[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                 PROPOSALS FOR A WATER RESOURCES DEVELOP-
                  MENT ACT OF 2024: STAKEHOLDER PRIORITIES

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

                                (118-40)

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                            SUBCOMMITTEE ON
                    WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT

                                 OF THE

                              COMMITTEE ON
                   TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                           DECEMBER 13, 2023

                               __________

                       Printed for the use of the
             Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
             
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]             


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

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
55-011 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2024                    
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                

             COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

  Sam Graves, Missouri, Chairman
Rick Larsen, Washington,             Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford, 
  Ranking Member                     Arkansas
Eleanor Holmes Norton,               Daniel Webster, Florida
  District of Columbia               Thomas Massie, Kentucky
Grace F. Napolitano, California      Scott Perry, Pennsylvania
Steve Cohen, Tennessee               Brian Babin, Texas
John Garamendi, California           Garret Graves, Louisiana
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr., Georgiavid Rouzer, North Carolina
Andre Carson, Indiana                Mike Bost, Illinois
Dina Titus, Nevada                   Doug LaMalfa, California
Jared Huffman, California            Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Julia Brownley, California           Brian J. Mast, Florida
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida         Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey       Puerto Rico
Mark DeSaulnier, California          Pete Stauber, Minnesota
Salud O. Carbajal, California        Tim Burchett, Tennessee
Greg Stanton, Arizona,               Dusty Johnson, South Dakota
  Vice Ranking Member                Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey,
Colin Z. Allred, Texas                 Vice Chairman
Sharice Davids, Kansas               Troy E. Nehls, Texas
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia, Illinois   Tracey Mann, Kansas
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire          Burgess Owens, Utah
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Rudy Yakym III, Indiana
Jake Auchincloss, Massachusetts      Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Oregon
Marilyn Strickland, Washington       Thomas H. Kean, Jr., New Jersey
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana            Anthony D'Esposito, New York
Patrick Ryan, New York               Eric Burlison, Missouri
Mary Sattler Peltola, Alaska         John James, Michigan
Robert Menendez, New Jersey          Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon                 Brandon Williams, New York
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio            Marcus J. Molinaro, New York
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan        Mike Collins, Georgia
Valerie P. Foushee, North Carolina   Mike Ezell, Mississippi
                                     John S. Duarte, California
                                     Aaron Bean, Florida
                                     Celeste Maloy, Utah

            Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment

  David Rouzer, North Carolina, 
             Chairman
Grace F. Napolitano, California,     Daniel Webster, Florida
  Ranking Member                     Thomas Massie, Kentucky
John Garamendi, California           Brian Babin, Texas
Emilia Strong Sykes, Ohio,           Mike Bost, Illinois
  Vice Ranking Member                Doug LaMalfa, California
Jared Huffman, California            Bruce Westerman, Arkansas
Frederica S. Wilson, Florida         Brian J. Mast, Florida
Patrick Ryan, New York               Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon,
Val T. Hoyle, Oregon                   Puerto Rico
Hillary J. Scholten, Michigan        Burgess Owens, Utah
Julia Brownley, California           Eric Burlison, Missouri
Mark DeSaulnier, California          John James, Michigan, Vice 
Greg Stanton, Arizona                Chairman
Chris Pappas, New Hampshire          Derrick Van Orden, Wisconsin
Seth Moulton, Massachusetts          Brandon Williams, New York
Troy A. Carter, Louisiana            Mike Collins, Georgia
Eleanor Holmes Norton,               Mike Ezell, Mississippi
  District of Columbia               John S. Duarte, California
Rick Larsen, Washington (Ex Officio) Celeste Maloy, Utah
                                     Sam Graves, Missouri (Ex Officio)

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................   vii

                 STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  North Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Water Resources 
  and Environment, opening statement.............................     1
    Prepared statement...........................................     3
Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in Congress from the 
  State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water 
  Resources and Environment, opening statement...................     4
    Prepared statement...........................................    10
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Missouri, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, opening statement..............................    15
    Prepared statement...........................................    15
Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress from the State of 
  Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
  Infrastructure, opening statement..............................    16
    Prepared statement...........................................    17

                               WITNESSES

Shane Kinne, Executive Director, Coalition to Protect the 
  Missouri River, oral statement.................................    19
    Prepared statement...........................................    21
Hon. Teresa B. Batts, Mayor, Surf City, North Carolina, oral 
  statement......................................................    22
    Prepared statement, with assistance from Nicole Elko, Ph.D., 
      Executive Director, American Shore & Beach Preservation 
      Association................................................    24
James Weakley, President, Lake Carriers' Association, oral 
  statement......................................................    27
    Prepared statement...........................................    28
Hon. Paul Anderson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Port 
  Tampa Bay, and Chairman of both the American Association of 
  Port Authorities and the Coalition for America's Gateways and 
  Trade Corridors, oral statement................................    30
    Prepared statement...........................................    32
Dave Mitamura, Executive Director, National Water Supply 
  Alliance, oral statement.......................................    34
    Prepared statement...........................................    35

                       SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

Submissions for the Record by Hon. Grace F. Napolitano:
    Discussion Draft, Priority for Water Supply and Conservation 
      Act of 2023................................................     6
    Fact Sheet, Priority for Water Supply and Conservation Act...     8
    Statement of Torey Carter-Conneen, Chief Executive Officer, 
      American Society of Landscape Architects...................    59
    Letter of December 12, 2023, to Hon. Sam Graves, Chairman, 
      and Hon. Rick Larsen, Ranking Member, Committee on 
      Transportation and Infrastructure, from John D.S. Allen, 
      President, Water Replenishment District Board of Directors.    66
Submissions for the Record by Hon. David Rouzer:
    Letter of December 13, 2023, to Hon. David Rouzer, Chairman, 
      and Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, Ranking Member, Subcommittee 
      on Water Resources and Environment, from Kristen 
      Swearingen, Vice President, Legislative and Political 
      Affairs, Associated Builders and Contractors...............    11
    Letter of December 13, 2023, to Hon. Thomas R. Carper, 
      Chairman, and Hon. Shelley Moore Capito, Ranking Member, 
      Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and Hon. 
      Sam Graves, Chairman, and Hon. Rick Larsen, Ranking Member, 
      House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, from 
      the American Chemistry Council et al.......................    12

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                            December 8, 2023

    SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

    TO:      LMembers, Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment
    FROM:  LStaff, Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment
    RE:      LSubcommittee Hearing on ``Proposals for a Water 
Resources Development Act of 2024: Stakeholder Priorities''
_______________________________________________________________________


                               I. PURPOSE

    The Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment of the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will meet on 
Wednesday, December 13, 2023, at 2:00 p.m. ET in 2167 Rayburn 
House Office Building to receive testimony at a hearing 
entitled, ``Proposals for a Water Resources Development Act of 
2024: Stakeholder Priorities.'' The hearing will allow Members 
to receive testimony from water resources stakeholders, such as 
local officials, levee district managers, and others to discuss 
priorities related to the civil works responsibilities of the 
United States Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) for a Water 
Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 2024.

                             II. BACKGROUND

THE UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS_CIVIL WORKS

    The mission of the Corps is to ``deliver vital engineering 
solutions, in collaboration with [their] partners, to secure 
our Nation, energize our economy, and reduce disaster risk.'' 
\1\ The Corps is the Federal Government's lead water resource 
development and management agency.\2\ Its water resource 
program dates back to 1824 when it was established for the 
purpose of improving river navigation.\3\ The role of the Corps 
has evolved and expanded since then to include other main water 
resource responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Corps, Mission and Vision, (last accessed Nov. 28, 2023), 
available at https://www.usace.army.mil/About/Mission-and-Vision/.
    \2\ Corps, About Corps Water Resources Planning, (last accessed 
Nov. 28, 2023), available at https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/
guidance.cfm?Id=0&Option=Planning%20Fundamentals
&Type=About#::text=The%20U.%20S.%20Army%20Corps%20of,money%20for%20impr
oving
%20river%20navigation.
    \3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Today, the Corps' primary civil works responsibilities are 
to support coastal and river navigation, address flood risk 
management and storm damage, and protect and restore aquatic 
ecosystems.\4\ Specifically, through its eight divisions and 38 
district offices, the Corps manages 14,000 miles of levees, 740 
dams, 12,000 miles of inland intracoastal waterways, 218 lock 
chambers, and 13,000 miles of navigation channels.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\ See generally Anna Normand & Nicole Carter, Cong. Rsch. Serv. 
(IF113322), Water Resources Development Acts: Primer, (updated July 20, 
2023), available at https://www.crs.gov/reports/pdf/IF11322/IF11322.pdf 
[hereinafter CRS Report IF113322].
    \5\ Corps, Value to the Nation, (last accessed Nov. 28, 2023), 
available at https://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/Missions/Value-to-the-
Nation/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Corps also provides outdoor recreation opportunities, 
offers water supply storage to state and local partners, 
assists in emergency response, and is a leading producer of 
hydropower in the United States.\6\ In fact, the Corps is the 
largest owner-operator of hydroelectric power plants in the 
United States, which produce approximately 25 percent of the 
Nation's total hydropower output.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Corps' infrastructure portfolio is currently valued at 
$206 billion.\8\ This valuation is referred to as its ``capital 
stock'' and includes all water resources infrastructure built 
by the Corps since 1928.\9\ The estimated capital stock value 
increased $6.6 billion on average each year until 1982, when it 
peaked at $357 billion.\10\ The Corps has reported that 
deterioration, general wear and tear of infrastructure assets, 
and asset retirements have contributed to a decline in the 
value of the capital stock.\11\ Furthermore, the Corps has a 
construction backlog exceeding $100 billion, in addition to 
various authorized but unfunded studies and operation and 
maintenance activities.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ Corps, Capital Stock: Summary, (last accessed Nov. 28, 2023), 
available at https://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/Missions/Value-to-the-
Nation/Fast-Facts/Capital-Stock/Summary/.
    \9\ Id.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ CRS Report IF113322, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    To achieve its civil works mission, the Corps plans, 
designs, and constructs water resources development projects, 
typically in partnership with, and utilizing the financial 
support of, non-Federal interests, commonly referred to as 
project sponsors. The Corps' planning process seeks to balance 
economic development and environmental considerations as it 
addresses National, regional, and local water resources issues.

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACTS

    Congress generally authorizes Corps' studies, projects, and 
programs and makes changes to agency policies through 
legislation referred to as Water Resources Development Acts 
(WRDAs). Congress has developed and enacted WRDAs 
intermittently since the 1980s and has biennially enacted a 
WRDA since 2014.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Authorizing provisions in WRDAs can be project-specific, 
programmatic, or general directives for the Corps. Project-
specific authorizations most often fall into one of three broad 
categories: project studies, construction projects, or 
modifications to existing projects. Furthermore, water resource 
projects typically require two types of Congressional 
authorization: (1) authority to study the feasibility of the 
project and (2) authority to construct (and operate and 
maintain, as applicable) the project.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IDENTIFYING WATER RESOURCE NEEDS

    Generally, the first step in developing a project through 
the Corps is to study the feasibility of the proposed project, 
which typically requires Congressional authorization. Once 
authorized, 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--which is subject to 
appropriations--and the non-Federal project sponsor.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\ CRS Report IF113322, supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since February 2012, the Corps' feasibility studies have 
been guided by the ``3x3x3 rule,'' which states that 
feasibility reports should, generally, be produced within three 
years; with a Federal cost of no more than $3 million; and 
involve all three levels of Corps review--district, division, 
and headquarters--throughout the study process.\16\ This 
concept, enacted as section 1001 of the Water Resources Reform 
and Development Act (WRRDA) of 2014, also allows for a waiver 
of the 3x3x3 process for project studies determined to be 
complex based on size, scope, or significance.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Corps, Smart Planning Feasibility Studies, (Sept. 2015), 
available at https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/library/smart/
SmartFeasibility_Guide_highres.pdf.
    \17\ 33 U.S.C. 2282c.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    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.\18\ 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.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    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 United States Army Corps of 
Engineers Chief of Engineers (more commonly referred to as a 
Chief's Report).\20\ If the results and recommendations on the 
proposed project are favorable, then the next step is 
Congressional authorization for construction of the project, 
which is typically given in a WRDA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ See e.g., Corps, Planner's Library, (last accessed Nov. 28, 
2023), available at https://planning.erdc.dren.mil/toolbox/
library.cfm?Option=Direct&Group=Main&Item=Chief%20Report
⋐=None&Sort=Default.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.\21\ These projects typically require a cost-
share with a non-Federal project sponsor.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ See generally Anna Normand, Cong. Rsch. Serv. (IF11106), Army 
Corps of Engineers: Continuing Authorities Programs, (updated Mar. 15, 
2023), available at https://www.crs.gov/reports/pdf/IF11106/IF11106.pdf 
[hereinafter CRS Report IF11106].
    \22\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There are currently nine CAP categories:
     LStreambank erosion and shoreline protection; \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ See the Flood Control Act of 1946, 33 U.S.C. 701r Sec.  14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LBeach erosion control; \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ See the Act of August 13, 1946, 33 U.S.C. 426g Sec.  3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LNavigation improvement; \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\ See the River and Harbor Act of 1960, 33 U.S.C. 577 Sec. 107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LMitigation of shore damage by Federal navigation 
projects; \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\ See the River and Harbor Act of 1968, 33 U.S.C. 426(i) Sec.  
11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRegional sediment management/beneficial use of 
dredged material; \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ See the WRDA 1992, 33 U.S.C. 2326 Sec.  204.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LFlood control; \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ See the Flood Control Act of 1948, 33 U.S.C. 701s Sec.  205.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LAquatic ecosystem restoration; \29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ See the WRDA 1996, 33 U.S.C. 2330 Sec.  206.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LRemoval of obstructions and clearing channels for 
flood control; \30\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\ See the Act of August 28, 1937, 33 U.S.C. 701g Sec.  2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     LProject modifications for improvement of the 
environment.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ See the WRDA 1986, 33 U.S.C. 2309a Sec.  1135.

    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.\32\ 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.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ WRDA of 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-580, 106 Stat. 4835, Sec. 219.; 
WRDA of 1999, Pub. L. No. 106-53, 113 Stat. 352, Sec.  552.; WRDA of 
2022, Pub. L. No. 117-263, 136 Stat. 3819, Sec. 8376.
    \33\ Corps, Environmental Infrastructure, (last accessed Nov. 28, 
2023), available at https://www.nap.usace.army.mil/Missions/Civil-
Works/Environmental-Infrastructure/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      III. OUTLOOK FOR A WRDA 2024

PENDING CHIEF'S REPORTS:

    Currently, the Committee is in possession of three Chief's 
Reports for possible inclusion in WRDA 2024: Gulf Intracoastal 
Waterway, Texas (navigation and storm risk management); Seagirt 
Loop, Baltimore, Maryland (navigation); and Rhode Island 
Coastline, Rhode Island (coastal storm risk management). The 
Committee maintains a list of all Chief's Reports submitted by 
the Secretary of the Army for possible WRDA 2024 consideration 
on its website at https://transportation.house.gov/wrda-2024/.

ANNUAL 7001 REPORTS:

    Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014 (P.L. 113-121) requires the 
Corps to transmit an annual report to the authorizing 
committees that identifies, for potential Congressional 
authorization, completed feasibility reports, proposed 
feasibility studies submitted by non-Federal interests through 
a public comment period, proposed modifications to authorized 
water resources development projects or feasibility studies, 
and proposed modifications to environmental infrastructure 
program authorities. This report is entitled ``Report to 
Congress on Future Water Resources Development'' and is due by 
February 1st of each year. The Committee officially received 
the 2023 Section 7001 Report on December 4, 2023. The non-
Federal proposal submission period for the 2024 Section 7001 
Report was open from May 5, 2023, through August 28, 2023.\34\ 
The Committee maintains a list of all existing Section 7001 
Reports on its website at https://transportation.house.gov/
wrda-2024/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \34\ Proposals by Non-Federal Interests for Feasibility Studies, 
Proposed Modifications to Authorized Water Resources Development 
Projects and Feasibility Studies, etc., 88 Fed. Reg. 29109 (May 5, 
2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             IV. WITNESSES

     LThe Honorable Teresa Batts, Mayor, Surf City, 
North Carolina
     LMr. Jim Weakley, President, Lake Carriers' 
Association
     LThe Honorable Paul Anderson, President and Chief 
Executive Officer, Port Tampa Bay
     LMr. Shane Kinne, Executive Director, Coalition to 
Protect the Missouri River
     LMr. Dave Mitamura, Executive Director, National 
Water Supply Alliance

 
 PROPOSALS FOR A WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2024: STAKEHOLDER 
                               PRIORITIES

                              ----------                              


                      WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2023

                  House of Representatives,
   Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment,
            Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:01 p.m. in 
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. David Rouzer 
(Chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
    Mr. Rouzer. The Subcommittee on Water Resources and 
Environment will come to order.
    I ask unanimous consent that the chairman be authorized to 
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the 
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at 
today's hearing and ask questions.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    As a reminder, if Members wish to insert a document into 
the record, please also email it to [email protected]. 
Again, that's [email protected].
    I now recognize myself for the purposes of an opening 
statement.

   OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID ROUZER OF NORTH CAROLINA, 
   CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT

    Mr. Rouzer. Today's hearing marks the second in a series of 
hearings this subcommittee is holding in preparation for the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2024. This past week, we 
heard from Assistant Secretary Connor and General Spellmon 
regarding the administration's priorities for WRDA 2024. Today, 
we have the opportunity to hear from stakeholders from across 
the Nation who will testify to the importance of Army Corps 
Civil Works programs and maintaining a consistent 2-year WRDA 
schedule.
    WRDA is one of the most important pieces of legislation we 
work to draft and pass here in the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee, and we are proud to do so regularly. 
Every 2 years since 2014, Congress has passed a bipartisan, 
consensus WRDA bill into law, helping communities across the 
country. I look forward to working once again with my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to continue the important 
work and tradition of passing this bill every 2 years.
    As I mentioned at last week's hearing, WRDA is a critical 
legislative vehicle to meet the water resources needs in our 
communities nationwide. Reliable water navigation systems allow 
for the safe and efficient shipping of cargo, fueling our 
economy. Levees protect homes and businesses from flooding. 
Dams also provide flood control for communities, along with 
power and opportunities for recreation. Of particular 
importance to my constituents on the coast in North Carolina's 
Seventh Congressional District, coastal restoration and 
nourishment projects mitigate erosion and damage from frequent 
coastal storms.
    WRDA 2020 reauthorized the coastal storm risk management 
projects in Wrightsville Beach and Carolina Beach, allowing 
these to continue to receive renourishment. As sand naturally 
shifts over time, these coastal communities rely on a 
predictable renourishment cycle to ensure they can withstand 
storms. WRDA 2022 also provided authorization for investment in 
other erosion mitigation efforts, such as the shoreline and 
riverine restoration in Southport, North Carolina, which will 
bolster the riverbank's resilience against damage from storms 
and vessel traffic.
    To enhance flood mitigation efforts, it is important to 
have a clear understanding of the need. As such, the 2022 WRDA 
also authorized the national coastal mapping program in North 
Carolina, which will map inland and coastal waterways to 
identify factors that increase flood risk. I was pleased to see 
funding included in the 2024 Energy and Water Appropriations 
bill--that is, if we ever have an appropriations package that 
passes Congress and gets signed into law. Let's hope that we 
do.
    Mrs. Napolitano. We will.
    Mr. Rouzer. My ranking member says we will, so, I take her 
word on it.
    I was also pleased to continue support of the Wilmington 
Harbor deepening project, as authorized in WRDA 2020, to allow 
the Port of Wilmington to meet increasing demand.
    All of these efforts are critical parts of keeping 
Americans safe and allowing our Nation's economy to thrive, 
which is exactly what this legislation enables.
    An important part of the WRDA process is the partnership 
between the Federal Government, non-Federal partners, and 
stakeholders, who come together to solve local resource needs. 
So, I am glad to see today that we have a panel of witnesses 
made up of diverse interests and geographic areas. This panel 
can speak to water resource challenges as well as to solutions 
that these WRDAs can provide.
    We look forward to hearing from each of you here today on 
the importance of this legislation in assisting with flood 
control, inland waterway navigation, coastal restoration, beach 
renourishment, and ensuring the safe movement of goods through 
maritime transportation.
    I would like to extend a very warm welcome to each of you 
but, in particular, to a friend and constituent of mine, Mayor 
Teresa Batts of Surf City, North Carolina, with whom my staff 
and I have done a tremendous amount of work through the years 
as it relates to the needs of Surf City and the coastal area 
there.
    [Mr. Rouzer's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Hon. David Rouzer, a Representative in Congress 
 from the State of North Carolina, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Water 
                       Resources and Environment
    Today's hearing marks the second in a series of hearings this 
subcommittee is holding ahead of drafting a Water Resources Development 
Act (WRDA) for 2024. Last week, we heard from Assistant Secretary 
Connor and General Spellmon about the Administration's priorities for 
WRDA 2024. Today, we have the opportunity to hear from stakeholders 
from across the nation about the importance of Army Corps Civil Works 
programs and maintaining a consistent two-year WRDA schedule.
    WRDA is one of the most important pieces of legislation we work to 
draft and pass here at the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, 
and we are proud to do so regularly. Every two years since 2014, 
Congress has been able to pass a bipartisan, consensus WRDA bill into 
law, helping communities across the country. I look forward to working 
once again with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to continue 
the important tradition of passing a WRDA bill every two years.
    As I mentioned at last week's hearing, WRDA is a critical vehicle 
to meet the water resources needs in communities nationwide. Reliable 
water navigation systems allow for the safe and efficient shipping of 
cargo, fueling our economy. Levees protect homes and businesses from 
flooding. Dams also provide flood control for communities, along with 
power and opportunities for recreation. Finally, of particular 
importance to my constituents up and down the coast in North Carolina's 
Seventh District, coastal restoration and nourishment projects mitigate 
erosion and damage from frequent coastal storms.
    WRDA 2020 reauthorized the Coastal Storm Risk Management projects 
in Wrightsville Beach and Carolina Beach allowing these beaches to 
continue to receive renourishment. As sand naturally drifts away with 
the current over time, these coastal communities rely on a predictable 
renourishment cycle to ensure they are not at unmanageable risk when 
storms come. WRDA 2022 provided authorization for investment in other 
erosion mitigation efforts, such as the Shoreline and Riverine 
Restoration in Southport, North Carolina, which will bolster the 
river's resilience against damage from storms and vessel traffic.
    However, the best way to combat erosion and enhance mitigation 
efforts is to have a clear understanding of our coasts. To support this 
effort, the last WRDA also authorized the National Coastal Mapping 
Program in North Carolina which will map inland and coastal waterways 
to identify factors which increase flood risk. I was pleased to see 
this project addressed in the 2024 Energy and Water Appropriations 
bill. I was also pleased to continue support of the Wilmington Harbor 
deepening project as authorized in WRDA 2020 to allow the Port of 
Wilmington to meet increasing demand. All of these efforts are critical 
parts of keeping Americans safe and allowing our nation's economy to 
thrive, which is exactly what WRDA does.
    An important part of the WRDA process is the partnership between 
the federal government, non-federal partners, and stakeholders, who 
come together to solve local water resources needs. I am glad to see 
today that we have a panel of witnesses made up of diverse interests 
and geographic areas, but who are brought together not only by water 
resources issues, but also by solutions that WRDAs can provide.
    I look forward to hearing from each of you here today on the 
importance of WRDA in assisting with flood control, inland waterway 
navigation, coastal restoration, beach renourishment, and ensuring safe 
movement of goods through maritime transportation.
    Particularly, I would like to extend a warm welcome to a friend and 
constituent of mine, Mayor Teresa Batts of Surf City, North Carolina, 
with whom I have been able to work through the WRDA process to secure 
an important beach nourishment project upon approval from the office of 
the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works.

    Mr. Rouzer. With that, I yield back and recognize my 
ranking member, Mrs. Napolitano, for 5 minutes for an opening 
statement.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GRACE F. NAPOLITANO OF CALIFORNIA, 
RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT

    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, my great friend, Chairman 
Rouzer, for holding today's meeting.
    Through the biennial enactment of the Water Resources 
Development Act, WRDA, this committee is addressing the water-
related needs of our States and local communities. WRDAs are a 
shining example of how Congress can efficiently and effectively 
meet the bipartisan needs of our communities when we decide it 
is best to work together than apart.
    Again, I look forward to continuing my relationship and 
partnership with you, Mr. Chairman, Chairman Graves, and 
Ranking Member Larsen, to get it done.
    Mr. Chairman, each of our communities experience unique 
water resources challenges. We seek to address these challenges 
through predictable enactment of WRDA, providing the Corps with 
the tools and funding necessary to address community needs.
    As stressors or local priorities change over time, this 
committee has stayed vigilant to ensure that the Corps has the 
authority and resources necessary to address local needs.
    The history of the Corps bears this out. The Corps' Civil 
Works responsibility was initially focused primarily on 
navigation, developing the coastal and inland harbors necessary 
for the efficient movement of goods to our then young, great 
Nation.
    That responsibility was later expanded to incorporate 
large-scale flood control, in part due to widespread flooding 
along the Mississippi River that devastated communities and 
livelihoods.
    More recently, as more and more communities have come to 
realize the economic, environmental, and public health benefits 
from restoring their environment, Congress expanded the Corps' 
responsibility to include watershed and ecosystem restoration--
benefits that can be seen in the Florida Everglades, coastal 
Louisiana, and the Great Lakes.
    Mr. Chairman, we have reached another one of those critical 
decision points, this time related to the Corps' role in 
addressing water supply and water conservation needs of the 
Nation. Communities across the country are now facing similar 
water supply and water conservation challenges that we have 
long felt in the West. Cities and towns are coming to recognize 
the importance of water security for the health of their 
municipalities, their industry, their agriculture, and their 
economies.
    Over the past decade, I have championed several provisions 
to enhance the authority and flexibility of the Corps to 
address local water supply and water conservation needs while 
balancing these efforts with the other authorized purposes of 
the Corps.
    Yet, despite these legislative efforts, the Corps and the 
Office of Management and Budget continue to believe that water 
supply and water conservation are not a primary mission of the 
Corps, meaning that these objectives do not get the same 
attention and budgetary priority as the three other mission 
areas.
    Therefore, it is prudent that we rethink the Corps' role in 
helping communities face water insecurity--not to supplant the 
State and local efforts, but to support them.
    For months, staff and I have been working with stakeholders 
and Members of Congress to elevate the water supply and water 
conservation mission of the Corps. My draft proposal, the, 
quote, ``Priority for Water Supply and Conservation Act,'' 
close quote, which I ask unanimous consent to include as part 
of today's hearing record----
    Mr. Rouzer [interposing]. Without objection.
    Mrs. Napolitano [continuing]. Would direct the Corps to 
give equal budgetary and policy priority to water supply and 
water conservation elements of Corps' projects that are 
authorized by Congress.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
  Discussion Draft, Priority for Water Supply and Conservation Act of 
       2023, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Grace F. Napolitano
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 
 Fact Sheet, Priority for Water Supply and Conservation Act, Submitted 
               for the Record by Hon. Grace F. Napolitano
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

      H.R. ___ the Priority for Water Supply and Conservation Act
         Introduced by Congresswoman Grace F. Napolitano (D-CA)
    Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
    Water is essential for life and critical to the well-being of both 
humans and ecological systems. Water is an essential input into 
virtually all economic activity--contributing to the success of 
industry, manufacturing, agriculture, hydroelectricity, transportation, 
and recreation. Both our way and quality of life depends, to a great 
extent, on a reliable and sustainable water supply systems, including 
efforts to conserve and reuse water whenever possible.
    Congress provided the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), the 
nation's largest water resources management agency, with a major role 
in assuring the nation's water supply.
    The Corps assists States and local interests in providing Americans 
with enough water to meet their needs--primarily by providing storage 
space for water supply in multi-purpose Corps' reservoirs. The Corps 
also plays a critical role in providing sustainable sources of water to 
meet the nation's agricultural needs.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    As recent history has shown, the water needs of society are 
increasing and becoming more diverse. Today, communities are challenged 
in balancing competing water supply uses along with the pressures of 
growing populations, aging infrastructure, ecosystem protection, and 
climate change, including persistent drought conditions. Water security 
is becoming increasingly important to the water resources needs of the 
Nation, requiring a rethinking of the historic priorities and missions 
of the Corps.
    For decades, water supply has been given less prominence than other 
infrastructure responsibilities of the Corps, such as its current 
primary missions for navigation, flood control, and ecosystem/
environmental restoration. Water supply, including water conservation, 
are increasingly important national priorities that should be elevated 
in federal public policy discussions and must be given equal priority 
in the national discussion on the role, purpose, and value of Corps' 
water resources development infrastructure.
What H.R. ___ the Priority for Water Supply and Conservation Act WOULD 
                                  do:
    H.R. ___ would elevate water supply and water conservation to 
primary mission areas of the Corps to further encourage a heightened 
public focus on the challenges in meeting the competing water resources 
needs of the nation.
    H.R. ___ would authorize the Corps to give equal priority to water 
resources development measures for increased and sustainable sources of 
water supply, including:
      efforts to revise antiquated water control manuals at 
existing Corps' water resources development projects to maximize the 
opportunities water supply and water conservation when not inconsistent 
with other authorized project purposes;
      measures to remove sediment at existing Corps' reservoir 
projects to maximize water supply storage capacity of existing 
facilities;
      measures to ensure sustainable clean water for the 
protection and restoration of the environment and natural habitat;
      the investigation of opportunities to increase or add 
water supply storage at existing Corps' water resources development 
projects;
      measures to promote the use of innovative technologies 
and practices, such as forecast informed reservoir operations (FIRO) 
and managed aquifer recovery (MAR), to maximize the availability of 
water supply opportunities;
      the development of drought contingency plans for 
communities served by Corps' water supply projects to help address 
sustainable local water needs; and
      measures to promote water conservation and water reuse 
practices at existing water resources development projects to maximize 
the utilization of existing water supplies.
What H.R. ___ the Priority for Water Supply and Conservation Act WOULD 
                                NOT do:
    H.R. ___ does not affect existing national policy that recognizes 
that States and local interests have primary responsibilities in 
developing water supplies for domestic, municipal, industrial, and 
other purposes.
    H.R. ___ does not contemplate the construction of new, major 
surface infrastructure by the Corps for water storage.
    H.R. ___ does not affect the Corps' existing legal requirements to 
enter into agreements with States, municipalities, or other supply 
users, such as the Water Supply Act of 1958.

