts.
        Still, fixing CSOs is not cheap. Over the last 15 years, Lowell has
    invested $150 million in CSO control projects, resulting in a 60%
    reduction in annual volume of CSO discharges.
        Even so, an average of 300-450 million gallons of raw sewage are
    released into the river each year.
        Overall, the city estimates it will cost roughly $400 million to
    eliminate all CSO discharges from its sewer systems.
        Lawrence, Haverhill, Fitchburg, and Methuen also face the daunting
    prospect of multi-million dollar projects to fix their CSOs.
        The same is true for Manchester, New Hampshire, which is further
    upstream along the Merrimack.
        In fact, Manchester dumps 221 million gallons in CSOs into the
    Merrimack each year.
        That is why my good friend, Mr. Pappas, a member of this committee,
    also requested a $20 million authorization to help Manchester fix its
    sewage systems.
        I strongly support this request and thank him for making it.
        After all, we are all a part of the Merrimack Valley ecosystem--and
    sewage in the river in Manchester eventually works its way to Lowell,
    to Methuen, to Lawrence, and to Haverhill.
        Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and my colleagues on the
    Committee, I'm not asking for an authorization to fix all of the sewage
    systems in my district.
        But I am asking for your help to make a dent.
        $20 million authorizations for each of these five cities will go a
    long way to cleaning up our drinking water and improving the health of
    hundreds of thousands of people in my district.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today and for
    considering my requests.
        I look forward to working with all of you as we craft WRDA and find
    ways to help the communities we serve.

        Mr. Rouzer. Well, thank you very much, very interesting.
        Are there any questions?
        Seeing none, we will move on to our next witness online. I
    would like to recognize the gentlewoman from Delaware, Ms.
    Blunt Rochester, for 5 minutes.

      TESTIMONY OF HON. LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                  CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

        Ms. Blunt Rochester. Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member
    Rouzer, and members of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and
    Environment, good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to
    testify at this Members' Day hearing on the proposals for a
    Water Resources Development Act of 2022.
        I come from the State of Delaware, where we feel the
    impacts of sea level rise daily. As the State with the lowest
    mean elevation, our coastal and riverbank communities have for
    decades fought the effects of climate change. Every day, I hear
    from my constituents the urgent need to protect and invest in
    our shorelines and riverbanks. Thousands of Delawareans have
    felt the impact of shoreline riverbank erosion.
        Just last September, Hurricane Ida caused historic flooding
    in the downtown Wilmington area from the overflowing Brandywine
    River, causing displacement of families. And last October,
    following a nor'easter, high tides caused extensive erosion,
    dune damage, and flooding to our beaches and beach communities
    in Sussex County.
        As Delawareans, we are not only concerned about the damage
    to our homes, but we are also concerned about how the ongoing
    impacts of climate change and extreme weather events will
    impact our State's economy and natural heritage. Not only do
    Delaware beaches provide an important natural defense between
    the rising sea water and our homes and roads, they also provide
    a recreational space for the more than 9 million visitors that
    come to our beaches every year, and are home to a diverse
    collection of plants and animals, including the celebrated
    horseshoe crab.
        For over 20 years, the State of Delaware and its local
    communities have worked in tandem with the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers to address shoreline and riverbank erosion and
    protect Delaware communities through the construction and
    maintenance of coastal storm risk management projects. Although
    the Philadelphia District has been a great partner, the Corps
    simply doesn't have the funding and the authority they need to
    protect the communities in Delaware from storms and rising sea
    levels.
        Fortunately, we have the opportunity in WRDA to empower the
    Corps to do more. We can and must provide them with the
    additional funding, resources, and authority to protect our
    shorelines and riverbanks and the communities that surround
    them. That is why earlier this year I was proud to introduce
    H.R. 6705, the bicameral and bipartisan Shoreline Health
    Oversight, Restoration, Resilience, and Enhancement Act,
    otherwise known as the SHORRE Act, along with my colleague,
    Representative Garret Graves from Louisiana, and Senators
    Carper and Cassidy.
        The SHORRE Act elevates shoreline and riverbank protection
    and restoration as a primary mission of the Army Corps, and
    expands the Corps' existing river flood mitigation and
    restoration authority. It gives the Corps the tools it needs to
    safeguard our riverbanks, coastlines, and coastal communities
    against flooding, promoting resilient and sustainable natural
    projects that address climate change.
        Additionally, the inclusion of this legislation will make
    it easier for our low-wealth and underresourced communities to
    partner with the Corps by reducing cost sharing, and it works
    to ensure that project implementation is more flexible and more
    efficient.
        I support the full inclusion of the SHORRE Act in the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022. And while the SHORRE Act is
    my top priority for WRDA, I would also like to advocate for
    three additional priorities that are important for my
    constituents.
        First, I would like to advocate for the inclusion of New
    Castle County to the list of eligible entities under the
    environmental infrastructure program, which will allow the
    county to pursue funding for critical wastewater and stormwater
    system improvements and infrastructure.
        Second, I would also like to advocate for funding to
    rehabilitate, retrofit, and remove dams across the country to
    help improve public safety. According to the American Society
    of Civil Engineers infrastructure report card, Delaware has
    over 63 high-hazard dams. Delaware also has small low-head
    dams, including dams along the Brandywine River, which are not
    only safety hazards, but also impact the river's natural
    ecosystem and biodiversity.
        And third, I would like to advocate for the expansion of
    the existing environmental infrastructure project in
    southeastern Pennsylvania to include the lower Delaware River
    Basin, which would expand the reach of the existing project and
    help abate flooding in the basin.
        I want to thank the committee for your tireless commitment
    and work on this legislation. And on behalf of the First State,
    thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to working
    with you all.
        [Ms. Blunt Rochester's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Lisa Blunt Rochester, a Representative in
                      Congress from the State of Delaware
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members of the
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, good morning and thank
    you for the opportunity to testify at this Members' Day Hearing on the
    proposals for a Water Resources Development Act of 2022.
        In Delaware, we feel the impacts of sea-level rise daily. As the
    state with the lowest mean elevation, our coastal and riverbank
    communities have for decades fought the effects of climate change.
    Every day I hear from my constituents the urgent need to protect and
    invest in our shorelines and riverbanks.
        Thousands of Delawareans have felt the impact of shoreline and
    riverbank erosion. Just last September, Hurricane Ida caused historic
    flooding in downtown Wilmington from the overflowing Brandywine River.
    And last October, following a nor'easter, high tides caused extensive
    erosion, dune damage, and flooding to our beaches and beach communities
    in Sussex County. As Delawareans, we are not only concerned about the
    damage to our homes--but we are also concerned about how the ongoing
    impacts of climate change and extreme weather events will impact our
    state's economy and ecosystem.
        Not only do Delaware beaches provide an important natural defense
    between the rising seawater and our homes and roads--but they also
    provide a recreational space for the more than 9 million visitors that
    come to our beaches every year \1\ and are home to a diverse collection
    of plants and animals, including the horseshoe crab.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.capegazette.com/article/record-9-million-tourists-
    come-delaware/151944
        \2\ https://dnrec.alpha.delaware.gov/outdoor-delaware/nourishing-
    delawares-beaches/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        For over twenty years, the State of Delaware and its local
    communities have worked in tandem with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    to address shoreline and riverbank erosion and protect Delaware
    communities through the construction and maintenance of coastal storm
    risk management projects. Although the Philadelphia District has been a
    great partner, the Corps simply doesn't have the funding and authority
    they need to protect the communities in Delaware from storms and rising
    sea levels. Fortunately, we have the opportunity in WRDA 2022 to
    empower the Corps to do more.
        We can provide them with the additional funding, resources, and
    authority to protect our shorelines and riverbanks and the communities
    that surround them--which is why earlier this year, I was proud to
    introduce H.R. 6705, the bicameral and bipartisan Shoreline, Health,
    Oversight, Restoration, Resilient and Enhancement Act or SHORRE Act,
    along with my colleague Representative Garret Graves from Louisiana--
    and Senators Carper and Cassidy.
        The SHORRE Act elevates shoreline and riverbank protection and
    restoration as a primary mission of the Army Corps--and expands Corps'
    existing river flood mitigation and restoration authority.
        It gives the Corps the tools it needs to safeguard our riverbanks,
    coastlines, and coastal communities against flooding--promoting
    resilient and sustainable natural project that addresses climate
    change. Additionally, the inclusion of this legislation will make it
    easier for our low-income communities to partner with the Corps by
    reducing cost-sharing and works to ensure that project implementation
    is more flexible and more efficient.
        I support the full inclusion of the SHORRE Act in the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022.
        While the SHORRE Act is my top WRDA priority, I'd also like to
    advocate for three additional priorities that are important for my
    constituents.
        First, I'd like to advocate for the inclusion of New Castle County
    to the list of eligible entities under the Environmental Infrastructure
    Program, which would allow the County to pursue funding for critical
    wastewater and stormwater system improvements and infrastructure.
        Second, I'd also like to advocate for funding to rehabilitate,
    retrofit, and remove dams across the country to help improve public
    safety. According to the American Society of Civil Engineers
    Infrastructure Report Card, Delaware has over 63 high-hazard dams.\3\
    Delaware also has smaller low-head dams, including dams along the
    Brandywine River, which are not only safety hazards, but also impact
    the river's natural ecosystem and biodiversity.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/state-item/delaware/
        \4\ https://www.americanrivers.org/2022/02/25-dams-to-watch-in-
    2022/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        And third, I'd like to advocate for the expansion of the existing
    environmental infrastructure project in Southeastern Pennsylvania to
    include the Lower Delaware River Basin, which would expand the reach of
    the existing project and help abate flooding in the Lower Delaware
    River Basin.
        I want to thank the Committee for their commitment and work on this
    legislation. On behalf of the First State, thank you for your
    consideration and I look forward to working with you all.

        Mr. Rouzer. Are there any questions for the gentlewoman?
        Seeing none, we thank her for her testimony, and we will
    now move forward to recognize the next witness, the gentlewoman
    from New York, Ms. Meng, for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. GRACE MENG, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
                         THE STATE OF NEW YORK

        Ms. Meng. Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and
    distinguished members of the House Transportation and
    Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
    thank you for allowing me to testify today.
        I am honored to share with you all my priorities as the
    committee considers reauthorization of the 2022 Water Resources
    Development Act that will support the safety and well-being of
    my constituents in Queens, New York.
        Last September, the remnants of Hurricane Ida caused record
    rainfall in New York City. Indeed, the National Weather
    Service, for the first time, issued a flash flood emergency for
    the city. The downpour caused massive flooding, where the
    streets literally became rivers, and waterfalls poured down
    into the subway system. Queens was hit particularly hard, and
    many of my constituents suffered devastating losses. Many were
    left without a home, a car, or their possessions. Tragically,
    16 New Yorkers lost their lives in the storm, including 13
    individuals who succumbed to the catastrophic flooding. Of
    those 16 deaths, 6 were my constituents. Many of the storm's
    victims died in their own homes. They lived in basement
    apartments that flooded too quickly--within seconds--for them
    to escape.
        This catastrophic flooding happened because New York City's
    sewer and water management systems were not built to handle the
    volume of rainfall from the storm. According to city officials,
    the water management system in New York City, which was built
    over a century ago, can only handle rainfall that is less than
    2 inches per hour. At its peak, Ida's rainfall was over 3
    inches per hour in parts of the city, far too fast and heavy
    for the existing infrastructure to handle. New York City was
    unprepared for Ida, and remains unprepared for another storm of
    its magnitude.
        And Hurricane Ida is not an isolated incident. Just 2 weeks
    before Ida, Tropical Storm Henri also broke the existing record
    for rainfall in an hour in New York City. In fact, 4 of the 20
    heaviest downpours in New York all happened within the last
    year. As climate change continues to cause more and more severe
    weather-related storms and natural disasters, we are going to
    see more events like Ida.
        We need to ensure that our communities are resilient to
    meet the challenges ahead, and New York City needs help to
    prevent Hurricane Ida's tragedies from repeating themselves.
    The four environmental infrastructure projects that I bring
    before the committee's consideration will bring invaluable help
    for New York City to make its sewer and water management
    systems more resilient to heavy rainfall, and will lower the
    risk of flooding and, by extension, death.
        These projects will install new water mains and
    rehabilitate or replace sewer lines to improve stormwater
    management. They will improve drinking water distribution,
    reduce sewer backups, and relieve flooding. Investing in New
    York City's water and sewer system is crucial to saving the
    lives and the livelihoods of my constituents as we continue to
    encounter the threat from climate change and extreme weather.
        Thank you again for your time and consideration of these
    matters. I ask that the chair and ranking member consider my
    projects for inclusion in this year's WRDA reauthorization to
    protect the people and families of Queens, and I yield back.
        [Ms. Meng's prepared statement follows:]

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Grace Meng, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of New York
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and distinguished Members
    of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water
    Resources and Environment, thank you for allowing me to testify today.
        I am honored to share with you all my priorities as the Committee
    considers reauthorization of the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA)
    of 2022, that will support the safety and wellbeing of my constituents
    in Queens, New York.
        Last September, the remnants of Hurricane Ida caused record
    rainfall in New York City; indeed the National Weather Service for the
    first time issued a flash flood emergency for the City. The downpour
    caused massive flooding where the streets became rivers, and waterfalls
    poured down into the subway system. Queens was hit particularly hard,
    and many of my constituents suffered devastating losses; many were left
    without a home, a car, or their possessions.
        Tragically, 16 New Yorkers lost their lives in the storm, including
    13 individuals who succumbed to the catastrophic flooding; of those 16
    deaths, 6 were my constituents. Many of the storm's victims died in
    their own homes; they lived in basements apartments that flooded too
    quickly for them to escape. This catastrophic flooding happened because
    New York City's sewer and water management systems were not built to
    handle the volume of rainfall from the storm.
        According to City officials, the water management system in New
    York City, which was built over a century ago, can only handle rainfall
    that is less than 2 inches an hour. At its peak, Ida's rainfall was
    over 3 inches per hour in parts of the City, far too fast and heavy for
    the existing infrastructure to handle. New York City was unprepared for
    Ida, and remains unprepared for another storm of its magnitude. And
    Hurricane Ida is not an isolated incident. Just two weeks before Ida,
    Tropical Storm Henri also broke the existing record for rainfall in an
    hour in New York City. In fact, four of the 20 heaviest downpours in
    New York happened last year.
        As climate change continues to cause more and more severe weather-
    related storms and natural disasters, we are going to see more often
    events like Ida. We need to ensure that our communities are resilient
    to meet the challenges ahead. And New York City needs help to prevent
    Hurricane Ida's tragedies from repeating themselves. The four
    Environmental Infrastructure projects that I bring before the
    Committee's consideration will bring invaluable help for New York City
    to make its sewer and water management systems more resilient to heavy
    rainfall, and will lower the risk of flooding and by extension, death.
        These projects will install new water mains and rehabilitate or
    replace sewer lines to improve stormwater management. They will improve
    drinking water distribution, reduce sewer backups, and relieve
    flooding. Investing in New York City's water and sewer system is
    crucial to saving the lives and livelihoods of my constituents as we
    continue to encounter the threat from climate change and extreme
    weather.
        Thank you again for your time and consideration of these matters. I
    ask that the Chair and Ranking Member consider my projects for
    inclusion in this year's WRDA reauthorization to protect the people of
    Queens.

        Mr. Rouzer. Are there any questions for the gentlewoman?
        Seeing none, we thank her, and we will move to our next
    witness, the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Mrvan, for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. FRANK J. MRVAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF INDIANA

        Mr. Mrvan. Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves,
    subcommittee Chair Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer, I
    appreciate the opportunity to testify at today's hearing on the
    Water Resources Development Act of 2022.
        On behalf of Indiana's First Congressional District,
    located in the environs of Chicago and home to 44 miles of Lake
    Michigan shoreline, I am seeking an increase of $25 million in
    the Federal authorization for section 219 Calumet region
    environmental infrastructure authority, from $100 million to
    $125 million.
        The Calumet region environmental infrastructure authority
    allows the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to provide technical
    planning, design, and construction to non-Federal interests,
    who have environmental infrastructure needs in Indiana's First
    Congressional District. These needs include development of
    wastewater treatment and related facilities and water supply,
    and treatment and distribution facilities.
        Over the past decades, this program authority has been
    integral in the efforts of local communities to improve our
    quality of place, safeguard the public health, and improve
    sustainability of water resources. Northwest Indiana is home to
    major industrial and manufacturing interests, and our
    communities rely on sewer systems that are currently operating
    beyond their expected life cycle. This situation has resulted
    in frequent sewage backups in environmental justice
    communities.
        During more frequent significant weather events, untreated
    municipal discharges empty into Lake Michigan, which poses a
    public health and environmental threat to our region and
    beyond. A $25 million increase in section 219 funding authority
    for the Calumet region environmental infrastructure authority
    will ensure continued construction assistance that will
    eliminate or improve combined sewer systems, reduce pollution
    in our waterways, remove failing septic systems, and provide
    clean drinking water, as well as additional water-related
    infrastructure, designed to protect area rivers and streams
    leading into Lake Michigan.
        In conclusion, I am requesting a $25 million increase in
    section 219 Calumet region environmental infrastructure
    authority and believe that this authority remains an
    indispensable resource for northwest Indiana to grow our
    economy and improve our quality of life.
        Thank you again for hosting this hearing, and for the
    opportunity to testify.
        [Mr. Mrvan's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank J. Mrvan, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Indiana
        Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves, Subcommittee Chair
    Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer, I appreciate the opportunity to
    testify at today's hearing on the Water Resources Development Act of
    2022.
        On behalf of Indiana's First Congressional District, located in the
    environs of Chicago and home to 44 miles of Lake Michigan Shoreline, I
    am seeking an increase of $25 million in the federal authorization for
    the Section 219--Calumet Region Environmental Infrastructure Authority,
    from $100 million to $125 million.
        As you know, the Calumet Region Environmental Infrastructure
    Authority is currently established under WRDA 1992, Section 219, as
    amended by WRDA 1996, Section 504 and WRDA 1999, Section 502, and FY04
    Appropriation Bill, Section 145.
        The Calumet Region Environmental Infrastructure Authority allows
    the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to provide technical planning, design,
    and construction to non-federal interests who have environmental
    infrastructure needs in Indiana's First Congressional District. These
    needs include development of wastewater treatment and related
    facilities and water supply, treatment and distribution facilities.
    Over the past decades, this program authority has been integral to the
    efforts of local communities to improve our quality of place, safeguard
    the public health, and improve sustainability of water resources.
        Northwest Indiana is home to major industrial and manufacturing
    interests, and our communities rely on sewer systems that are currently
    operating beyond their expected life-cycle. This situation has resulted
    in frequent sewage backups in environmental justice communities. During
    more frequent significant weather events, untreated municipal
    discharges empty into Lake Michigan, which poses a public health and
    environmental threat to our region and beyond.
        A $25 million increase in Section 219 funding authority for the
    Calumet Region Environmental Infrastructure Authority will ensure
    continued construction assistance that will eliminate or improve
    combined sewer systems, reduce pollution in our waterways, remove
    failing septic systems, and provide clean drinking water, as well as
    additional water-related infrastructure, designed to protect area
    rivers and streams leading into Lake Michigan.
        In conclusion, I am requesting a $25 million increase in the
    Section 219--Calumet Region Environmental Infrastructure Authority, and
    believe that this authority remains an indispensable resource for
    Northwest Indiana to grow our economy and improve our quality of life.
    Thank you again for hosting this hearing and the opportunity to
    testify.

        Mrs. Napolitano [presiding]. Thank you for your testimony.
        Reclaiming my time, I would very much like to recognize our
    next witness, the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Foster, for 5
    minutes.

      TESTIMONY OF HON. BILL FOSTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

        Mr. Foster. Thank you. Good morning, Chairwoman Napolitano
    and Ranking Member Rouzer, and thank you for holding this
    Members' Day hearing, and to all the members of the
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment for allowing me
    to testify here today.
        I am here this morning to urge full Federal funding for the
    remaining design, construction, operation, maintenance, repair,
    replacement, and rehabilitation of the Brandon Road Asian carp
    barrier and lock and dam project in my district, and to request
    that Will County be included in the United States Army Corps of
    Engineers' section 219 environmental infrastructure
    authorization.
        The Brandon Road Lock and Dam, located on the Des Plains
    River in Joliet, Illinois, serves as the last line of defense
    to prevent the spread of Asian carp and other aquatic invasive
    species from reaching Lake Michigan and all the tributaries and
    lakes in the Great Lakes Basin.
        Asian carp were first introduced in Arkansas and have
    traveled up the Mississippi River. If this species reaches the
    Great Lakes, it would create an environmental and economic
    catastrophe throughout the upper Midwest. And that is why
    supporting the Brandon Road Lock and Dam project has always
    been one of my greatest priorities.
        I commend the Federal Government's recognition of the
    importance of the Brandon Road Lock and Dam project through
    past legislative and agency actions. Most recently, the U.S.
    Army Corps of Engineers announced $225 million to move forward
    on this project. Thanks to the Infrastructure Investment and
    Jobs Act, the Army Corps of Engineers finally has the resources
    it needs to finish planning and begin construction of this
    critical project that will help protect Illinois waterways, and
    the rivers and lakes that define the Great Lakes region.
        Illinois and the Great Lakes States did not create this
    Asian carp problem, and we should not be forced to bear the
    entire cost of protecting the Great Lakes region. Therefore, we
    request full Federal funding for the Brandon Road Lock and Dam
    project in the 2022 Water Resources Reform and Development Act.
        I would also like to draw attention to another project that
    requires funding in my district: the inclusion of Will County
    in the environmental infrastructure authorization. I strongly
    support their request, because it will enable them to expand
    and support water treatment, water supply, sewer, stormwater,
    storage treatment, and distribution projects in the district.
        Will County is one of the fastest growing jurisdictions in
    Illinois, and home to the largest inland port in North America.
    The county is rapidly diversifying and growing, but the
    population and economic growth have strained both local
    infrastructure and resources.
        In recent years, the area has experienced an increase in
    flooding incidents along both the Kankakee and DuPage Rivers,
    and a dramatic increase in both rainfall and snowfall,
    straining current water and sewer infrastructure. Funding these
    projects will improve the quality of life for residents in some
    of our most disadvantaged communities in the county, enhance
    the quality of treatment of water and stormwater drainage, and
    address public safety concerns.
        Working with my colleagues, I urge your strong
    consideration of our request for Will County. And thank you
    again, and I yield back the balance of my time.
        [Mr. Foster's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill Foster, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Illinois
        Good morning, and thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking
    Member Rouzer for holding this Members' Day Hearing, and to the Members
    of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment for allowing me
    to testify here today.
        I am here this morning:
          To urge full federal funding for the remaining design,
    construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and
    rehabilitation of the Brandon Road Lock and Dam Project in my district.
          And to request that Will County be included under the
    United States Army Corps of Engineers Section 219, Environmental
    Infrastructure authorization.

        The Brandon Road Lock and Dam, located along the Des Plaines River
    in Joliet, Illinois, serves as the last line of defense to prevent the
    spread of Asian Carp and other aquatic invasive species from reaching
    Lake Michigan and all the tributaries and lakes in the Great Lakes
    basin.
        Asian Carp was first introduced in Arkansas and has traveled up the
    Mississippi River. If the species reaches the Great Lakes, it could
    create an environmental and economic catastrophe.
        That's why supporting the Brandon Road Lock and Dam Project has
    always been one of my most important priorities.
        I commend the Federal Government's recognition of the importance of
    the Brandon Road Lock and Dam Project through past legislative and
    agency actions.
        Most recently, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced that they
    allocated 225 million dollars to move forward on this project.
        Thanks to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Army
    Corps of Engineers finally has the resources it needs to finish
    planning and begin construction on this critical project that will help
    protect Illinois waterways and the rivers and lakes that define the
    Great Lakes region.
        Illinois and the Great Lake states did not create this Asian Carp
    problem, so we should not be forced to bear the cost of protecting the
    entire Great Lakes region.
        Therefore, we request full federal funding for Brandon Road Lock
    and Dam Project in the 2022 Water Resources Reform and Development Act.
        I would also like to draw your attention to another project that
    requires funding in my district--the inclusion of Will County in the
    Environmental Infrastructure Authorization.
        I strongly support their request because it will enable them to
    expand and support water treatment, water supply, sewer, stormwater,
    storage treatment, and distribution projects in the district.
        Will County is one of the fastest-growing jurisdictions in Illinois
    and home to the largest inland port in North America.
        The County is rapidly diversifying and growing, but the population
    and economic growth have strained both local infrastructure and
    resources.
        In recent years, the area has experienced an increase in flooding
    incidents along both the Kankakee and DuPage rivers and a dramatic
    increase in both rain and snowfall, straining current water and sewer
    infrastructure.
        Funding these projects will improve the quality of life for
    residents in some of the most disadvantaged communities in the County,
    enhance the quality of treatment of water and stormwater drainage, and
    address public safety concerns.
        Working with my colleagues, I urge your strong consideration of our
    request for Will County.
        Thank you again, and I yield back the balance of my time.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Foster. I appreciate your
    testimony.
        And we would like to recognize our next witness, the
    gentleman from Kansas, Mr. Mann, for 5 minutes, sir.