    Mrs. Napolitano. To be clear, my proposal does not 
automatically add water supply or water conservation to the 
existing projects, nor would it put a finger on the scale to 
prioritize water supply or water conservation over other 
existing, authorized project purposes. Nor would it affect 
existing national policy that recognizes that the State and 
local interests have primary responsibilities in developing 
local water supplies.
    My proposal simply eliminates any artificial barriers being 
used by the Corps or OMB to exclude from consideration worthy 
water supply and conservation projects authorized by Congress 
that also have substantial State and local support.
    Mr. Chairman, as we develop a new WRDA bill for 2024, that 
legislation should recognize the increased role the Corps is 
playing and will continue playing in addressing the municipal, 
industrial, and agricultural water needs of our communities and 
constituents.
    I look forward to working with you on this proposal and on 
our continued partnership to develop another successful WRDA 
this Congress. So, let's get to work, and I yield back.
    [Mrs. Napolitano's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Hon. Grace F. Napolitano, a Representative in 
Congress from the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee 
                   on Water Resources and Environment
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding today's hearing.
    Through biennial enactment of Water Resources Development Acts, 
this committee is addressing the water related needs of our states and 
local communities. WRDAs are a shining example of how Congress can 
efficiently and effectively meet the bipartisan needs of our 
communities when we decide it is better to work together than apart.
    Again, I look forward to continuing my partnership with you, with 
Chairman Graves, and with Ranking Member Larsen to get this done.
    Mr. Chairman, each of our communities' experience unique water 
resources challenges. We seek to address these challenges through 
predictable enactment of WRDAs--providing the Corps with the tools 
necessary to address community needs.
    As stressors or local priorities change over time, this Committee 
has stayed vigilant to ensure that the Corps has the authority and 
resources necessary to address local needs.
    The history of the Corps bears this out. The Corps' civil works 
responsibility was initially focused primarily on navigation--
developing the coastal and inland harbors necessary for the efficient 
movement of goods to our young nation.
    That responsibility was later expanded to incorporate large-scale 
flood control, in part, due to widespread flooding along the 
Mississippi River that devastated communities and livelihoods.
    More recently, as more and more communities have come to realize 
the economic, environmental, and public health benefits from restoring 
their environment, Congress expanded the Corps' responsibility to 
include watershed and ecosystem restoration--the benefits that can be 
seen in the Florida Everglades, Coastal Louisiana, and the Great Lakes.
    Mr. Chairman, we have reached another one of those critical 
decision points--this time related to the Corps' role in addressing 
water supply and water conservation needs of the nation.
    Communities across the country are now facing similar water supply 
and water conservation challenges as we have long felt in the West. 
Cities and towns are coming to recognize the importance of water 
security for the health of their municipalities, their industry, their 
agriculture, and their economies.
    Over the past decade, I have championed several provisions to 
enhance the authority and flexibility of the Corps to address local 
water supply and water conservation needs, while balancing these 
efforts with the other authorized purposes of Corps' projects.
    Yet, despite these legislative efforts, the Corps (and the Office 
of Management and Budget) continue to believe that water supply and 
water conservation are not ``primary missions of the Corps''--meaning 
that these objectives do not get the same attention and budgetary 
priority as other mission areas.
    Therefore, it is prudent that we rethink the Corps' role in helping 
communities facing water insecurity--not to supplant state and local 
efforts, but to support them.
    For months, I have been working with stakeholders and other Members 
of Congress to elevate the water supply and water conservation mission 
of the Corps.
    My draft proposal, the ``Priority for Water Supply and Conservation 
Act,''--which I ask unanimous consent to include as part of today's 
hearing record--would direct the Corps to give equal budgetary and 
policy priority to water supply and water conservation elements of 
Corps projects that are authorized by Congress.
    To be clear, my proposal would not automatically add water supply 
or water conservation to existing projects, nor would it put a 
``finger-on-the-scale'' to prioritize water supply or water 
conservation over other exiting authorized purposes.
    Nor would it affect existing national policy that recognizes that 
states and local interests have primary responsibilities in developing 
local water supplies.
    My proposal simply eliminates any artificial barriers being used by 
the Corps or OMB to exclude from consideration worthy water supply and 
conservation projects authorized by Congress that also have substantial 
state and local support.
    Mr. Chairman, as we develop a new WRDA bill for 2024, that 
legislation should recognize the increased role that the Corps is 
playing (and will continue to play) in addressing the municipal, 
industrial, and agricultural water needs of our communities and 
constituents.
    I look forward to working with you on this proposal, and on our 
continued partnership to develop another successful WRDA this Congress.
    Let's get to work, and I yield back.

    Mr. Rouzer. I thank the gentlelady.
    I have a couple documents to enter into the record myself.
    I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter 
from Associated Builders and Contractors dated December 13, 
2023, outlining WRDA priorities.
    I also ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a 
letter from a maritime coalition dated December 13, 2023, also 
outlining WRDA priorities.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    [The information follows:]

                                 
 Letter of December 13, 2023, to Hon. David Rouzer, Chairman, and Hon. 
 Grace F. Napolitano, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water Resources 
 and Environment, from Kristen Swearingen, Vice President, Legislative 
 and Political Affairs, Associated Builders and Contractors, Submitted 
                  for the Record by Hon. David Rouzer
                                                 December 13, 2023.
The Honorable David Rouzer,
Chairman,
U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee 
        on Water Resources and Environment, 2165 Rayburn House Office 
        Building, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Grace Napolitano,
Ranking Member,
U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Subcommittee 
        on Water Resources and Environment, 2165 Rayburn House Office 
        Building, Washington, DC 20515.
    Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano and Members of the U.S. 
House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on 
Water Resources and Environment:
    On behalf of Associated Builders and Contractors, a national 
construction industry trade association with 68 chapters representing 
more than 23,000 member companies, we thank you for holding the 
hearing, ``Proposals for a Water Resources Development Act of 2024: 
Stakeholder Priorities.''
    ABC believes that the WRDA 2024 bill represents an opportunity to 
deliver a bipartisan infrastructure bill with constructive feedback 
from nonfederal partners and other stakeholders. ABC urges the 
committee to continue the tradition of keeping anti-competitive 
procurement provisions out of the final WRDA product's legislative 
language.
    ABC appreciates the opportunity to comment on the committee's 
important work to improve our nation's water infrastructure and share 
our priorities, as ABC and our members are committed to building 
taxpayer-funded projects with the highest standards of safety and 
quality.
    ABC urges the committee to ensure that all contracts awarded from 
funds of the legislation are granted through a fair and competitive 
bidding process that allows all qualified contractors to compete on a 
level playing field based on merit, experience, quality and safety.
    The committee should be aware that WRDA projects could be effected 
by President Biden's Feb. 4, 2022, Executive Order 14063 [https://
www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/02/09/2022-02869/use-of-project-
labor-agreements-for-federal-construction-projects], which requires 
PLAs on federal contracts of $35 million or more. Once final, the Biden 
proposal will replace President Obama's Feb. 2, 2009, Executive Order 
13502, which encourages federal agencies to mandate PLAs on large-scale 
federal construction projects exceeding $25 million in total value on a 
case-by-case basis, and permits states and localities to mandate PLAs 
on federally assisted projects. ABC estimates the final Biden proposal 
will affect as many as 120 federal contracts valued at $10 billion, 
which is approximately 40% of the value of federal construction put in 
place on an annual basis.
    To deliver the highest quality projects at the best cost to 
taxpayers, a critical part of any federal investment in infrastructure 
should include the entire construction industry. The most cost-
effective way to rebuild infrastructure is to promote open competition. 
ABC urges the committee to ensure that WRDA 2024 is free from any 
government mandated PLAs.
    Further, while ABC supports increased financing of water 
infrastructure projects, we are concerned that these funds would apply 
the recently rewritten [https://www.abc.org/DavisBacon] federal Davis-
Bacon Act requirements to federal and nonfederally funded projects, 
decreasing the value to taxpayers. The committee should consider 
opposing the more than 50 significant changes and urge the U.S. 
Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division to withdraw the final 
rule. Additionally, the committee should study the flawed and 
inflationary wage determination process' effects on WRDA projects, 
including the impact on competition, increase in the cost of 
construction, and the effect on the number projects funded.
    ABC members stand ready for the opportunity to build and maintain 
America's water infrastructure to the benefit of the communities that 
it will serve.
    Thank you for your consideration of ABC's concerns.
            Sincerely,
                                        Kristen Swearingen,
                 Vice President, Legislative and Political Affairs,
                               Associated Builders and Contractors.

                                 
 Letter of December 13, 2023, to Hon. Thomas R. Carper, Chairman, and 
    Hon. Shelley Moore Capito, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on 
 Environment and Public Works, and Hon. Sam Graves, Chairman, and Hon. 
  Rick Larsen, Ranking Member, House Committee on Transportation and 
 Infrastructure, from the American Chemistry Council et al., Submitted 
                  for the Record by Hon. David Rouzer
                                                 December 13, 2023.
The Honorable Thomas R. Carper,
Chairman,
Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 
        20510.
The Honorable Shelley Moore Capito,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Environment and Public Works, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC 
        20510.
The Honorable Sam Graves,
Chairman,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Rick Larsen,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of 
        Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Chairmen Carper and Graves and Ranking Members Moore Capito 
and Larsen:
    The undersigned organizations applaud the provisions in the 
bipartisan Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) that focus on the 
health of our nation's ports and waterways and request that this 
legislation ensures that needed modifications are made to keep U.S. 
waterways operating safely, efficiently, and competitively in the 
global marketplace.
    The U.S. maritime infrastructure system acts as a critical link in 
the American economy. In 2022, the U.S. maritime transportation 
system--consisting of harbors, ports, channels, locks, dams, and 
waterways--delivered over $2.3 trillion worth of imports and 
exports.\1\ The U.S. coastal port and inland waterway system together 
support over 2.5 million jobs associated with the shipping industry.\2\ 
\3\ Many commodity markets rely on waterborne commerce including farm 
and livestock products, raw materials and minerals, coal, iron ore, 
chemicals, petroleum and petroleum products, and consumer goods. The 
coastal port and inland waterway system support an additional 28 
million jobs in these and related industries. With many U.S. jobs and 
markets dependent upon U.S. waterways and infrastructure, a healthy and 
reliable maritime system is more important than ever in keeping 
domestically produced goods and markets competitive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ 2022 USDOT, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S.-
International Freight Trade by Transportation Mode
    \2\ PwC. Economic Contribution of the US Tugboat, Towboat, and 
Barge Industry. May 10, 2017
    \3\ Martin Associates. 2018 National Economic Impact of the U.S. 
Coastal Port System. March 2019
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The U.S. maritime infrastructure system is in critical condition, 
and geopolitical and national security events have created increased 
demand for U.S. commodities and energy exports, resulting in pressures 
on the system not seen in decades. U.S. international and domestic 
trade is expected to continue increasing while global trade volume, 
shipping distances, and vessels expand to maximize cost efficiency. 
While the reliance on the maritime system grows, the existing 
infrastructure is aging with the average age of locks in the United 
States now exceeding 50 years. As a result of aging infrastructure, 
traffic delays, frequent congestion and added costs are common events 
for waterway users.
    To address these challenges, the Water Resources Development Act of 
2024 must include provisions to facilitate maintaining the future 
efficient and effective construction and maintenance of important 
maritime projects. In addition, provisions must ensure waterway usage 
is safe, secure, and affordable. WRDA 2024 must take into consideration 
the following:
      Inland waterways construction and major rehabilitation 
projects funded by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) 
remain at federal cost. The 11,000 miles of fuel-taxed navigable 
waterways are a crucial component of our nation's agriculture, energy, 
and manufacturing supply chains. Despite facilitating the transport of 
one-third of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, the system relies on 
a network of lock and dam infrastructure that was constructed in the 
early 20th century, far exceeding its original 50-year design life. 
Deterioration has made these projects more susceptible to failures that 
result in unscheduled closures or stoppages. These delays increase 
congestion and the cost of transporting waterborne commodities, 
compounding the recent effects of inflation on consumers. Necessary 
capital improvements to the inland waterways transportation system are 
cost-shared through a 29-cent-per-gallon fuel tax imposed on commercial 
users of the system, and these taxes are deposited into the Inland 
Waterways Trust Fund (IWTF) to help with recapitalization of the 
system. The current cost-share requirement is 35% from the IWTF, with 
the remaining 65% from General Treasury funds, both appropriated to the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (The Corps) in an Energy and Water 
Development appropriations bill. In providing Infrastructure Investment 
and Jobs Act (IIJA) funds to The Corps, Congress waived the cost-share 
requirement for inland waterways construction and major rehabilitation 
projects, recognizing the importance of accelerating the pace to 
complete projects in order to strengthen America's supply chain and 
stay competitive in global markets. The IIJA funded seven inland 
waterways construction projects, but due to significant cost overruns, 
IIJA funds will be unable to complete any of these projects that were 
originally considered funded to completion. Unless modified in WRDA 
2024, this will jeopardize and needlessly delay critical ongoing and 
planned capital improvements across the antiquated inland waterways 
transportation system, further delaying the economic and environmental 
benefits to the Nation.

      +  Consistent with Congressional intent, the undersigned 
organizations request that all inland waterways construction and major 
rehabilitation projects funded by the Infrastructure Investment and 
Jobs Act (IIJA) remain at federal cost. This is consistent with the 
intent that IIJA-funded inland waterways construction projects are 
completed at 100% federal cost to achieve an accelerated return on 
investment. Ensuring the cost of these projects remains 100% federally 
funded will allow the nation to realize economic return more quickly, 
reduce the supply chain's environmental footprint, address uncertainty 
in global agriculture and energy markets, and is consistent with 
Congressional intent.

      Reauthorization of the National Dam Safety Program and 
needed reforms to the High Hazard Potential Dam Rehabilitation Program. 
These two programs serve as the backbone of federal efforts to ensure 
the safety and resilience of the nation's dams. Congress has 
demonstrated its willingness to support these programs through needed 
investments in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), and 
must continue to build on these investments to improve dam safety and 
protect downstream communities. We ask that WRDA 2024 include:
      a.  A five-year reauthorization of the National Dam Safety 
Program, ensuring that program can continue to support state-level 
programs through 2028.
      b.  The removal of unnecessary limitations in the existing law 
prohibiting states from receiving State Assistance Grant funding 
totaling more than 50% of the cost of implementing state dam safety 
programs. States are already required to make reasonable effort to fund 
their own programs, and removing this limitation will allow for annual 
appropriations and IIJA funds to flow more freely to states.
      c.  A new definition of ``small underserved community'' for the 
High Hazard Potential Dam Rehabilitation Program, and waiving the 35% 
non-federal cost share requirements for grant eligible communities that 
fall under this definition.
      d.  Ensure that operation and maintenance responsibility or high 
hazard potential dam projects falls on dam owners and not smaller grant 
subrecipients.
      e.  Language requiring an update from The Corps on efforts to 
implement the National Low Head Dam Inventory, which was authorized in 
WRDA 2022.
      f.  Creation of a program dedicated to financing stormwater 
infrastructure projects.

      Necessary adjustments to Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 
We ask that WRDA 2024 include dedicated funding of the Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) to make certain that ports and channels 
are maintained at their full depth and width to accommodate a variety 
of commerce and waterway traffic. We also request that the bill include 
language to maintain a new program, without affecting existing HMTF 
funding allocations, for a five-year Inland Waterways Dredge Pilot 
Program to increase the reliability, availability, and efficiency of 
federally owned and operated inland waterways projects, provide cost 
savings, and enhance the availability of container cargo on inland 
waterways.

      Energy Port Funding Allocation. The Corps has twice 
failed to recommend a single dollar of HMTF towards the energy port 
target in the fiscal year 2023 work plan to meet the funding 
allocations outlined in WRDA 2020. Energy ports are critical to our 
national supply chain and stable HTMF funding for expanded uses is 
fundamental to maintaining international competitiveness. This funding 
can assist with capital improvements at these critical ports, which 
already pay a significant share of the collected tax. The Corps must 
meet the donor and energy target in the FY24 work plan and include the 
funding in future budget submissions.

      National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) permitting 
processes transparency. Requiring The Corps to provide a report to the 
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the House 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure on National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) permitting processes, including the 
length of time the Corps took to complete environmental assessments and 
the number of outstanding assessments to be completed.

    As a significant component of local, state, and national economies, 
the health of our maritime system is essential to our way of life. 
Dependable, modernized maritime infrastructure is critical in 
maintaining and enhancing U.S. competitiveness in the global 
marketplace. The undersigned organizations strongly support your 
bipartisan leadership to improve our nation's infrastructure, and we 
look forward to working with you to swiftly enact this legislation.
            Sincerely,

American Chemistry Council.
American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers.
American Petroleum Institute.
American Society of Civil Engineers.
Chamber of Shipping of America.
Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Company, LLC.
Illinois Soybean Association.
National Mining Association.
The American Waterways Operators.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Waterways Council, Inc.

    Mr. Rouzer. It is my great pleasure to recognize the 
chairman of the full committee, Mr. Graves, for 5 minutes for 
an opening statement.

  OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SAM GRAVES OF MISSOURI, CHAIRMAN, 
         COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

    Mr. Graves of Missouri. Thank you, Chairman Rouzer.
    And I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here 
today.
    This is our second hearing in preparation for the committee 
writing and passing our sixth consecutive bipartisan Water 
Resources Development Act since 2014, at least.
    Ensuring effective and reliable water infrastructure is 
vital to American families, to our businesses, to farms, and 
the economic development of our country.
    My district is bordered by two of the largest rivers in the 
United States--on one side, the Missouri River, and on the 
other side, the Mississippi River. And that is why a major 
priority of mine is ensuring that our river navigation 
infrastructure on the Mississippi and Missouri--and the rest of 
the Nation's waterways, for that matter--gets the investment 
that they desperately need.
    In addition, we have to 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. And we learned that lesson the hard way 
in 1993, in 2011, and again in 2019, when flooding along the 
Missouri and Mississippi Rivers devastated communities all 
across my district.
    I have long been concerned that the current river 
management incorrectly prioritizes fish and wildlife over the 
protection of people and property. And that has 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 is going to be a 
top priority of mine throughout the development of WRDA 2024.
    And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    [Mr. Graves of Missouri's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress 
 from the State of Missouri, and Chairman, Committee on Transportation 
                           and Infrastructure
    Thank you, Chairman Rouzer, and thank you to our witnesses for 
being here today.
    This is our second hearing in preparation for the Committee writing 
and passing our sixth consecutive bipartisan Water Resources 
Development Act since 2014. 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 the hard way in 1993, 2011, and again in 2019 when 
flooding along the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers devastated 
communities across my district.
    I have long been concerned that current river management 
incorrectly prioritizes 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 2024.

    Mr. Rouzer. The gentleman yields back.
    I now recognize the ranking member of the full committee, 
Mr. Larsen, for 5 minutes.

 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICK LARSEN OF WASHINGTON, RANKING 
     MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

    Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for holding 
this second hearing on the development of the Water Resources 
Development Act.
    In the Pacific Northwest and across the entire country, 
businesses and communities understand the critical importance 
of ports, harbors, and inland waterways to keeping goods that 
we rely on moving, protecting homes from flood damage, and 
preserving our ecosystems.
    Since 2014, this committee has honored its commitment to 
meet local water resource needs around the country carried out 
by the Army Corps through regular enactment of bipartisan 
WRDAs. WRDAs support projects that address local water resource 
challenges to create jobs in construction, and support 
industries and businesses that benefit directly from port 
projects.
    Regular, predictable enactment of WRDA also allows for the 
implementation of critical and timely policy reforms that 
improve the function and flexibility of the Corps to respond to 
local water resource challenges.
    WRDA 2022 is a blueprint for future WRDAs. It successfully 
authorized the construction of 25 new projects covering each 
facet of the Corps' missions, as well as almost 100 new 
feasibility studies for future water resource development 
projects.
    WRDA 2022 also authorized a historic total of more than 
$6.5 billion in environmental infrastructure assistance for 
community-driven projects, including $200 million for locally 
supported water and wastewater infrastructure projects in my 
home State of Washington.
    These Federal, State, and local partnerships are critical 
to help address the growing water and the wastewater 
infrastructure needs throughout the country.
    WRDA 2024 is our opportunity to build on the bipartisan 
successes of the last few bills. We can continue to advance 
efforts to expand America's navigational capacity and 
strengthen its supply chains through port, harbor, and inland 
waterways development. We can continue to authorize job-
creating investments that simultaneously address the water 
resource challenges facing our communities and support 
national, regional, and local economies.
    And we can continue to prepare our communities for the 
challenges that the climate crisis poses as well as what 
extreme weather events impose upon us. And we can continue to 
promote equity for all communities by ensuring access to the 
Corps' technical and planning expertise, as well as by 
increasing the coordination between the Corps and Tribal, 
minority, and disadvantaged communities.
    Beyond regular enactment of WRDAs, Congress also needs to 
provide sufficient funding to the Corps for project planning, 
construction, and operation and maintenance so communities can 
quickly realize the benefits of water resource improvements. 
The $17 billion downpayment made through the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law is a great start, but Congress needs to 
continue to sustain robust investment in our water 
infrastructure into the future.
    So, I look forward to the continued partnership with Chair 
Graves, Chair Rouzer, and Ranking Member Napolitano as we 
develop the new bipartisan WRDA 2024.
    And, with that, I yield back.
    [Mr. Larsen of Washington's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
 Prepared Statement of Hon. Rick Larsen, a Representative in Congress 
    from the State of Washington, and Ranking Member, Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure
    Thank you, Chair Rouzer, for holding a second hearing on the 
development of the Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA.
    In the Pacific Northwest and across the country, businesses and 
communities understand the critical importance of ports, harbors and 
inland waterways to keeping the goods we rely on moving, protecting 
homes from flood damage, and preserving our ecosystems.
    Since 2014, this Committee has honored its commitment to meet local 
water resource needs around the country carried out by the Army Corps 
through regular enactment of bipartisan WRDAs.
    WRDAs support projects that address local water resource challenges 
to create jobs in construction, and support industries and the 
businesses that benefit directly from Corps projects.
    Regular, predictable enactment of WRDAs also allows for the 
implementation of critical and timely policy reforms that improve the 
function and flexibility of the Corps to respond to local water 
resources challenges.
    WRDA 2022 is a blueprint for future WRDAs.
    It successfully authorized the construction of 25 new projects 
covering each facet of the Corps' missions, as well as almost 100 new 
feasibility studies for future water resource development projects.
    WRDA 2022 also authorized a historic total of more than $6.5 
billion in environmental infrastructure assistance for community driven 
projects, including $200 million for locally supported water and 
wastewater infrastructure projects in my home state of Washington.
    These federal, state, and local partnerships are critical to help 
address the growing water and wastewater infrastructure needs 
throughout the country.
    WRDA 2024 is our opportunity to build on the bipartisan successes 
of the last few bills.
    We can continue to advance efforts to expand America's navigational 
capacity and strengthen its supply chains through port, harbor, and 
inland waterways development.
    We can continue to authorize job-creating investments that 
simultaneously address the water resources challenges facing our 
communities and support national, regional, and local economies.
    We can continue to prepare our communities for the challenges the 
climate crisis poses as well as extreme weather events.
    We can continue to promote equity for all communities by ensuring 
access to the Corps' technical and planning expertise, as well as by 
increasing the coordination between the Corps and Tribal, minority, and 
disadvantaged communities.
    Beyond the regular enactment of WRDAs, Congress also needs to 
provide sufficient funding to the Corps for project planning, 
construction, and operation and maintenance so communities can quickly 
realize the benefits of water resources improvements.
    The $17 billion downpayment made by the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law is a great start, but Congress needs to continue to sustain robust 
investment in our water infrastructure into the future.
    I look forward to the continued partnership with Chairman Graves, 
Chairman Rouzer, and Ranking Member Napolitano in developing a new 
bipartisan WRDA 2024.
    With that, I yield back.

    Mr. Rouzer. The gentleman yields back.
    I would now like to welcome our witnesses and thank them 
for being here today.
    I will identify each: Mr. Shane Kinne, executive director 
of the Coalition to Protect the Missouri River; Mayor Teresa 
Batts of Surf City, North Carolina; Mr. Jim Weakley, president 
of the Lake Carriers' Association; Mr. Paul Anderson, president 
and CEO of Port Tampa Bay; and Mr. Dave Mitamura, executive 
director of the National Water Supply Alliance.
    I want to briefly take a moment to explain the lighting 
system, which is fairly self-explanatory. Green means go, 
yellow means you have a little time left, and red means wrap it 
up as quickly as possible.
    I ask unanimous consent that the witnesses' full statements 
be included in the record.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    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.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    I also ask unanimous consent that the record remain open 
for 15 days for additional comments and information submitted 
by Members or witnesses to be included in the record of today's 
hearing.
    Without objection, so ordered.
    As your written testimony has been made part of the record, 
the subcommittee asks that you limit your oral remarks to 5 
minutes.
    I would now like to recognize the chairman of the full 
committee, Mr. Graves, to introduce Mr. Kinne.
    Mr. Graves of Missouri. So, thanks, Mr. Chairman, and I do 
want to take just a moment to go in a little bit more depth on 
Shane Kinne. He is the executive director, as was pointed out, 
of the Missouri Coalition to Protect the Missouri River, and I 
want to thank him for being here today.
    The Coalition to Protect the Missouri River has been at the 
forefront of the fight to ensure that the river is responsibly 
managed and that we get back to the original intent of this 
system--and that's navigation and flood control--and, at the 
same time, balancing the other needs, which do include water 
supplies and include science-based recovery of some endangered 
species.
    I have been proud to work with Shane on these efforts, both 
in his current role with the coalition and also through his 
work with the Missouri Corn Growers Association helping farmers 
navigate the aftermath of the 2011 flood.
    And I want to thank Shane again for your work and for 
making the trip out here to testify today.
    And I look forward to the testimonies.
    And, with that, thanks, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Kinne, you are now recognized for 5 
minutes.

  TESTIMONY OF SHANE KINNE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COALITION TO 
 PROTECT THE MISSOURI RIVER; HON. TERESA B. BATTS, MAYOR, SURF 
CITY, NORTH CAROLINA; JAMES WEAKLEY, PRESIDENT, LAKE CARRIERS' 
ASSOCIATION; HON. PAUL ANDERSON, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 
  OFFICER, PORT TAMPA BAY, AND CHAIRMAN OF BOTH THE AMERICAN 
ASSOCIATION OF PORT AUTHORITIES AND THE COALITION FOR AMERICA'S 
  GATEWAYS AND TRADE CORRIDORS; AND DAVE MITAMURA, EXECUTIVE 
            DIRECTOR, NATIONAL WATER SUPPLY ALLIANCE

  TESTIMONY OF SHANE KINNE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COALITION TO 
                   PROTECT THE MISSOURI RIVER

    Mr. Kinne. Chairman, members of the committee, and ranking 
members, thank you for the opportunity to testify today 
regarding WRDA 2024 and its importance for the Missouri River 
and our stakeholders.
    As mentioned, my name is Shane Kinne. I am the executive 
director of the Coalition to Protect the Missouri River.
    CPMR was established in 2001 and is made up of more than 30 
members across 6 States in the Midwest region, and we support, 
as the chairman indicated, responsible management of the 
Missouri River resources as well as the maintenance and 
enhancement of the congressionally authorized purposes of the 
river, including flood control, navigation, and water supply.
    We also support, as was indicated, science-based habitat 
restoration for endangered or threatened species, provided 
those management actions keep human interests and our members' 
interests in mind and properly balanced.
    We are here at a very important time when it comes to the 
Missouri River and Missouri River management. While there are 
challenges that I will discuss, we have much momentum on the 
Missouri River, as well, in regards to flood control and to 
navigation.
    Much of this is due to recently passed WRDA bills and 
generational authorizations of projects and studies that were 
included in those WRDA bills. And if those studies and projects 
are properly executed, it will have a long-term impact on the 
Missouri River and our region.
    In order for us, though, to continue to capitalize on that 
momentum and the excitement we have going on in the Missouri 
River, it is critical that Congress continues to pass WRDA 
bills on time and every 2 years, as that is what we need to 
capture that momentum and take action.
    The historic flood of 2019 caused billions of dollars in 
flood damages throughout Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, and Missouri, 
with much of those damages in Missouri's Sixth Congressional 
District, as the chairman indicated.
    WRDA 2020 authorized the Lower Missouri River Flood 
Resiliency Study, which is allowing our region to take a new 
look at flood control along the Missouri River. This study is 
going to focus on local solutions and increased resiliency of 
flood control on the Missouri River.
    As part of this study, it is critical that stakeholders 
begin to see progress as soon as possible, which is why passing 
a WRDA bill in 2024 is absolutely critical, so we can take 
action on solutions that we already have agreement on moving 
forward.
    In addition, between disaster funding from 2019 and the 
2022 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, over $469 million is being 
invested in the Missouri River navigation channel. We are only 
halfway through this investment in this project, and it is 
already having a staggering impact on the resiliency of the 
channel. Several navigators have shared with me recently that 
they were able to move boats during the past 2 years of low 
water when they wouldn't have been able to in previous years 
without this work and rock placement.
    Along with this success, WRDA 2020 also authorized the 
Missouri River Navigation Resiliency Study that is allowing us 
to take a fresh look at a broad range of factors that could 
improve resiliency of navigation on the river. The timing of 
this study, along with the Federal investment that I just 
mentioned, is absolutely critical to gain momentum for shipping 
on the river.
    Commercial traffic is increasing on the river to levels we 
haven't seen in decades, with the Port of Blencoe at Blencoe, 
Iowa, opening in 2021 with NEW Cooperative of Iowa. They have 
had three successful navigation seasons north of Omaha, 
Nebraska.
    Prior to opening this port, NEW Co-Op transported 
fertilizer up the Mississippi River and across the State of 
Iowa via truck, and now they are able to move fertilizer all 
the way up the Missouri River to their northwest Iowa 
locations. This has saved them roughly 250,000 truck-miles 
every year the last 3 years off the road, which shows the 
significance of the impact of being able to move product on 
barge.
    In addition to moving fertilizer up, they were able to move 
corn, soybean meal, distillers grain, and scrap iron back 
south, being able to use both directions of the river.
    Passing a WRDA bill in 2024 is critical to leveraging this 
success that we are experiencing now into long-term 
resiliency--not just resiliency of the Missouri River, but also 
of the Mississippi River, as well.
    Flows from the Missouri River are critical to shipping on 
the middle Mississippi River between St. Louis, Missouri, and 
Cairo, Illinois. And this just highlights the national 
importance of movement on the Missouri River and flows on the 
Missouri River, especially right now as we see those low flows.
    We, as CPMR, have shaped our priorities to promote 
continued progress in all these areas. And they include 
shifting the previously mentioned Navigation Resiliency Study 
from a 50/50 cost-share to a 75/25 cost-share due to its 
national impact, its regional impact, and to ensure that this 
study is completed on time and gives local stakeholders the 
confidence of that long-term resiliency while maintaining 
important stakeholder buy-in. Shipping reliability and cost-
share shift will maintain that input.
    Bank erosion continues to be an issue as well, and those 
are also included in our priorities.
    These are just a few of our priorities. We will submit our 
full list to the committee.
    Again, we appreciate the opportunity to talk about the 
Missouri River today and its impact regionally and nationally 
and look forward to this committee's work on WRDA 2024.
    [Mr. Kinne's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
  Prepared Statement of Shane Kinne, Executive Director, Coalition to 
                       Protect the Missouri River
    Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the 
opportunity to testify today regarding WRDA 2024 and its importance to 
Missouri River stakeholders. I'm Shane Kinne, Executive Director of the 
Coalition to Protect the Missouri River.
    CPMR was established in 2001, and is made up of more than 30 
members in six states and supports the responsible management of 
Missouri River resources, as well as the maintenance and enhancement of 
congressionally authorized purposes of the river, including flood 
control, navigation and water supply. We also support science-based 
habitat restoration for endangered or threatened species, provided that 
management actions are responsibly conducted and properly balanced with 
our members' interests.
    We are in a very important time period for the Missouri River. 
While there are challenges, there is much momentum, both for flood 
control as well as navigation on the Missouri River. Much of this is 
due to recently passed WRDA bills that authorized important, 
generational projects and studies that, if properly executed, will 
improve the lives of those that live and work in the lower Missouri 
River basin. In order for us to continue to capture and capitalize on 
that momentum, it is critical that Congress continues to pass WRDA 
bills consistently and on-time.
    The historic flood of 2019 caused billions of dollars in damages in 
the states of Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska and Missouri with much of that in 
Missouri's 6th District.
    WRDA 2020 authorized the Lower Missouri River Flood Resiliency 
Study, allowing our region to take a new look at flood control along 
the Missouri River. This study will focus on local solutions and 
increased resiliency. As part of this study, it is critical that 
stakeholders begin to see progress as soon as possible. Passing a WRDA 
bill in 2024 will allow us to take a step forward now on agreed-upon 
solutions, while the full study progresses.
    In addition, between disaster funding from the 2019 flood and 2022 
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law funding, over $469 million is being 
invested in the Missouri River navigation channel. We are only halfway 
through this project and it is already having a staggering impact on 
the resiliency of the channel. Several navigators have shared that they 
have been able to move boats during the past two years of low water, 
when they previously wouldn't have been able to.
    Along with this success, WRDA 2020 also authorized a Missouri River 
navigation resiliency study that is allowing us to take a fresh look at 
a broad range of factors that could improve resiliency of navigation on 
the river. The timing of this study with the federal investment into 
the river is critical.
    Commercial traffic is increasing on the Missouri River to levels we 
haven't seen in decades. The Port of Blencoe, located at MOR 680.5, 
Blencoe Iowa was opened by farmer-owned NEW Cooperative in 2021. Having 
three successful navigation seasons north of Omaha, Nebraska has 
allowed NEW Cooperative to reduce their truck miles on Iowa highways by 
approximately 249,491 miles annually. Prior to opening this port, NEW 
Cooperative transported fertilizer from the Mississippi River, all the 
way across the state of Iowa in the spring. The operation of this 
facility allows the efficient movement of fertilizer and additional 
commodities up the Missouri River, and also allows barges to be 
reloaded with products such as soybean meal, dried distillers grain, 
soybeans, corn, and scrap iron to ship back south. This is just one 
example of success stories we are seeing.
    Passing a WRDA bill in 2024 is critical to leveraging this success 
into long-term resiliency. Not just resiliency of the Missouri River, 
but also the Mississippi River. Flows from the Missouri River are 
critical to shipping on the middle Mississippi River between St. Louis, 
Missouri and Cairo, Illinois, highlighting their national importance.
    CPMR has shaped our WRDA 2024 priorities to promote continued 
progress in these areas.
    Our priorities include:
      Shifting the previously mentioned Missouri River 
Navigation Resiliency Study from 50/50 cost share study to a 75/25 cost 
share. This study will have national impact to shipping reliability and 
this cost share shift will provide certainty to it's completion while 
maintaining stakeholder input.

      Bank erosion and land loss continue to be a challenge for 
landowners and also threaten the viability of levee systems. WRDA 2022 
included a pilot program to address this issue. In WRDA 2024 we are 
advocating to expand this to a permanent authority for the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers to address critical bank erosion.

      In WRDA 2022 the USACE was required to inventory non-
USACE federal lands that would physically qualify for Bank 
Stabilization and Navigation Project mitigation acres. CPMR supports 
movement toward ensuring those lands are counted in the 166,000 acres 
as well as looking at what state lands should qualify.

    These are just a few of our WRDA priorities. We will submit our 
full list as part of the record. They include additional items to 
promote navigation and flood risk resiliency while also protecting 
private property and businesses that operate on the Missouri River.
    Failing to pass a WRDA bill in 2024 will mean missed opportunities 
at a critical time to support resiliency of flood control, navigation 
and water supply uses in the region. Thank you for your efforts to pass 
this legislation and thank you again for the opportunity to testify 
today.

    Mr. Rouzer. Ms. Batts, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

  TESTIMONY OF HON. TERESA B. BATTS, MAYOR, SURF CITY, NORTH 
                            CAROLINA

    Ms. Batts. Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano, 
Chairman Graves, and Ranking Member Larsen, it is an honor and 
a privilege to testify before this distinguished subcommittee 
today to discuss the town of Surf City's Federal coastal storm 
risk project.
    My name is Teresa Batts, and I am the mayor of Surf City, 
North Carolina.
    Passing the Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA, on a 
biennial basis has provided the Nation's coastal engineering 
community with the reliability and certainty that it needs to 
advance critical resilience projects like the one at Surf City.
    The town supports the development of WRDA 2024. We 
acknowledge the tremendous bipartisan track record of this 
important infrastructure bill. Thank you for your leadership 
and commitment to the authorizing process.
    I would also like to acknowledge Chairman Rouzer, an ardent 
champion for U.S. coastal resilience and for the North Carolina 
beach communities. Thank you for your support in highlighting 
our WRDA needs.
    Chairman Rouzer, you have visited Surf City numerous times. 
I am certain you remember meeting myself and members of the 
council following Hurricane Florence and recall the damage it 
caused in our communities.
    These photos give you a sense of the extreme vulnerability 
that Surf City faces. They were taken post-Florence and 
illustrate the consequences of not having adequate beach and 
dune infrastructure in place. As Chairman Rouzer mentioned last 
week, our Federal nourishment project is long overdue.
    The town of Surf City is located in the heart of Topsail 
Island, North Carolina, and it serves as the economic engine 
for the surrounding island and inland communities. Our 
residents and property owners have strong ties to the coastal 
environment, representing commercial and recreational 
fishermen, a thriving agriculture industry, as well as retail, 
restaurants, and other businesses. A majority of households 
make between $50,000 to $150,000 per year. These are people 
that work in our schools, support the tourism sector, and work 
in construction.
    Please consider an open invitation to visit Surf City.
    [Slides shown.]
    Beaches and dunes are a proven form of natural 
infrastructure. They protect coastal communities like Surf City 
from flooding, ensuring local businesses are still running 
after a storm and that coastal residents can return to their 
homes quickly with few repairs. Proactively investing in wide 
beaches and high vegetative dunes save the Federal Government 
money by reducing post-disaster recovery payments.
    Storm risk management is not the only reason to invest in 
coastal infrastructure projects. Beaches are economic engines, 
dominating 66 percent of the U.S. tourism market. Surf City, 
for example, offers an affordable, working-class vacation to 
the American people. Tourists will stop coming to the beaches 
if they go away.
    Beaches create jobs, too. Nationally, the ocean-based 
tourism sector employs more Americans than the entire real 
estate industry, as well as more people than telecommunications 
and building construction combined. Surf City's economy is 
entirely dependent on the beach.
    The town of Surf City requires authorization of our coastal 
storm risk management project in WRDA 2024. As Chairman Rouzer 
explained in last week's hearing, despite initial authorization 
in WRRDA 2014, the town has yet to see construction of the 
Federal beach project.
    As the photos show, 13 years without a project has led to 
increased vulnerability and reduced protection. Delays in the 
project have led to the loss of millions of Federal, State, and 
local tax dollars due to price escalation in dredging costs.
    The town has also invested significant dollars in erosion 
mitigation, including $14 million in a sand truck haul project 
to shore up the disappearing beach.
    When the town learned of the construction funding for this 
project through the Disaster Recovery Act in 2019, we 
immediately engaged with the Wilmington District and the South 
Atlantic Division, who have been wonderful partners throughout 
this long process.
    Because North Topsail Beach withdrew their project in 2021, 
we need authorization for a Surf City-only project in the DRA 
2019 funds. Currently, investigation funds that will lead to 
the construction are awaiting approval.
    Surf City has been prepared to sign a project partnership 
agreement to see this project to construction since day one. 
The town faithfully procured land to increase our public 
parking and access to the beach. We have secured over 86 
percent of our necessary easements and are dedicated to 
obtaining 100 percent.
    In closing, Surf City is grateful to the subcommittee and 
Congress for ensuring the critical missions of the Army Corps 
of Engineers. The Federal project will provide not only our 
first large-scale nourishment project but will also serve as a 
longer term solution to maintaining our beaches that our 
residents and visitors both cherish and respect greatly.
    As shown today, we are in desperate need of new 
authorization for a Surf City-only project, which can only 
happen through the WRDA process. The town of Surf City supports 
timely passage of WRDA 2024 and respectfully requests the 
subcommittee's support to include this project.
    Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
    [Ms. Batts' prepared statement follows:]


                                 
  Prepared Statement of Hon. Teresa B. Batts, Mayor, Surf City, North 
 Carolina, Prepared With Assistance From Nicole Elko, Ph.D., Executive 
       Director, American Shore & Beach Preservation Association
    Chairman Rouzer and Ranking Member Napolitano, it is an honor and a 
privilege to testify before this distinguished subcommittee today to 
discuss the Town of Surf City's federal coastal storm damage reduction 
project. My name is Teresa Batts and I am the mayor of Surf City, North 
Carolina.
    Passing the Water Resources Development Act, or WRDA as it is 
commonly referred to, on a biannual basis has provided the nation's 
coastal engineering community with the reliability and certainty that 
it needs to advance critical resilience projects like the one at Surf 
City. The Town of Surf City supports the development of WRDA 2024 and 
we would like to acknowledge the tremendous bipartisan track record of 
this important infrastructure bill. Thank you for your leadership and 
commitment to this authorizing process.
    I would also like to acknowledge Chairman Rouzer, an ardent 
champion for U.S. coastal resilience and for North Carolina beach 
communities. Congressman Rouzer, thank you for your support of the Town 
of Surf City and for highlighting our WRDA needs.
    Chairman Rouzer, you have visited Surf City numerous times and I'm 
quite certain you remember meeting with myself and members of our 
Council following Hurricane Florence and recall the damage it caused in 
our community. These photos give the other subcommittee members a sense 
of the extreme vulnerability that Surf City faces. They were taken post 
Florence and illustrate the consequences of not having an adequate dune 
structure in place. You can see the exposed infrastructure and the 
devastation this creates. As Chairman Rouzer mentioned last week, our 
federal nourishment project is long overdue.
    The Town of Surf City was founded in 1949. We are located in the 
heart of Topsail Island, North Carolina, and serve as the economic 
engine for the surrounding island and inland communities. Our residents 
and property owners have strong ties to the coastal environment, 
representing commercial and recreational fisherman, a thriving 
aquaculture industry, as well as retail, restaurants, and other 
businesses, all within a vibrant, family friendly, small town 
environment.
    I hope the committee will consider my open invitation to visit Surf 
City. In the meantime, I appreciate the opportunity today to highlight 
the desperate need for authorization of our federal project as well as 
the value that the coastal mission of the US Army Corps of Engineers' 
(Corps) provides to the nation.
    Beaches and dunes are a proven form of natural infrastructure. They 
protect coastal communities like Surf City from flooding, ensuring that 
local businesses are still running after a storm, and that coastal 
residents can return to their homes quickly with few repairs. Economic 
benefits of storm protection for our roads, infrastructure, and private 
property are of utmost importance. Proactively investing in wide 
beaches and high, vegetated dunes saves the federal government money by 
reducing post-disaster recovery payments.
    Beaches, dunes and wetlands are, simply put, wise fiscal 
investments. Proactively investing in coastal infrastructure will save 
the federal government money by reducing post-disaster recovery 
payments.
    Storm risk management is not the only reason to invest in coastal 
infrastructure projects. The beach is the reason tourists visit Surf 
City, as well as every other beach town in the U.S. A 2022 study found 
that beach vacations were the most popular destinations, accounting for 
66% of family trips. Remember, most U.S. beach towns are not the land 
of the rich and famous. We offer an affordable, working-class vacation 
to the American public. Tourists spend money in my town, in the hotels, 
restaurants, and shops because they are on a beach vacation. They will 
stop coming if the beach goes away.
    Beaches create jobs too. Nationally, the ocean-based tourism and 
recreation sector employs more Americans than the entire real estate 
industry, as well as more people than building construction and 
telecommunications combined. People don't come to my town for health 
care or to work in a textile plant. A majority of households make 
between $50,000 and $150,000 per year, demonstrating a strong presence 
of middle-income residents. These are people that work in our schools, 
support the tourism sector, and work in construction.
    For every dollar the federal government spends on beach 
restoration, you collect at least $250 in beach tourist tax revenues. 
When this revenue is combined with the cost savings from coastal 
disasters and the recreational and workforce benefits that beaches 
provide, it is crystal clear that these projects are excellent national 
investments that increase coastal resilience.
    The Town of Surf City requires authorization of our Coastal Storm 
Risk Management project in WRDA 2024. The initial Chief's Report that 
combined Surf City with North Topsail Beach was completed in 2010 and 
authorized in WRDA 2014. Thirteen years later, our town has yet to see 
construction of a federal beach project. This time span has led to 
increased vulnerability due to reduced protection. The Town has been, 
and remains, committed to this project as we feel that a Corps' beach 
provides us the best protection for the taxpayers dollar. Delays in the 
project have led to a loss of millions of federal, state, and local tax 
dollars due to price escalation in the dredging industry over this time 
frame. The Town has also invested significantly in erosion mitigation 
efforts during this time including a $14 million sand truck haul 
project to shore up the disappearing beach.
    When the Town was notified of construction funding for this project 
through the Disaster Recovery Act of 2019, we were immediately engaged 
with the Wilmington District to complete the necessary local items to 
advance the project. The Wilmington District and South Atlantic 
Division have been wonderful partners throughout this very long 
process. North Topsail Beach, on the other hand, withdrew from the 
project in 2021. This requires a new authorization for a Surf City only 
project in order to use the DRA 2019 funds. Currently, investigation 
funds that will ultimately lead to construction are awaiting approval.
    Surf City has been prepared to sign a Project Partnership Agreement 
and see this project to construction since Day 1. The Town faithfully 
procured land to increase our public parking and access to the beach, 
we have secured over 86% of easements necessary to authorize the Corps' 
and its contractors to complete the work and are dedicated to obtaining 
100%. Simply stated, the Town has been a great partner to the Corps' 
and will continue throughout the lifespan of this critical project for 
the Town of Surf City.
    Surf City is grateful to your subcommittees and Congress for 
ensuring that the critical missions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
are authorized and implemented. On behalf of my fellow community 
leaders, thank you for WRDA22 with its many coastal provisions. We 
recognize the need for implementation. Improving the resilience of 
coastal communities will take coordination across multiple federal 
agencies working together with state and local authorities. Most 
importantly for our town, the Surf City Coastal Storm Risk Management 
project will provide not only the first large-scale nourishment project 
for our coastline, but also serve as the longer term solution to 
maintaining the beach that our residents and visitors both cherish and 
respect greatly.
    In closing, we are in desperate need of new authorization for a 
``Surf City only'' project to be eligible for construction, which can 
only happen through the WRDA process. The Town of Surf City supports 
timely passage of WRDA 2024 and respectfully requests the 
subcommittee's support to include this project. Thank you for the 
opportunity to testify today.
  Photos illustrating the vulnerability of the Town of Surf City, NC, 
                      following Hurricane Florence
                             September 2018
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Weakley.