      TESTIMONY OF HON. TRACEY MANN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                        FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS

        Mr. Mann. Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves,
    Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members of
    the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify before
    you today.
        I represent the ``Big First'' district of Kansas, which is
    the exact center of America, and the breadbasket of the
    country. We are the largest beef-producing district in the
    Nation, and we are home to more than 60,000 farms, ranchers,
    and agricultural businesses. So, it is easy to see why
    advocating for Kansas farmers, ranchers, and agricultural
    producers is one of the greatest privileges of my job in
    Congress. And when legislation like the Water Resources
    Development Act comes up, I will always stand up to make sure
    that the voices of the Big First are heard.
        Water is obviously an integral part of agriculture thriving
    in America. Kansans use it to produce the most affordable and
    safe food supply in the world. That said, where there is too
    much water from a flood, or not enough water from drought,
    agricultural producers walk a fine line as they ensure that
    America remains the most food secure country in the world.
        For agricultural businesses to function well, producers
    need to be able to transport goods and commodities safely,
    securely, and promptly. They need smooth, commercial traffic to
    flow through our ports and inland waterways. They need flood
    control and abatement in both the planning stage and emergency
    relief, and they need improved infrastructure on our waterways
    like locks and dams. Accordingly, I believe that WRDA is good
    for both agriculture itself and agricultural businesses in this
    country.
        WRDA lets the Army Corps of Engineers work to strengthen
    the infrastructure in communities facing repeated flooding and
    reduce the cost of water by adjusting existing water supply
    contracts. These are great moves for our country that will keep
    our people safe and keep money in their pockets.
        WRDA helps protect not only people's livelihoods, but also
    their actual lives. I have seen firsthand the damage and
    horrors that can result from flooding, like last May, when it
    happened in Natoma, Kansas, when flash floods from heavy rains
    damaged more than half of the homes in town. Shockingly, Natoma
    didn't qualify for FEMA relief, and only two people had flood
    insurance.
        When we allow WRDA to work, it isn't just good for farmers,
    ranchers, and agricultural producers. It is good policy for our
    whole country. WRDA is an effective way to steward taxpayer
    dollars by responsibly investing in our country upfront, rather
    than spending even more on the back end with disaster relief
    funding.
        For America to run smoothly, we need to develop strong
    water infrastructure and water programs to protect homes and
    businesses, and make sure that weather emergencies don't
    cripple us. WRDA can help us do just that, which is why I am
    outlining my priorities here today. When I see a policy like
    WRDA that protects people's lives and livelihoods, provides for
    quick and effective responses in the event of disasters, and
    makes sure that people aren't overpaying for their utilities,
    that is a policy that I can support.
        And with that, Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
        [Mr. Mann's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Tracey Mann, a Representative in Congress
                            from the State of Kansas
        Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Chairwoman Napolitano,
    Ranking Member Rouzer, and Members of the Committee, I appreciate the
    opportunity to testify before you today.
        I am Tracey Mann, and I represent the Big First District of Kansas,
    which is the pilot light of America and the breadbasket of this
    country. We are the largest beef-producing district in the nation, and
    we are home to more than 60,000 farms, ranches, and agricultural
    businesses. So, it's easy to see why advocating for Kansas farmers,
    ranchers, and agricultural producers is one of the great privileges of
    my job in Congress, and when legislation like the Water Resources
    Development Act comes up, I will always stand up to make sure that the
    voices of the Big First are heard.
        Water is obviously an integral part of agriculture thriving in
    America--Kansans use it to produce the most affordable and safe food
    supply in the world. That said, whether it's too much water from a
    flood, or not enough water from drought, agricultural producers walk a
    fine line as they ensure that America remains the most food secure
    country in the world. For agricultural businesses to function well,
    producers need to be able to transport goods and commodities safely,
    securely, and promptly; they need smooth commercial traffic to flow
    through our ports and inland waterways, they need flood control and
    abatement in both the planning stage and emergency relief, and they
    need improved infrastructure on our waterways like locks and dams.
    Accordingly, I believe that WRDA is good for both agriculture itself,
    and agricultural businesses in this country.
        A good reauthorization of WRDA would let the Army Corps of
    Engineers work to strengthen the infrastructure in communities facing
    repeated flooding and reduce the cost of water by adjusting existing
    water supply contracts. These are great moves for our country that will
    keep people safe and keep money in their pockets. A good
    reauthorization of WRDA would help protect not only people's
    livelihoods, but also their actual lives. I've seen firsthand the
    damage and horrors that can result from flooding--last May it happened
    in Natoma, KS, when flash floods from heavy rains damaged more than
    half of the homes in town. Shockingly, Natoma didn't qualify for FEMA
    relief and only two people had flood insurance. When we allow WRDA to
    work, it isn't just good for farmers, ranchers, and agricultural
    producers--it's good policy for our whole country. WRDA is an effective
    way to steward taxpayer dollars by responsibly investing in our country
    upfront, rather than spending even more on the backend with disaster
    relief funding.
        For America to run smoothly, we need to develop strong water
    infrastructure and water programs to protect homes and businesses and
    make sure that weather emergencies don't cripple us. WRDA can help us
    do just that, which is why I am outlining my priorities here today.
    When I see a policy like WRDA that protects people's lives and
    livelihoods, provides for quick and effective responses in the event of
    disasters, and makes sure that people aren't overpaying for their
    utilities, that's a policy that I can support.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, sir, for your testimony. The
    committee will stand in recess until 12:20.
        We thank you, and we will reconvene in 20 minutes.
        [Recess.]
        Mrs. Napolitano. I call the committee to order, and thank
    you for all the testimony prior to this, and we will now
    recognize our next Member of Congress, the gentleman from
    Georgia, Mr. Bishop, for 5 minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                   CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA

        Mr. Bishop of Georgia. Thank you very much, Chairwoman
    Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer. Thank you for giving me
    the opportunity to speak today to ask that the subcommittee
    give the fullest consideration to my Water Resources
    Development Act requests.
        But I also want to commend the leadership of Chairman
    DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves for their important work on
    this issue, as well.
        I have submitted five requests to the committee which will
    address longstanding environmental and infrastructure concerns
    that have an impact on Georgia's Second Congressional District
    and throughout the State.
        My first priority is to address the perennial problem of
    aquatic invasive species, particularly hydrilla, that have
    plagued Lake Seminole for the past 20 years. Many areas of the
    lake are inaccessible because of hydrilla, an aggressive weed.
    It negatively affects water quality, the economy, the
    biosphere, and local businesses.
        I am joined by both Congressman Lawson and Congressman Dunn
    of Florida in asking that the subcommittee identify hydrilla as
    an additional aquatic invasive species of concern by amending
    section 1108 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2018,
    which directs the Army Corps of Engineers to research their
    prevention, management, and eradication. Adding hydrilla to the
    list will emphasize the range of aquatic invasive species that
    plague U.S. waterways, as well as focus the Corps of Engineers'
    attention on hydrilla, a particularly pernicious plant.
        My next two requests would greatly improve water quality
    and water infrastructure in Albany, Georgia.
        One request would address combined sewer overflow. During
    hard rains, millions of gallons of sewage mix with hundreds of
    millions of gallons of rainwater, and this results in an
    unhealthy discharge into the Flint River. While the city has
    made progress separating the overflow, they would benefit from
    Federal support to separate sewage from the rainwater. For this
    project, I am requesting an authorization of $105 million in
    funding for this environmental infrastructure project.
        The next project for Albany involves the city's flood
    plain. July marked the 27th remembrance of the 1994 flood,
    which was a 500-year flood that, literally, submerged Albany,
    and separated the city with floodwaters from the Flint River.
    The Albany State University campus was up to its rooftops and,
    of course, followed 4 years later by another 500-year flood
    that had the same results. The people of Albany still remember
    the tragedies that resulted from that. And so Albany, still
    being flood-prone, we are asking that the subcommittee support
    my request for a study on the feasibility of modifying the
    landscape to reduce the city's flood potential.
        My fourth request focuses on Georgia's maritime shipping
    infrastructure. As the dean of the Georgia congressional
    delegation, I join my friend and colleague, Buddy Carter, in
    requesting a study to determine the feasibility of widening the
    Savannah Harbor to accommodate a greater throughput of large
    vessels to ensure that the South's busiest port can keep pace
    with the ever-growing demand for maritime shipping.
        The Port of Savannah is the pride of Georgia, particularly
    in its role as the biggest, busiest, and most economically
    productive port in the region. The Savannah Harbor expansion
    project has completed many of its milestones since construction
    commenced in 2015. However, the existing Federal channel still
    cannot adequately support the influx of newer, larger vessels
    that are calling on the port. Further, improvements to the
    Savannah Harbor will undoubtedly spur economic activity in
    Georgia and the broader Southeast region.
        Finally, I am requesting that the Corps of Engineers study
    the feasibility of utilizing a forecast-informed reservoir
    operations system in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River
    Basin. The FIRO system is an approved Corps policy and a
    flexible and adaptive water management tool to help water
    managers make decisions about holding back or releasing water
    from reservoirs based on modern meteorological, river flow, and
    other forecasting methods and metrics. With climate change
    causing increased rainfalls and intermittent drought, forecast-
    informed reservoir operations in the ACF River Basin will
    provide the necessary flexibility to meet future climate
    conditions.
        I am grateful for the opportunity to testify on behalf of
    my WRDA requests, and I look forward to working with the
    committee to provide information and to answer any further
    questions. Thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time,
    20 seconds.
        [Mr. Bishop's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Sanford D. Bishop, Jr., a Representative in
                       Congress from the State of Georgia
        Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer,
        Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today to ask that
    the Subcommittee give the fullest consideration to my Water Resources
    Development Act requests. I also want to commend the leadership of
    Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves for their important work on
    this issue as well.
        I submitted five requests to the committee, which will address
    longstanding environmental and infrastructure concerns that have an
    impact in Georgia's Second Congressional District and throughout the
    State.
        My first priority is to address the perennial problem of aquatic
    invasive species, particularly hydrilla, that have plagued Lake
    Seminole for the past twenty years. Many areas of the lake are
    inaccessible because of hydrilla, an aggressive weed. It negatively
    affects water quality, the economy, the biosphere, and local
    businesses.
        I am joined by both Congressman Lawson and Congressman Dunn of
    Florida in asking that the Subcommittee identify hydrilla as an
    additional aquatic invasive species of concern by amending Section 1108
    of the Water Resources Development Act of 2018, which directs the Army
    Corps of Engineers to research their prevention, management, and
    eradication. Adding hydrilla to the list will emphasize the range of
    aquatic invasive species that plague U.S. waterways, as well as focus
    the Corps of Engineers' attention on Hydrilla, a particularly
    pernicious plant.
        My next two requests would greatly improve the water infrastructure
    in Albany, Georgia. One request would address combined sewer overflow.
    During hard rains, millions of gallons of sewage mix with hundreds of
    millions of gallons of rainwater. This results in unhealthy discharge
    into the Flint river.
        While the city has made progress separating the overflow, they
    would benefit from federal support to separate the sewage from the
    rainwater. For this project, I am requesting authorization of $105
    million in funding for this environmental infrastructure project.
        The next project in Albany involves the city's floodplain. July
    marked the 27th Remembrance of the Flood of 1994, a so-called ``500-
    year flood,'' that submerged Albany, GA with floodwaters from the Flint
    River--literally cutting the city in half and having water levels
    covering the rooftops on the campus of Albany State University.
    Unfortunately, 4 years later in 1998, there was a repeat with another
    so-called ``500-year flood'' with equal devastation. While some
    mitigation has been undertaken, portions of Albany along the Flint
    River banks are still very much flood-prone. Local residents remember
    the flood and describe the tragedy like it was yesterday. I ask that
    the Subcommittee support my request for a study on the feasibility of
    modifying the landscape to reduce the city's flood potential.
        My fourth request focuses on Georgia's maritime shipping
    infrastructure. As the dean of the Georgia Congressional Delegation, I
    join my friend and colleague Buddy Carter in requesting a study to
    determine the feasibility of widening the Savannah Harbor to
    accommodate a greater throughput of large vessels to ensure the South's
    busiest port can keep pace with the ever-growing demand for maritime
    shipping.
        The Port of Savannah is the pride of Georgia, particularly in its
    role as the biggest, busiest, and most economically productive port in
    the region. The Savannah Harbor Expansion Project has completed many of
    its milestones since construction commenced in 2015; however, the
    existing federal channel still cannot adequately support the influx of
    newer, larger vessels that are calling on the port.
        Further improvements to the Savannah Harbor will undoubtedly spur
    economic activity in Georgia and the broader southeast region.
        Finally, I am requesting that the Corps of Engineers study the
    feasibility of utilizing a forecast informed reservoir operations
    (FIRO) system in the Apalachicola Chattahoochee Flint (ACF) River
    Basin. The FIRO system is an approved Corps policy and a flexible and
    adaptive water management tool to help water managers make decisions
    about holding back or releasing water from reservoirs based on modern
    meteorological, river flow, and other forecasting methods and metrics.
    With climate change causing increased rainfalls and intermittent
    drought, forecast-informed reservoir operations in the ACF River Basin
    will provide the necessary flexibility to safely meet future climate
    conditions.
        I am grateful for the opportunity to testify on behalf of my WRDA
    requests. I look forward to working with the committee to provide
    information and answer any further questions.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you for your prompt response, and
    thank you for your testimony.
        Are there any questions?
        Hearing and seeing none, I thank you very much, Mr. Bishop.
        Next we have Mr. Earl Blumenauer. I recognize our next
    witness from Oregon.
        You have 5 minutes, sir.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. EARL BLUMENAUER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                        FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

        Mr. Blumenauer. Thank you very much, Madam Chair and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, for providing the opportunity to share
    my priorities for the upcoming Water Resources Development
    bill.
        WRDA is an opportunity to reauthorize new projects and to
    continue to modernize the Corps of Engineers, ensuring equity
    and justice are centered in the Corps' mission.
        As the committee is aware, based on our work together in
    2018, one of my priorities is to ensure the Corps creates
    adequate Tribal housing to address the displacement of Columbia
    River Treaty Tribes by the construction of the Dalles Dam and
    other dams along the lower Columbia River. The construction of
    these dams, beginning in the 1930s, inundated and destroyed
    villages where the Columbia River Tribes lived, fished, and
    traded for thousands of years. These dams damaged their
    heritage, livelihoods, and economic base, and they have never
    been fully compensated for these losses.
        In 2013, the Corps determined that many Tribal families who
    lived on the banks of the Columbia River prior to construction
    of the dams did not receive relocation assistance.
        In 2016, the Corps completed a legal analysis of its unmet
    obligations to build this housing for the four Treaty Tribes.
    The Corps found that it had an existing authority to construct
    one village associated with the construction of the Dalles Dam.
    Following an authorization in the 2018 WRDA, the Corps produced
    a list of replacement village options associated with the
    Dalles Dam that were not mutually acceptable to the Columbia
    River Treaty Tribes.
        Last year, the Corps and the four Columbia River Treaty
    Tribes had a Government-to-Government meeting, where they
    determined that the authorization needs to be updated and
    clarified. The Corps and the Tribes are asking for additional
    authority to produce a comprehensive village development plan
    that will help us meet the Federal Government's unmet
    obligations to the Tribes.
        I have fought for the construction of this replacement
    housing with the Corps' existing authority. Now I am asking
    that we provide them additional authority in order to fully
    address the Federal Government's unmet, acknowledged obligation
    to the Tribe.
        Another priority of mine is the authorization of the Corps'
    Portland Metro Levee System improvement project. This project
    will reduce flood risk and increase the resiliency and
    reliability of the levee system along the Columbia River in the
    metropolitan area. It was originally designed and constructed
    by the Corps of Engineers over 80 years ago. This federally
    authorized infrastructure has allowed the area along the river
    to become a cornerstone to the regional, statewide, and,
    indeed, the national economy.
        The levee system reduces flood risk for vital
    infrastructure, like the Portland International Airport, three
    interstate highways, an Air National Guard base, a major
    natural gas pipeline, backup drinking water for nearly 1
    million people, and transmission lines for all regional
    electricity providers.
        In addition to safeguarding thousands of residents, the
    levees also help keep harmful pollutants out of the Columbia
    River, and protect over 2,000 acres of parks and natural spaces
    that are home to some endangered and protected species.
        These improvements to the Portland Metro Levee System will
    increase the resilience, reliability, and operability of the
    system. It will protect our environment and our communities,
    especially the most vulnerable.
        In general, while I applaud the significant progress made
    by the committee in the 2020 WRDA bill, we must continue to
    ensure that the Corps has the tools and capacity needed to
    advance community-supported solutions to water resources
    challenges for the Nation's most vulnerable communities. I have
    submitted requests to this end, asking that we in Congress
    continue to work with the Corps to ensure the agency is taking
    full advantage of existing programs, authorities, and
    operations to leverage natural systems and prioritize
    resilience in the face of increasingly frequent and severe
    climate disasters.
        These issues are critical for my constituents. They are
    critical for our region and, indeed, for the Nation.
        I deeply appreciate the opportunity to share my perceptions
    and requests with the subcommittee. Thank you very much.
        [Mr. Blumenauer's prepared statement follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Hon. Earl Blumenauer, a Representative in
                       Congress from the State of Oregon
        Chair Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer,
        Thank you for providing the opportunity to testify on behalf of
    priorities in the upcoming Water Resources Development bill. Continuing
    the recent successes of passing WRDA bills, this bill will help many
    states and localities, including Oregon, move critical projects
    forward.
        WRDA 2022 will not only provide the opportunity to authorize new,
    eligible projects. It is also an opportunity to continue to modernize
    the Army Corps of Engineers and ensure equity and justice are centered
    in the Corps' mission.
                                 Tribal Housing
        As the Committee is aware, based on my initiatives in the 2018 WRDA
    bill, one of my priorities is to ensure the Corps creates adequate
    tribal housing to address the displacement of the Columbia River Treaty
    Tribes by the construction of The Dalles Dam and other dams along the
    lower Columbia River.
        The construction of The Dalles, Bonneville, and other lower
    Columbia River dams beginning in the 1930s inundated and destroyed
    villages where Columbia River Tribes lived, fished, traded, and
    socialized for thousands of years. The dams severely damaged their
    heritage, livelihoods, and economic base. The Tribes and their citizens
    have never been fully compensated for these losses.
        In 2013, the Corps determined that many Tribal families who lived
    on the banks of the Columbia River prior to construction of the
    Bonneville and The Dalles dams did not receive relocation assistance.
    In 2016, the Corps completed a legal analysis of its unmet obligation
    to build housing on the Columbia River for the four Treaty Tribes,
    finding that it had existing authority to construct one village
    associated with the construction of The Dalles Dam.
        On the basis of these studies, I have fought for funding for the
    Corps to construct housing that they have the authority to replace
    associated with this particular dam. Where the Corps has not found
    existing authority to replace villages inundated due to the
    construction of the other dams, I am working to provide them that
    authority in order to fully address the federal government's unmet
    obligations to the Tribes.
        Following an authorization in the 2018 WRDA, the Corps produced a
    list of replacement village options associated with The Dalles Dam that
    were not mutually acceptable to Columbia River Treaty Tribes. Last
    year, the Corps and the four Columbia River Treaty Tribes had a
    government-to-government meeting where it was determined that the
    authorization needs to be updated and clarified. The Corps and the
    Tribes are asking for additional authority to produce a comprehensive
    village development plan that will help us as the federal government
    finally meet our unmet obligations to the Tribes.
                              MCDD Chief's Report
        Another priority is the authorization of the Corps' Portland Metro
    Levee System improvements project, which will reduce flood risk and
    increase the resiliency and reliability of the levee system along the
    Columbia River in the Portland metro area.
        The Portland Metro Levee System was originally designed and
    constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over 80 years ago. The
    federally authorized infrastructure has allowed the area along the
    river to become a cornerstone to the regional, statewide, and national
    economy. The livelihood of people throughout Oregon and the Pacific
    Northwest is reliant on the levee system as it reduces flood risk for
    vital infrastructure like the Portland International Airport, three
    interstate highways, a U.S. Air National Guard base, a major natural
    gas pipeline, back-up drinking water for nearly one million people, and
    transmission lines for all regional electricity providers. In addition
    to safeguarding over 7,500 residents and 59,000 jobs, the levees and
    associated drainage infrastructure also help keep major pollutants out
    of the Columbia River and protect over 2,000 acres of parks and natural
    spaces that are home to multiple endangered and protected species.
        The Portland Metro Levee System project includes a series of
    improvements spanning the length of the system. These improvements will
    increase the resilience, reliability, and operability of the system by
    improving levee performance and reliability while reducing risk of
    flooding. These improvements will also address environmental justice
    concerns and economic risks in the area.
                             Resilience and Equity
        In general, while I applaud the significant progress made by
    Committee in the 2020 WRDA bill, more can be done to ensure that the
    Corps has the tools and capacity needed to advance community-supported
    solutions to water resources challenges for the nation's most
    vulnerable communities. This includes increasing capacity and expertise
    within the Corps, ensuring meaningful opportunities for public input,
    increasing opportunities for assistance, maximizing toxics remediation
    and ecological restoration, and advancing environmental justice.
        We must also work with the Corps to ensure the agency is taking
    full advantage of existing programs, authorities, and operations to
    leverage natural systems and prioritize resilience in the face of
    increasingly frequent and severe climate disasters.
        These are critical issues for my constituents. Thank you for the
    opportunity to speak about the infrastructure needs and opportunities
    for Oregon's Third Congressional District.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Blumenauer, for your
    testimony. And we now would like to recognize our next witness,
    the gentlewoman from Virginia, Mrs. Luria, for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. ELAINE G. LURIA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                   FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

        Mrs. Luria. Well, thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking
    Member Rouzer, and my colleagues on the subcommittee for this
    opportunity. I would like to bring some attention to a few
    critical issues that impact water infrastructure in my
    district.
        Virginia's Second Congressional District is defined by its
    wetlands, Chesapeake Bay tributaries, and the Norfolk Harbor.
    My district and the surrounding region require significant
    water infrastructure and resiliency investments. To understand
    my district, one must understand that the Port of Virginia is
    the gateway to transporting goods to so many communities.
        Federal facilities and installations make up a significant
    portion of my district, and the Eastern Shore is also facing
    severe resiliency threats, particularly from erosion. These
    three defining factors have impacted my requests for the Water
    Resources Development Act of fiscal year 2022.
        My top request for WRDA 2022 is that the Congress include
    language to clarify that Federal facilities are, in fact,
    included in the coastal resiliency feasibility study for
    coastal Virginia.
        The Hampton Roads region is home to 18 military
    installations, including Naval Station Norfolk, the world's
    largest naval base, and Langley Air Force Base, the world's
    oldest and continuously operating Air Force base. Currently,
    there are limitations under existing authorities that restrict
    the ability to incorporate these installations and facilities
    into the Civil Works planning and construction process.
    Excluding a large portion of the region from these studies
    would result in an illogical data gap for the Army Corps.
    Reducing or removing those challenges and limitations
    potentially generates Federal cost savings and increases
    regional climate resilience through military and Civil Works
    partnerships on coastal storm risk management.
        Lacking the ability to incorporate military installations
    and other Federal facilities into the Civil Works project
    implementation process will force the Corps to perform work
    solely on a cost reimbursable basis, in accordance with one of
    the several available reimbursement authorities. It requires
    each Federal facility to individually carry out their own
    study, which is an enormous financial and logistical burden.
    For a coastal storm risk management study of significant size,
    like coastal Virginia, the coordination process under these
    authorities would be logistically impracticable.
        Secondly, I would like to talk about Norfolk Harbor,
    Anchorage Foxtrot. The Port of Virginia is one of the Nation's
    and Commonwealth's most significant economic engines. On an
    annual basis, the port is responsible for more than 400,000
    jobs and $92 billion in spending across the Commonwealth, and
    generates more than 7\1/2\ percent of Virginia's gross State
    product.
        I am grateful that the Norfolk Harbor is receiving robust
    funding from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and
    from standard appropriations. However, further action is
    needed.
        Anchorage Foxtrot at the Norfolk Harbor is used primarily
    as an emergency swing anchorage to prepare for inclement wave
    conditions in the harbor or Chesapeake Bay. For vessels to
    effectively use the anchorage, it is imperative that the
    anchorage to approach depths to match that of the current
    Federal channel. Norfolk Harbor's Anchorage Foxtrot is
    currently designed as a 3,000-foot diameter circle for free-
    swinging bow anchorage.
        The proposed modification includes the widening of
    Anchorage Foxtrot beyond its current authorized diameter of
    3,620 feet to 3,840 feet, and deepening the anchorage to 55
    feet, to be consistent with the 1986 authorization and the
    project depth of the Federal channel. This modification will
    provide a deeper and wider anchorage, and will permit use by
    larger vessels calling at the port.
        Lastly, I would like to talk about the Eastern Shore of
    Virginia, and the Cedar Island feasibility study. The Eastern
    Shore of Virginia has been fervently fighting erosion and sea
    level rise, as well as land subsidence, specifically, a barrier
    island called Cedar Island. Cedar Island is a major Virginia
    seaside barrier island, and barrier islands enhance back
    barrier marsh resilience to sea level rise. Both the barrier
    island and the marsh provide storm and flood protection of the
    mainland infrastructure from the Atlantic Ocean.
        Cedar Island has been ongoing significant coastal erosion
    for decades, with substantial damage from Superstorm Sandy. The
    continuing erosion of Cedar Island will eventually open the
    seaside, marsh, and mainland to full ocean impact. We must take
    a closer look at Cedar Island and how to preserve the marsh.
    That is why I requested a specific Army Corps feasibility study
    for this area.
        Again, I would like to thank Chair Napolitano and Ranking
    Member Rouzer and my colleagues on this committee for giving me
    the chance to speak today about these important priorities
    throughout coastal Virginia. By making much-needed investments
    in our water infrastructure, we can set coastal Virginia
    communities up for economic success and ensure their resiliency
    in the future. Thank you.
        [Mrs. Luria's prepared statement follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Hon. Elaine G. Luria, a Representative in
                   Congress from the Commonwealth of Virginia
        Thank you, Subcommittee Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer,
    and my colleagues on the subcommittee for this opportunity. I would
    like to bring some attention to a few critical issues that impact water
    infrastructure in my district.
        Virginia's second district is defined by its wetlands, Chesapeake
    Bay tributaries, and the Norfolk Harbor. My district and the
    surrounding region require significant water infrastructure and
    resiliency investments. To understand my district, one must understand
    that the Port of Virginia is the gateway to transporting goods to so
    many communities.
        Federal facilities and installations make up a significant portion
    of my district, and the Eastern Shore is also facing serious resiliency
    threats, particularly from erosion. These three defining factors have
    impacted my requests for the Water Resources Development Act of Fiscal
    Year 2022.
                          Federal Facilities Inclusion
        My top request for WRDA 2022 is that the Congress include language
    to clarify that federal facilities are in fact included in the Coastal
    Resiliency Feasibility Study for Coastal Virginia. Hampton Roads region
    is home to 18 military installations, including Norfolk Naval Station,
    the largest navy base in the world, and Langley Air Force base, the
    longest continuously active air force base in the world. Currently,
    there are limitations under existing authorities that restrict the
    ability to incorporate these installations and facilities into the
    Civil Works planning and construction processes.
        Excluding a large portion of the region from these studies would
    result in an illogical data gap for the Army Corps. Reducing or
    removing those challenges and limitations, potentially generates
    federal cost savings and increased regional climate resilience through
    military and civil works partnerships on Coastal Storm Risk Management
    (CSRM) projects.
        Lacking the ability to incorporate military installations and other
    Federal facilities into the civil works project implementation process,
    will force the Corps to perform work solely on a cost-reimbursable
    basis in accordance with one of several available reimbursement
    authorities.
        It requires each federal facility to individually carry out the
    study, which is an enormous financial and logistical burden. For a
    Coastal Storm Risk Management study of significant size like Coastal
    Virginia, the coordination process under these authorities would be
    logistically impracticable.
                           Norfolk Harbor Anchorage F
        The Port of Virginia is one of the Nation's and Commonwealth's most
    significant economic engines. On an annual basis, the port is
    responsible for more than 400,000 jobs and $92 billion in spending
    across the Commonwealth and generates more than seven and a half
    percent of Virginia's Gross State Product.
        I am grateful that Norfolk Harbor is receiving robust funding from
    the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and standard appropriations;
    however further action is needed. Anchorage F at the Norfolk Harbor is
    used primarily as an emergency swing anchorage to prepare for inclement
    wave conditions in the harbor Chesapeake Bay or in situations of
    unexpected extended vessel wait times prior to calling port.
        For vessels to effectively utilize the anchorage, it is imperative
    for the anchorage to approach depths to match that of the Federal
    Channel. Norfolk Harbor's Anchorage F is currently designed as a 3,000-
    foot diameter circle for free-swinging bow anchoring.
        The proposed modification includes widening the Anchorage F beyond
    its currently authorized diameter of 3,620-feet to a diameter of 3,840-
    feet and deepening the anchorage to 55-feet consistent with the 1986
    authorization and the project depth of the Federal Channel.
        This modification would provide a deeper and wider anchorage and
    will permit use by larger vessels calling to the port. I respectfully
    ask that the Committee authorize the modification in WRDA22.
            Eastern Shore of Virginia Cedar Island Feasibility Study
        Additionally, the Eastern Shore of Virginia has been fervently
    fighting erosion, sea-level rise, and land subsidence. Specifically, a
    barrier island called Cedar Island. Cedar Island is a major Virginia
    seaside barrier island. Barrier islands enhance back-barrier marsh
    resilience to sea-level rise.
        Both the barrier island and the back island marsh provide storm
    surge and flood protection of the mainland infrastructure from the
    Atlantic Ocean. Cedar Island has been undergoing significant coastal
    erosion for decades with substantial damage from Superstorm Sandy.
        The continuing erosion of Cedar Island will eventually open the
    seaside marsh and mainland to full ocean impact.We must take a closer
    look at Cedar Island and how to preserve the marsh. That is why I
    requested a specific Army Corps feasibility study for this area.
                                    Closing
        Again, I would like to thank Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member
    Rouzer, and my colleagues on the Committee for giving me the chance to
    speak about these priorities throughout Coastal Virginia.
        By making much-needed investments in our water infrastructure, we
    can set our Coastal communities up for economic success and ensure
    their resiliency for future generations.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much for your testimony,
    Mrs. Luria.
        I would like to tell it is going to be Mr. Sessions, Ms.
    Stansbury, Mr. Trone, and Mr. Correa.
        Mr. Sessions, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. PETE SESSIONS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                        FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