     TESTIMONY OF JAMES WEAKLEY, PRESIDENT, LAKE CARRIERS' 
                          ASSOCIATION

    Mr. Weakley. Thank you.
    Since 1880, the Lake Carriers' Association has represented 
U.S. flagships moving 90 million tons of cargo annually. They 
are the building blocks of America: iron ore, construction 
stone, coal, cement, grain, salt, and sand. Our economy and our 
national security need a resilient Great Lakes Navigation 
System, or GLNS.
    It is the most efficient and environmentally sustainable 
mode. Our Jones Act qualified vessels can move a ton of cargo 
600 miles on 1 gallon of fuel. One of our 1,000-foot-long ships 
carries 70,000 tons, the equivalent of 40 river barges, 700 
railcars, or 2,800 trucks. With our efficiency, trucks could 
use lawnmower engines.
    The Corps estimates our transportation rate savings at $3.9 
billion. The industry drives $36 billion in economic activity, 
generates $6 billion in tax revenue and 147,350 U.S. jobs, with 
more than $17.8 billion in wages annually.
    WRDA is the most important piece of legislation Americans 
have never heard of. It authorizes maritime infrastructure. 
Providing for the national defense and facilitating commerce 
are two basic functions of the Federal Government. WRDA 
accomplishes both.
    When I started at LCA, the GLNS was unsustainable. The 
Corps was not funded to remove the 3.3 million cubic yards of 
annual sedimentation clogging our navigational arteries in 
America's heartland. The backlog peaked at 18 million cubic 
yards. For every inch of navigational depth lost, our largest 
vessels lose 270 tons of cargo. U.S. lakers light-loaded three 
of every four voyages, and vessels grounded in the navigation 
channel.
    The Corps was on a 400-year pace to recapitalize 
infrastructure. The locks in Michigan were poorly funded and 
less reliable. The new Soo lock was authorized in 1986 and 
languished on congressional life support. Multiple Congresses 
would not pass WRDA, and the system was in a death spiral.
    A Department of Homeland Security study estimated an 
unplanned closure of a single Soo lock would result in a 
recession and 11 million Americans unemployed. Twice, WRDA 
reauthorized the construction of a new Soo lock.
    It took multiple WRDAs to right the ship. Bills provided 
greater access to the industry-funded Harbor Maintenance Trust 
Fund and its $10 billion surplus. WRDAs resuscitated the GLNS 
and placed it on a healthier diet of regular authorizations and 
more funding.
    I am a strong proponent of the 2-year WRDA cycle. It 
provides new opportunities, policy corrections, increased 
funding authorizations, and congressional guidance. It is 
simply good governance.
    I know the Great Lakes Navigation System may need further 
authorizations to address material management and to provide 
beneficial use opportunities. The 2-year WRDA cycle provides 
the needed flexibility for better stewardship of 
infrastructure, environmental resources, and precious tax 
dollars.
    I have two specific requests for WRDA 2024.
    The five Great Lakes connecting channels should be 100 
percent federally funded, as are the Soo locks. These are 
system resources and should not require a non-Federal sponsor.
    We need to fix Middle Neebish Channel in the St. Marys 
River. It should only have one authorized depth, not two. It is 
unusual. It is a safety hazard. Nothing separates the shallow 
and the deep sides. It is a problem navigating in the ice, 
particularly when the Coast Guard closes the downbound channel, 
forcing transits in the opposite direction. This channel's 
design creates a safety hazard. We don't need a study; we need 
action. First, deepen the turns.
    I support the 2-year WRDA cycle. It is good governance. 
WRDAs resurrected the Great Lakes Navigation System. We are 
asking for two small fixes: full Federal funding of the 
connecting channels and fixing the Middle Neebish Channel. We 
will be back, given the appropriate legislative pace, for 
additional requests.
    Please pass WRDA 2024.
    Thank you.
    [Mr. Weakley's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
    Prepared Statement of James Weakley, President, Lake Carriers' 
                              Association
    The below testimony provides support for a predictable two-year 
Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) cycle, discusses the importance 
of WRDA to the Great Lakes Navigation System (GLNS), and presents two 
specific requests for WRDA 2024: full federal funding for the 
maintenance of the five Great Lakes connecting channels and a single 
authorized depth for a portion of one of those connecting channels.
    Since 1880, the Lake Carriers' Association (LCA) has represented 
the U.S.-flag Great Lakes fleet, which today can move 90 million tons 
of cargos annually. They are the building blocks of American 
manufacturing, infrastructure, and energy: iron ore, construction 
stone, coal, cement, and other dry bulk materials such as grain, salt, 
and sand.
    Now more than ever, the national economy and our national security 
need a reliable and resilient Great Lakes maritime transportation 
system that stretches over 1,600 miles from Duluth, MN, to the Saint 
Lawrence Seaway. It is the most efficient, environmentally friendly, 
and socially responsible mode of transportation. Our Jones Act 
qualified vessels can move a ton of cargo more than 600 miles using a 
single gallon of fuel. One of our 1,000-foot long ships can carry as 
much as 70,000 net tons of cargo. That is the equivalent of 40 river 
barges, 700 rail cars, or 2,800 25-ton trucks. For trucks to match our 
horsepower-to-ton efficiency, they would need to be moved with a 5-
horsepower lawnmower engine.
    The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) estimates that the GLNS 
results in an annual transportation rate savings of $3.9 billion 
annually. A recent report, Economic Impacts of Maritime Shipping in the 
Great Lakes [https://lcaships.com/programs/economy/economic-impacts-
jobs/], highlights Great Lakes shipping's contribution to the success 
of our nation. The industry drives $36 billion in annual economic 
activity, which generates more than $6 billion in tax revenue annually. 
147,350 U.S. jobs are tied to our fourth seacoast and more than $17.8 
billion in family sustaining wages are paid every year.
    WRDA is the most important piece of legislation that most Americans 
have never heard of. It authorizes funds for our nation's maritime 
infrastructure. We are and always have been a maritime nation. WRDA 
sets policy; authorizes studies, projects, and project modifications; 
and provides Congressional direction to the Corps. Providing for 
national defense and facilitating commerce are two of the basic 
functions of the Federal Government. WRDA accomplishes both of these.
    When I started at the LCA over 20 years ago, the Great Lakes 
maritime infrastructure was on an unsustainable and downward 
trajectory. The Corps was not funded to remove the 3.3 million cubic 
yards of annual sedimentation clogging the navigational arteries in the 
GLNS, America's heartland. The situation would only worsen, peaking at 
18 million cubic yards as measured from the ``functional dimensions'' 
in 2007 and again in 2103. The ``functional dimension'' only exists in 
the Great Lakes. It is the minimum opening that will allow vessels to 
operate in the channel. In some cases, it means allowing only one-way 
traffic, even though the waterway is authorized for two-way traffic. 
The rest of the nation, if not the world, measures its dredging backlog 
from ``authorized dimensions.'' That is an example of how bad things 
were in the GLNS.
    For every inch of navigational depth lost by our largest vessels, 
270 tons of cargo are not carried. From 2007 to 2012, U.S.-flag 
operators light loaded their vessels on 3 of every 4 voyages. In 2012 
alone, there were 9 vessel groundings in GLNS navigation channels.
    The Corps was on a 400-year pace to recapitalize the region's 
breakwalls and jetties. Using the period of the last 8 years, the Corps 
is now recapitalizing those structures on a 25-year pace. The Corps' 
navigation locks in Sault Ste. Marie, MI (Soo Locks), connecting Lake 
Superior with Lake Huron, were poorly funded and becoming less 
reliable. The new Soo Lock authorized in 1986 had languished on 
Congressional life support with little progress. Multiple Congresses 
would come and go without passing a WRDA and one could argue that the 
system was in a slow death spiral.
    It took multiple WRDAs to provide the necessary course corrections 
to right the ship. In 2011, I testified before this subcommittee in 
support of H.R. 104, Realizing America's Maritime Promise (RAMP) Act, a 
variation of which was later incorporated into WRDA and improved by 
subsequent laws. The bill allowed greater access to the Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF), which is funded by the ad valorem cargo 
tax assessed on maritime cargo to fund harbor maintenance. Eventually, 
WRDA also authorized the drawdown of the $10 billion surplus that had 
accumulated in the HMTF since its inception. This increased funding 
both reduced the GLNS dredging backlog and increased the pace of 
breakwall and jetty repairs nationwide. WRDA 2014 authorized the GLNS 
for the first time as a system and recognized the interconnectivity and 
interdependence of our Great Lakes ports. A 2015 Department of Homeland 
Security Study, The Perils of Efficiency [https://www.remi.com/wp-
content/uploads/2021/08/DHS-OCIA-The-Perils-of-Efficiency-An-Analysis-
of-an-Unexpected-Closure-of-the-Poe-Lock-and-Its-Impact.pdf], pointed 
out that an unplanned 6-month closure of a single navigation lock, the 
Poe, at the Soo Locks would result in a North American resource-driven 
recession and 11 million unemployed Americans. Armed with that 
knowledge, this Subcommittee twice used WRDA to reauthorize the 
construction of the new Soo Lock project to provide system resiliency. 
That project is well underway and on schedule for completion in 2030.
    It took multiple WRDAs to revive the GLNS and place it on a 
healthier diet of regular authorizations and more appropriate funding 
levels. I am a strong proponent of the 2-year WRDA cycle. It provides 
new opportunities, policy course corrections, increased funding 
authorizations, and Congressional guidance. It is simply good 
governance. Even though I have only two WRDA requests for this bill, I 
know at some point, the GLNS may need additional authorization language 
to address the emerging problem of dredged material management and 
provide other beneficial use opportunities for unconfined placement, 
particularly for Lake Erie ports. We may need future WRDA language to 
increase dredging capacity or to make the current capability more 
efficient. I know we will need future WRDA language to deal with 
problems that we can't even anticipate. The 2-year WRDA cycle provides 
the needed flexibility and process to address needs in a timely manner. 
The Corps needs and deserves Congressional authorization and direction 
to be better stewards of our nation's maritime navigation 
infrastructure, environmental resources, and precious tax dollars.
    On behalf of my members and the GLNS, I have two specific requests 
for WRDA 2024:

        Any study, design, or construction of improvements to Great 
        Lakes ``connecting channels'' should be 100% federally funded, 
        as are the Soo Locks. They should not require a nonfederal 
        sponsor. There are five connecting channels on the Great Lakes: 
        the St. Marys River (connecting Lake Superior with Lake Huron), 
        the Detroit River, the St. Clair River, the Channels in Lake 
        St. Clair (connecting Lake Huron to Lake Erie) and the Straits 
        of Mackinac (connecting Lake Michigan to Lake Huron). These are 
        ``system'' resources and should not require a nonfederal 
        sponsor. The Straits of Mackinaw are naturally deep and require 
        little maintenance. The St. Marys River, which requires 
        dredging and may soon require a nonfederal sponsor in order for 
        the Corps to address dredged material management needs, unless 
        this request is enacted. The Detroit/St. Clair River does not 
        immediately need a nonfederal sponsor to address dredged 
        material management but will in the future. Once the Corps 
        implements the new Great Lakes water level datum, this problem 
        could become even bigger and more urgent.

        The upbound channel of the St. Marys River in the vicinity of 
        Neebish Island, the Middle Neebish Channel, should be 
        authorized at the deeper depth (27 or 28 feet depending on the 
        location). Currently it is split down its length and the 
        channel has both a 21 foot and 27/28 foot project depth for the 
        same stretch of the river. This is very unusual. It is a relic 
        from the 1960s when the downbound West Neebish Channel was 
        being constructed and vessels had to go in both directions via 
        the Middle Neebish Channel and upbound vessels were expected to 
        be empty. It also limits the ability of vessels to load more 
        cargo when taking cargo to Lake Superior because today's 
        vessels are larger. This is a safety hazard. There is nothing 
        separating the shallower and deeper sides of the channel. They 
        are simply marked with different range markers, which can be a 
        bit confusing. It is also a problem while navigating when the 
        channel is covered by ice. We have experienced several 
        instances of vessels going aground on the shallow side of the 
        channel. Sometimes it is a result of navigational error, but it 
        can be a result of ship handling problems caused by ice or 
        wind. It is particularly a problem when the Coast Guard closes 
        the downbound channel and forces vessels to transit the upbound 
        channel in the opposite direction. Once the historical anomaly 
        is corrected, our first priority would be to deepen the turns 
        to facilitate navigation, particularly during the winter 
        icebreaking operations. I want to emphasize that this is an 
        existing authorized channel; its design creates a safety 
        hazard. We don't need a study, we need action. The 
        appropriations process can prioritize the turns over the 
        straightaways and allow this project to compete with other 
        projects.
                               Conclusion
    I applaud your commitment to the two-year WRDA cycle. It provides 
the needed flexibility, progress, and good governance. This Committee 
and WRDA are directly responsible for the resurrection of the GLNS. 
Thank you for that! This year, we are asking for two small changes: 
full federal funding of connecting channels and fixing Middle Neebish 
Channel. You have accomplished much and there is more to be done. We 
will be back, given the appropriate legislative pace, when the time is 
right for additional requests. I urge passage of WRDA 2024.

    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Anderson.

TESTIMONY OF HON. PAUL ANDERSON, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE 
  OFFICER, PORT TAMPA BAY, AND CHAIRMAN OF BOTH THE AMERICAN 
ASSOCIATION OF PORT AUTHORITIES AND THE COALITION FOR AMERICA'S 
                  GATEWAYS AND TRADE CORRIDORS

    Mr. Anderson. Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano, 
and members of the subcommittee, it is a pleasure to be here 
today not only as the president and CEO of Port Tampa Bay but 
also as a representative of America's vast network of ports and 
trade corridors. Thank you for your invitation.
    I am speaking today in my dual role as chairman of the 
American Association of Port Authorities and the Coalition for 
America's Gateways and Trade Corridors.
    The Water Resources Development Act is a lifeline for our 
Nation's economic and infrastructural progress. The biennial 
rhythm of WRDA is vital for the sustenance and growth of trade 
and commerce across our great Nation. This consistent cycle 
allows us at Port Tampa Bay and others like us to plan, 
develop, and execute projects critical to our Nation's economic 
security and growth.
    Port Tampa Bay, as Florida's largest port, is a cornerstone 
in the State's supply chain, yet our influence extends far 
beyond State lines. The proposed deepening of our 47-mile-long 
shipping channel, a project awaiting the August Chief's Report 
from the Army Corps of Engineers, will upgrade the national 
supply chain infrastructure--a strategic move that will reduce 
congestion in out-of-State ports and a commitment to enhancing 
the efficiency of national logistics.
    We understand the August timetable does not quite align 
with the House and Senate consideration of WRDA, but we hope 
Congress will include the authority to construct this project 
in any final legislation.
    The deepening of Tampa Harbor will generate average annual 
transportation benefits of $88.5 million for our Nation, 
according to the Army Corps' feasibility study. This project, 
however, hinges on the timely progression of the WRDA cycle.
    Nearly 70 percent of the 20 million cubic yards of the 
material dredged as part of our deepening will be reused at a 
number of sites, including restoration of Egmont Key, a 
national and historic treasure.
    Now let me speak to the significance of this legislation to 
the American Association of Port Authorities.
    AAPA is the unified voice of the seaport industry in the 
Americas. And my testimony is given on behalf of State and 
local public agencies located in the Atlantic, Pacific, and 
gulf coasts; the Great Lakes; and in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto 
Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
    For more than a century, AAPA membership has empowered port 
authorities to serve global customers and create economic and 
social value for their communities. Our Nation's seaports 
deliver vital goods to consumers, facilitate the export of 
American-made goods, create jobs, and support local and 
national economic growth.
    Ports also play a crucial role in our national defense--a 
point acknowledged through the designation of 18 of our 
Nation's commercial ports as ``strategic seaports,'' as 
designated by the Department of Defense.
    The total economic value generated in terms of revenue to 
businesses, personal income, and the economic output at U.S. 
coastal ports accounted for $5.4 trillion, roughly 26 percent 
of our Nation's GDP. This research also showed over 30.8 
million Americans are employed in jobs generated as a result.
    The Water Resources Development Act is a key piece of 
legislation that provides essential authority for water 
infrastructure projects across our Nation. WRDA provides 
authority for the Army Corps of Engineers to carry out projects 
related to flood control, navigation, and environmental 
restoration.
    WRDA plays a critical role in protecting our environment 
and our natural resources. It provides authority for projects 
to restore wetlands, protect endangered species, and improve 
water quality.
    Congress must continue to support this legislation and 
provide the necessary funding and authority to carry out these 
important projects. It is critical to U.S. ports and U.S. 
exporter competitiveness that Congress continue enacting WRDA 
legislation every 2 years.
    It is my request that a bipartisan effort be made to ensure 
timely passage of WRDA, not just for the benefit of our port at 
Port Tampa Bay, but for every port, every State, and every 
citizen who relies on the seamless flow of goods and services 
that our ports facilitate.
    Thank you for your time today, your consideration, and your 
pivotal role in the shaping of the future of our Nation's trade 
and infrastructure.
    Thank you.
    [Mr. Anderson's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Hon. Paul Anderson, President and Chief Executive 
Officer, Port Tampa Bay, and Chairman of both the American Association 
of Port Authorities and the Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade 
                               Corridors
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for your invitation to testify this 
afternoon about the importance of the Committee's commitment to enact 
into law every two years a comprehensive and bipartisan Water Resources 
Development Act, or WRDA as it is commonly known.
    I am speaking today not only as the President and CEO of Port Tampa 
Bay, but also as the Chairman of both the American Association of Port 
Authorities (AAPA) and the Coalition for America's Gateways and Trade 
Corridors (CAGTC). It is my goal to talk discuss how the WRDA process 
not only impacts Port Tampa Bay, but all of America's ports and trade 
gateways.
    I would like to thank the Water Resources and Environment 
Subcommittee and the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for 
working to ensure that our nation's maritime transportation system 
remains functional. As maritime trade continues to rebalance from the 
recent COVID-19 pandemic-driven supply chain disruptions, your 
recognition of the important role played by our nation's ports and Army 
Corps of Engineers' maritime navigation infrastructure has been 
critical. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today and discuss how 
we can continue to maintain this nationally critical infrastructure for 
generations to come.
    WRDA is a lifeline for our nation's economic and infrastructure 
progress. The biennial rhythm of WRDA is vital for the sustenance and 
growth of trade and commerce across our great nation. WRDA's consistent 
schedule allows Port Tampa Bay, and others like us, to plan, develop, 
and execute projects critical to our nation's economic security and 
growth. This is a key piece of legislation that provides essential 
authority for water infrastructure projects across the country. It 
helps to ensure that our nation's ports, harbors, and other waterways 
are maintained and improved, and that they can continue to support 
economic growth and development. WRDA provides authority for the Army 
Corps of Engineers to carry out projects related to flood control, 
navigation, and environmental restoration. These projects are vital to 
protecting our communities from the devastating impacts of floods and 
other natural disasters, and they help to ensure that our waterways 
remain open and accessible to shipping and commerce. In addition, WRDA 
plays a critical role in protecting our environment and our natural 
resources. It provides authority for projects that restore wetlands, 
protect endangered species, and improve water quality. These projects 
are essential to preserving our natural heritage and ensuring the 
health and well-being of our communities.
    WRDA supports economic growth, protects our environment, and 
ensures the safety and well-being of our communities. Congress must 
continue to support this legislation and provide the necessary 
authority to carry out these important projects. It is critical to U.S. 
port and exporter competitiveness that Congress continue enacting WRDA 
legislation every two years to minimize delays in updating this 
infrastructure to keep up with the demands of maritime commerce.
    Port Tampa Bay, Florida's largest port, is a cornerstone in the 
state's supply chain, but our influence also extends far beyond state 
lines. The proposed deepening of our 47-mile-long shipping channel, a 
project awaiting the August Chief's Report from the Army Corps of 
Engineers, is more than a local enhancement. It will upgrade national 
supply chain infrastructure which is a strategic move to reduce 
congestion in out-of-state ports and will also support the efficiency 
of national logistics. The deepening of the Tampa harbor will generate 
an average annual transportation benefit of $88.5 million for the 
nation, according to the Army Corps' feasibility study. This project, 
however, hinges on the timely progression of the WRDA cycle. A delay in 
WRDA is not just a postponement of a project; it's a setback for our 
national economic interests, a ripple effect that slows our ability to 
advance towards a more prosperous and resilient future.
    Our approach to development at Port Tampa Bay is not just about 
expansion but also about resiliency and responsible growth. We believe 
that our projects have shown a proven track record to this commitment. 
Port Tampa Bay supports an MSA with over 3.2 million people, the 17th 
largest in the country, in the nation's third most populous state. 
Nearly 70 percent of the 20 million cubic yards of the material dredged 
as a part of our deepened channel will be reused at a number of sites 
locally. For example, dredged material from the channel deepening will 
be repurposed for the restoration of Egmont Key, a national and 
historic treasure, and for the creation of new industrial land. A 
balanced approach ensures that while we grow, we also protect and 
enrich our environment.
    As the Chairman of the AAPA, my testimony is given on behalf of 
state and local public agencies located along the Atlantic, Pacific, 
and Gulf coasts, the Great Lakes, and in Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, 
Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. For more than a century, AAPA 
membership has empowered port authorities to serve global customers and 
create economic and social value for their communities. Today in our 
nation's Capital, AAPA is representing ports on urgent and pressing 
issues facing our industry, promoting the common interests of the port 
community, and providing critical industry leadership on security, 
trade, transportation, infrastructure, environmental, and other issues 
related to port development and operations.
    Port authorities are governmental entities that own facilities at 
one or more ports. While the roles of port authorities in port 
operations vary, most ports can be categorized as Operating Ports or 
Landlord Ports. Operating Ports own and construct port facilities, own 
cargo handling equipment, and hire labor to move cargo through port 
premises. At these operating ports, stevedores hire dockworkers to move 
cargo between ships and the dock. Landlord Ports, on the other hand, 
own the land and wharves of a port and lease these premises to our 
partners in the Marine Terminal Operator industry.
    Our nation's seaports deliver vital goods to consumers, facilitate 
the export of American made goods, create jobs, and support local and 
national economic growth. Ports also play a crucial role in our 
national defense--a point acknowledged through the designation of 18 of 
our nation's ports as ``strategic seaports'' by the Department of 
Defense.
    According to Martin Associates \1\, an internationally recognized 
economic and transportation consulting firm, the total economic value 
generated in terms of revenue to businesses, personal income and 
economic output at U.S. coastal ports accounted for $5.4 trillion, 
roughly 26 percent of GDP. This research also showed over 30.8 million 
Americans are employed in jobs generated because of port activity. 
Ports also generate significant tax revenue, with $47.1 billion of 
direct, induced, and indirect federal, state and local tax revenue 
created through the economic activity taking place at ports across the 
nation. AAPA is currently conducting an updated Economic Impact Study 
and will share the results of the Study with the House Committee on 
Transportation & Infrastructure when it is completed in the spring of 
2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ 2018 National Economic Impact of the U.S. Coastal Port System. 
(2019, March).
    http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/
Martin%20study_executive%20summary%202018%20US
%20coastal%20port%20impacts%20final.docx
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Congress must unite in a bipartisan effort to reaffirm its 
commitment to this promise. Let us work together to ensure the timely 
passage of WRDA, not just for the benefit of Port Tampa Bay, but for 
every port, every state, and every citizen who relies on the seamless 
flow of goods and services that our ports facilitate.
    Thank you for your time, your consideration, and your pivotal role 
in shaping the future of our nation's trade and infrastructure. It was 
an honor to have the opportunity to speak to you today.

    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Mitamura.

TESTIMONY OF DAVE MITAMURA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL WATER 
                        SUPPLY ALLIANCE

    Mr. Mitamura. Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano, 
and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for 
the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss 
stakeholder priorities for WRDA 2024.
    Thank you also for your commitment to maintaining the 
biennial, bipartisan WRDA process, which is crucial--crucial--
to maintaining and improving our Nation's water infrastructure.
    My name is Dave Mitamura, and I serve as the executive 
director of the National Water Supply Alliance. NWSA is a 
national not-for-profit organization representing water supply 
providers across the country who work every day to meet the 
Nation's growing water supply needs.
    Our members have a direct and substantial interest in the 
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Water Supply Program or depend 
upon storage space in Corps reservoirs to meet the needs of the 
communities they serve.
    Our members advocate for the preservation and enhancement 
of the Nation's water supply, protect traditional State 
authorities, and ensure that water supply interests share 
equitably in the benefits of multipurpose reservoir projects.
    I, personally, have worked either with or for the Corps for 
over 20 years. Throughout my career and especially in my role 
at NWSA, I have seen firsthand the value that comes from open 
communication and direct engagement with the leadership and 
staff at the Corps.
    Under the leadership of Lieutenant General Scott Spellmon, 
the Corps has developed a strong working relationship with us. 
A dedicated Corps water supply team regularly attends NWSA 
meetings, actively participating in candid debates and 
collaborative discussions as we work to refine and improve the 
Corps program.
    We appreciate this transparency and collaboration, but more 
can be done. Our Nation faces significant and evolving water 
supply challenges. Our infrastructure is aging, our populations 
are growing, and we are experiencing droughts of increasing 
severity, frequency, and duration.
    Additional priority and resources dedicated to water supply 
are desperately needed and overdue. NWSA believes that, with a 
few tweaks, the Corps can be better equipped to bolster its 
water supply efforts in support of regional, State, and local 
partners.
    This subcommittee is well-informed on the expanse of the 
Corps water supply portfolio. I won't belabor the statistics. 
My written testimony includes several data points on the Corps' 
impact on water supply. They are significant and meaningful.
    Under the current and mounting challenges facing water 
supply in the U.S., the Corps' Water Supply Program can and 
should play a more active and significant role in addressing 
the needs of the Nation. Yet, still, water supply remains a 
relatively low priority within the Corps. The Corps' Water 
Supply Program receives only a tiny fraction of the budget and 
staff as compared to other mission areas.
    As a result, water supply studies take many years, even 
decades, to complete. Some studies never even make the cut due 
to the lack of priority. I have provided examples of this lack 
of focus in my written testimony.
    NWSA recommends that the subcommittee consider ways to 
increase the priority given to water supply within the Corps so 
the emphasis is more commensurate with its importance to the 
Nation. Put plainly, agencies focus on the missions prescribed 
to them by Congress.
    NWSA also recommends that the subcommittee seek new ways 
for State and local partners to collaborate with the Corps--for 
example, allowing studies led by non-Federal partners, 
optimizing storage for water supply as appropriate, and 
modernizing operations to adapt, such as water conservation.
    Given our Nation's water supply needs, we cannot wait 
decades to take water supply studies from authorization to 
completion, and we certainly cannot deny opportunities to start 
such studies. We must find ways to prioritize water supply and 
to evaluate needs and implement solutions more quickly if we 
are to meet the challenges to come.
    Thank you, Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano, and 
members of the subcommittee, for your hard work developing the 
Nation's water resources infrastructure. NWSA looks forward to 
working with the subcommittee as it develops WRDA 2024.
    [Mr. Mitamura's prepared statement follows:]

                                 
Prepared Statement of Dave Mitamura, Executive Director, National Water 
                            Supply Alliance
    Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano, and distinguished 
Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear 
before you today to discuss stakeholder priorities for WRDA 2024. Thank 
you also for your commitment to maintaining the biennial, bipartisan 
WRDA process, which is crucial to maintaining and improving our 
Nation's water infrastructure.
    My name is Dave Mitamura, and I serve as the Executive Director of 
the National Water Supply Alliance (NWSA). NWSA is a national not-for-
profit organization representing water supply providers who work every 
day to meet the Nation's growing water supply needs. Our members have a 
direct and substantial interest in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' 
(USACE) Water Supply Program or depend upon storage space in USACE 
reservoirs to meet the needs of the communities they serve. Our members 
represent communities across the Nation, from the East Coast to the 
West Coast and from North Dakota to Texas. We seek to give water supply 
providers across the country a unified voice to advocate for the 
preservation and enhancement of the Nation's water supply, and the 
protection of traditional State authorities, and to ensure that water 
supply interests share equitably in the benefits of multipurpose USACE 
reservoirs.
    I have worked either with or for USACE for over 20 years. 
Throughout my career, and especially in my role as the Executive 
Director of NWSA, I have seen first-hand the value that comes from open 
communication and direct engagement with USACE leadership and staff. 
Under the leadership of LTG Scott Spellmon, USACE has developed a 
strong working relationship with NWSA. The USACE water supply team 
regularly attends NWSA meetings, actively participating in 
collaborative discussions and candid debates with our members as we 
look for ways to work together more directly and effectively.
    This transparency and collaboration are both appreciated and 
necessary, but more can be done. Our Nation faces significant and 
evolving water supply challenges. Our infrastructure is aging. Our 
populations are growing. And we are experiencing droughts of increasing 
severity, frequency, and duration. We and our federal partners must 
become more nimble and more adaptable. Additional priority and 
resources dedicated to water supply are desperately needed and overdue. 
We must also look for new and creative mechanisms for state and local 
interests to collaborate with USACE to advance needed water resource 
projects. Only through a real partnership involving all levels of 
government, affected communities, as well as the private sector--and 
through the integration of new and existing water storage projects into 
our Nation's water supply systems--will we succeed in meeting the 
challenges of today and tomorrow.
    This afternoon, my remarks will focus on how to strengthen this 
relationship in service of our Nation's water supply. NWSA believes 
that, with a few tweaks, USACE can be better equipped to bolster its 
water supply efforts in support of regional, state, and local partners.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Reservoirs are a Critical Component of the 
                  Nation's Water Supply Infrastructure
    While water supply is and should remain a State and local 
responsibility, storage space in federal reservoirs operated by USACE 
is a critical part of our Nation's water supply system. According to 
USACE, there are nearly 140 USACE reservoirs across the country with 
storage space dedicated to municipal and industrial water supply. 
Collectively, these reservoirs provide over eight million acre-feet of 
dedicated water supply storage space and a firm yield to contracting 
water providers exceeding six billion gallons per day. According to a 
2017 report from the USACE Institute for Water Resources, the water 
supply storage space in USACE projects is sufficient to meet the 
household needs of approximately 100 million people.
    The importance of USACE reservoirs as a source of water supply 
storage will only grow. As communities and groups work to address 
property, environmental, and budgetary challenges, maximizing the use 
of this existing infrastructure, rather than constructing new 
reservoirs with their attendant costs and environmental impacts, is 
frequently the most environmentally sensitive and cost-effective means 
to provide necessary storage space for water supply. While we recognize 
that multiple purposes must be balanced, there is no better way to 
maximize value to the Nation of the federal investment in reservoir 
storage space than to utilize that storage for water supply purposes.
    What is more, time after time, USACE studies have shown that 
enormous water supply benefits can be achieved with little if any 
effect on other authorized purposes. At Stockton Lake in Missouri, for 
example, a partial flood-storage reallocation has been proposed that 
would provide a badly needed regional water supply solution for 
communities across southwest Missouri. Yet USACE's study shows this 
reallocation would have ``no additional flood risk management impacts 
or increased inundation downstream,'' while the value of system energy 
would be reduced by just 0.53 percent.
    As recent droughts in the West have shown, it is more important 
than ever to have enough storage space to capture and store the water 
we need when and where it is available. This requires us to identify 
areas where storage space in USACE reservoirs can most effectively be 
used to meet water supply needs; to provide USACE adequate resources to 
commence and complete needed reallocation and feasibility studies; and 
to advance those studies much more quickly than has occurred in the 
past.
    We must also look for ways to include water conservation as a 
purpose of federal projects, and to more quickly adapt reservoir 
operating rules to facilitate water conservation. The collaboration 
between the Orange County Water District and USACE at Prado Dam in 
California is an example of the water supply benefits that can be 
achieved through water conservation operations. In simple terms, by 
adjusting operations to add water conservation, USACE allows for 
temporary use of the project's storage capacity for conserving 
stormwater that would otherwise flow to the ocean. Releases from the 
dam can be managed to allow water to be recharged into the Orange 
County Groundwater Basin and provide a significant increase to water 
supply availability--all in a way that maintains flood protection and 
does not affect the primary purpose of flood risk management. The 
Orange County Water District has recharged an average of 55,000 acre-
feet per year of stormwater--enough water for 440,000 people annually. 
The majority of this groundwater recharge is directly tied to water 
conservation at Prado Dam. These are low-cost, low-risk, and high 
reward options to expand water supplies, and opportunities exist to 
implement similar operational changes to facilities at other projects. 
Those efforts can only succeed, however, if USACE has sufficient 
resources to initiate and complete the necessary studies in a 
reasonable period of time.
    Importantly, state and local interests contracting for storage 
space in USACE projects pay their own way. Under USACE policies 
implementing the Water Supply Act of 1958, for example, water supply 
users reimburse the U.S. Treasury for the updated cost of constructing 
their storage space in today's dollars, or for any benefits that are 
foregone due to their use, whichever is higher. They also pay their 
share of annual operations and maintenance (O&M) and repair, 
replacement, and rehabilitation (RR&R) costs incurred by the 
government. Even putting aside the national benefits secure water 
supplies provide, the USACE Water Supply Program yields substantial 
returns on federal investments. During the 10-year period from 2007 to 
2016, for example, USACE reports that district offices spent 
approximately $10 million in total to administer water supply storage 
contracts. In return, water supply users paid $650 million to the U.S. 
Treasury for project investment costs, interest payments, and O&M 
costs.
    Challenges remain, however. Despite the significant benefits the 
USACE Water Supply Program provides and the exceptional efforts of 
dedicated USACE staff, water supply remains a relatively low priority 
within USACE. The USACE water supply program receives only a tiny 
fraction of the budget and staff devoted to other mission areas. As a 
result, water supply studies take many years--even decades--to 
complete. Some studies never even make the cut due to the lack of 
priority. For example:
      To meet growing demand for water in Colorado's Front 
Range and on northeast Colorado farms, Congress authorized USACE to 
study a reallocation of water supply storage space in Chatfield 
Reservoir in the Water Resources Development Act of 1986. Eighteen 
years later, in 2004, USACE published a notice of intent to prepare an 
Integrated Feasibility Report/Environmental Impact Statement in the 
Federal Register. And in 2014--nearly ten years after the notice of 
intent was published and almost 30 years after the study was 
authorized--the feasibility report was completed and a record of 
decision approving the reallocation was signed.