        Mr. Sessions. Madam Chairwoman, thank you very much. What
    an honor it is to be before both you and the ranking member
    from North Carolina, Mr. Rouzer. Madam Chairman, I am seeking
    your assistance to authorize this project, which I will speak
    of, whose appropriations level--we are seeking the
    authorization for that--would be for $30 million to complete
    the Lake Waco embankment stabilization project.
        Madam Chairman, Texas primarily lives off surface water. We
    have lakes all over the State of Texas, which are designed to
    help cities not only have enough water for their needs, but
    also a chain system whereby water moves down rivers to other
    places. This is all taken care of through the wise management
    of the Corps of Engineers.
        The Corps of Engineers is very important to the State of
    Texas, as they are to other States, that they provide not only
    professional and engineering support, but really wise
    management.
        Something beyond their control occurred in 2015, where
    Texas--and all of Texas--received the highest rainfall amount
    that they have ever received. Waco, Texas, in particular,
    received 9.27 inches of rainfall in May alone. This was over
    several days, not over the month, but that was the monthly
    total. Between April and June, a total of 20 inches fell over
    that period of time. And the all-time record was just 4 months
    later, in October, 15.19 inches.
        Madam Chairman, this placed the Corps of Engineers in a
    very difficult circumstance, whereby they were trying to manage
    the water flow up and down these rivers that were swollen, that
    caused communities great harm by flooding and other things. And
    I think the Corps of Engineers was in trouble, and they tried
    to deal with this.
        But what happened is that Lake Waco is a reservoir that set
    aside--not one of those primary places that would release
    water--and they could not release water, even though it was all
    over the State of Texas, because of downstream flooding.
    Because of this, this caused extensive damage to a roadway
    known as Lake Shore Drive that comes near the lake. The
    excessive level of water caused erosion through wave action
    over the several weeks. This wave action put in jeopardy and
    has now, over time, through erosion, this roadway that Waco is
    responsible for.
        In the bill, S. 1811 that was passed in the 116th Congress
    through the Water Resources Development Act, section 147. As
    part of this work, we went and made sure that there was
    legislation which would allow the Corps of Engineers, through
    the Secretary, to be able to make a determination that, even
    though they were not maybe directly in charge of this, that
    they had a part of that damage. They actually controlled the
    water. The city of Waco did not control the water that would be
    taken out of the reservoir. And as a result of excessive time
    that it was there, it has caused this damage. It is very
    important to Waco, Texas, that they take care of those parts
    that they believe they are responsible for.
        This is damage that was caused solely as a result of that
    rising water of the lake, and I believe that that fits well
    within the Corps of Engineers. I respectfully submit myself to
    you today, and to the gentleman, Mr. Rouzer, to ask for you to
    please include this in the authorization that would be
    necessary that would give relief to this. And the reason why is
    that, if it continues to go on, if there is continued erosion,
    that it could cause what is estimated to be about $100 million
    worth of damage. Extensive evaluation by an engineering company
    has been done. I believe the Corps of Engineers is aware of
    this, and I would ask that this project please be included
    within your authorization mark that you make.
        Madam Chairman, Mr. Rouzer, I want to thank you for your
    time. As always, if you have any questions, please seek me. I
    will be very pleased to discuss it with you. And thank you very
    much.
        [Mr. Sessions' prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Pete Sessions, a Representative in Congress
                            from the State of Texas
        The Lake Waco Embankment Stabilization Project has been the top
    priority for the City of Waco and McLennan County for 5 years. Previous
    language in WRDA 2020 has proved insufficient to address the concern.
        Lake Waco sits as one of the USACE lakes near the top of the Brazos
    River in Waco, Texas. Since 2015, excessive rainfall has caused the
    Army Corps of Engineers to maintain higher water levels in Lake Waco
    for longer periods of time, to prevent flooding in downriver
    reservoirs. This excess water and retention time has led to significant
    erosion along a main road, Lake Shore Drive, which now risks collapse.
        Lake Waco Lake Shore Drive is a key artery to the City of Waco and
    its surrounding areas. Failure of the land beneath the roadway along
    Lake Shore Drive would cost nearly $100 million in repair and
    remediation costs, as well as economic harm due to the loss of a key
    route for commerce in and around Central Texas.
        The Lake Waco embankment instability presents a risk of deep
    landslides and shallow slope failures, including larger catastrophic
    failures that would represent a disastrous event for the USACE, Waco
    Lake, Lake Shore Drive and the City of Waco. Aside from the obvious
    impacts as well as life and safety considerations, a catastrophic
    landslide would negatively impact the mission of the USACE Civil Works.
        As shown in the figures below, specific potential impacts to the
    Civil Works mission include:
          Flood Risk Management: A catastrophic landslide would
    result in the mobilization of many hundreds of thousands of cubic yards
    of landslide debris. This would damage slopes within the fee boundary
    and would also push a large portion of the debris into the flood
    storage boundary area. The debris would reduce available flood storage
    and could result in a floodwater rise.
          Recreation: A large landslide would disrupt operations
    and possibly harm park grounds at Koehne Park on the shores of Waco
    Lake.
          Infrastructure: In addition to potential damage at Koehne
    Park, a catastrophic landslide would destroy Lake Shore Drive and
    associated underground utilities, severing both local access and
    services for the community.
          Environmental Stewardship: A landslide failure would
    deposit a wide variety of debris into Waco Lake and could be
    devastating to the local environment. Significant water quality issues
    and environmental impacts would likely require mitigation.

        A proactive approach of repairs to this looming threat will avoid
    the need for an emergency response from a catastrophic failure and
    serves the greater mission of USACE Civil Works. Compared to the cost
    of repairing and mitigating a catastrophic landslide, the capital costs
    of a proactive project will undoubtedly result in greater savings and
    construction efficiencies.
        Thank you.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Sessions. You submitted a
    letter. We will include it in the record, as requested.
        [The information follows:]

      Letter of March 16, 2022, from Hon. Pete Sessions to Hon. Grace F.
    Napolitano, Chair, and Hon. David Rouzer, Ranking Member, Subcommittee
     on Water Resources and Environment, Submitted for the Record by Hon.
                                 Pete Sessions
                                                        March 16, 2022.
    Chairwoman Grace Napolitano,
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
    1610 Longworth HOB, Washington, DC 20515.
    Ranking Member David Rouzer,
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
    2333 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
        Dear Grace and David,
        Since 2015 the city of Waco, Texas has been dealing with an issue
    that has not moved to final resolution in dealing with the United
    States Army Corps of Engineers (``USACE''). The essence of the issue is
    damage from the excessive wave action from a swollen lake for weeks
    which caused the excess erosion that now threatens an adjacent roadway
    with collapse.
        In May of 2015, Texas had its heaviest rainfall month on record. In
    Waco, Texas, 9.27" of rainfall happened in May alone. Between April and
    June 2015, a total of 20" of rain fell in Waco, Texas including areas
    that fell into Lake Waco.
        This excess rainfall was followed by an all-time Waco record of
    15.19" of rain in October of the same year. These record rainfalls and
    Lake Waco's location near the top of the Brazos River forced the USACE
    to retain these record water levels in Lake Waco for longer than usual
    to prevent overflow further downstream. This caused the excess erosion
    that threatens the nearby roadway, Lake Shore Drive, with collapse.
        I am seeking your assistance to authorize this project whose
    appropriations level would be $30 million to complete the Lake Waco
    Embankment stabilization project. This will reinforce the roadway and
    prevent a potentially catastrophic failure of the embankment. Such a
    disaster would cost an estimated $100 million to repair costs, on top
    of economic costs due to Lake Shore Dr's position as a key artery for
    commerce in Waco, Texas.
        Please do not hesitate to reach me if I can answer any questions.
    Thank you for your consideration in this important priority for Waco,
    Texas.
            Sincerely,
                                                 Pete Sessions,
                                            Member of Congress (TX-17).

        Mr. Sessions. Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you for your testimony, sir. I look
    forward to looking at your project.
        Mr. Sessions. Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Next I would like to recognize the
    gentlewoman from New Mexico, Ms. Stansbury, online.

      TESTIMONY OF HON. MELANIE A. STANSBURY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

        Ms. Stansbury. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and thank you
    to Ranking Member Rouzer, and thank you to everyone who serves
    on this important committee, for the work that you do to
    support our water resources management across the country.
        As we consider the 2022 Water Resources Development Act,
    many of you know, our West and our communities across the
    Southwest are gripped by the worst drought that we have seen in
    1,200 years. And as we all know, this is very much the
    signature of climate change.
        New Mexicans are deeply concerned about ensuring that our
    water infrastructure is up to the challenge of responding to
    this drought and the increasing hydrologic change that we are
    seeing across our communities. To this end, we are humbly
    requesting the inclusion of several community-driven and
    science-based proposals in the 2022 WRDA, which would greatly
    improve water infrastructure and management across our State
    and across our district.
        First, we humbly request that the committee consider
    authorizing an additional $50 million for the section 593
    program, and include water reuse projects as an environmental
    infrastructure project eligible for assistance under section
    593. Increasing the section 593 authorization would help to
    fund drinking water, wastewater, water security, and stormwater
    projects throughout New Mexico's First Congressional District
    and across our State.
        We also humbly request that the committee include language
    directing the Army Corps and other Federal water management
    authorities to work together with the National Academy of
    Sciences and other agencies to study system operations and
    management in the Rio Grande Basin, and recommend management
    models, systems, and operational changes. This study will help
    water managers throughout the Rio Grande Basin improve
    management flexibility and water security, which is crucial to
    our long-term water security in our State, especially as we are
    facing climate change.
        I am also currently drafting legislation that would provide
    authorities to increase operational flexibility on the Rio
    Grande.
        Our office is also working to draft legislation to unleash
    the power of big data and water data to improve real-time water
    management across the country. By improving Federal water data
    availability, interoperability, and tools, along with
    partnerships with State, Tribal, local, and other entities, we
    have the capacity to fundamentally transform how we manage our
    water. I request that this committee consider prioritizing
    requests and projects that improve water data and tools, and
    potentially include authorizing language to support this
    effort.
        Also included in our request is a request for the town of
    Estancia, New Mexico, which is a rural, underserved community
    facing imminent threats of water shortages. We respectfully ask
    that the committee authorize $100,000 for the Corps to update a
    hydrologic analysis for the town of Estancia, so that we can
    address the much-needed infrastructure needs of this community.
        Additionally, the Middle Rio Grande flood protection
    project, which was originally authorized with a 25-percent non-
    Federal cost share, we request that the cost share be reduced
    so that the project can move forward without further delays for
    our community.
        The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 authorized
    $4 million to the Bureau of Reclamation to study irrigation
    infrastructure for 18 federally recognized Pueblos in New
    Mexico who rely on water from the Rio Grande for cultural,
    agricultural, municipal, and ceremonial purposes. The study
    identified $280 million in irrigation improvements needed on
    Pueblo lands. While this may not fall within the jurisdiction
    of the Army Corps, I urge that the committee consider
    authorizing an additional $200 million to the Bureau of
    Reclamation, should projects be included for other agencies or
    the Pueblo irrigation infrastructure improvement project.
        We also ask that the committee consider including funding
    for our acequia resilience and Tribal acequia program.
        Finally, I request that the committee authorize an
    additional $5 million for the Tribal Partnership Program. This
    program is the only Corps authority that specifically directs
    partnerships with Tribes and supports the administration's
    commitment to addressing the water needs of our Tribal and
    rural communities, particularly in underserved communities.
        I thank the Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member for the
    time and opportunity today, and look forward to working with
    you to see these proposals come to fruition.
        Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        [Ms. Stansbury's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Melanie A. Stansbury, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of New Mexico
        Thank you for the important work this Committee and your staff do
    to improve and support water management and infrastructure across the
    United States. As we consider the 2022 Water Resources Development Act,
    much of the West is facing its worst drought in over 1,200 years. New
    Mexicans are deeply concerned about ensuring that our water
    infrastructure is up to the challenge of responding to this drought and
    increasing hydrologic change.
        To this end, we are humbly requesting the inclusions of several
    community-driven and science-based proposals for inclusion in the 2022
    Water Resources Development Act, which would greatly improve water
    infrastructure and management in New Mexico's First Congressional
    District.
    Increase Funding Under the Section 593 Authorization and Include Water
                                 Reuse Projects
        Section 593 funds were authorized in the Water Resources
    Development Act of 1999 to support environmental infrastructure
    projects in central New Mexico. These funds have been used to build
    important sections of the South Valley Water Utility Project, but
    funding has reached its authorization limit since it was last increased
    in 2005.
        We request that the Committee consider authorizing an additional
    $50 million for the Section 593 Program and include water reuse
    projects as an environmental infrastructure project eligible for
    assistance under Section 593(c).
        Increasing the Section 593 authorization would help to fund
    drinking water, wastewater, water security, and stormwater projects
    throughout New Mexico's First District and across the state. This
    additional funding is estimated to cover all anticipated Section 593
    project funding needs for the next decade.
        The request is strongly supported throughout our district by
    numerous stakeholders, including the Southern Sandoval County Arroyo
    Flood Control Authority, the Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water
    Utility Authority, the Albuquerque Metropolitan Arroyo Flood Control
    Authority, Bernalillo County, and Valencia County.
      National Academy of Sciences Reservoir Operations Study in the Rio
                                  Grande Basin
        The Upper Rio Grande River includes a complex system of dams,
    reservoirs, irrigation systems, flood control structures and other
    projects with individual authorizations for specific projects and
    purposes. The individual, sometimes conflicting, authorizations mean
    that the Rio Grande cannot be managed to optimize complimentary and
    competing demands on the system as a whole at the watershed level.
    Modernizing water management on the Rio Grande will require updating
    and optimizing the models and systems utilized to manage the watershed.
        We request that the Committee include language in WRDA directing
    the Army Corps and other federal water management authorities operating
    projects in the Rio Grande to work together with the National Academy
    of Sciences to study system operations and management in the Rio Grande
    Basin and recommend management models, systems, and operational changes
    that can optimize water availability, storage, streamflow, and hazard
    mitigation, taking into account the impacts of a changing climate. This
    study will help water managers throughout the Rio Grande Basin improve
    management flexibility and water security. The National Academy of
    Sciences has already worked with key stakeholders, including the Corps
    and the Bureau of Reclamation on developing a memorandum of agreement
    for the study. The Bureau of Reclamation is expected to receive
    direction to participate in the study in the FY 2022 Appropriations
    bill, and the requested language in WRDA would help to further advance
    this critical study.
        Modern, flexible management of the Rio Grande River is critical to
    New Mexico's long-term water security in the face of climate change and
    crucial to sustaining our communities' cultures, traditions, and ways
    of life. I am currently drafting legislation that would provide
    authorities to increase operational flexibility on the Rio Grande.
    Having the best available science to guide our management models and
    systems is critical to ensuring that flexible management authorities
    can improve water security across the basin.
        I am also drafting legislation to unleash the power of water data
    to improve real-time water management across the country, by improving
    federal water data availability, interoperability, and tools and
    partnerships with state, tribal, local and other entities. I request
    that this Committee consider prioritizing requests and projects that
    improve water data and tools and potentially include authorizing
    language to support this effort.
           Updated Hydrologic Analysis Study for the Town of Estancia
        The town of Estancia, New Mexico, is a rural, underserved community
    facing imminent threats of water shortages. Groundwater pumping has
    caused the Estancia Valley Fill aquifer to drop by as much as five feet
    annually in some locations. Agricultural production is at risk from
    drying wells and saline water migration. The town is in critical need
    of a water detention pond and a new water diversion structure. A
    hydrologic analysis was completed in 2001 by the Corps, but the town
    has been unable to request funding for these projects without an
    updated Hydrologic Analysis.
        I urge the Committee to authorize $100,000 for the Corps to update
    a hydrologic analysis for the town of Estancia. Updating this
    hydrologic analysis will help the town of Estancia build much-needed
    infrastructure to divert and preserve water, protect agricultural
    production, and reduce flood hazards.
                 Middle Rio Grande Flood Protection Cost Share
        The Middle Rio Grande Flood Protection Bernalillo to Belen, New
    Mexico project was originally authorized in the Water Resources
    Development Act of 1986. The recommended plan, as outlined in the 2020
    Chief's Report, would restore approximately 266 acres of riparian
    forest habitat and improve hydrologic connectivity between the Rio
    Grande and its floodplain by constructing high-flow channels, bank
    destabilization, berm removal, willow swales, and wetlands. It would
    also restore native habitat diversity through re-creation of historic
    habitat types that were lost to water management activities, creating
    new successional stages of existing habitat, exotic species reduction,
    and re-vegetation of native plant species. With a high cost to benefit
    ratio of 9.46, the recommended plan is a smart investment for taxpayers
    and important to the restoration of the watershed.
        At the time of original authorization, flood control projects had a
    25% non-federal cost share, under which the 3.2 mile Corrales Unit was
    completed. The Water Resources Development Act of 1996 increased the
    non-federal cost share to 35% but did not directly adjust the cost
    share of projects with prior authorization. The 2018 General
    Reevaluation Report and 2020 Chief's Report cited the Project's
    original authorization but used the increased non-federal cost share of
    35% without any specific Congressional direction to increase the cost
    share for projects with prior authorization.
        I request that the Committee direct the Corps to honor the original
    cost share authorization of 25% for the Middle Rio Grande Flood
    Protection Bernalillo to Belen, New Mexico project.
        The Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District is the non-federal cost
    share partner for this project. This project is located in two New
    Mexico counties where the per capita income is significantly below the
    national average: Bernalillo ($29,195; 2019); and Valencia ($21,740;
    2019). The increased cost share moved this project further out of reach
    for a community that had been working to meet its cost share for a
    generation.
              Pueblo Irrigation Infrastructure Improvement Project
        The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 authorized $4
    million to the Bureau of Reclamation to study irrigation infrastructure
    for 18 federally-recognized Pueblos in New Mexico who rely on water
    from the Rio Grande Basin for cultural, agricultural, municipal, and
    ceremonial purposes. This study identified nearly $280 million in
    irrigation improvements needed on Pueblo lands. Should programs
    authorized by agencies other than the Army Corps be considered for
    inclusion in this WRDA bill, I urge the Committee to authorize an
    additional $200 million for Reclamation's Pueblo Irrigation
    Infrastructure Improvement Project to address the infrastructure needs
    of these projects, which are so vital to the economic, cultural, and
    environmental resilience of our Pueblo Tribal communities in the Rio
    Grande Basin.
                 Acequia Resiliency and Tribal Acequia Program
        The Water Resources Development Act of 1986 authorized the Acequia
    Resiliency and Tribal Acequia Program in section 1113 for the
    restoration and preservation of acequia systems. Acequias are ancient
    water management systems that include irrigation works that are the
    backbone of agricultural and community life in New Mexico. Acequias
    have been communally managed and maintained by generations of
    communities. Increasingly, however, climate change is threatening New
    Mexico's proud tradition of acequias through inconsistent and variable
    water flows.
        I request that the Committee authorize an additional $27 million
    for the Acequia Resiliency and Tribal Acequia Program. This increase
    will allow for needed infrastructure improvements of river diversion
    structures, increased local capacity to manage and prevent invasions of
    plant species, and support research and development of management
    solutions for invasive aquatic plants.
               Increase Tribal Partnership Program Authorization
        The Water Resources Development Act of 2000 authorized the Tribal
    Partnership Program in Section 203 for increased cooperation between
    the Corps and Tribal nations to study and carry out projects that will
    substantially benefit Tribes. This program has supported numerous
    critically important flood control projects on Tribal lands in New
    Mexico and demand for the program by Tribes and Pueblos has grown with
    increasing awareness.
        I request that the Committee authorize an additional $5 million for
    the Tribal Partnership Program. This program is the only Corps
    authority that specifically directs partnerships with Tribes, including
    much-needed projects that may not otherwise receive vital funding. The
    program supports the Administration's commitment to Tribes and
    promoting environmental justice and equity, particularly in rural and
    underserved communities.
        Thank you for considering these proposals. I look forward to
    working with you to ensure these items are included.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Ms. Stansbury. Are there any
    questions?
        Hearing none and seeing none, I thank you again. And we
    will have testimony--Mr. Trone, Mr. Correa, and Ms. Plaskett.
        Mr. Trone, you are on for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. DAVID J. TRONE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                       FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

        Mr. Trone. Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking
    Member Rouzer, for the opportunity to submit testimony to the
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's Subcommittee
    on Water Resources and Environment.
        As you draft the Water Resources Development Act of 2022, I
    would like to highlight two priorities that are essential in my
    district, Maryland's Sixth Congressional District, and the
    wider community.
        As our Nation works to repair our infrastructure, it is
    critical we discuss the impact these systems have on the health
    of our communities and the health of our environment. Within my
    district, the town of Boonsboro and the city of Brunswick need
    support to address infrastructure needs. Local officials have
    worked hard to find solutions to the growing issues in order to
    support Marylanders and protect our environment.
        My first request to the committee is for the environmental
    infrastructure needs of the town of Boonsboro, including
    replacing the Boonsboro Reservoir. The Boonsboro Reservoir is
    an aging 1.3 million-gallon drinking water reservoir built way
    back in 1954. The reservoir serves both Boonsboro and
    Keedysville, which Boonsboro shares a drinking water system
    with.
        Unfortunately, the reservoir is suffering from leaks, which
    impair its function and cost the town an estimated 15,000 to
    25,000 gallons of treated water per day. Due to the reservoir's
    age and condition, it is unable to be repaired. If the
    sidewalls and levees were to fail, the resulting flooding and
    disruption of water service would be devastating from both a
    public health and environmental perspective.
        I am requesting $5 million in environmental infrastructure
    funding to address the needs of the town and replace the broken
    reservoir, preventing future damage.
        My second request to the committee would support the
    environmental infrastructure needs of the city of Brunswick,
    including upgrading the Brunswick Wastewater Treatment plant.
        The Brunswick Wastewater Treatment Plant was constructed in
    the 1980s and designed to treat 0.6 million gallons a day of
    municipal wastewater. In 2007, the plant upgraded the treatment
    capacity to 1.4 million gallons a day. Today, the plant has
    equipment that is near failure, and the town is gravely at risk
    of violating the sewage sludge utilization permit due to
    inadequate sludge dewatering. As it stands, the plant also
    lacks treatment capacity for any future expansion. This is an
    environmental hazard that could affect the Potomac River, along
    which the plant sits.
        I am requesting $15 million in environmental infrastructure
    funding to address the needs of the city, including resolving
    the immediate needs of the plant and increasing treatment
    capacity.
        Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members
    of the subcommittee, thank you. Thank you for the opportunity
    to submit this testimony. I look forward to working with you to
    ensure the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 reflects our
    needs as a Nation. Thanks again very much.
        [Mr. Trone's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. David J. Trone, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Maryland
        Thank you Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer for the
    opportunity to submit testimony to the Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure's Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment. As
    you draft the Water Resources Development Act of 2022, I would like to
    highlight two priorities that are essential to my district--Maryland's
    sixth--and the wider community.
        As our nation works to repair our infrastructure, it is critical
    that we discuss the impact these systems have on the health of our
    communities and the health of our environment. Within my district, the
    Town of Boonsboro and the City of Brunswick need support to address
    infrastructure needs. Local officials have worked hard to find
    solutions to growing issues in order to support Marylanders and protect
    our environment.
        My first request to the committee is for the environmental
    infrastructure needs of the Town of Boonsboro, including replacing the
    Boonsboro Reservoir. The Boonsboro Reservoir is an aging 1.3 million
    gallon drinking water reservoir built in 1954. The reservoir serves
    both Boonsboro and Keedysville, which Boonsboro shares a drinking water
    system with. Unfortunately, the reservoir is suffering from leaks which
    impair its function and cost the town an estimated 15,000 to 25,000
    gallons of treated water per day. Due to the reservoir's age and
    condition, the reservoir is unable to be repaired. If the sidewalls and
    levees were to fail, the resulting flooding and disruption in water
    service would be devastating from both a public health and
    environmental perspective. I am requesting $5 million in environmental
    infrastructure funding to address the needs of the town, including
    replacing the broken reservoir and preventing future damage.
        My second request to the committee would support the environmental
    infrastructure needs of the City of Brunswick, including upgrading the
    Brunswick Wastewater Treatment Plant. The Brunswick Wastewater
    Treatment Plant was constructed in the 1980s and designed to treat 0.6
    million gallons a day of municipal wastewater. In 2007, the plant
    upgraded the treatment capacity to 1.4 million gallons a day. Today,
    the plant has equipment that is near failure, and the town is at risk
    of violating the Sewage Sludge Utilization Permit due to inadequate
    sludge dewatering. As it stands, the plant also lacks the treatment
    capacity for future expansion. I am requesting $15 million in
    environmental infrastructure funding to address the needs of the city,
    including resolving the immediate needs of the plant and increasing the
    treatment capacity.
        Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members of the
    Subcommittee--thank you again for the opportunity to submit this
    testimony. I look forward to working with you to ensure that the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022 reflects our priorities and needs as
    a nation.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Trone. It is very nice of
    you to cut short. It makes our job easier here. Thank you. Have
    a good day.
        I would like to recognize our next witness, the gentleman
    from California, Mr. Correa, who has done a good job in
    representing me.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. J. LUIS CORREA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS
                      FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Correa. Thank you, Madam Chair Napolitano and Ranking
    Member Rouzer for your indulgence, for hosting Members' Day for
    Members to share their requests for the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022.
        Before I start with my statement, I want to go through and
    give you a little bit of history of Orange County, California.
    Orange County has traditionally been an agricultural county.
    Back in the 1930s, we had major flooding in this area subject
    to this request. A lot of damage when it was an agricultural
    county. Orange County's population has gone from about 100,000
    to about 3.4 million people today, home to Disneyland, Anaheim
    Angels, Anaheim Ducks, a very densely populated area, Orange
    County, California.
        The Santa Ana River mainstem project, the subject of this
    request, is an almost $3 billion cooperative flood control
    project between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the
    counties of Orange and Riverside in San Bernardino. The project
    was authorized by Congress in the Water Resources Development
    Act of 1986, and construction began in 1989. The main features:
    construction of Seven Oaks Dam, improvements to the Prado Dam
    Reservoir, and improvements to the lower river in Orange
    County. The last remaining component in Orange County flood
    risk management for the Santiago Creek area includes the
    building, storage, and existing--essentially, working on the
    existing gravel pits, onlet structures, and down-street
    channelizations.
        Now, let me tell you that the Santa Ana River was once
    characterized as the worst flood threat west of the
    Mississippi. Once completed, this project will prevent an
    estimated $40 billion in damages, protect over 100,000 acres in
    Orange County, and benefit over 4 million residents in Orange,
    Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. For this reason my
    request would raise the authorized Federal help for the Santa
    Ana River mainstem project by an additional $170 million so
    that we can complete this project as designed, approved, all of
    the components, period.
        Now, as I mentioned earlier, we are a very densely
    populated county. Back in the day, when Orange County was
    essentially an agricultural area, our founding fathers never
    thought about recreational areas. They never thought about
    putting land aside to build parks, because we were an ag area:
    open, wide spaces. That is no longer the case. Today Orange
    County, my area in Orange County, is probably the second most
    densely populated area in the State of California, and I am
    sure one of the top most densely populated areas in the United
    States.
        To that end, I am also requesting--my second request--$10
    million to conduct a study, design, and construction on
    modification to the project to direct the Army Corps of
    Engineers to add recreational areas along the Santiago Creek
    and the confluence of the Santiago Creek and Santa Ana River.
        Madam Chair and Ranking Member, what we want to do is
    secure Orange County, Orange County's economy, make sure we
    don't have one of those big floods again like we had in the
    1930s. We are almost there. Let's finish the job and, at the
    same time, for another $10 million, make sure that the Santa
    Ana River, which is now lined with cement, becomes a river of
    life, so it is a win-win situation. Our constituents can
    recreate in an area that keeps them safe from that 200-year
    flood.
        Madam Chair, thank you.
        [Mr. Correa's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. J. Luis Correa, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of California
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer, for hosting
    Members' Day for members to share their requests for the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022.
        Today, I'd like to highlight a project that is in the heart of my
    district.
        In the 1986 Water Resources Development Act, the Santa Ana River
    Mainstem Project (Project) was fully authorized as a flood-risk
    management project that included environmental features, restoration of
    temporary loss of habitat values, cultural mitigation, and a 32 mile
    system of recreation trails.
        The Project, which includes the Santiago Creek component, also
    received funding under the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (BB18) so that
    all components could be completed as designed and approved. The
    Santiago Creek work represents the last component of the Project.
    Despite the Congressional mandate to complete the work on the Project,
    the Santiago Creek component is threatened because the Corps is facing
    unanticipated cost increases which limit its ability to implement
    construction for all of the projects funded under BB18.
        For that reason, my request would raise the authorized federal help
    for the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project by an additional $170 million
    so that it could be completed as designed and approved, including all
    components.
        Additionally, the only recreation and esthetic treatment for the
    portion near the Santiago Creek currently authorized for the Creek in
    the project is a 1.7 mile bike path. My constituents in Santa Ana have
    limited access to green space, and it's important to the health of our
    community that we maximize every opportunity to provide additional
    recreational areas.
        To that end, I am also requesting $10 million to conduct a study,
    design, and construction on modification to the Project to direct the
    Army Corps to add recreational areas along the Santiago Creek and at
    the confluence of the Santiago Creek and the Santa Ana River, as well
    as directing the Corps to incorporate natural infrastructure, including
    vegetation along the Santiago Creek and at the confluence of the
    Santiago Creek and the Santa Ana River consistent with the Army Corps'
    Engineering with Nature policy, where appropriate.
        I thank the Committee again for this opportunity to discuss an
    important project to provide hardworking Santa Ana residents with
    recreational space. Access to public recreational space can improve
    physical and mental health and foster a love of the outdoors and
    conservation in our youth. Americans support and recognize the benefits
    that public recreational spaces offer and how they can transform our
    cities into vibrant and healthy communities. Santa Ana residents
    deserve to have access to natural resources in our city, and I urge the
    Committee to support this additional funding and investment.
        Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter and I look
    forward to continuing to work with you on these and other issues and I
    yield back the balance of my time.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Correa, and I agree with
    you on that. Thank you for your testimony, sir. And thank you
    again for everything you have done.
        Now, next, we have Mrs. Lee, followed by Mr. Valadao.
        Mrs. Lee, the gentlewoman from Nevada, you are recognized
    for 5 minutes.

    TESTIMONY OF HON. SUSIE LEE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
                          THE STATE OF NEVADA

        Mrs. Lee of Nevada. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair and
    Ranking Member Rouzer, for having this Members' Day hearing on
    this critically important bill that addresses the water supply
    and environmental infrastructure needs of this Nation and our
    local communities.
        As many of you know, southern Nevada, where I represent,
    and the entire West, is facing an unprecedented drought. In my
    district, Lake Mead, which supplies water for 25 million people
    across Nevada, Arizona, and California, is at the lowest level
    it has been since the Hoover Dam was constructed in the 1930s.
    Now, more than ever, it is critical that we build the
    infrastructure we need to make our communities resilient to
    drought, and to better manage our water resources. And that is
    precisely why I am advocating for critical investments in
    section 595, the Army Corps program in rural Nevada and across
    the Western U.S. To date, funding for this water management
    program has been almost completely expended since its last
    authorization.
        Section 595 allows the Army Corps to provide design and
    construction assistance for water-related environmental
    infrastructure projects. These projects include things like
    wastewater treatment plants, water supply facilities,
    environmental restoration, and surface water protection. In my
    district, section 595 has funded a range of projects to protect
    water resources and ensure our community has access to clean
    drinking water.
        In Searchlight, Nevada, the Army Corps was critical in the
    design and construction of the Searchlight Water and Wastewater
    System improvements. In Boulder City, they renovated three city
    wastewater pump stations and several miles of force main to
    protect against accidental discharge of wastewater into the
    Lake Mead National Recreation Area and Lake Mead. And just
    outside of Las Vegas, the Army Corps and Las Vegas Valley Water
    District have worked closely to complete an urgent upgrade to
    meet fire protection and emergency requirements after the
    system suffered water leaks, excessive corrosion, and main
    breaks.
        The declining groundwater levels and well deterioration
    presented a significant water supply risk for the Greater Las
    Vegas Valley community. Section 595 was critical to updating
    our facilities and protecting against ongoing drought
    conditions so that the existing water system has a reliable
    means to safely provide for the community's water needs.
        I cannot stress how important the section 595 program is
    for southern Nevada and the American West, as the region faces
    the worst drought we have faced in twelve centuries. Yes, I
    said that: twelve centuries.
        But thank you again, Madam Chair and Ranking Member Rouzer.
    And again, I urge you to support this important program.
        [Mrs. Lee's prepared statement follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Susie Lee, a Representative in Congress from
                              the State of Nevada
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer, for hosting
    a Members' Day Hearing on this critically important bill to address the
    water supply and environmental infrastructure needs of our nation and
    our local communities.
        As many of you know, southern Nevada--and the entire West--is
    facing an unprecedented drought. In my district, Lake Mead, which
    supplies water for 25 million people across Nevada, Arizona, and
    California, is at its lowest level since the construction of the Hoover
    Dam in the 1930s. Now more than ever, it's critical that we build the
    infrastructure we need to make our communities resilient to drought and
    better manage our water resources.
        That is why I'm advocating for critical investments in the Section
    595 Army Corps program in rural Nevada and across the Western U.S. To
    date, funding for this vital water management program has been almost
    completely expended since its last authorization. Section 595 allows
    the Army Corps to provide design and construction assistance for water-
    related environmental infrastructure projects. These projects include
    things like wastewater treatment plants, water supply facilities,
    environmental restoration, and surface water protection.
        In my district, Section 595 has funded a range of projects to
    protect our water resources and ensure our community has access to
    clean drinking water.
        In Searchlight, the Army Corps was critical in the design and
    construction of Searchlight Water and Wastewater System improvements.
        In Boulder City, they renovated three city wastewater pump stations
    and several miles of force main to protect against accidental discharge
    of wastewater into the watershed of Lake Mead National Recreation Area
    and Lake Mead.
        And just outside of Las Vegas, the Army Corps and Las Vegas Valley
    Water District have worked closely to complete an urgent upgrade to
    meet fire protection and emergency requirements after the system
    suffered from water leaks, excessive corrosion, and main breaks. The
    declining groundwater levels and well deterioration presented a
    significant water supply risk for the greater Las Vegas Valley
    community. Section 595 was critical to updating our facilities and
    protecting against ongoing drought conditions so that the existing
    water system has a reliable means to safely provide for the community's
    water needs.
        I cannot stress enough how important the Section 595 program is for
    southern Nevada--and the American West--as the region faces the worst
    drought in twelve centuries.
        Thank you again, Chair Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer for the
    chance to speak about this important program. I yield my time.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much for your testimony,
    Mrs. Lee, and that will be taken into consideration.
        I would like to recognize our next Member, the gentlewoman
    from the U.S. Virgin Islands, Ms. Plaskett.
        You are on, Ms. Plaskett, for 5 minutes.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. STACEY E. PLASKETT, A DELEGATE IN CONGRESS
                        FROM THE VIRGIN ISLANDS

        Ms. Plaskett. Thank you. It is so wonderful to be here with
    you, Chairwoman Napolitano, as well as Ranking Member Rouzer,
    members of the subcommittee, and particularly, of course, the
    staff, who do so much of the great work. I want to thank you
    for the opportunity to advocate on behalf of my district, the
    U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as the noncontiguous portions of
    this country, as the committee develops the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022.
        I have a lot of critical priorities that I would like to
    discuss with you, but I think I would rather use my time to
    talk specifically about some policy issues and policy changes
    which I believe will be really helpful to the U.S. Virgin
    Islands, as well as the noncontiguous U.S., and moving forward
    with a variety of projects for flood control, storm damage
    reduction, and ecosystem restoration.
        The Virgin Islands is currently having difficulty with
    moving ahead on projects that have been authorized and funded,
    due to insufficient funds to pay local cost share requirements.
    Therefore, I have requested language to allow non-Federal
    sponsors to use State and local fiscal recovery funds to pay
    the local cost share on all phases of water resources
    development projects. This is consistent with the Department of
    the Treasury's guidance on the use of these funds under the
    American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.
        However, the Corps of Engineers is presently requiring non-
    Federal sponsors to obtain a signed letter from the U.S.
    Treasury Secretary to explicitly authorize such use of funds to
    pay the local cost share on each water resources development
    project. This is an unnecessary bureaucratic hurdle. It is
    impractical, unreasonable, and unrealistic for each project,
    and the inconsistency with standing guidance issued for the use
    of funding provided for the State and local fiscal recovery
    funds under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.
        Allowing the use of the ARPA funding to meet local cost
    share requirements will greatly benefit the Virgin Islands
    because sufficient local funds are not available to pay for
    medium-sized flood control projects that were authorized in the
    Water Resources Development Act of 2020, and funded to build
    with resources allocated under the Infrastructure Investment
    and Jobs Act and the Disaster Relief Act of 2021.
        I have also asked that cost share waiver authority that
    currently exists for U.S. Territories and Indian Tribes under
    section 1156 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 be
    extended to apply to the preconstruction design and engineering
    phase of a water resource development project, in addition to
    studies. This would tremendously help both the Territories and
    Indian Tribes.
        In my district, due to insufficient funds to pay local cost
    share and the inability to use the ARPA funding to pay such
    local cost share, the preconstruction design and engineering
    phase of the largest flood risk management project on St.
    Thomas that is currently authorized and funded cannot move
    forward.
        These are examples, I believe, of policy issues which I
    think could work to support the increase in completing these
    projects, and making sure that they are done.
        And lastly, I have requested, with other Members from the
    noncontiguous U.S., that the committee include language to
    authorize the Secretary, in conducting a study of flood risk
    management or hurricane and storm damage risk reduction, to
    recommend a project in the noncontiguous U.S. without meeting a
    demonstration that the project can be justified by national
    economic development benefits. The noncontiguous areas of the
    U.S. are set apart geographically from the rest of the country,
    and have special needs related to flood risk management or
    hurricane and storm damage risk reduction.
        I have a written testimony which has much more specificity
    with regard to priorities and projects, but I appreciate the
    opportunity to speak with you all today about these issues, and
    thank you for your time.
        I yield back.
        [Ms. Plaskett's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Stacey E. Plaskett, a Delegate in Congress
                            from the Virgin Islands
        Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, members of the
    subcommittee. Good day and thank you for this opportunity to advocate
    on behalf of my district, the U.S. Virgin Islands, as the committee
    develops the Water Resources Development Act of 2022. The Water
    Resources Development Act, traditionally renewed every two years,
    authorizes a variety of water projects for construction, including
    projects to improve navigation, flood control, hurricane and storm
    damage reduction, shoreline protection, and ecosystem restoration, as
    well as environmental infrastructure projects. It creates good-paying
    jobs while strengthening and improving the vital water infrastructure
    that Americans rely on.
        There are five critical priorities I want to bring to your
    attention for inclusion in the Water Resources Development Act for
    2022. The first is the environmental infrastructure project that I have
    requested on behalf of my district, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the
    Virgin Islands Waste Management Authority.
        The purpose of the project is to remediate the contamination caused
    by overflowing oil storage at the oil collection points, and to
    construct proper containment areas for the oil storage for the Do-It-
    Yourself oil users of the U.S. Virgin Islands. The taxpayers of the
    Virgin Islands need a proper and clean way to dispose of their used
    motor and cooking oil. The Virgin Islands Waste Management Authority
    needs the funds for the remediation of these existing sites which have
    been overwhelmed with the volume of the oil. The surrounding soil has
    been contaminated and the extent of the contamination is unknown. This
    project would fund the investigation of the site media to determine how
    far the oil contamination has reached. This directly impacts the
    environment.
        The second part of the project is to construct proper oil
    containment areas to support the proper storage of the territory's
    residential used oil. With proper storage tanks and containment areas,
    further pollution to the environment will be prevented. This project
    will benefit the residents of the Virgin Islands by having less
    pollution released to the environment and having a safe and clean area
    to dispose of their used oil.
        I am requesting new environmental infrastructure authority for the
    foregoing purposes, and the requested funding authorization amount is
    $1.584 million.
        Additionally, I have a number of policy requests that will assist
    the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the noncontiguous United States, in moving
    forward with a variety of projects for flood control, storm damage
    reduction, and ecosystem restoration.
        The Virgin Islands is currently having difficulty with moving ahead
    on projects that have been authorized and funded due to insufficient
    funds to pay local cost share requirements.
        Therefore, I have requested language to allow non-Federal sponsors
    to use State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds to pay the local cost
    share on all phases of water resources development projects. This is
    consistent with Department of the Treasury guidance on the use of these
    funds under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021. However, the Corps of
    Engineers is now requiring non-Federal sponsors to obtain a signed
    letter from the U.S. Treasury Secretary to explicitly authorize such
    use of funds to pay the local share on each water resources development
    project. Such a bureaucratic hurdle is impractical, unreasonable,
    unrealistic for each project, and inconsistent with standing guidance
    issued for the use of funding providing from the State and Local Fiscal
    Recovery Funds under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021.
        Allowing the use of ARPA funding to meet local cost share
    requirements will greatly benefit the Virgin Islands because sufficient
    local funds are not available to pay for the medium-sized flood control
    projects that were authorized in the Water Resources Development Act of
    2020 and funded to be built with resources allocated under the
    Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Disaster Relief Act of
    2021.
        I have also asked that the cost share waiver authority that
    currently exists for U.S. territories and Indian tribes under section
    1156 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 be extended to
    apply to the pre-construction design and engineering phase of a water
    resources development project, in addition to studies. This would be of
    tremendous help to both the territories and Indian tribes. In my
    district, due to insufficient funds to pay local cost share, and the
    inability to use ARPA funding to pay such local cost share, the pre-
    construction design and engineering phase of the largest flood risk
    management project on St. Thomas that is currently authorized, and
    funded, cannot move forward. This cost share waiver authority would
    allow us to go ahead with this important project for flood control.
        Additionally, I have requested a modest increase to the Continuing
    Authorities Program per-project limit applicable to projects for flood
    control, and aquatic ecosystem restoration, to $15 million, and a
    similar increase to the per-project limit applicable to projects for
    shoreline protection, to $10 million. These limits have not been
    increased in nearly 10 years, since 2014. This policy would be of great
    assistance to my district and many others around the country with CAP
    projects that have expected costs currently reaching the limit. Once
    the limit is reached, the cost of the project above that amount must be
    borne entirely from the non-Federal project sponsor, or the project
    will have to wait years for authorization and further funding.
        Lastly, I have requested, with other Members from the noncontiguous
    United States, that the committee include language to authorize the
    Secretary, in conducting a study of flood risk management or hurricane
    and storm damage risk reduction, to recommend a project in the
    noncontiguous U.S. without needing a demonstration that the project is
    justified by national economic development benefits. The noncontiguous
    areas of the United States are set apart geographically from the rest
    of the country, and have special needs related to flood risk management
    or hurricane and storm damage reduction.
        This policy would align well with the same federal authority that
    currently exists for studies of harbor and navigation improvements, and
    related projects, in the noncontiguous United States. This policy
    request is designed to help with the authorization of flood control or
    storm damage reduction projects in U.S. territories, Hawaii, or Alaska,
    which are less populated and challenged to generate sufficient national
    economic benefits as compared to that of larger communities in the
    lower 48 contiguous States. These communities are particularly
    vulnerable to climate change. Sea level rise is placing stress on reef
    ecosystems and other natural barriers that protect shorelines, prevent
    coastal road damages, mitigate inland flooding, stave off salinization
    of freshwater sources, and more.
        I humbly ask that the committee favorably consider all these
    provisions that I have requested as it drafts the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022. Thank you for your work on this legislation
    and your attention to my requests.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much, Ms. Plaskett. We
    understand the issues that the Territories have, and we are
    trying to work with them to see what we can do to help out.
    Thank you very much.
        Now I would like to recognize our next Member, the
    gentleman from California.
        Mr. Valadao, you are on for 5 minutes, sir.

        TESTIMONY OF HON. DAVID G. VALADAO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Valadao. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Napolitano,
    Ranking Member Rouzer, and members of the subcommittee. Thank
    you very much for this opportunity to advocate for my requests
    for the Water Resources Development Act of 2022.
        I am glad to see the committee is planning to stay on the
    2-year track with WRDA legislation.
        Improving projects, processes, and access to water is
    crucial, especially in districts like mine. Even though many of
    the Federal assets in my district and across California are
    managed by the Bureau of Reclamation, there are still
    opportunities in WRDA bills to help the Central Valley.
        I would like to start by discussing my request to include
    my legislation, the RENEW WIIN Act, in the base bill. This
    legislation was actually first enacted in the WRDA bill of
    2016, which was ultimately signed into law as the WIIN Act.
        According to a study from UC Merced, the drought directly
    cost the agriculture economy in California $1.1 billion, 8,750
    jobs last year. The Central Valley desperately needs water, and
    this no-cost, clean extension of the operations and storage
    provision in the WIIN Act is an important step to ensure
    reliable water supply for our communities.
        Specifically, the bill extends through 2031 the authority
    of the Bureau of Reclamation to provide support for Federal or
    State-led water storage projects in certain Western States. It
    also extends provisions specific to California, including
    drought relief and the operations of the Central Valley
    Project, which is a hydropower and water management project in
    California that is operated by the Bureau of Reclamation.
        Further, the bill extends through 2036 consultation
    requirements concerning biological assessments and the
    coordinated operations of the Central Valley Project and the
    State Water Project in California.
        My next request is about the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    Big Dry Creek Reservoir and the Fancher Creek Reservoir in
    Fresno County. The project was originally designed to help the
    San Joaquin Valley region with flood control. The language
    submitted to you would provide the Army Corps with authority
    for temporary storage of water, which is much needed in our
    region.
        Groundwater basins in the San Joaquin Valley have long
    suffered from critical overdraft. Prolonged drought, like what
    we are currently facing, has enhanced the need for additional
    water storage in the region. Reoperation of the Redbank and
    Fancher Creeks project would greatly help the area by
    temporarily storing and redistributing the water for recharge
    to better balance groundwater levels for our communities and
    economy. This project will provide the necessary evaluation and
    improvements to reoperate reservoirs within the Redbank and the
    Fancher Creeks project, primarily the Big Dry Creek Reservoir.
        Reoperation will allow for the holding of stormwater into
    spring and summer for later release in the region's extensive
    system of groundwater recharge basins. The ability to capture,
    store, and effectively use these flows is critical to the
    region's efforts to balance water use and long-term water
    sustainability. Repetitive and often severe drought experienced
    by the Fresno/Clovis region calls for this water supply
    resiliency afforded by maximizing the storage of surface water.
        The project will serve as a conservation pool for short-
    term storage of available surface waters up to 15,000 acre-
    feet, and will be used for downstream beneficial uses,
    primarily direct and indirect recharge within the critically
    overdrafted groundwater basin. This project will help meet the
    water needs of our communities, which are mainly disadvantaged.
        Finally, I would like to highlight my final request that
    would amend the Army Corps project purpose to include water
    supply. Given the increasing frequency of periods of excess
    water and excess drought as a result of extreme weather
    conditions, this additional authority would help to utilize and
    maximize storage capacity to serve the beneficial uses in
    California. This is a cost-effective way to prepare for drought
    emergencies and increase climate resiliency. The provision
    provides the Secretary with more flexibility in how they are
    able to adapt to future climate scenarios.
        Thank you again for giving me this opportunity to highlight
    the importance of my WRDA requests. I hope you will seriously
    consider the inclusion of these requests in the base bill.
        Thank you, and I yield back.
        [Mr. Valadao's prepared statement follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. David G. Valadao, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of California
        Good afternoon Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and members
    of the subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to advocate for my
    requests for the Water Resources Development Act of 2022.
        I am glad to see the committee is planning to stay on the two-year
    track with WRDA legislation. Improving projects, processes, and access
    to water is crucial, especially in districts like mine. Even though
    many of the federal assets in my district and across California are
    managed by the Bureau of Reclamation, there are still opportunities in
    WRDA bills to help the Central Valley.
        I would like to start by discussing my request to include my
    legislation, the RENEW WIIN Act, in the base bill. This legislation was
    actually first enacted in the WRDA bill of 2016, which was ultimately
    signed into law as the WIIN Act.
        According to a study from UC Merced, the drought directly cost the
    agriculture economy in California 1.1 billion dollars and 8,750 jobs
    last year. The Central Valley desperately needs water, and this no-
    cost, clean extension of the operations and storage provisions in the
    WIIN Act is an important step to ensure a reliable water supply for our
    communities.
        Specifically, the bill extends through 2031 the authority of the
    Bureau of Reclamation to provide support for federal or state-led water
    storage projects in certain western states. It also extends provisions
    specific to California, including drought relief and the operations of
    the Central Valley Project, which is a hydropower and water management
    project in California that is operated by the Bureau of Reclamation.
        Further, the bill extends through 2036 consultation requirements
    concerning biological assessments and the coordinated operations of the
    Central Valley Project and the State Water Project in California.
        My next request is about the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Big Dry
    Creek Reservoir and the Fancher Creek Reservoir in Fresno County. The
    project was originally designed to help the San Joaquin Valley region
    with flood control. The language submitted to you would provide the
    Army Corps with authority for the temporary storage of water which is
    much needed in our region.
        Groundwater basins in the San Joaquin Valley have long suffered
    from critical overdraft. Prolonged drought, like what we are currently
    facing, has enhanced the need for additional water storage in the
    region. Reoperation of the Redbank and Fancher Creeks project would
    greatly help the area by temporarily storing and redistributing the
    water for recharge to better balance groundwater levels for our
    communities and economy.
        This project will provide the necessary evaluation and improvements
    to reoperate reservoirs within the Redbank and Fancher Creeks Project,
    primarily the Big Dry Creek Reservoir. Reoperation will allow for the
    holding of storm water into spring and summer for later release into
    the region's extensive system of groundwater recharge basins. The
    ability to capture, store, and effectively use these flows is critical
    to the region's efforts to balance water use and long-term water
    sustainability. Repetitive and often severe drought experienced by the
    Fresno/Clovis region calls for the water supply resiliency afforded by
    maximizing the storage of surface water.
        The project will serve as a conservation pool for short-term
    storage of available surface waters up to 15,000 acre-feet, and will be
    used for downstream beneficial uses, primarily direct and indirect
    recharge, within the critically over drafted groundwater basin. This
    project will help meet the water needs of our communities which are
    mainly disadvantaged.
        Finally, I would like to highlight my final request that would
    amend the Army Corps project purpose to include water supply. Given the
    increasing frequency of periods of excess water and excess drought as a
    result of extreme weather conditions, this additional authority would
    help to utilize and maximize storage capacity to serve the beneficial
    uses in California.
        This is a cost-effective way to prepare for drought emergencies and
    increase climate resiliencies. The provision provides the Secretary
    with more flexibility in how they are able to adapt to future climate
    scenarios.
        Thank you again for giving me the opportunity to highlight the
    importance of my WRDA requests. I hope you will seriously consider the
    inclusion of these requests in the base bill.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Valadao, for your
    testimony, and it will be considered. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Valadao. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. The next witness, the next Member, and
    probably the last, is the gentleman from Hawaii, Mr. Case.
        You have 5 minutes, sir.

     TESTIMONY OF HON. ED CASE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM
                          THE STATE OF HAWAII

        Mr. Case. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member,
    members of the committee. Aloha and mahalo for the opportunity
    to support this committee's continued efforts on behalf of
    critical water resources activities and programs that are
    important to both our Nation and to my home State of Hawaii.
        Hawaii, of course, is an island State, with the ocean on
    all sides. So, the impacts of our ocean on our lands directly
    affect our everyday lives. This is especially important where
    we go to enjoy our oceans and marine environment, and where we
    host millions of visitors per year seeking the same experience,
    making travel and tourism by far our largest single economy.
    So, the impacts of climate change on coastal erosion and
    flooding, especially along our world-class beaches, are severe,
    both as to our economy and our way of life.
        The State of Hawaii needs the technical assistance only the
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers can provide to save our precious
    beaches and oceans, especially iconic Waikiki Beach and the
    surrounding Mamala Bay. This is my top WRDA request to this
    committee for assistance.
        Mamala Bay and Waikiki Beach in Honolulu have played a
    central role in Hawaii's recreational, cultural, and economic
    story for centuries.
        Waikiki Beach and its offshore waters form the hub of our
    visitor industry, our largest overall economic driver, with
    direct contributions of around 25 percent of our total GDP.
    Waikiki Beach is one of the most visited and enjoyed beaches on
    Earth, with over 10 million visitors per year. These visitors
    are both local residents for whom Waikiki Beach is the most
    central ocean recreation area in urban Honolulu, and our
    tourists.
        The majority of tourists who visit Hawaii stay at some
    point in Waikiki hotels and resorts right on Waikiki Beach, or
    right next to it, so they can visit the beach. A 2016 report by
    the University of Hawaii concluded that some 58 percent of
    tourists to Waikiki would not have visited if there was no
    beach and easy ocean access at Waikiki.
        However, the increasing impacts of climate change and sea
    level rise, which is especially problematic for island States
    and Territories such as Hawaii, are taking an alarming toll on
    Waikiki Beach. Especially over the past decade, there has been
    an alarming increase in shoreline erosion, with associated
    impacts on the immediate ocean habitat, ecosystems, and
    recreational opportunities. These have been exacerbated by
    completely inadequate shoreline stabilization efforts for
    decades. and in some places, for over a century.
        The threat of further accelerating erosion up to the total
    loss of the beach is very real. The consequences would be
    widespread. In the visitor industry alone, the University of
    Hawaii 2016 study concluded that complete erosion of Waikiki
    Beach would result in a loss of some $2.2 billion annually in
    spending and revenue for Hawaii's economy.
        There have been some small and discrete stabilization
    projects initiated and implemented along specific portions of
    the Waikiki coastline, but no comprehensive, integrated project
    that would address the threat in its entirety. A new
    comprehensive feasibility study is required to develop a
    project or series of projects that address the long-term
    sustainability and utility of Waikiki Beach and its adjacent
    ocean environment and critical public infrastructure. Such a
    study will help ensure the associated recreational and economic
    benefits are preserved and enhanced.
        Your committee has within its power the abilities to make a
    legislative correction to assure this study can move forward.
    Section 209 of Public Law 87-874 currently authorizes the Corps
    of Engineers to conduct surveys of flood and tidal events only
    of Hawaii's rivers and harbors. But it does not cover related
    shorelines or nearby buildings and infrastructure. There is
    really no justification for this distinction, especially in the
    specific case of Waikiki Beach, where the basic challenge
    extends from the land through the beach to the marine
    environment. Your support is needed to make sure we take into
    consideration the outsized issues like this that remote and
    coastal locations face as our country debates how to approach
    impacts to infrastructure due to climate change.
        Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to the Corps
    of Engineers for its continued commitment to improving and
    adjusting to these unique situations in Hawaii and urge further
    consideration of these topics that are so vital to my home
    island State.
        Mahalo again for your time, and I appreciate your
    consideration of these concerns from Hawaii as you reauthorize
    the Water Resources Development Act.
        [Mr. Case's prepared statement follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Ed Case, a Representative in Congress from
                              the State of Hawaii
        Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves and Members of the Committee:
        Aloha, and mahalo for the opportunity to support this Committee's
    continued efforts on behalf of critical water resources activities and
    programs that are important to both our nation and my home state of
    Hawai`i.
        Hawai'i of course, is an island state, with the ocean on all sides,
    so the impacts of our ocean on our land directly affect our everyday
    lives. This is especially important where we go to enjoy our oceans and
    marine environment, and where we host millions of visitors per year
    seeking the same experience, making travel and tourism by far our
    largest single industry. So the impacts of climate change on Coastal
    erosion and flooding, especially along our world-class beaches, are
    severe both as to our economy and our way of life.
        The State of Hawai`i needs the technical assistance only the U.S.
    Army Corps of Engineers can provide to save our precious beaches and
    oceans, especially iconic Waikiki Beach and the surrounding Mamala Bay.
    This is my top request to this Committee for assistance.
        Mamala Bay and Waikiki Beach in Honolulu have played a central role
    in Hawaii's recreational, cultural and economic story for centuries.
    Waikiki Beach and its offshore waters form the hub of Hawaii's visitor
    industry, Hawaii's largest overall economic driver with direct
    contributions of around 25% of our total GPD. Waikiki Beach is one of
    the most visited and enjoyed beaches on earth, with over 10 million
    visitors per year. These visitors are both local residents, for whom
    Waikiki Beach is the most central ocean recreation in urban Honolulu,
    and tourists. The majority of tourists who visit Hawai`i stay at some
    point in Waikiki hotels and resorts, right on Waikiki Beach or right
    next to it so they can visit the beach. A 2016 report by the University
    of Hawai`i concluded that some 58% of tourists to Waikiki would not
    have visited if there was no beach and easy ocean access at Waikiki.
        However, the increasing impacts of climate change and sea level
    rise, which is especially problematic for island states and territories
    such as Hawai`i, are taking an alarming toll on Waikiki Beach.
    Especially over the past decade, there has been an alarming increase in
    shoreline erosion with associated impacts on the immediate ocean
    habitat, ecosystems and recreational opportunities. These have been
    exacerbated by completely inadequate shoreline stabilization efforts
    for decades--and in some places for over a century.
        The threat of further accelerating erosion up to the total loss of
    the beach is real. The consequences would be widespread. In the visitor
    industry alone, the University of Hawai`i 2016 study concluded that
    complete erosion of Waikiki Beach would result in a loss of some $2.2
    billion annually in spending and revenue for Hawaii's economy.
        There have been some small and discrete stabilization projects
    initiated and implemented along specific portions of the Waikiki
    coastline, but no comprehensive, integrated project that would address
    the threat in its entirety. A new, comprehensive feasibility study is
    required to develop a project or series of projects that address the
    long-term sustainability and utility of Waikiki Beach and its adjacent
    ocean environment and critical public infrastructure. Such a study will
    help ensure the associated recreational and economic benefits are
    preserved and enhanced.
        Your Committee has within its power the ability to make a
    legislative correction to assure this study can move forward. Section
    209 of Public Law 87-874 currently authorizes the Corps of Engineers to
    conduct surveys of flood and tidal events only of Hawaii's rivers and
    harbors, but it does not cover related shorelines or nearby buildings
    and infrastructure. There is no justification for this distinction,
    especially in the specific case of Waikiki Beach where the basic
    challenge extends from the land through the beach to the marine
    environment. Your support is needed to make sure we take into
    consideration the outsized issues like this that remote and coastal
    locations face as our country debates how to approach impacts to
    infrastructure due to climate change.
        Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to the Corps of
    Engineers for its continued commitment to improving and adjusting to
    these unique situations in Hawai`i and urge further consideration of
    these topics that are so vital to my home state.
        Mahalo you for your time, and I appreciate your consideration of
    these concerns from Hawai`i as the Committee reauthorizes the Water
    Resources Development Act.

        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you for your testimony, Mr. Case,
    and I understand what climate change is doing to all of the
    United States. Thank you again.
        Mr. Case. Thank you.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you to all the Members for their
    testimony. It was very enlightening and very helpful to the
    subcommittee.
        I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing
    remain open until such time as our witnesses have provided any
    answers--there were no questions, so I guess that doesn't
    apply--to any questions that may be submitted to them in
    writing.
        I ask unanimous consent that the record remain open 15 days
    for any additional comments and information submitted by
    Members of Congress to be included in the record of today's
    hearing.
        And without objection, so ordered.
        I would like to thank our witnesses again for the
    testimony.
        Do you have any comments?
        Mr. Rouzer. No, it was a great subcommittee hearing, Madam
    Chair, and I look forward to lunch.
        Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you for hanging with us. I would
    like to thank our witnesses again for their testimony.
        And if no Members have anything to add, the committee
    stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 1:14 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                           Submissions for the Record

                                  ----------

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
         from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
                       Transportation and Infrastructure
        Thank you, Chair Napolitano.
        Keeping the Water Resources Development Act on a two-year cycle is
    critical to address and advance our Nation's water resources
    infrastructure needs.
        Like the critical flood control projects in my home State and
    District, other Members have critical priorities too.
        As we move forward, an important step is to gather as much input as
    possible.
        Today we will hear from our Congressional colleagues about a number
    of projects and policies that will help inform a WRDA bill.
        Past WRDAs have had strong bipartisan support, so I hope this
    hearing today will help us reach that same goal this year.
        Thank you again to the Subcommittee Chair and thank you to all the
    Members testifying today. I yield back.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Pete Aguilar, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of California
        I want to thank Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer for
    holding this Member Day hearing on the Water Resources Development Act
    (WRDA) of 2022, and allowing me to speak about some of the projects I
    submitted that will benefit my constituents in California's 31st
    Congressional District.
                                 Seven Oaks Dam
        First, the Seven Oaks Dam is one of the largest embankment dams in
    the United States. It was proposed in response to major floods in the
    mid-twentieth century and constructed between 1993 and 2000 to provide
    flood protection to San Bernardino, Riverside and Orange Counties. The
    reservoir has a gross storage capacity of 145,600 acre-feet with a
    113,000 acre-feet reserve for flood control. Since its construction,
    the dam has not been filled to capacity.
        Under the dam's original project authorization, the Water Resources
    Development Act of 1986, the dam was only authorized for a single
    purpose--flood control. However, the Seven Oaks Dam has the
    infrastructure and technical design to serve as a multi-use dam. The
    Water Resources Development Act of 2020 authorized and directed a
    feasibility study to add water conservation as an authorized purpose
    for the dam. Since this feasibility study, I urge the Committee to add
    water conservation as an authorized purpose for the dam. By adding
    water conservation as an authorized component, the dam and reservoir
    would be used more efficiently and would provide a greater benefit to
    the community.
                     Environmental Infrastructure Requests
        Similar to Community Project Funding in the Appropriations process,
    I am happy to see that the Committee created a pathway to carry out
    water-related environmental infrastructure projects in WRDA.
        The first environmental infrastructure project that I request the
    Committee consider is the Bohnert Septic to Sewer Conversion Project.
    This project will connect about 150 septic tanks to a municipal sewer
    in Rialto, California and address the community's concerns of the
    septic tanks overflowing into the streets, contaminating the
    groundwater and causing health issues for the community. A feasibility
    study and Preliminary Design Report have been completed for the project
    and the Los Angeles District of the US Army Corps of Engineers has
    confirmed that this project is compatible with the purpose of
    environmental infrastructure projects.
        The second environmental infrastructure project that I submitted
    with Congresswoman Norma Torres is the Rialto Wastewater Plant
    Microgrid Project in Rialto and Bloomington, California. This project
    will implement a microgrid powered through a unique combination of
    biogas cogeneration, solar power and backup battery storage to reliably
    supply electricity for the City's wastewater treatment plant (WWTP).
    The Rialto Microgrid is designed to keep residents' wastewater utility
    rates in check, reduce climate emissions and provide ecosystem
    restoration and emergency management benefits to the local community.
    As wildfire season becomes year-long in California, the resilience of
    the microgrid power source will be important for the Inland Empire to
    work towards achieving greater energy independence.
        Ensuring that future generations have clean air and water is one of
    the most important responsibilities we have as a country. The projects
    I requested in WRDA 2022 are essential to mitigating flood risk for
    residents, reducing climate emissions and improving air quality for the
    Inland Empire. I will continue fighting for additional resources to
    help support projects in the Inland Empire that protect our residents'
    environmental health.
        I want to close by once again thanking the Members of this
    Committee for working on the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of
    2022. I look forward to continuing my work with each of you as you
    develop WRDA 2022.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Nanette Diaz Barragan, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of California
        Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee on my
    priorities. I would like to outline my in-district WRDA priorities, as
    well as policy changes I am in support of.
                         In-District Project Priorities
    Dominguez Channel Water Quality Infrastructure Project
        One project priority is to improve the water quality of the
    Dominguez Channel in my district, which has been degraded by industrial
    pollution. Last fall, many residents in Carson were forced to leave
    their home for weeks as an odor from hydrogen sulfide emissions from
    the channel made living near it unbearable. This is an environmental
    justice issue. It's critical the Army Corps support water quality
    solutions to Dominguez.
        My WRDA submission would support a feasibility study to identify
    potential actions that can be taken to improve water quality, such as
    water quality treatment facilities, water resources development
    projects, or the modification of an existing water resources
    development project. The request also includes federal support of up to
    75% of the cost of the study, design, and construction of any proposed
    solution. The maximum cost covered by the Army Corps would be $30
    million.
    WRD PFAS Remediation Program
        Another project priority that would benefit my district is the
    Water Replenishment District's $100 proposal to treat water wells
    affected by PFAS. There are approximately 63 drinking water wells with
    PFAS levels above their respective RLs in WRD's service area, and thus
    far, 14 water purveyors have applied for grant funding from WRD to
    install treatment systems for their PFAS-affected wells. Water
    purveyors with PFAS-affected wells above the RLs must notify the public
    about these wells or remove their wells from service.
        Some water purveyors have shut down their production wells due to
    PFAS detections. Without WRD's PFAS Remediation Program, these
    purveyors would be unable to afford installation of treatment systems.
    The threat of well closure is especially critical in low-income
    communities, where well closures can significantly increase the cost of
    tap water.
        The benefit of the PFAS Remediation Program is removal of
    contaminants from the water and reducing public exposure to PFAS. It
    also ensures an uninterrupted supply of high-quality groundwater at
    affordable rates.
                                 Policy Changes
    Redressing Environmental Justice
        While significant progress was made in the 2020 WRDA bill, much
    more can still be done to ensure that the Army Corps of Engineers has
    the tools and capacity needed to advance community-supported solutions
    to the entrenched water resources challenges that plague far too many
    of the nation's most vulnerable communities.
        This includes increasing capacity and expertise within the Corps,
    ensuring meaningful opportunities for public input, increasing
    opportunities for assistance by expanding the Pilot Program for
    Economically Disadvantaged Communities, maximizing toxics remediation
    in ecological restoration, navigation and flood resilience projects,
    advancing environmental justice innovation, and supporting minority-
    owned businesses.
        I have submitted 6 requests for environmental justice policy
    improvements, based on a letter to the committee I co-led with
    Representative Cohen.
    Resilience Directorate
        Another policy ask I have is for Congress to establish a Resilience
    Directorate. Congress should establish a Resilience Directorate within
    the Office of the Chief of Engineers to improve the Corps' ability to
    reduce flood risks, promote coordinated planning across districts and
    Corps business lines, and better leverage the benefits of natural
    infrastructure. The Directorate should be tasked with ensuring that
    existing programs, authorities, and operations take full advantage of
    natural infrastructure and adopt modern, comprehensive planning
    approaches.
        Critically, the Directorate should have the resources and budgetary
    authority needed to work and coordinate across Corps business lines to
    infuse resilience into every aspect of the Corps' work. Congress should
    also establish ``community and natural systems resilience'' as co-equal
    project purpose for each water resources project to eliminate a
    perceived barrier to comprehensive resilience planning. These reforms
    will help the Corps take full advantage of its programs and authorities
    to improve community and water resources resilience and avoid piecemeal
    planning that can increase flood risks and recovery costs.
        Thank you again for this opportunity to provide testimony, and for
    your consideration. I look forward to working with you to advance these
    priorities in WRDA.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Kathy Castor, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Florida
        Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves,
        Thank you for the opportunity to highlight important water resource
    priorities that will protect and improve the water quality of Tampa Bay
    and enhance the lives of my neighbors in Tampa, Hillsborough County,
    Florida. Florida is a biodiverse state with many ecosystem needs, and
    the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers does important work to address the
    water quality challenges make communities more resilient to the rising
    risks and costs of the climate crisis. As the House Committee on
    Transportation and Infrastructure reviews projects and priorities for
    the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 (WRDA 2022), I encourage
    you to strongly consider including several projects in the Tampa Bay
    area.
                                 Tampa Bay Area
        The entire Tampa Bay watershed serves as a recreational, economic
    and natural resource that defines our area with growing stresses of
    high population densities and aging infrastructure. The area is home to
    over 145,000 people, 81,000 homes, 66 medical facilities, and more than
    900 miles of roads, including critical evacuation routes, below 6 feet
    Mean Higher High Water (MHHW). An Integrated Climate and Land-Use
    Scenario (ICLUS) study depicted that future development along the
    western shores of the south Tampa peninsula, and along the eastern and
    southeastern shores of the Hillsborough Bay and Tampa Bay, is likely to
    occur within the 10-percent annual exceedance probability (AEP) for
    flood risk.
        MacDill Air Force Base, a significant base for national security,
    is in the southern portion of the south Tampa peninsula and is highly
    vulnerable to coastal hazards. The western shores of the peninsula have
    significantly higher risk for damages and flooding, due to the tidally
    influenced man-made canals, which have left dredge holes, several of
    which have not filled in over time. These holes can affect wave climate
    in the areas and were identified as a priority for ecosystem
    restoration efforts in the recent Army Corps of Engineers South
    Atlantic Coastal Study (SACS.) The study also states that in
    Hillsborough Bay, the highest Expected Annual Damages (EAD) will occur
    on Harbor Island, Davis Island and Downtown Tampa, where critical
    infrastructure like Tampa General Hospital and the Port Tampa Bay are
    located. The Tampa Bay area also has more than 15,500 historic
    structures, and over 470 known archaeological sites. Downtown Tampa
    houses nine National Register of Historic Places (NHRP) and more than
    60 NHRP buildings and structures that are in an at-risk zone for
    flooding from sea level rise (SLR) and increased storm surge activity.
    Our historic district of Ybor City also is close by.
        Finally, Tampa Bay has unique species and ecosystems, with vast
    marine habitats, seagrass beds, mangrove wetlands, saltmarshes, sandy
    beaches and dunes, and upland forests that serve many ecological
    functions, containing some of the most diverse waterbird nesting
    populations and rookeries in the United States, providing goods and
    services for Florida and our nation. These areas are identified in SACS
    at highest risk due to sea level rise and habitat die off or
    transition. Sea level rise and coastal storm flooding also will impact
    commercial and recreational fisheries, causing economic impact across
    the Tampa Bay region. The health of the Tampa Bay has been afflicted by
    the devastating Piney Point disaster in 2021 and its resulting red
    tide.
        I also encourage the Committee to prioritize other investments for
    the State of Florida to protect water resources and drinking water.
    Congress must support efforts that aid in improving the water quality
    and health of Upper Tampa Bay and its surrounding communities of Dana
    Shores, Town n' Country, and Safety Harbor, which are often overlooked.
    This will help local partners and organizations, like the Tampa Bay
    Estuary Program, protect the natural environment, support the local
    economy, and create jobs. I would also like to highlight the importance
    for the Committee to help address the primary drivers of algal blooms
    and degradation of aquatic ecosystems, which negatively impact the
    water quality of the region, while taking into consideration bridge
    replacement projects that prioritize better water circulation and
    protection of the wetlands in the area.
                            Needed WRDA Investments
        I urge the Committee to support robust investments in our nation's
    ports, harbors, and inland waterways, which are vital to the health and
    economic well-being of communities, including in Tampa Bay. Below I
    have included some specific priorities for the Committees to consider
    including in the WRDA 2022
        1.  As Florida's largest port, Port Tampa Bay serves West and
    Central Florida and the Southeastern United States. It services both
    industrial ships and commercial cruise lines, moving roughly 33 million
    tons of cargo per year and providing over 80,000 jobs to the city and
    surrounding areas. All fuels for the Central Florida region move
    through this port, including for the Tampa International Airport and
    MacDill Air Force Base. It is also a vital gateway for Florida
    fertilizer to be shipped to domestic and international markets. As the
    port expands and serves more ships transiting the Panama Canal and
    Caribbean, I encourage the Committee to direct the Secretary of the
    Army to survey federal navigation channels to facilitate the needs of
    larger ocean-going vessels that would otherwise be prohibited from
    transiting the channel due to draft restrictions.
        2.  To protect my community from coastal hazards, I urge the
    Committee to ensure coastal Storm Risk Management measures are used to
    protect critical infrastructure at the Port Tampa Bay and in McKay Bay.
    McKay Bay is home to the McKay Bay Waste-To-Energy facility, a power
    plant fueled by municipal solid waste and many other industrial sites
    such as the Bay Side Power Plant and CSX Rockport Pier Terminal. This
    important power plant provides a reliable, environmentally conscious
    way of managing the City of Tampa's 360,000+ tons of municipal solid
    waste that citizens generate each year, providing enough electrical
    power to supply electrical needs for up to 15,000 Tampa homes per
    month. McKay Bay is surrounded by mangroves and salt marsh wetlands and
    is located along the Great Florida Birding Trail. Given its proximity
    to dense populations and businesses in downtown Tampa, it is crucial
    that the Committee works to ensure that the infrastructure in McKay Bay
    remains protected against coastal storm threats by adding resilience.
        3.  Based on the population and infrastructure exposure analysis in
    SACS, we know that most of the population and infrastructure in the
    Tampa Bay area are subject to coastal hazards, particularly in the
    areas surrounding Hillsborough Bay, including downtown Tampa, Bayshore
    Boulevard, which connects downtown Tampa with MacDill Air Force Base,
    is the second longest continuous sidewalk in the United States, widely
    used for recreation and exercise purposes and providing a link to the
    recreation areas of Ballast Point and Picnic Island, as well as Gandy
    Bridge. Bayshore is designated ``Zone A'' for natural disaster
    evacuation purpose as it is prone to flooding, and is in dire need for
    implementation of hybrid structural and natural and nature-based
    feature (NNBF) initiatives to protect and enhance the natural
    environment for habitat and recreation. I encourage the Committee to
    take necessary action to enact the structural restoration needed to
    preserve Bayshore Boulevard for the next generation of Americans to
    enjoy.
        4.  It is imperative for the Committee to consider investments in
    habitat restoration and protection at the Bay Point dredge hole. The
    Bay Point dredge sits on Old Tampa Bay north of the Courtney Campbell
    Causeway. Old Tampa Bay is classified as impaired by the Florida
    Department of Environmental Protections, mainly due to mercury found in
    fish tissue and bacteria found on Picnic Island beaches. Additionally,
    in a study conducted by the Hillsborough County Environmental
    Protection Commission, Bay Point dredge hole is ranked worst on both
    bottom dissolved oxygen and the benthic index, third worst on sediment
    contaminants, and worst overall compared to 11 other Tampa area dredge
    holes. The hole has not filled in naturally and is an opportunity for
    beneficial placement of dredged material for ecosystem restoration
    purposes.
        5.  Habitat restoration and protection is also needed at the
    MacDill Docks. MacDill Air Force Base is home to the headquarters of
    two US military unified combatant commands: United States Central
    Command and United States Special Operations Command. Approximately
    15,000 individuals work at MacDill, and it is a significant contributor
    of the local economy. MacDill is also home to several federally
    protected wildlife species including wood storks, red knots, piping
    plovers, Florida burrowing owls, smalltooth sawfish, giant manta rays,
    Florida manatees and American alligators. One of the most important
    protected species found at MacDill is the gopher tortoise, which is a
    candidate for the federal Endangered Species list and is listed as
    threatened within the state of Florida. MacDill has also practiced
    habitat restoration through the Stormwater Improvement and Management
    project in the southeastern portion of the base, as well as the
    creation of a saltern habitat in the southern portion of the base,
    which is important to conserve the Tampa Bay estuary. These habitat
    restoration efforts have improved the water quality around MacDill and
    helped maintain the small population of gopher tortoises and Florida
    burrowing owls. I highly encourage the committee to consider the
    Habitat restoration and protection at MacDill.

        As Chair of the U.S. House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis,
    I am grateful for the work the Committee has already done to address
    water resource challenges and urge the Committee to be bold and
    strategic in crafting a WRDA 2022 bill that helps tackle the climate
    crisis and protect communities across the nation. I understand that the
    projects and policy priorities included in these WRDA reauthorization
    bills are essential to the everyday lives of Americans and our economy
    and thank you for the opportunity to share my priorities. I look
    forward to working with you to craft a forward-thinking WRDA 2022 that
    protects and restores our nation's ports, harbors, inland waterways,
    ocean, and wetland ecosystems, and improves nature's resilience to
    climate impacts, including coastal flooding. If you have any questions
    or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me or my Legislative
    Assistant Maria Robayo.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Diana DeGette, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Colorado
        Chairman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer:
        Thank you for providing the opportunity to submit written testimony
    to advocate for priorities in the upcoming Water Resources Development
    bill. Continuing the recent successes of passing Water Resources
    Development Act (WRDA) bills in 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2020, this bill
    will help many states and localities move critical projects forward.
        The 2022 WRDA bill gives us an opportunity to authorize new,
    eligible projects, as well as modify existing projects and regulations
    that allows us to improve the critical work of the U.S. Army Corps of
    Engineers (USACE). This year, I am seeking modifications to language
    for an existing project, increases in program limits for other USACE
    projects, clarification of statutory language for congressionally
    mandated steps in implementation of USACE projects, and language to
    further assist with streamlining permits for local projects. These
    modifications would benefit projects in my district and others across
    the country.
        Chatfield Downstream Channel Improvement Project: I want to thank
    the committee for its continued support of the Chatfield Downstream
    Channel Improvement Project. The work authorized by previous
    legislation turned neglected portions of the South Platte River into a
    vibrant and important resource for recreation and growing communities.
    However, the project is far from complete, as seven miles of river
    still require remediation. For the remainder of the project, I ask that
    the committee consider adding the following language to WRDA 2022,

            ``Chatfield Downstream Improvement Channel: The Chatfield
            Downstream Project authorized in the River and Harbors Act of
            1950 is henceforth reauthorized for updated hydrology as
            currently approved by FEMA for the South Platte River.''

        The proposed language would clarify the authority of USACE to
    approve modifications to the channel that are being proposed as part of
    the corridor plan and allow for continuous uninterrupted work on the
    whole corridor.
        Pre-Construction Engineering and Design: As you well know, the Pre-
    Construction Engineering and Design (PED) phase of USACE projects is
    critical for making sure projects continue to move forward during the
    period between the signing of a Chief of Engineers report and the
    authorization of a project. I ask that the committee consider language
    that would allow PED funding to be included in the Investigations
    portion of the USACE budget with dedicated amounts for PED that allow
    projects to keep progressing. I would also ask the committee to
    consider language that removes the PED requirement once a project is
    authorized for construction. These changes would benefit the South
    Platte River and Tributaries, Adams and Denver Counties, Colorado
    Project in my district. The project became eligible for PED funding in
    July 2019, but the project only recently received a portion of the
    necessary PED funding to move forward in the Fiscal Year 2022 Omnibus
    bill. The lack of funding caused delays and drove up costs for USACE
    and the City and County of Denver. While this example impacts my
    constituency, it is certainly not unique to my district. The simple
    proposed modifications will ensure that projects, and the entities
    responsible for planning and completing projects, can maintain progress
    while avoiding unnecessary delays.
        Continuing Authorities Program: The Continuing Authorities Program
    (CAP) is incredibly helpful for local sponsors and stakeholders in my
    district, like the Southern Platte Valley, Denver, CO Ecosystem
    Restoration Study project. Allowing local sponsors to advance limited
    projects without the need for project-specific congressional
    authorization helps stakeholders quickly and efficiently complete
    critical projects throughout the United States. I request the committee
    increase the overall program limits, as well as the individual per
    project federal limits. Increases to the CAP limits would help USACE
    quickly allocate money from the Infrastructure, Investment, and Jobs
    Act. Additionally, I ask that the committee require USACE to post to
    the federal register the 10 pilot CAP projects for economically
    disadvantaged areas as authorized in WRDA 2020.
        Section 408 Permissions: Finally, I urge the committee to require
    USACE to work with nonfederal sponsors to develop categorical
    permissions for Section 408 permissions within 180 days of enactment of
    WRDA 2022. Due to the lack of national categorical permissions for
    Section 408, the use of categorical permissions has led to limited and
    mixed results. Creating a set of national categorical permissions that
    can be used across all USACE Districts will create much needed clarity
    for local sponsors moving forward.
        Thank you for taking the time to consider these requests in the
    upcoming 2022 Water Resources Development Act. If you have any
    questions please do not hesitate to reach out to my staffer, Nicholas
    Anuzis.

        Prepared Statement of Hon. Rosa L. DeLauro, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of Connecticut
        Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Subcommittee
    Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer and all the members of the
    Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment for holding this
    Members' Day hearing to examine some of our priorities for a new Water
    Resources Development Act (WRDA) for 2022.
        As we all know, WRDA is essential to everyday hardworking Americans
    and vital to ensuring a robust economy. Nearly 80 percent of traded
    goods move through our nation's ports, harbors, and inland waterways.
    Projects for flood damage reduction help protect our rural and urban
    communities from coastal storms and inland flooding, which benefits
    millions of Americans. And ecosystem restoration projects restore and
    maintain our natural resources. This important work, carried out by the
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), is made possible through the work
    enacting WRDA.
        Since 2014, the House Committee on Transportation and
    Infrastructure has crafted and passed WRDA on a bipartisan and biennial
    basis. WRDA provides the Corps with the authority to address water
    infrastructure needs to cities, agriculture, and industry--to aid in
    the production of hydropower, to manage a national recreation program,
    and to address local environmental infrastructure needs. This is key to
    preserving our nation's economy, protecting our communities and
    businesses, and maintaining our quality of life.
        So, I am grateful today for the opportunity to highlight a few
    projects that are of concern--including the reauthorization of the
    Environmental Protection Agency's Long Island Sound Program--as the
    committee works toward developing a new WRDA.
        Having grown up on the shores of the Long Island Sound--it has
    always held a special place in my heart. More than 120 species and six
    states depend on the Sound for so many economic and environmental
    reasons. It is a beautiful estuary and a national treasure, and to my
    constituents--has long been considered our very own national park.
    Every year, millions flock to it for recreational purposes--and it
    provides a critical transportation corridor for goods and people. In
    addition, the Sound continues to provide feeding, nesting, and nursery
    areas for diverse animal and plant life. The ability of the Sound to
    sustain this is dependent on the quality of its waters, habitats, and
    living resources. So, I have long been a steadfast advocate for
    safeguarding and restoring the water quality and the diverse habitats
    of the Sound. Last authorized in WRDA 2018, the current authorization
    period is 2019-2023. And since the next WRDA bill will not be until
    2024, I want to ensure that the authorization carries over until the
    next bill goes into effect.
        As an additional part of our effort to address investments in
    America's water infrastructure, I also urge the Subcommittee to
    consider authorizing project studies for the Guilford Harbor and Sluice
    Channel, the Branford Harbor and Stony Creek Channel Navigation
    Project, and the Woodbridge Flood Risk Management.
        The Town of Guilford's Marina (Guilford Harbor and Sluice Channel)
    is an essential facility for Guilford's recreational and commercial
    industries. The Marina in-water facilities consist of 111 floating
    slips, 7 commercial docks, 14 river mornings, and a boat ramp. The
    Marina also provides parking and access to a 1000-foot scenic overlook
    and finishing areas. Maintaining appropriate depths of the access
    channels to the Marina and East River are vital for its function.
        As a result of the tidal flow and the natural silting of the
    Entrance and Sluice Creek Channels--it is necessary to regularly dredge
    these channels, the Marina Basin, and the East River Anchorage. This
    silting process necessitates that we maintain a schedule to dredge
    every 6 years. And the last dredging project was completed in 2015--
    making this an urgent project to get done immediately.
        The dredging of the Branford River and the Stony Creek Channel is
    another vital project that needs attention. Currently, both the river
    and channel suffer from extensive areas of shoaling, which is directly
    affecting the public and businesses that rely on these natural
    resources. The river and channel are important components of the
    economic makeup of Branford and surrounding towns due to the numerous
    commercial, public, and recreational interests and opportunities
    available. There are approximately 2,000 vessels docked and moored on
    the river and in Stony Creek. Branford Police and Fire Departments have
    vessels on the river, which provide public safety, rescue, and fire
    suppression to all boaters, commercial facilities, and several
    inhabited islands along the coast of Branford.
        And I must take this opportunity to mention the Woodbridge Floor
    Risk Management Project. While Woodbridge's designated flood hazard
    areas cover less than 6% of its area, these designations affect some
    296 parcels within the Town. For landowners whose parcels lie within
    the 100-year flood zone, mitigation measures can help significantly
    reduce the risk of costly damage from a serious flood.
        So, thank you again for the opportunity to speak today and
    considering my requests to help ensure that these critical projects
    receive the attention they deserve so that they can continue being
    valuable resources for generations to come. Thank you.

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Suzan K. DelBene, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of Washington
        Dear Chair DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves,
        Thank you for the opportunity to share my priorities with you as
    the committee works on the Water Resources and Development Act (WRDA)
    of 2022.
        As the Biden Administration is working tirelessly to get critical
    resources from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act out to our
    communities, I have been meeting with our state, county, local, and
    Tribal governments to share resources, understand their needs, and
    promote cross-jurisdictional collaboration. From these conversations,
    it has become clear that the number one infrastructure need in
    Washington's 1st Congressional District right now is funding for water
    infrastructure projects. While the bipartisan infrastructure law
    includes tremendous resources for our communities, the unmet need is
    simply too great and additional assistance is needed.
        That's why I am requesting the committee include my environmental
    infrastructure (EI) assistance request in the House's WRDA legislation.
    Washington state is one of only six states that currently does not have
    a single EI assistance authorization on the books, leaving our
    communities at a disadvantage in receiving support from the United
    States Army Corps of Engineers.
        My office has identified nearly 50 projects in my district,
    spanning across King, Snohomish, Whatcom, and Skagit counties, totaling
    a need of nearly $500 million. These projects include the Nooksack
    River Floodplain Restoration Project, which is a multi-phase, $200
    million project that would help address the historic flooding recently
    experienced in my district, including by creating over 1100 acres of
    floodplain habitat by purchasing land and relocating Everson's
    Wastewater Treatment Plant. Between Whatcom and Skagit counties, there
    was over $100M worth of damage to public and private infrastructure and
    allowing communities in these counties to access EI assistance will be
    critical to preventing future damage.
        The Snohomish County Government has significant water
    infrastructure needs as well, totaling more than $83 million, including
    a $60 million request for a 335-acre tidal restoration project that
    would also relocate an aging and flood vulnerable critical water supply
    pipeline. Furthermore, many of the smaller, more rural cities and towns
    in these four counties would benefit from the Corps' expertise in
    carrying out their water infrastructure projects. The Town of
    Darrington's $2 million water supply upgrades project to remove
    asbestos piping and the Town of Skykomish's $1.9 million Old Cascade
    Highway Drainage Project that will help alleviate property/home
    flooding are two such examples of projects that could benefit if this
    new EI authority was granted.
        Our larger cities also require additional assistance to accommodate
    the growing population in the region. For example, the City of Redmond
    has a $6 million project to extend sanitary sewer mains into a
    neighborhood with aging and failing septic systems as a way to improve
    water quality in streams that drain to the Sammamish River.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to share my priorities for WRDA
    2022 with you, and I hope the committee will give strong consideration
    to my EI assistance authorization request. My staff and I would be more
    than happy to provide any additional information the Committee requires
    about the items discussed above.

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Veronica Escobar, a Representative in
                        Congress from the State of Texas
        Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano and Ranking Member Rouzer:
        As you continue to gather feedback from members while crafting the
    Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2022, I respectfully ask for
    your consideration to include a study I have requested that would focus
    on the environmental impacts of reducing congestion by using light rail
    at land ports of entry over bodies of water.
        The district I represent includes El Paso, Texas, which is a
    vibrant community in the middle of the Chihuahuan desert, situated in
    the westernmost part of the state. It not only has beautiful mountain
    ranges like the Franklin Mountains, a great source of pride for El
    Pasoans, but it is also a dynamic border community that shares its air,
    water, and people with the city of Ciudad Juarez, Mexico.
        Additionally, El Paso is the largest metropolitan area along the
    U.S. Mexico Border with several ports of entry that facilitate the
    daily passage of thousands of vehicles, pedestrians, and millions of
    dollars in trade for the United States annually.
        The infrastructure at these ports is outdated which continues to
    cause a substantial amount of congestion and alarming levels of air
    pollution. Most recently, The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
    designated El Paso as a nonattainment zone due to the high levels of
    emissions that are partially caused by the wait times at our ports of
    entry.
        El Paso was once the leader in commuter rail that operated in both
    El Paso and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. Rail has been one of the major
    economic drivers in El Paso's economic growth. By 1974, which was the
    last year the El Paso-Juarez international rail system was running,
    11,000 people were riding the rail daily.
        Having an international rail system allowed people from both
    countries to commute back and forth and support each other's local
    economy. It was also a more environmentally friendly way of commuting
    from one city to another.
        Furthermore, my district is currently facing the challenges of
    congestion at our ports of entry and extreme levels of greenhouse gas
    emissions that continue to cause many health risks for a community that
    is economically disadvantaged and continues to have the highest
    uninsured rates in Texas.
        By conducting a study of the environmental impacts of reducing
    congestion by using light rail at land ports of entry over bodies of
    water, we would be able to discover options on how to relocate or
    minimize congestion in the El Paso region and other communities with
    this issue.
        Addressing this environmental dilemma highlights the importance of
    having an international transportation option like light rail readily
    available in communities like mine to ensure economic development,
    decrease wait times, alleviate much of the congestion we are seeing
    today, support job creation, and improve the safety and security for
    all who cross our border.
        El Paso has been able to benefit from past WRDA legislation and
    maintains a close and vital relationship with the Army Corps of
    Engineers. Reauthorizing WRDA provides communities across the country
    the opportunity to continue to improve and implement critical projects.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today and for
    your consideration of this important study request.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Russ Fulcher, a Representative in Congress
                            from the State of Idaho
        Dear Chairman DeFazio, Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member
    Graves, Ranking Member Rouzer,
        Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony regarding the
    Water Resources Development Act of 2022. As you may know, federal
    forest management continues to be a challenge for local communities,
    States, and Tribes, but there are bright spots like the Good Neighbor
    Authority. Already in law, the Good Neighbor Authority allows States to
    partner with stakeholders to ensure sound forest management. I am
    excited that we have the opportunity now to extend this authority, in a
    pilot program, to the Army Corps of Engineers for the Walla Walla
    District to partner with the State of Idaho to help manage timber
    around the Dworshak Project in Orofino, Idaho. This commonsense
    arrangement will ensure that the Army Corps can stay focused on the
    Dworshak Project and highlight a partnership with the State of Idaho
    that benefits the community and our federal partners.
        In addition to this new opportunity for the Army Corps, I am
    committed to ensuring that the Lower Four Snake River Dams (LSRD)
    continue their vital mission to provide reliable, clean, and renewable
    energy to the people of the Northwest. As you may know, last summer,
    there was peak power demand in the Northwest, and without the LSRD, the
    situation may have been made worse. Your support of the navigation and
    power requirements of these dams are vital to the future of power
    generation in the Northwest.
        Given the mission of the dams, I also support efforts to maintain
    proper dredging for turning basins and access channels, a key priority
    for the Snake River managed by the Army Corps. Maintenance of the Snake
    River between Lewiston, Idaho, and Clarkston, Washington is critical to
    support safe and efficient navigation. The Snake River is a vital pass-
    through for wheat exports, especially as global instability continues
    to destabilize food networks across the World.
        Finally, as our Nation continues to face unprecedented challenges,
    I am thankful for the bipartisan efforts to ensure that the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022 builds on what makes our country
    strong and recognizes the continued need to maintain the natural
    resources bestowed upon us.

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Andrew R. Garbarino, a Representative in
                      Congress from the State of New York
        Dear Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Chairwoman Napolitano
    & Ranking Member Rouzer:
        I want to thank you and all members of the House Transportation and
    Infrastructure Committee for your work and attention to the needs of
    individual districts as they relate to the Water Resources Development
    Act (WRDA) of 2022. I hope that this written testimony provides a
    better understanding to the study requests I have submitted for the
    committee's consideration for inclusion in WRDA.
        As you are all aware, New York's 2nd Congressional District on Long
    Island encompasses a large section of the south shore of the Great
    South Bay. Since joining Congress, I have been in constant contact with
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers officials and project managers who are
    working tirelessly to ensure Long Island's south shore is maintained,
    protected, and prepared to withstand continuous seashore erosion and
    the effects of seasonal costal storms and hurricanes.
        Within the submission timeframe my staff and I were able to submit
    three requests to be considered for the WRDA of 2022. My submissions
    are as follows, in no particular order:
    1) An Army Corps of Engineers study of the replacement and
            reconstruction of the bulkhead system at John J. Burns Park of
            Oyster Bay, New York
        The Town of Oyster Bay has experienced significant flooding around
    Burns Park. To address these flood risks, the town is interested in
    pursuing the proper process to have the Army Corps of Engineers to
    consider the replacement and reconstruction of the bulkhead system
    along the western and southern property boundary of John J. Burns Park.
    The study and consideration of the project would potentially lead to
    the replacement of the bulkhead, tieback capping and safety railing
    system, along with other site restoration. This study request is to
    determine if such a project would provide significant impact to the
    shoreline's resilience to future climate change and hurricane and flood
    risk management.
    2) An Army Corps of Engineers study of the replacement and
            reconstruction of the bulkhead system at the Joseph J. Saladino
            Memorial Marina of Oyster Bay, New York
        The Town of Oyster Bay, to mitigate any future hurricane and storm
    damage, seeks the replacement and reconstruction of the bulkhead system
    of the Joseph J. Saladino Memorial Marina. The study would determine if
    the replacement of the bulkhead, tieback capping, restoration of
    utilities to existing floating docks and further site restoration would
    positively impact shoreline resilience and hurricane and major storm
    risk reduction.
    3) Study by the Army Corps of Engineers to determine the viability and
            eligibility of designating the Connetquot River and Greene's
            Creek in the Town of Islip of Suffolk County, New York as
            federal navigable waterways eligible for dredging project.
        Currently, the Connetquot River is recognized by the State of New
    York as a Wild, Scenic and Recreational River. I have many constituents
    who use the river and creek for recreational purposes to access the
    Great South Bay. Many of those constituents have shared their concerns
    about the navigability of the waterways. This study request is for the
    Army Corps of Engineers to determine the best course of action for the
    health and safety of the river and creek's water environment and to
    better manage the mineral build up that prevents safe and accessible
    navigation of the area.
        In closing, I thank you for your time and consideration of my
    priorities for WRDA to improve the economic outlook and shoreline
    resilience of my district. As always, I look forward to working with
    the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the years to come to ensure Long
    Island's south shore is ready to face the challenges brought by climate
    change and unpredictable storms and flooding that so often plagues my
    shoreline communities.

       Prepared Statement of Hon. Raul M. Grijalva, a Representative in
                       Congress from the State of Arizona
        Thank you for your long-standing commitment to improving
    transportation and infrastructure of our nation, and your work on the
    reauthorization of WRDA.
                       International Outfall Interceptor
        The International Outfall Interceptor (IOI) is the infrastructure
    that transports wastewater from Sonora, Mexico and Arizona to the
    Nogales International Wastewater Treatment Plant. The IOI pipeline
    covers approximately 8.5 miles. Under a 1944 water utilization treaty,
    Mexico can treat water in the United States. The International Border
    and Water Commission (IBWC) is tasked with managing international
    infrastructure negotiations and operates the Nogales International
    Sanitation Project.
        On average, 92% of the water treated daily at the Nogales
    International Wastewater Treatment Plant is from Mexico and 8% from the
    surrounding community. Unfortunately, due to damage and aging
    infrastructure, the IOI needs costly and urgent repairs. Wastewater
    constantly emerges from the IOI and pollutes surrounding rivers and
    streams. Rains carry the polluted stormwater into Nogales, Arizona and
    exposes downstream populations to extraordinary public health risk.
        In 2017, the Governor of Arizona declared the Disaster Declaration
    process for the State of Arizona to secure immediate federal assistance
    to remedy and prevent raw sewage exposure to Arizona residents. Every
    year during the monsoon season the health of residents along the
    Arizona southern border are put at risk, due to this ongoing issue.
    While Arizona residents are very familiar with this issue, other
    communities along the United States-Mexico border experience similar
    health risks due to similar issues. In July 2021, the IBWC awarded an
    $13.8 million contract to begin the first three phases of a five-stage
    repair process. A groundbreaking for the repairs occurred in January
    2022.
        I appreciate the Chairs past support to address the issues
    surrounding IOI and ask that you use this vehicle to include provisions
    to settle the last remaining items of the longstanding IOI pipeline
    issues. I encourage you to work with my office and the IBWC to include
    authorization and full funding to continue repairs and clarify that the
    IBWC is responsible for future maintenance of the IOI to prevent raw
    sewage from spilling into waterways. It is my understanding that the
    IBWC is now prepared to accept this role, provided they are authorized
    and allocated the funding necessary. After years of neglecting much-
    needed repairs, repairs have begun, and we now have the opportunity to
    settle the maintenance issue once and for all.
        There is clear precedent for this language to be included in WRDA.
    The project was originally authorized for $11,100,000 by WRDA 1990,
    Section 101(a)(4), Public Law 101-640. The project was again authorized
    for $25,410,000 by WRDA 2007, Section 3008. Recently, S. 2848, WRDA,
    included Section 8008 International Outfall Interceptor Repair,
    Operations and Maintenance.
        We should not leave a city in the United States susceptible to the
    risk of raw sewage spills, especially when preventative rehabilitation
    improvements have already started. I greatly appreciate you and your
    staff's past support of inclusion of the IOI and encourage you to once
    again work to provide a final remedy for this situation.
        Thank you for your leadership, and consideration. My staff and I
    stand ready to work with you to ensure these items are included.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Josh Harder, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of California
        I want to thank the Committee for the opportunity to participate in
    today's Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) Member Day hearing. I
    write to respectfully urge the Committee to approve much-needed funding
    for California's Central Valley in this year's WRDA.
        Specifically, I am requesting the Committee to approve an
    environmental infrastructure authority authorizing $200M in spending
    over a lifetime for the region. Let me explain why this funding is
    desperately needed. My region--composed of Stanislaus and San Joaquin
    counties--is one of the most agriculturally rich areas of the world,
    but is also home to some of the poorest communities in our country.
    It's faced years of reduced federal investment compared to other parts
    of our state--for example, over the last twelve years, the Bay Area
    received nearly double the federal funding from competitive Department
    of Transportation grants as the Central Valley. This environmental
    infrastructure authority will begin to correct this funding disparity
    and support our local economy.
        This authority would improve water infrastructure for many Black
    and Latino communities lacking the most basic features of a safe,
    healthy, sustainable neighborhood--potable drinking water, sewer
    systems, safe housing, public transportation, parks, sidewalks, and
    streetlights. To capture the scope of the issue, in Stanislaus County
    alone, $50 million in American Rescue Plan funding is being used to
    connect some of these unincorporated areas, but there is still an
    estimated $400 million needed to install sewer mainlines, potable water
    systems and storm drainage for just these areas--that doesn't even
    include the backlog of maintenance and upgrades for the rest of the
    county.
        In addition to this lack of basic water infrastructure, the Central
    Valley is experiencing the worst megadrought in 1,200 years. This
    drought has caused water supply to be rationed--with many farmers
    fallowing farms that have been in their families for generations. The
    economic impact and ripple effects of this drought in the Valley are
    estimated at $1.7 billion in gross revenue losses, almost 15,000 full
    and part time jobs, and nearly $1.1 billion in lost value added that
    could have been expected. By targeting federal investment to the
    Central Valley, we can mitigate the impact of future droughts on our
    nation's food supply and ensure that investment flows to the areas that
    need it most--rather than other areas in California.
        I urge the Committee to include this new environmental
    infrastructure authority for Stanislaus and San Joaquin Counties in
    this year's WRDA bill, and thank you again for the opportunity to talk
    about this important issue.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in
                        Congress from the State of Texas
        Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano for holding today's hearing to
    receive testimony from Members on the critical water infrastructure
    needs of their communities and state.
        I want to bring an important water resource project in my district
    to the committee's attention. The White Rock Lake is a 1,015-acre city
    lake located just outside of Dallas. The lake is one of the most
    heavily used parks in the Dallas Park system and is home to the Dallas
    Arboretum, the White Rock Lake Museum, the Bath House Cultural Center,
    a large boat ramp and fishing pier, over 9 miles of hiking and biking
    trails, a dog park, picnic area, and pavilions.
        White Rock Lake has experienced an accumulation of sediment since
    it was last dredged in 1998, reducing the capacity of the lake, with
    reductions in its water quality and recreational use. As one of the
    city's most heavily used parks, the health of White Rock Lake is of
    interest to the entire Dallas community. Lake user groups and
    individuals have been petitioning the city to perform another dredge
    over the last few years, with the pandemic increasing the already heavy
    use of White Rock Lake, adding urgency to the need to dredge the lake.
        The goals of the White Rock Lake dredging project is to restore the
    depth of the lake to enhance watersport recreation, remove sediment
    from the shoreline to improve maintenance, and improve water quality to
    minimize negative impacts to aquatic habitat and other environmentally
    sensitive areas.
        Most of the projects we'll hear about today could not be completed
    without the hard work of the Corp of Engineers, and I want to thank the
    staff of the North Texas Army Corps office. We've collaborated on
    projects that have greatly benefited North Texas and the nation, and I
    encourage my colleagues to continue to support the Army Corps important
    work.
        I want to again thank you, Madam Chair, for holding today's
    hearing. I am pleased that our subcommittee continues to work to
    improve the quality of our waterways for all our constituents.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Mondaire Jones, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of New York
        Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and members of
    the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for the opportunity to
    express my strong support for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers projects and
    policy in the Water Resources Development Act of 2022 that will help
    protect the lives and livelihoods of Rockland and Westchester County
    residents.
        Last summer, communities in my district were devastated by
    Hurricane Ida. Six Westchester County residents tragically lost their
    lives and countless homes and businesses were destroyed by flooding. In
    fact, the flooding was so severe that outdated models considered
    Hurricane Ida a once-every-300-years event. But anyone paying attention
    knows that extreme weather events like Hurricane Ida are not happening
    once every 300 years. These disasters are happening year after year.
        Rye Brook residents Ken and Fran Bailie were two of my constituents
    killed by Hurricane Ida. They were on their way home from Iona College,
    where they worked as brilliant and committed computer science
    professors, when their car was overwhelmed by rushing water that
    overflowed from the Blind Brook.
        The Blind Brook is a consistent source of flooding during heavy
    rain events--regularly filling basements in the many homes, businesses,
    community centers, and schools that sit in the floodplain. In 2019,
    municipalities affected by the flooding requested that the Army Corps
    conduct a watershed study of the area. The Army Corps has completed all
    preliminary work, but the feasibility study has not yet begun.
        As the committee begins consideration of the Water Resources
    Development Act of 2022, I request that you include language directing
    the Army Corps to expedite this project before flooding from the Blind
    Brook claims any more lives in our community.
        Additionally, I am requesting the scope of the study be expanded to
    address the frequency and severity of weather events caused by climate
    change. Currently, the Army Corps is authorized to study the Blind
    Brook's 100-year floodplain. This scope is insufficient to understand
    the full impact of storms like Hurricane Ida. The scope of the Blind
    Brook Watershed Study must be expanded to understand the impacts of
    future storms in the full Hurricane Ida-affected floodplain. Without
    this change, any analysis conducted by the Army Corps will be
    incomplete.
        I am also calling on the committee to include a policy change in
    the 2022 Water Resources Development Act that will allow the Army Corps
    to more comprehensively study the effects of climate change on
    watersheds. I am requesting the scope of Watershed Studies be expanded
    to include sea level rise, coastal storm damage reduction, and erosion
    and shore protection so that the impact of sea level rise and coastal
    hazards can be adequately considered in relevant Watershed Studies.
        The Hudson River is a scenic, ecologically rich centerpiece of
    economic and recreational life in many Rockland and Westchester County
    communities. But the effects of climate change also mean that our
    rivertowns can expect increased flooding, watershed damage, and erosion
    in the coming years. These communities are in need of significant
    resources for resiliency and flood mitigation--needs that can be better
    understood and addressed with the assistance of the U.S. Army Corps.
        Expanding the scope of watershed studies to include sea level rise
    and coastal hazards will help communities along the Hudson River and
    communities along tidal rivers across the country address the realities
    of the climate crisis.
        I thank the committee for its efforts to understand Member
    priorities in this process and its consideration of these requests,
    along with the others I have submitted, for inclusion in the 2022 Water
    Resources Development Act.

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Marcy Kaptur, a Representative in Congress
                             from the State of Ohio
        Thank you Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, and your
    staffs for the hard work you have put in to developing the Water
    Resources Development Act of 2022 (WRDA). On a bipartisan basis, your
    Committee has now completed work on four consecutive WRDAs since 2014--
    advancing significant progress to meet our nation's needs.
        The Committee's authorization of new U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    projects, studies, and policies supports local, regional, and national
    priorities that have a lasting impact. As Chair of the Appropriations
    Subcommittee that oversees the Corps' budget, it is an honor to partner
    with you in this mission.
        I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with you here today the
    important issues facing the Great Lakes communities that I represent.
    The bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that Congress
    passed last year contains funding for an array of projects that we have
    worked on together for many years.
        Within this legislation was $17.1 billion for Corps initiatives--
    including $516.2 million for the Soo Locks project and $225.8 million
    for the Brandon Road Lock and Dam project.
        The critical role that Great Lakes waterways play in sustaining and
    advancing America's economic vitality cannot be overstated. As Chair of
    the Energy and Water Subcommittee, it has been my top priority to
    secure the federal resources that ensure the navigability and
    preservation of the Great Lakes for generations to come. The Soo Locks,
    located on the St. Marys River in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, are a
    vital system of water locks that facilitate maritime shipping between
    Lake Superior and the four other Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence
    Seaway. Approximately 80 million tons of cargo--valued at nearly $6
    billion--pass through the Soo Locks each year.
        The Brandon Road Lock and Dam, located on the Des Plaines River
    near Joliet, Illinois, is a central connection point through which
    invasive Carp species frequently move between the Illinois Waterway
    system into Lake Michigan and the four other Great Lakes, severely
    harming native fish species. The $225.8 million from the Infrastructure
    Investment and Jobs Act will fund the construction and deployment of
    state-of-the-art technologies and innovative programs that interrupt
    the movement--protecting the Great Lakes' $7 billion fishing and $16
    billion recreational boating industries.
        I would also like to thank the Committee for its continued focus on
    another ecological problem that we face in the Great Lakes region:
    harmful algal blooms (HABs). The expertise of Corps scientists and
    engineers is invaluable in the fight against the devastation wrought by
    HABs. The Corps provides resource management, water flow design, and
    engineering solutions for HAB prevention, mitigation, and control. I
    urge the Committee to continue supporting the ongoing work of the Corps
    for testing HAB controls and encouraging continued interagency
    cooperation.
        Finally, I ask that the Committee consider my request--which I
    submitted along with my friend and colleague whose district also
    stretches along Lake Erie, Congressman David Joyce--to allow for
    increases to the Corps' Continuing Authorities Program federal
    expenditure limits to keep up with inflation. It is important that the
    Corps has the funds and flexibility to implement these necessary
    programs.
        Thank you again for your dedication to pursuing another WRDA on a
    bipartisan basis.

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Brenda L. Lawrence, a Representative in
                      Congress from the State of Michigan
        Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and members of the
    Committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today regarding
    critical issues facing my constituents in Michigan's 14th Congressional
    District.
        As you all know too well, across the country, our water
    infrastructure is failing. Too many communities are dealing with the
    reality of decades of underinvestment in our infrastructure. My
    constituents have been paying the price for that failure for too many
    years.
        Last summer, heavy rainfall across Southeast Michigan demonstrated
    how our deteriorating infrastructure is failing Michiganders.
        In my district, residents in the Metro Detroit region faced the
    brunt of this rainfall, which flooded their basements, overran their
    cars, and left them without power for weeks.
        In this year's Water Resources Development Act, it is critical to
    my constituents that we address flood control mitigation efforts.
        A comprehensive study by the Army Corps of Engineers would help the
    Great Lakes Water Authority mitigate the risk of basement and surface
    flooding following similar examples of intense rain.
        Forecasted increases in rainfall intensity due to climate change
    have demonstrated that a long-term flood mitigation plan is necessary
    for the residents and businesses within Great Lake Water Authority's
    service area in Southeast Michigan, which includes 2.8 million people--
    approximately 30 percent of the state's entire population.
        In my district, two projects will greatly benefit from the
    assistance of the Army Corps.
        Just north of Detroit, along the shores of Lake St. Clair, an aging
    sea wall is in desperate need of repairs to prevent flooding of a
    critical roadway. The impacted communities, Grosse Pointe Shores and
    Grosse Pointe Farms, have spent years engaging with key stakeholders
    and seeking assistance from state and federal agencies.
        A feasibility study by the Army Corps could help assess the
    potential for a naturalization of the lakeshore to replace the obsolete
    concrete barrier. Not only would this naturalization protect the local
    water supply, sewers, and roadways from flooding, it would also address
    a serious safety concern due to debris from the concrete wall.
        Naturalizing the Lake St. Claire shoreline would also increase
    biodiversity and improve a valuable fishing resource, supporting
    findings by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in November 2021.
        My requests also include a feasibility study for the City of
    Detroit, where the Jefferson Chalmers and Jefferson Village
    neighborhoods on the Lower East Side are also dealing with severe
    flooding.
        During a 2019 flood event, high water levels in the Detroit River
    flooded more than 300 homes in the Lower East Side, and 7 billion
    gallons of river water entered sewerage and water treatment systems.
        This additional load caused increased discharges of untreated water
    into the Detroit River, violating water quality requirements, and
    putting the whole wastewater system for Southeast Michigan at risk of
    failure.
        A feasibility study for the City of Detroit would allow for long-
    term mitigation measures to address flooding.
        Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves, I would like to thank
    you and the members of the Committee once more for your tireless work
    on this legislation, and thank you for the opportunity to address the
    critical needs of my district.

        Prepared Statement of Hon. Doris O. Matsui, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of California
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to come before the
    Committee and lay out my key priorities for the Water Resources
    Development Act (WRDA) of 2022.
        As the Representative of Sacramento, California, WRDA is uniquely
    meaningful to me and to my constituents, who live in the second most
    flood-prone city in the country, after New Orleans.
        We need to thoughtfully prioritize projects that consider the long-
    term consequences of climate change . . . the catastrophic flooding we
    have seen across the country in just the last year is telling and I
    fear that severe flooding will no longer be 100 or even 500-year
    events, but a new norm for my constituents. I want to thank the
    Committee for including the Yolo Bypass Study in WRDA 2020 and for
    supporting many of the flood control projects in the Sacramento region.
        In this regard, I want to highlight the phenomenal work of the non-
    federal sponsor in my district--the Sacramento Area Flood Control
    Agency. SAFCA is an incredibly sophisticated and proactive partner that
    has been working hand in hand with the Army Corps of Engineers--getting
    several projects in my district started ahead of schedule and on
    budget. In this regard, SAFCA has received approval for nearly $100
    million in cost sharing credits for its excess cost-sharing
    contributions that WRDA authority allows to be transferred to another
    SAFCA project. However, the authority to transfer credits is set to
    expire in 2024.
        This year, my most pressing request is to extend the authority
    provided in Section 1020 of the WRRDA 2014, and I have submitted draft
    legislation to remove the current legislative sunset in making the
    authority permanent. We must allow our non-federal sponsors to utilize
    these credits.
        The Corps has approved transferring excess credit generated by
    implementation of components of the American River Watershed Common
    Features Natomas Basin (ARCF Natomas) Project for use against non-
    Federal Sponsor cost-share for American River Watershed Common Features
    2016 Project (ARCF 2016). Both projects are scheduled to continue
    construction well past 2024. Additionally, the Corps continues to ask
    the non-Federal Sponsors to advance some components of the work in ARCF
    Natomas, creating additional excess credits and this will extend past
    the 2024 deadline.
        Certainty in this will be critical in flood control planning not
    only for my constituents but potentially for non-federal project
    sponsors elsewhere.
        For 15 years, I have worked tirelessly with dedicated stakeholders
    in my district to make the Sacramento region as safe as possible for
    all residents.
        WRDA 2022 represents a tremendous opportunity to move forward and
    achieve even greater strides . . . through responsible and resilient
    flood control projects and forward-looking ideas for America's water
    infrastructure.
        Thank you for your time and consideration.

       Prepared Statement of Hon. James P. McGovern, a Representative in
                Congress from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
        Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and Members of the
    Transportation & Infrastructure Committee: thank you for providing this
    opportunity for input as you craft the 2022 Water Resources Development
    Act. I want to thank the Committee for the effort that you have all
    undertaken to make this Congress a historic one for infrastructure
    investments. This year's WRDA has the potential to build significantly
    on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to ensure that one of our most
    precious natural resources receives the investments and attention it
    deserves.
        I would like to focus my testimony today on the potential to shape
    this year's WRDA around our broader interest in ensuring resilience for
    our rivers and the ecosystems they sustain. When people think of the
    Army Corps' inland work, they often think of projects along some of our
    country's largest rivers, and rightly so. But the Army Corps also has
    an important role to play in the stewardship of smaller watersheds,
    such as those in the Northeast. Through the work of the Army Corps of
    Engineers, Congress has an opportunity to better understand, and adapt
    to, the effects of climate change on watersheds.
        With that in mind, I would like to highlight three critical rivers
    in the Second District of Massachusetts, where the Army Corps could
    explore opportunities for whole-of-watershed approaches to ecosystem
    restoration and climate resilience.
        The Connecticut River flows through the heart of New England, from
    its headwaters in New Hampshire, through Vermont, Massachusetts, and
    Connecticut. The watershed is home to historic communities and some of
    the most productive farmland in the Northeast. The Army Corps has
    conducted two studies on the causes, impacts, and types of projects to
    mitigate widespread and ongoing streambank erosion on the Connecticut
    River in New Hampshire, Vermont, and Massachusetts, one in 1979 and
    another in 1991. Erosion continues to be a significant issue, leading
    to loss of prime farmland; dangerous, steep, and crumbling riverbanks;
    and habitat loss. Erosion conditions have worsened due to severe storm
    events caused by climate change and by increased use of the river for
    hydroelectric generation. An updated study of streambank erosion and
    the impact of hydroelectric facilities on the Connecticut River would
    be extremely valuable for preventing further riparian habitat
    degradation, and the Army Corps could leverage existing data from
    previous studies.
        The Blackstone River played an essential role in our nation's
    history: it powered the birth of the Industrial Revolution in America.
    This history of intense use and increased development along the river,
    however, have led to significant loss of floodplain wetlands, which
    significantly constrains overall ecological health of the watershed. To
    identify the location of historic wetlands with restoration potential,
    the Army Corps studied the main stem of the Blackstone River in 1994,
    and an updated study could dramatically enhance ecosystem restoration
    efforts.
        The Blackstone River Valley could also benefit from an Army Corps
    study of water supply and flow. With climate change driving more
    frequent and extreme drought and altered hydrology, urbanization
    increasing population, and new hydropower planned for the Blackstone
    region, ensuring the amount, rate, quality, and timing of water for
    designated uses is critical. A study could identify current and
    potential flow-degraded areas under future climate stress, with the
    goal of developing a watershed-wide management strategy.
        In the northwest portion of my district, the Deerfield River is a
    natural treasure, main tributary of the Connecticut, and prime example
    of a river at risk of climate-related impacts. The watershed sustained
    major flood damage and ecosystem impacts from Tropical Storm Irene in
    2011. Major roads and primary evacuation routes were blown out. Other
    roads, culverts and bridges were washed away, leaving residents
    stranded for days, and wastewater treatment plants were inundated and
    forced off-line. With climate change increasing the frequency,
    magnitude, duration and intensity of hurricanes, tropical storms and
    rain events, this flood and ecosystem damage will only increase, and
    the costs post-disaster continue to escalate. An Army Corps feasibility
    study could identify cost-effective and sustainable flood mitigation,
    infrastructure damage reduction, and ecosystem restoration projects.
        Finally, I would like to briefly mention a smaller project that is
    just one of many examples around my district of opportunities for the
    Army Corps to have a significant and near-term impact on local
    ecosystem restoration. In my hometown of Worcester, Salisbury Pond is a
    13-acre body of water amid a densely populated urban environment.
    Located within a public park, the pond has high recreational and
    ecological value, but upstream development and urban runoff has
    severely degraded water quality and wildlife habitat. The Army Corps
    could assist with efforts to remove excess sedimentation through
    dredging and help design best management practices going forward.
        In closing, I wish to again express my appreciation for the
    opportunity to testify, as well as your commitment to addressing the
    climate crisis through our legislative efforts. Rivers quite literally
    sustain our communities, and the need for proper stewardship will only
    increase in the years ahead. Thank you.

        Letter of March 7, 2022, from Hon. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a
       Representative in Congress from the State of New York, to Colonel
     Matthew W. Luzzatto, Commander and District Engineer, U.S. Army Corps
    of Engineers, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
                                                         March 7, 2022.
    COL Matthew W. Luzzatto,
    Commander and District Engineer,
    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

    Re:  Submission Requests for the Water Resources Development Act of
    2022

        Dear COL Matthew W. Luzzatto,
        I write to you regarding the Water Resources Development Act of
    2022 (WRDA), wherein Members of the House of Representatives had the
    opportunity to submit policy, project and environmental infrastructure
    requests to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
    As the representative for coastal communities such as City Island,
    Throggs Neck, College Point, and many others, the WRDA 2022 bill has
    the potential to make strides in our efforts to remove polluting debris
    in our waterways, treat wastewater, address sewage overflow, mitigate
    flooding, and restore environmental degradation in my district. Below I
    outline my project, study and environmental infrastructure requests in
    hopes that the USACE district office, in collaboration with USACE
    headquarters and the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on
    Water Resources and Environment, will advance them.
        My project and study requests include:
          Removal of derelict barges from the waters of Eastchester
    Bay and Flushing Bay
          Reauthorization of the New York Harbor Collection and
    Removal of Drift, Section 91 of WRDA 1974, and deauthorized by section
    6001 of WRDA 2014--The reauthorization of this language will reinstate
    USACE authority to proactively assess our request for the removal and
    disposal of barges across Eastchester Bay and Flushing Bay.
          Turtle Cove: Sediment Placement, Waterward Expansion--In
    Pelham Bay, along Eastchester Bay at the mouth of the Hutchinson River,
    Turtle Cove is the location of an important coastal marsh restoration
    opportunity. Marsh erosion, exacerbated by sea level rise, threatens
    the health of this vibrant ecosystem. Restoration here could include
    creation of a living shoreline that builds out recently lost salt marsh
    and expands nursery habitat for fish, structure for oyster and other
    shellfish, and substrate for salt marsh grasses that help improve water
    quality, support foraging water birds, and help absorb coastal wave
    energy.
          Expand use of Forecast-informed reservoir operations
    (FIRO) beyond the west coast--This concept has been piloted by many,
    including the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Pacific Division,
    and should be adopted and expanded across all of USACE. The USACE pilot
    has enabled its operators to better optimize water resources at Lake
    Mendocino in Northern California. A multi-agency report issued on
    February 4, 2021 describes how these forecasting tools helped operators
    increase the lake's dry season storage for drinking water, improved its
    ability to alleviate flood risk, and enhanced environmental conditions
    in the downstream Russian River to support salmonid species.
          Ecosystem restoration investigations--Include tidal
    flooding due to projected sea level rise analyses to demonstrate how
    tidal flooding could impact ecosystems over time and to inform design
    that can provide long-term resiliency benefits.
          Coastal storm risk management studies--(1) Include tidal
    flooding due to projected sea level rise analyses to inform the
    development of alternatives that produce coastal surge benefits while
    also addressing tidal flooding impacts (2) Require sensitivity analyses
    using local scientifically peer-reviewed sea level rise projections,
    where applicable.

        Additionally, I would also like to express support for the
    following shared member project, study, and policy initiatives:
          Hutchinson River Basin Feasibility Study and Southern
    Westchester Saw Mill River Stormwater Management Feasibility Study
    (Congressman Bowman NY-16)
          New York-New Jersey Harbor Deepening Channel Improvements
    (submitted jointly with Rep. Espaillat, Tonko, Nadler, Jones and
    Senator Schumer)
          New York New Jersey Watershed Protection Act (H.R. 4677)
          Environmental Justice Provisions (Congressman Cohen TN-
    09)
          Watershed Study Coastal Hazards Amendment 33 U.S.C.
    Sec. 2267a (Congressman Jones NY-17)

        Finally, I would appreciate USACE Regional Office's support for the
    environmental infrastructure requests outlined below:
          LaGuardia Airport Wetlands + Oyster Reefs--this project
    is aimed at providing habitat restoration and marsh expansion along the
    airport's edge, a dramatic increase in marsh area and creation of
    seagrass beds, along with new upland habitat, provides pollution
    abatement benefits and storm surge mitigation. Oyster reef
    reintroduction along LGA's shoreline and marsh expansion is aimed at
    restoring oysters to the waterways all around the airport and providing
    shoreline erosion protection for the entire upper East River. Oysters
    provide habitat for fish and waterfowl, buffered waterfronts from wind
    and wave impacts, and clean water--by filtering up to 50 gallons of
    water a day--the entire Harbor. Oyster reef creation can start to
    recreate some of these ecosystem services for Flushing Bay, which is
    already home to one of the largest assemblages of native oysters in the
    city. Partnering with Riverkeeper and the Billion Oyster Project, and
    staged at the new Queens Water Exploration Center, LaGuardia's oyster
    reefs could fuel an environmental transformation of the entire Upper
    East River.
          Queens, New York--amendment to Section 219 of the Water
    Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4835; 110 Stat. 3757; 113
    Stat. 334; 113 Stat. 1494; 114 Stat. 2763A-219; 119 Stat. 2255).
    Partnering with New York DEP and Congresswoman Meng, this project will
    provide stormwater management and improvements to combined sewer
    overflows can reduce the risk of flood impacts in Queens, New York.
          Wastewater Treatment Infrastructure and Management
    Authorities--amending H.R. 3563 (WRDA 1996) Sec. 552 NEW YORK CITY
    WATERSHED and the Bronx River watershed--H.R. 3563 (WRDA 1996) Sec.
    503. ``Watershed Management, Restoration, and Development'' subsection
    (b) SPECIFIC MEASURES. To include the remediation, construction,
    repair, maintenance or replacement of stormwater and wastewater
    treatment systems in the authority of the US Army Corps of Engineers.
          +  Specifically, Amend H.R. 3563 (WRDA 1996) Sec. 552 NEW YORK
    CITY WATERSHED--by adding the following: `` . . . and the construction,
    repair, maintenance or replacement of stormwater and wastewater
    treatment systems. The US Army Corps of Engineers shall, to the
    greatest extent possible, support infrastructure upgrades, stormwater
    management, and sewage contamination in waterways for combined sewer
    systems and stand-alone sewage plants. Where necessary, the Chief of
    Engineers shall work with the Administrator of the Environmental
    Protection Agency to assess feasibility of improvements and coordinate
    wastewater infrastructure upgrades. Any recommendations or authorized
    work related to wastewater treatment shall, to the greatest extent
    possible, incorporate site and neighborhood-specific contexts, leverage
    green infrastructure, and promote environmental resilience for all
    species and natural systems.''
          +  Related to the Bronx River watershed--amend H.R. 3563 (WRDA
    1996) Sec. 503.``Watershed Management, Restoration, and Development''
    subsection (b) SPECIFIC MEASURES by adding: ``(6) Remediation,
    construction, maintenance, and repair of stormwater and wastewater
    treatment systems, in a manner that is to the greatest extent possible,
    incorporate site and neighborhood-specific contexts, leverage green
    infrastructure, and promote environmental resilience for all species
    and natural systems. Where necessary, the Chief of Engineers shall work
    with the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to assess
    feasibility of improvements and coordinate wastewater infrastructure
    upgrades.''
          Big Rock Beach in College Point--improvement of 28th
    Avenue street end--Partnering with project sponsor Waterfront Alliance
    and local advocates in cleaning up trash and debris and creating an
    open space beachfront area for the community. Over the last few years
    the beach has been primarily used as a local dump site for trash and
    debris and its stairway to the site has deteriorated. A large sandy
    beach street end with earthen stairs to get down to the water edge will
    offer full programming potential, quiet waters and access to the
    Flushing Bay shoreline.
          Ecosystem Redesign of LaGuardia Breakwall--to allow for
    greater tidal flow and habitat formation. Jutting out into Flushing Bay
    from the eastern end of the LaGuardia Airport runway is a half-mile-
    long breakwall. Sitting at the waterline, this man-made structure
    bisects the Bay, limiting not just boat traffic to the piers of World's
    Fair Marina, but also limiting sediment flux (leading to built-up
    mounds of sewage solids) and tidal exchange (causing local water
    quality impairments). The community envisions an entirely re-thought
    and redesigned breakwall that takes into account the ecological and
    structural needs of the entire system. With an inlet punched through
    the middle of the wall to perhaps allow more water to ebb and flow
    through the system, and oyster, mussel, seagrass, and fish habitat
    structural improvements to the wall itself, this new smart breakwall
    will change the physical, chemical, and biological baselines of the
    Bay.

        Thank you for your consideration of these important measures which
    are needed for the protection of communities living in the densest
    coastal region of our nation. We urge you to support and provide the
    guidance necessary to ensure these requests can be implemented and meet
    the needs of constituents in the New York and New Jersey region.
            Sincerely,
                                      Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
                                                    Member of Congress.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Tom O'Halleran, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Arizona
        I want to thank Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves for
    allowing for member testimony regarding the 2022 Water Resources
    Development Act. Improving water infrastructure is critical in Arizona
    as the entire Southwest is suffering from extended drought conditions.
    In August 2021, the federal government declared a water shortage at
    Lake Mead, one of the Colorado River's main reservoirs for the first
    time. This has resulted in Tier 1 reductions, resulting in potential
    reductions for the state of Arizona, counties and localities, and
    tribal communities. I would like to the importance of three projects to
    Pinal County, Arizona.
                                  Welton Wash
        During heavy storms, a small community of 55 homes and properties
    in a Dudleyville residential neighborhood experiences serious flooding,
    making roadways impassable and cutting off the community from basic and
    emergency services. A study identified a recommended solution that
    entails construction of a detention basin north of the community on
    State Route 77 and a channel to convey flows from that basin to the San
    Pedro River. The County is currently performing a survey of the area
    and will soon begin to acquire the easements necessary to implement the
    flood mitigation solution. Federal funding from Section 205 of
    approximately $5.5 million will be necessary to complete the project.
                             Ak-Chin Levee/Channel
        The Santa Cruz River, its tributaries and other river systems in
    the County have a long history of producing catastrophic flows during
    major storms, resulting in severe damage to farms, housing,
    communities, businesses, and infrastructure across the region. A 2010
    Data Collection Report found that 34 major flood events have occurred
    on the river since the late 1800s, roughly one every 4 years, with 6 of
    the 7 largest flood events occurring in the last 50 years. The USACE
    study found that a levee or channel constructed east of the Ak-Chin
    reservation would be effective in mitigating future flood damage.
    Project costs are estimated to be less than $10 million, and as such,
    it is a good fit for funding from the USACE's Section 205 Continuing
    Authorities Program.
                         Pinal County--Santa Rosa Canal
        The 56-mile Santa Rosa Canal delivers Colorado River water through
    the Central Arizona Project (CAP) to agricultural and tribal lands in
    Pinal County, Arizona. SRC is federally owned, with the Maricopa-
    Stanfield Irrigation and Drainage district operating and maintaining
    the Canal and associated facilities under contract with the Bureau of
    Reclamation. This proposal would construct alternative conveyance
    facilities for the Districts' groundwater in lieu of continued use of
    the Santa Rosa Canal for delivery of that supply. The estimated cost is
    $17.8 million ($10.9 million to $14.2 million for construction, $3.6
    million for design and administration).
        Thank you for the consideration of my requests and please contact
    Adam Finkel on my staff.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Cathy McMorris Rodgers, a Representative in
                     Congress from the State of Washington
        Thank you Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves for your work
    on the Water Resources and Development Act (WRDA) of 2022, as well as
    the time each of your staff members have put into this process. I
    appreciate the opportunity to highlight my priorities for WRDA 2022.
        My top priority is to protect the Federal Columbia River Power
    System (FCRPS) and the four dams on the Lower Snake River. As you both
    know, the FCRPS comprises 31 hydroelectric projects in the Columbia
    River Basin and provides one third of the electricity used in the
    Pacific Northwest, as well as critical flood risk management,
    irrigation, and navigation benefits. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
    (USACE) operates the Columbia River's Chief Joseph Dam, the second
    largest hydropower producing dam in the United States, as well as a
    series of eight dams on the lower Columbia and Snake Rivers.
        There has been much attention paid to the FCRPS over the past few
    years, particularly due to National Wildlife Federation et. al. v.
    National Marine Fisheries Service et. al [01-640], litigation
    challenging the 2020 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and Record of
    Decision (ROD) jointly issued by the USACE, Bureau of Reclamation
    (BoR), and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) on the Columbia River
    System Operations. In October of last year, U.S. District Judge Michael
    Simon issued a stay in this case. Since that time, the four Lower Snake
    River Dams have continued to be the target of the plaintiffs and
    national environmental groups, with calls for dam breaching or making
    significant changes to dam operations that would functionally breach
    the dams.
        I am concerned that emotions continue to overshadow facts when it
    comes to Columbia Basin salmon recovery and the impact that the Lower
    Snake River dams have on threatened and endangered salmon populations.
    These are the facts: the Columbia River Basin is home to 61 different
    fish species, and thirteen species of Columbia River Basin salmon and
    steelhead are impacted by the river power system and listed for
    protection under the Endangered Species Act. Of these 13 species, only
    four travel the length of the Columbia River and through the Lower
    Snake River dams to spawn: Snake River Steelhead, Snake River Spring/
    Summer Chinook, Snake River Fall Chinook, and Snake River Sockeye.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/dam-migration/
    killerwhales_snakeriverdams.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Of these four species, according to Washington State's 2020 State
    of Salmon Report, Snake River Fall Run Chinook are approaching their
    goal and Snake River Basin Steelhead are making progress, while Snake
    River Spring/Summer Chinook remain in crisis.\2\ It is also important
    to note that while Puget Sound Salmon are not impacted by the Columbia
    River Power System, they are in crisis.\3\ Further, the National
    Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has found Puget Sound Salmon to
    be the priority fish populations for the Southern Resident Killer
    Whale.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://stateofsalmon.wa.gov/statewide-data/salmon/
        \3\ https://stateofsalmon.wa.gov/statewide-data/salmon/
        \4\ https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/dam-migration/srkw-salmon-
    sources-factsheet.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        I share the goal of recovering threatened and endangered fish
    species in the Columbia River Basin, which is why I have been a
    proponent for the clean, renewable hydropower that is generated by the
    river system, and specifically, the Lower Snake River dams. The Lower
    Snake River dams provide BPA with capacity to meet peak energy demand
    loads. The four dams generate approximately 1,000 megawatts of power on
    average annually, with the capacity for generating over 3,000 megawatts
    of power.\5\ The need for this capacity was demonstrated during severe
    cold and heat events last year. In 2021, BPA issued assessments
    indicating the Lower Snake River dams prevented rolling blackouts
    during the deep freeze and severe heat events in the Pacific Northwest.
    In January and February of 2021, the four dams each generated more than
    400 megawatts of energy, with some providing more than 500
    megawatts.\6\ Additionally, during the 5-day heatwave in June, the
    Lower Snake River dams held 15% of BPA's total required reserves. At
    their highest, the dams provided 1,118 megawatts of combined energy.\7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/publications/fact-sheets/
    fs-201603-A-Northwest-energy-solution-Regional-power-benefits-of-the-
    lower-Snake-River-dams.pdf
        \6\ https://www.bpa.gov/about/newsroom/news-articles/20210616-
    lower-snake-river-dams-provided-crucial-energy-and-reserves-in-winter-
    20
        \7\ https://www.bpa.gov/-/media/Aep/about/publications/news-
    releases/20210722-pr-10-21-lower-snake-river-dams-help-region-power-
    through-recent-heatwave.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Lower Snake River dams are not only critical to grid
    reliability in the Pacific Northwest, through fish passage adaptations,
    they achieve 96 percent passage survival for juvenile yearling Chinook
    salmon and steelhead smolts. We also have reason to be encouraged by
    recent fish returns on the Lower Snake River. Snake River Spring
    Chinook returns have increased since 2019, with 2020 returns up 55
    percent and 2021 returns up 27 percent. Fisheries managers also predict
    a 40 percent increase for Spring/Summer Chinook on the Snake River in
    2022.\8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ https://www.columbian.com/news/2021/dec/15/columbia-river-
    spring-chinook-projections-are-
    up-for-2022/
    #::text=This%20year's%20projection%20is%20for,last%20year's%20return%20
    of
    %201%2C800
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The bottom line is that efforts to breach the Lower Snake River
    dams are misguided, which is why I have submitted a request to WRDA
    2022 that would prevent funding or authorization of the study of
    removal, study of power, flood control, or navigation replacement, dam
    removal technical assistance, or removal of powered Federal dams in the
    USACE Northwestern Division. It's time to stop focusing on distractions
    and start focusing on solutions that will get results for all salmon in
    the Columbia River Basin.
        One such solution would be fish passage at Howard Hanson Dam on the
    Green River, which would reopen over 60 miles of prime habitat for
    Endangered Species Act-listed salmon and steelhead populations. In
    October 2015, NOAA Fisheries issued a draft jeopardy opinion to the
    Army Corps for the continued operation of HAHD and full realization of
    the Howard A. Hanson Dam Additional Water Storage Project (HAHD-AWSP)--
    a multi-phase habitat restoration and flood mitigation effort
    authorized by Water Resources Development Act of 1999. NOAA fisheries
    found the dam puts Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, and Southern
    resident orcas at risk. On February 15, 2019, the Army Corps and NOAA
    Fisheries agreed to the Howard A. Hanson Dam Biological Opinion, which
    outlines the Army Corps' responsibility to design and construct a
    downstream fish passage facility to aid the recovery of ESA-listed
    species. The USACE is in the final stages of completing the updated
    cost assessment and Director's Report. The updated cost assessment is
    expected to be completed in March 2021 with the Director's Report to
    follow. The authorization of the Director's Report is needed to move to
    the construction phase of the project and completion of Phase I of the
    HAHD-AWSP. I have submitted a request that directs the USACE Secretary
    to expedite design for fish passage facilities at Howard Hanson Dam.
        Moving to navigation challenges on the Snake River, it is
    absolutely critical for Congress to help better define the navigation
    channel at the confluence of the Snake and Clearwater Rivers in Eastern
    Washington and Western Idaho. Under the River and Harbors Act of 1945,
    the Federal channel of the Snake River is vaguely defined. The Walla
    Walla District of the USACE previously exercised broad discretion when
    conducting dredging actions to maintain the federal channel, turning
    basins, and access channels. Dredging is not currently needed annually,
    but it is needed more routinely to ensure the grain terminals and port
    cruise terminal at the Ports of Lewiston and Clarkston are fully
    accessible. In any given year, nearly 10 percent of U.S. wheat exports
    transit the Snake River, and the grain terminals are the starting point
    on the primary transportation path for the bulk of Idaho's wheat moving
    to the West Coast for export. This area is also critical to the river
    cruise industry, which provides over $15 million in direct economic
    benefits to the region. We must ensure a properly maintained channel to
    provide transportation efficiency and increased navigation safety.
    Clearly defining the Snake River channel, turning basins, and secondary
    access channels in the Lower Granite pool will assist the Corps in
    planning routine maintenance and safe and efficient transportation
    access for the Port of Clarkston, Washington and Lewiston, Idaho in a
    manner that aligns with current USACE policies and practice nationwide.
    You will see that I have included a table with detailed coordinates for
    the navigation channel definition in my submission to the member
    portal.
        Finally, Chairman, I have appreciated our partnership on all things
    Columbia River Treaty over the past several years. Your contributions
    to the many discussions we have had with administration officials and
    our colleagues in the Pacific Northwest about the treaty negotiations
    will be missed by all next Congress and in the years to come. I
    appreciate the work that the committee has already done to ensure USACE
    has the authorization and resources it needs to help support our team
    within the Department of State during its negotiations with the
    Canadian government. I support making sure the United States has a plan
    in place to address Columbia River Treaty-related issues, and if USACE
    needs additional support to put this plan in place, I would support its
    inclusion in WRDA 2022. I look forward to our continued work on this
    matter as the final bill takes shape.
        Thank you again for the opportunity to share my priorities for WRDA
    2022 with the committee. Please do not hesitate to contact me or my
    staff should you have questions about any of my requests.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Harold Rogers, a Representative in Congress
                       from the Commonwealth of Kentucky
        Chairman Napolitano, Ranking Member Westerman, and other
    distinguished Members of the subcommittee, I would like to thank you
    for your consideration of my priorities for the 2022 Water Resources
    Development Act (WRDA). I know your Committee works diligently to
    ensure that all Americans can benefit from our nation's incredible
    water resources and infrastructure--whether through the transportation
    of goods on our waterways, locks, and dams, flood control projects that
    protect our communities from disaster, and also incredible recreational
    opportunities. Previous WRDA bills have done a great deal to help the
    people of my district in southern and eastern Kentucky across each of
    the aforementioned areas. Whether it is the importance of locks and
    dams on the Kentucky and Ohio Rivers to the Kentucky economy, Wolf
    Creek Dam on Lake Cumberland, the incredible flood control projects in
    many of my towns and communities, and our Corps lakes' many
    recreational uses, we benefit greatly from these resources. As you
    begin the 2022 WRDA process, I would like to raise four specific
    priorities that will benefit those in my district in Kentucky.
    Legislative Language for each of these proposals is attached.
     Expand Section 202 of the Energy and Water Development Act to Include
    Beattyville, Kentucky on the Northern and Southern Fork of the Kentucky
                                     River
        First, I request an expansion of Section 202 of the of the Energy
    and Water Development Act of 1981 to include the North and South Forks
    of the Kentucky River near Beattyville, KY, which suffered catastrophic
    flooding in the winter of 2021. Section 202 provides much needed flood
    management assistance to regions prone to frequent floods. In response
    to the flooding in 2021, where downtown Beattyville was six feet
    underwater, I secured a Community Funding Project Request for a flood
    management study to be conducted through the Louisville District of the
    Army Corps of Engineers. The purpose of this request is to ensure the
    necessary authorization is in place so construction can begin as soon
    as the study is finalized.
        Beattyville, KY sits at the nexus of three rivers, and is thus
    often prone to flooding. This area is still reeling from the economic
    impacts of having their whole downtown put out of commission. While I
    am proud to report that most of the businesses are back up and running
    over a year later, we simply cannot afford to have such flooding occur
    again.
              Wolf Creek Dam Water Reallocation Study Prohibition
        Second, I request that language be included in this year's WRDA to
    prohibit a water reallocation study to be conducted at Wolf Creek Dam.
    This request would maintain historic WRDA and Energy and Water
    Appropriations language prohibiting a water reallocation study at Wolf
    Creek Dam on Lake Cumberland. The region surrounding the dam is one of
    the poorest in the nation, and a reallocation study might lead to
    increased water supply rates, which would place yet another financial
    hardship on my constituents.
                       Concessionaire Gross Revenue Fees
        Third, I am seeking the inclusion of language that caps the amount
    of fees that the Army Corps of Engineers can charge concessionaires for
    revenues from the sale of commoditized items like fuel and food items.
    Currently, the Corps charges concessionaires escalating fees based on
    how much gross revenue they earn in a given year, and this can reach as
    high as 4.6 percent of gross revenues. Fuel and food sales are very
    important amenities that the general public expects at these
    facilities, but these items are typically sold with a margin of only
    one or two percent. More importantly, this rate structure provides a
    disincentive for concessionaires to provide, expand, or enhance food
    sales locations, which could directly impact the quality of the
    public's enjoyment of these facilities. To rectify this situation, my
    proposed language would provide a cap of one percent on the amount of
    revenue fees charged for the sale of commoditized items, including food
    and fuel sales, at a concessionaire's operation.
          Concessionaire Authorized Lease Length & Approval Authority
        Finally, I am seeking the inclusion of language that would
    modernize the lease term length between the Army Corps of Engineers and
    concessionaires. Under current law, the lease terms the Corps provides
    to concessionaires may be inconsistent and inadequate for the Corps to
    meet their Congressional mandates of enhancing the public access and
    enjoyment of federal resources. Private concessionaire investment,
    which helps the Corps meet these mandates, is dependent upon adequate
    and affordable financing. The current length of time that the Corps
    provides to concessionaires is problematic in that the term varies from
    district to district, and is generally insufficient to allow for
    traditional financing.
        As a result, I request that the term for a lease provided by the
    Corps to concessionaires be modified to provide for a base 25-year
    lease and then the option of additional 25-year extensions if agreed
    upon by both the Corps and the concessionaire. This will allow for a
    consistent national leasing structure and provide a period of time that
    allows concessionaires to seek and receive the financing they need to
    start-up, expand, or improve their facilities.
        Further, the Corps currently requires any lease of 50 or more years
    to be approved by Headquarters, USACE. This level of decision authority
    dramatically increases the bureaucratic hurdles faced by
    concessionaires, when it is the local Corps districts and divisions
    that have the best understanding of what would best serve that region's
    interests. As such, my proposed language would also direct the
    Secretary to delegate this authority, when appropriate, to lower levels
    of Corps leadership.
        Thank you again for your consideration of my 2022 WRDA requests. I
    look forward to working with you as this process unfolds, so we can
    continue to maximize both Kentucky and our nation's water resources. If
    you or your staff have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact
    me or my staff.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Bobby L. Rush, a Representative in Congress
                           from the State of Illinois
        Chair Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouzer, Chair DeFazio, and Ranking
    Member Graves, and other members of the Water Resources and Environment
    Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony as you
    work on developing the 2022 iteration of the Water Resources
    Development Act.
        Water resources are the lifeblood of the city of Chicago and the
    1st Congressional District of Illinois. Entire communities and
    economies in northeast Illinois depend upon the Great Lakes and the
    other water resources that bless our state. Thus, changes made to the
    Water Resources Development Act are of particular interest to my
    constituents, and I urge you to make sure that the bill your Committee
    develops adequately protects and fosters the resources my community
    depends upon.
        However, the health of Lake Michigan, the Chicago River and
    Mississippi Rivers, and the broader Great Lakes are absolutely vital
    not just to the city of Chicago, but to the entire nation. Local
    governments cannot have the burden of protecting these resources placed
    solely upon them--they need appropriate federal support to protect
    these national treasures.
        As such, as the Subcommittee considers priorities for WRDA
    reauthorization, I ask that you keep the following priorities in mind
    which are important to my district, the city of Chicago, and the State
    of Illinois, and which will also help the nation as a whole:
          Supporting the use of a Locally Preferred Plan for the
    City of Chicago's work at Morgan Shoal on the Chicago Shoreline
    project;
          Finding a way to support the Village of Dixmoor, Illinois
    with a new environmental infrastructure authorization to help its
    ailing water system;
          Fully funding the Brandon Road Lock and Dam;
          Authorizing environmental infrastructure to aid Will
    County, Illinois' water system;
          Introducing a federal cost-share for revetment
    maintenance;
          Reforming the Army Corps' project partnership agreements;
          Modifying the way that zoning impacts the Army Corps
    values land transfers;
          Waiving cost-share requirements for small ``continuing
    authorities'' projects;
          Allowing the Corps more flexibility in responding to
    site-specific issues and local context such as using asphalt rather
    than concrete for Chicago Shoreline projects;
          Adding more flexibility for non-federal sponsors in
    restrictions on ecosystem restoration projects; and
          Allowing maintenance activities in the first five years
    of a project's lifespan to count towards the local sponsor's cost-
    share.

        Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to submit testimony on
    our nation's water infrastructure priorities as a part of this special
    Member Day hearing. I look forward to continuing to work with you on
    these important issues.
        If you have any questions about any of my priorities, please do not
    hesitate to contact me or my staff. Thank you for your consideration.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Bradley Scott Schneider, a Representative in
                      Congress from the State of Illinois
        Thank you, Madam Chair, for the opportunity to testify and advocate
    on behalf of my district as the subcommittee begins consideration of
    the next round of Water Resource Development Act projects.
        I first want to discuss the critical role the U.S. Army Corps must
    play in ensuring the climate resiliency of our communities. My
    district--like all of ours--has seen first-hand the impact of climate
    change, having faced several so-called ``100-year floods'' over the
    past decade or so. These major precipitation events, increasing both in
    frequency and severity, will strain our existing water infrastructure.
    A stark example of how we're already seeing the impact in our
    community: the Des Plaines River Trail in my district is a wonderful,
    multiuse trail running throughout my district. But because of climate-
    fueled precipitation, over the last 4 years it has been flooded 50% of
    the time.
        We must ensure we build in the necessary capacity and resiliency in
    our water infrastructure to handle the challenges of the climate
    crisis. And we know this investment pays for itself: FEMA estimates
    that for every dollar invested in flood mitigation, there are $4 of
    public benefit.
        We must also work to better understand how climate change will
    impact the Great Lakes system, one of our country's greatest natural
    treasures, a prime economic engine for our region, and the source of
    drinking water for more than 30 million people. Our stewardship of the
    Great Lakes is especially important as we see lake levels fluctuate
    wildly over a few years' time. These fluctuations can have a dramatic
    effect on coastal erosion as we've seen firsthand in my district. And
    we must make sure we're doing everything we can to make the Great Lakes
    system climate resilient. They are a national treasure that we must
    protect.
        Second, I would like to advocate for the inclusion of Lake County
    within Sec. 219 authority. In Illinois, Cook County is a designated
    geographic area eligible for Sec. 219 which allows local municipalities
    to work jointly with the Army Corps on environmental infrastructure.
    However, despite efforts in years past to add Lake County, no
    geographic areas have been added to Sec. 219 authority in over a
    decade. This must change, particularly as we see climate change taking
    an increasing toll in my community.
        I have submitted a request to this year's WRDA, jointly with two of
    my Illinois colleagues, to add Lake County to Sec. 219. I encourage
    this committee to consider this request so that we can provide Lake
    County with more tools to improve its water and environmental
    infrastructure.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, a Representative
                 in Congress from the Commonwealth of Virginia
        Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, Chairwoman Napolitano,
    Ranking Member Rouzer and members of the Transportation and
    Infrastructure Committee, thank you for providing me this opportunity
    to discuss the priorities of my congressional district in the upcoming
    Water Resources and Development Act (WRDA).
        I represent the 3rd congressional district of Virginia where the
    Chesapeake Bay meets the James, Nansemond, and Elizabeth Rivers, and
    where there are both challenges and opportunities. The U.S. Army Corps
    of Engineers has worked to keep America's waterways and ports open to
    trade, while working with our communities to ensure that they can
    continue to live with the water that surrounds our community. My
    district is home to the Port of Virginia, which is one of the largest
    and busiest ports on the eastern seaboard. With 95 percent of our
    nation's trade moving by water, it is essential that the Port is able
    to maintain operations. The 3rd district is also home to multiple
    shipyards and neighbors Norfolk Naval Station, the largest naval base
    in the world. These waterways are essential to the Hampton Roads
    economy.
        I would like to take a moment to thank the Committee for their work
    with the Port of Virginia in the 2020 WRDA. The Port of Virginia is
    tied to more than 400,000 jobs and $100 billion in spending across the
    Commonwealth. It is critical that we ensure that the Port is able to
    handle the increased number and size of container ships.
        The Port and the Army Corps of Engineers have undertaken the
    widening and deepening of the Norfolk Harbor to enable safe and
    efficient two-way passage of the newer and larger container ships.
    Expanding the Norfolk Harbor to allow for safe two-way traffic will
    also help prevent backlogs of commercial vessels that could cause
    costly delays and supply chain disruptions. In order to further improve
    this project, a modification is required. The proposed modification
    that I have submitted to the committee adds the widening and deepening
    of Anchorage F so that it is consistent with the project depth of the
    Federal Channel. Deepening and widening are a critical part of the
    Norfolk Harbor project and ensures that there is a safe anchorage for
    ultra-large container vessels.
        My district is also home to the Virginia Peninsula which is working
    to adapt to the surrounding rising water. Unfortunately, due to
    climate-driven sea level rise, compounded by historic land subsidence
    in the region, the waterways surrounding the Peninsula pose a serious
    risk. Some studies estimate this rise to be as much as 7 feet by the
    year 2100, making the Hampton Roads region the second largest
    population center at risk from sea level rise in the nation, behind
    only New Orleans. High tides, nor'easters, and hurricanes exacerbate
    the risk of flooding in the region.
        State and local elected officials in Virginia already appreciate
    the significant threat sea level rise poses to Hampton Roads.
    Unfortunately, the cost to proactively and aggressively address this
    problem head-on is far too great for any city to bear by itself.
    Inaction will greatly increase the financial and human costs and is
    simply not an option. While considerable sums of money to address these
    issues has been spent, the entire scope of the project is very large.
    That is why I am appreciative of the Committee's inclusion of
    resiliency initiatives in your infrastructure proposal.
        I am asking that federal properties be included in the Coastal
    Storm Risk Management (CSRM) study of the Virginia Peninsula and
    greater Hampton Roads region. The federal government, especially our
    military, has a significant footprint in our region. Not including
    these properties and installations in any subsequent report and plan
    will significantly harm any storm risk management efforts as it would
    not account for the outsized federal footprint in Hampton Roads.
    Allowing the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works to enter
    into agreements with other Federal agencies that own or operate
    property in the study area would allow for a truly comprehensive study
    on the Peninsula so that these installations are incorporated into the
    planning and construction process, saving money for taxpayers and
    producing more thorough plans.
        Thank you again for allowing me the opportunity to share my
    priorities for the forthcoming Water Resources and Development Act of
    2022. I look forward to working with you and the entire committee to
    ensure that these projects are included in order for the critical work
    in Hampton Roads to continue.

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Mikie Sherrill, a Representative in Congress
                          from the State of New Jersey
        Thank you, Chairwoman Napolitano (and Chairman DeFazio), for the
    opportunity to testify today and for your strong leadership throughout
    the WRDA process. I want to also recognize my New Jersey colleagues on
    the committee, Representatives Payne, Sires, and Malinowski, and
    Representative Malinowski particularly for his work on this
    subcommittee to advance New Jersey's priorities.
        I'm here today because flooding has plagued my district in North
    Jersey for generations. Last September, the remnants of Hurricane Ida
    caused significant damage to the region, including the tragic loss of
    life around the Peckman River. And while I am deeply grateful to the
    Committee for authorizing the Army Corps of Engineers Peckman River
    Basin Project, and the Army Corps for providing the full $146.2 million
    in federal funding to complete it, I wish I could tell you that the
    Peckman is the only source of flooding in my district.
        Unfortunately, flooding is an all too frequent reality for my
    constituents. The banks of the Whippany River have deteriorated badly,
    and the flooding that results is felt throughout the surrounding
    communities. The oldest historically Black church in Morris County,
    Bethel Church in Morristown, which has stood for over 178 years, has
    faced consistent flooding from the Whippany, leading to significant
    damage to the building and grounds. In 2001, when Tropical Storm Irene
    caused the Whippany River to surge beyond its banks, it filled the
    basement of the church with four feet of water.
        It doesn't stop there. I met recently with Mayors of four other
    impacted towns in the district--East Hanover, Hanover, Parsippany, and
    Florham Park. The flooding is such a regular occurrence that the towns
    now have water rescue units in place after the Mayors were regularly
    going out in rowboats to rescue residents. Hanover Township had to move
    the location of a fire house, and major roadways for business access
    are consistently flooded and closed at great economic cost to the
    community.
        My community needs the Army Corps to help. That's why I am
    requesting a General Investigation Watershed Study of the Whippany
    River, to begin the process of a federally-funded mitigation and
    restoration effort.
        I have also toured flood zones and spoken with Mayors and residents
    of towns including Pequannock, Montville, Lincoln Park, Wayne,
    Fairfield, Pompton Lakes, Livingston, Florham Park and Chatham about
    the impact of chronic flooding from the Passaic River. Flooding along
    the Passaic has caused twelve federal disaster declarations since 1968
    and multiple Army Corps reports support the need for mitigation
    efforts. The Corps estimates that when viewed over time, the average
    annual flood damage in the basin is over $160 million. Yet these towns
    are too often left to manage mitigation efforts on their own, without
    federal or state support--shouldering a regional issue in a piecemeal
    fashion that is both expensive and inefficient, not to mention an
    unfair burden for them to bear. To that end, I am here to request
    federal help. To begin this process, we need to authorize a feasibility
    study on desnagging, potential home elevations, and other mitigation
    opportunities under CAP authority around the Passaic River Basin.
        The good work this committee can do extends beyond flood
    mitigation. To that end, I am grateful for the Committee's decision to
    restore the authorization of Environmental Infrastructure Projects and
    I request that you consider the following submissions:
        First, several communities in my district, including Boonton
    Township and Montville have water treatment plants that are in urgent
    need of repair and updating. The poor condition and outdated
    technologies of these plants threaten the ability to maintain a safe
    and reliable supply of potable water. As such, I am requesting Army
    Corps investment to fund the needed improvements, repairs, and updates.
        Second, fourteen municipalities in my district currently have at
    least one Public Water System with PFAS violations, according to the
    NJDEP. PFAS, also called ``forever chemicals'', are linked to negative
    health consequences including cancer, infertility, liver and kidney
    disease, hormone disruption, and damage to the immune system,
    especially in children. These towns, which have populations as small as
    2,100 and as large as 50,000 people, do not have the resources to fix
    these issues on their own. As such, I am requesting Army Corps funding
    for a regional project in Essex, Morris, Passaic and Sussex Counties to
    install filters on municipal wells and elsewhere in the water
    infrastructure system to ensure clean drinking water for our
    communities.
        Third, the impact of Harmful Algae Blooms on Lake Hopatcong has
    been an ongoing struggle in my district. The closure of the lake during
    the summer season of 2019, which was caused by a HABs outbreak, was
    devastating to the community, not just from a recreational perspective,
    but because the lake and the tourism associated with it are a major
    economic driver for the region. One of the biggest contributors to this
    issue is the lack of sewer infrastructure along the lake. That is why I
    am requesting Army Corps funding for the study and installation of
    public sanitary sewers in Jefferson Township to help address this
    chronic issue.
        And while I have several other requests that I have submitted to
    the Committee, I know I am limited in my time here today. I also know
    that you are all committed to our job in Congress to make the
    government work for the people we represent. The Water Resources
    Development Act is a tremendous opportunity to make long-overdue
    progress, and I urge you to include these requests.
        Thank you and I yield back.

      Prepared Statement of Hon. Nydia M. Velazquez, a Representative in
                      Congress from the State of New York
        Dear Chairwoman Napolitano, Ranking Member Rouser, and members of
    the subcommittee, I thank you for allowing me to submit testimony for
    the record about my district's priorities for the Water Resources
    Development Act (WRDA) of 2022. I also commend all the Committee's
    staff for all their work and help during the submission process of WRDA
    projects.
        As climate change and rising sea levels continues to present
    enormous challenges for our communities, it is more important than ever
    to invest in resilient water resources infrastructure. As such, I would
    like to discuss two crucial projects that would be beneficial for my
    district and my constituents.
        First, I would like to highlight the Newtown Creek Salt Marsh and
    Ecology Berm project. This new environmental infrastructure request
    seeks to restore wetland habitat and build an elevated shoreline for
    public access and provide protection for adjacent properties and
    roadways from sea level rise and future storm surges. Once surrounded
    by 1,200 acres of tidal salt marsh, industrial growth and urban
    development left the Newtown Creek totally devoid of all marsh
    environment by the twenty-first century. The native salt marsh grasses
    help improve water quality, improve dissolved oxygen levels, mitigate
    storm surges, and provide critical habitat for keystone marine species,
    including the native ribbed mussels which are tremendous filter feeders
    and already exist in small crevices along the Creek's shorelines. The
    Newton Creek Alliance is ready and able to be the project sponsor if
    this infrastructure request is accepted by the Committee.
        Similarly, I also proudly submitted to this Committee, the Brooklyn
    Navy Yard Comprehensive Port Resiliency Plan as a new environmental
    infrastructure request. This Plan seeks to address flooding and sea
    level rise to keep critical maritime infrastructure functional
    including three of the last working dry docks on the East Coast which
    service U.S. Coast Guard and National Oceanic and Atmospheric
    Administration (NOAA) vessels and can catalyze development of offshore
    wind farms to generate renewable energy for the State. The Navy Yard's
    maritime infrastructure includes three of the last working dry docks on
    the East Coast. In just this current fiscal year, the Brooklyn Navy
    Yard Development Corporation is managing approximately $150 million of
    FEMA funds to invest in improving berths, dry docks, bulkheads, and
    other waterfront infrastructure. The Navy Yard's working waterfront
    includes GMD Shipyard, which provides O&M for public and private
    vessels, including U.S. Coast Guard and NOAA vessels. The Navy Yard was
    designated a port eligible for NYSERDA port infrastructure investment
    by the Governor of New York, as part of the Governor's efforts to
    catalyze development of offshore wind farms that will generate 9.5 GW
    of renewable energy for the State. The Navy Yard is susceptible to
    flooding and sea level rise, and there will likely be new improvements
    required to protect it and this unreplaceable infrastructure. The
    sponsor for this project is the Brooklyn Navy Yard Development
    Corporation.
        Finally, I would like to testify about the bipartisan request for a
    language in support for the Community of El Cano Martin Pena (CMP) in
    Puerto Rico. This year, environmental justice was delivered when the
    CMP was awarded with $163 million as one of the projects to receive
    funding following the enactment of the Infrastructure and Investment
    Act. I have been a proud advocate of this project throughout the years
    and through different WRDA requests. I stand in support again to
    include language to allow the USACE Secretary to credit, toward the
    non-Federal cost share of the Cano Martin Pena Project authorized by
    Section 5127 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007, any costs
    for provision of real property interests, performance of relocations,
    and demolition of structures that are determined by the Secretary to be
    required for the project, including such costs incurred prior to the
    effective date of the partnership agreement for the project.
        Once more, I would like to thank Chairman Napolitano, Ranking
    Member Rouzer, and the staff for the hard work through the WRDA process
    and for your consideration of these remarks.
        Thank you for allowing me the time to provide testimony.

                                   [all]