      At J. Percy Priest reservoir near Nashville, Tennessee, 
water supply providers requested additional storage in 2008 to meet the 
rapidly growing needs in the City of Murfreesboro and Rutherford 
County--one of the fastest growing regions in the United States. Yet it 
took twelve years for the Assistant Secretary to approve an 
Environmental Assessment and authorize the requested reallocation of 
storage.

      In the White River Basin in Northwest Arkansas, water 
supply demands are growing at an extraordinary rate and additional 
water supply storage space is needed. However, water supply users have 
been informed that all future water supply reallocation studies will be 
placed on hold pending completion of a basin-wide watershed study--a 
study that remains in its early stages and that will take years to 
complete.

      Section 7001 of WRRDA 2014 required USACE to submit an 
Annual Report to Congress on feasibility reports and project 
modifications to be considered for authorization under future Water 
Resources Development Acts. Yet water supply projects have long been 
excluded from consideration and relegated to the appendix on grounds 
that water supply is not considered by USACE to be one of its primary 
mission areas.

    To be sure, study considerations and project timelines have been, 
and will continue to be, affected by factors specific to each project, 
and USACE staff have worked diligently using the resources available to 
complete the studies discussed above. Nevertheless, these timelines are 
not atypical for water supply studies at projects nationwide. And 
denying water supply proposals in the Section 7001 report further 
stymies the ability of water supply evaluations to proceed. Given our 
Nation's water supply needs, we cannot wait decades to take water 
supply studies from authorization to completion, and we certainly 
cannot deny opportunities to start such studies. We must find ways to 
evaluate needs and implement solutions more quickly if we are to meet 
the challenges to come.
 How Can the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Strengthen its Water Supply 
                                Efforts?
    As this Subcommittee crafts the Water Resources Development Act of 
2024, NWSA asks that you consider ways to increase the priority given 
to water supply within USACE, so the emphasis given to water supply 
within the agency is more commensurate with its importance to the 
Nation. Experience with other USACE program areas, such as ecosystem 
restoration, has shown that mission priorities can and should evolve to 
meet the Nation's changing needs. Simply put, all agencies and 
organizations, USACE included, naturally emphasize and devote resources 
to programs that fall within their priority mission areas, while less 
attention and fewer resources are devoted to programs that do not. 
Given our Nation's rapidly evolving water supply challenges--and the 
enormous water supply benefits that can be realized through the use of 
storage in USACE projects--it is time for USACE to recognize the key 
role it plays in meeting the Nation's water needs and for resources to 
be allocated accordingly.
    Despite these challenges, USACE maintains the status quo when it 
comes to the USACE water supply program. USACE often points out 
Congress's recognition in the Water Supply Act that state and local 
interests have ``primary responsibility'' for ``developing water 
supplies for domestic, municipal, industrial, and other purposes . . . 
'' We agree with this statement, but there is nothing inconsistent with 
state and local control and growing the priority of water supply within 
USACE. Planning to meet water supply needs is a state and local 
responsibility, and states should always retain their traditional 
authority to grant water rights and to allocate water among their 
citizens. But, just as Congress recognized these core principles in the 
Water Supply Act, it also emphasized ``that the Federal Government 
should participate and cooperate with States and local interests in 
developing such water supplies in connection with the construction, 
maintenance, and operation of Federal navigation, flood control, 
irrigation, or multiple purpose projects.'' What is needed is greater 
facilitation and support from USACE.
    We also ask that the Committee seek new and creative ways for State 
and local interests to collaborate with USACE to move studies and 
projects forward, including by allowing them to assist USACE in 
completing the studies necessary to evaluate and approve requests for 
water supply storage space. In other areas, Congress has recognized the 
benefits that flow from allowing project sponsors to participate in 
completing necessary environmental studies. For example, the 2023 
Fiscal Responsibility Act directs all federal agencies to ``prescribe 
procedures to allow a project sponsor to prepare an environmental 
assessment or [Environmental Impact Statement]'' under the National 
Environmental Policy Act. This has always been permissible, and some 
agencies have used this process to expedite the preparation of NEPA 
study documents, but other agencies have been unwilling to provide this 
option to project sponsors--forcing Congress to step in and mandate 
this common-sense option.
    In the case of water supply, reallocation studies are the primary 
means of determining whether storage space at USACE facilities should 
be allocated to water supply. However, the timeline for USACE to 
complete reallocation studies is often far too long due to a lack of 
resources and focus. To address this, NWSA has developed a 2024 WRDA 
proposal that would let non-federal partners conduct reallocation 
studies, or parts of reallocation studies, which would be submitted to 
USACE for review and evaluation. Under our proposal, studies would move 
forward only after USACE and the non-federal partner have agreed on key 
study parameters and assumptions. No study requirements would be 
relaxed, and the studies would be just as rigorous. And, as with NEPA, 
ultimate review and approval of any study would remain exclusively with 
USACE. Yet real water supply benefits could be realized because non-
federal partners can prioritize and advance needed studies far more 
quickly than USACE, letting water supply projects move from study to 
implementation in a reasonable period of time.
    Thank you, Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano, and Members 
of the Subcommittee, for your exceptional work to develop the Nation's 
water resources infrastructure. I appreciate the opportunity to appear 
before you to discuss the importance of water supply in the overall 
USACE portfolio. NWSA looks forward to working with the Subcommittee as 
it develops WRDA 2024.

    Mr. Rouzer. Well, thank you all for your testimony.
    I want to take a moment to welcome our newest member of the 
subcommittee, Ms. Celeste Maloy, representing Utah's Second 
Congressional District.
    Welcome, Celeste. Glad that you are here, and I look 
forward to having you on this subcommittee.
    We will now turn to questions for the panel. I will 
recognize myself for 5 minutes.
    Mayor Batts, you talked a great deal in your testimony 
about the situation there at Surf City. Can you give a little 
bit of a history of the challenges that you have faced because 
you have not gotten the renourishment dollars that you need, 
for example, other things that need to be tended to that, from 
a city perspective or a town perspective, that you have not 
been able to do? Those type of items I think the subcommittee 
would be interested to learn.
    Ms. Batts. So, as far as things that we haven't been able 
to do is moving forward with giving the residents the help, 
safety, and welfare of having an established dune line 
protecting our infrastructure, which is our water and our 
sewer, our roads that are oceanfront, and protect not only our 
oceanfront homes but all the homes behind it as well.
    We have spent $14 million in tax dollars after Hurricane 
Florence with a truck haul to temporarily shore up our 
disappearing beach. We are in desperate need of this new 
authorization for a Surf City-only project. The town requires 
authorization of our coastal storm risk management project in 
WRDA 2024.
    Mr. Rouzer. Well, we will obviously continue to work on 
this. I know how critically important it is. I remember 
Hurricane Florence very, very well in 2018. I remember 
Hurricane Matthew quite well from 2016. And it really does a 
significant amount of damage.
    Mitigation efforts are incredibly important in terms of 
preventing property loss; helps to mitigate costs in the 
National Flood Insurance Program, et cetera, et cetera. And so, 
it has a real domino effect.
    Mr. Anderson, I am going to switch to you quickly: supply 
chain infrastructure. Infrastructure is so critically important 
to the supply chain.
    Can you talk about the need for a robust supply chain, 
especially after the disruptions that took place with COVID-19, 
and the nexus with WRDA projects?
    Mr. Anderson. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Critically important to 
our Nation is supply chain connectivity, freight corridors 
connecting our gateway ports to the hinterland cargo movement.
    It is also vitally important, as I mentioned in my 
comments, that--and as most of the testimony today--for having 
a predictable WRDA cycle that allows ports--in our case, 
ports--but other water-related projects to be able to make the 
investments and align those with other investments that create 
freight capacity, freight velocity, and expansion for our 
Nation's ports.
    The most recent supply chain crisis was--most people agree 
it was COVID. The demand went up; it exceeded our capacity. 
There were some other issues. It is also up to the beneficial 
cargo owners to diversify their supply chains and use other 
ports. And we have seen that happen in the gulf. Gulf ports 
have seen cargo move from west coast ports as some of the 
companies are diversifying.
    So, aligning the WRDA investments with strategic 
investments into our freight corridors as well as diversifying 
the supply chain are critical to preventing supply chain issues 
that we have seen recently.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Weakley, you talked a good little bit about 
the Great Lakes and their importance to our economy and 
security.
    Specifically, the 100-percent Federal--or, at least, the 
idea that it ought to be 100 percent federally allocated, can 
you elaborate a little more on that, that particular point in 
particular?
    Mr. Weakley. Yes, sir. To be clear, I am not talking about 
all the navigation channels, just those five that we consider 
systems resources or connecting channels. They connect our 
different lakes--Lake Superior to Lake Huron, Lake Michigan to 
Lake Huron, and Lake Huron to Lake Erie.
    So, WRRDA 2014, the wisdom of this subcommittee, designated 
the Great Lakes for the first time in history as a navigational 
system. Before that, we were just a series of independent 
ports. So, I think it is consistent with the systemwide 
approach.
    It is also consistent with the way that Soo locks are 
treated as a system asset. There is not a non-Federal sponsor 
for that project, sir.
    Mr. Rouzer. Very good. Thank you.
    My time has expired.
    I now recognize Mrs. Napolitano.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Mitamura, how would the elevation of water supply and 
water conservation added to the three primary mission areas of 
the Corps be helpful in advancing authorized projects to 
address local water scarcity issues?
    Mr. Mitamura. First of all, Ranking Member Napolitano, 
thank you for your focus on water supply. NWSA appreciates your 
leadership.
    As I said in my remarks, the time required to complete and 
implement water supply studies and projects is a chronic 
challenge, one made even more important based on the Nation's 
rapidly evolving water supply needs. These delays often result 
from a lack of resources and attention allocated to water 
supply.
    We believe the proposed legislation would help to elevate 
the priority given to water within the Corps, encourage 
flexibility inside the agency when it comes to water supply 
projects and studies, and help make additional resources 
available to Corps staff so they can move water supply projects 
from the study to implementation more quickly.
    Ultimately, we think this becomes a way for the Corps to 
find a way to say ``yes'' when working on water supply issues 
that are so critical to our Nation.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Yes, sir.
    Would this draft proposal preserve the primary 
responsibility of States and local interests in managing local 
water supply concerns?
    Mr. Mitamura. Yes, it would. State and local interests 
should always retain primary responsibility for meeting water 
supply needs. The proposed legislation would not affect that.
    Instead, it would help produce additional tools and 
resources available to the Corps so the Corps can cooperate 
with State and local interests in these important efforts, 
consistent with longstanding congressional policy as stated in 
the Water Supply Act of 1958.
    The legislation is also very clear that it does not alter 
or affect traditional State authorities to regulate the use and 
allocation of water--something that is extremely important to 
NWSA's members.
    Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you.
    And to the rest of you, thank you for your support of 
WRDAs.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Webster, you are recognized.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you 
for having this important meeting. Everybody loves ports; 
everybody loves WRDA. So, thank you for doing that.
    My question is for Paul Anderson.
    As you know, the Army Corps is working on a general 
reevaluation of the port for deepening Tampa Bay's shipping 
channels, and a channel deepening project would allow ports to 
accommodate larger next-generation ships. That has become sort 
of the industry standard.
    Can you elaborate on how the importance of channel 
deepening projects in the Port of Tampa as well as the greater 
area of Florida will benefit from these services?
    Mr. Anderson. Yes, Congressman, the deepening project at 
Port Tampa Bay is vitally important to be able to--just like we 
talked about the cycle of WRDA being 2 years, having 
predictability for funding, we have to be able to anticipate, 
which we know is coming, larger ships into the Gulf of Mexico 
that will be Asian services, in particular, coming to the 
Panama Canal. We have seen those increase over time. The other 
gulf ports are deepening, as well, and have deepened.
    So, this will allow us to be able to handle the larger 
vessels that we anticipate and know are coming in the future. 
It creates a more efficient transportation system. It creates 
more volume so that we can serve the incredibly growing market 
in particular of the central Florida and Florida area where we 
are seeing significant population growth. And it allows us to 
work with our customers to be more efficient, drive cost down, 
and create economic value for the citizens of our State and our 
Nation.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. Can you maybe discuss the 
importance of timing, these close timing relationships, to the 
Army Corps and their Chief's Report and all that can happen 
from that? Could you give me a little breakdown on that?
    Mr. Anderson. Yes, sir.
    As I mentioned in my testimony, members of the 
subcommittee, we have a Chief's Report in August of 2024. It is 
going to be very close to any timing of a WRDA passage. And it 
is really critical that we get that included in the next WRDA 
so that we can continue that predictability for the incredible 
growth, as I mentioned, and getting that in the next WRDA bill.
    So, the timing is going to be a little tricky, and one of 
my specific asks is that the subcommittee, the committee get 
that included in next year's WRDA.
    Mr. Webster of Florida. Thank you very much.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Ms. Wilson.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you, Chair Rouzer and Ranking 
Member Napolitano, for convening today's hearing.
    In south Florida, water is woven into the fabric of our 
daily existence. From the essential natural drinking water that 
residents rely on, the sunny beaches that millions enjoy every 
year, to the surrounding waters that shape our environment and 
ecosystem, there is no question about the need to safeguard our 
water and enhance our water infrastructure.
    That is why, in my community, we are working to address the 
critical needs of the Everglades, identifying the need to 
replace hundreds of thousands of septic tanks that are 
polluting communities, protecting our neighbors from storm 
surges, and improving our ports so that we remain competitive 
in the global maritime industry.
    Through Federal, State, and local collaboration, we strive 
to improve our water infrastructure and better utilize our 
water resources. We can accomplish this by passing the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2024.
    While making these financial commitments, it is imperative 
that we also work with our environmental stakeholders to ensure 
that our decisions will help heal environmental shortfalls of 
the past while building our future.
    I want to take a moment to also highlight the bipartisan 
nature of this bill. While our Nation often witnesses a 
dysfunctional and partisan Congress, I am proud that we are 
unified in our commitment to safeguard water resources. Because 
our water is precious, and protecting it must be a priority.
    With that, I have a few questions for the witnesses.
    Mr. Mitamura, in south Florida, the Western Everglades 
Restoration Project has been repeatedly delayed. As a result, 
our local Tribal communities are now facing challenges with 
excess water and agricultural pollutants.
    Can you elaborate on how State and local interests can work 
on delayed projects like the Western Everglades Restoration 
Project?
    Mr. Mitamura. I am sorry, Ms. Wilson. Can you restate that 
question? I am not sure what you are asking as it relates to 
water supply.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. In your testimony, you stressed the 
importance of looking for new and creative mechanisms for State 
and local interests to collaborate with USACE to advance needed 
water resource projects.
    Mr. Mitamura. Yes, that is correct.
    So, one pushback we have received is that it would take 
away from the other interests in the Corps program. But what we 
are trying to do is elevate water supply to have equal footing. 
And, ultimately, the Congress directs the Corps on how to parse 
those pieces.
    We are not trying to intrude or disrupt the programs that 
are already in existence and have great needs as well as water 
supply. So, we don't see a negative impact to the other 
purposes, including ecosystem restoration.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you.
    It is great to see another Floridian in the room, 
especially one who is the chair of the American Association of 
Port Authorities.
    When I first came to Congress, the Water Resources 
Development Act was not on a 2-year cycle, and my fellow 
Floridian Congressman, Bill Posey, and I launched the 
bipartisan Florida Ports Caucus to advocate for the restoration 
of the 2-year cycle.
    Can you elaborate on the significance of the 2-year Water 
Resources Development Act cycle, or WRDA, as opposed to a 1-
year cycle to address the issues?
    Mr. Anderson. I would be happy to. Thank you for your warm 
welcome. And I want to, first of all, thank you for your 
leadership on our Florida Ports Caucus, and I am looking 
forward to our next meeting this spring.
    The WRDA cycles, as we know it, and as this committee has 
promulgated, successfully every 2 years. There was a period of 
time, Congresswoman, where we went 7 years at one point. I 
believe, maybe 20 years ago, a 5-year cycle. And it's just not 
a way to do business for our Nation's ports.
    I have mentioned it several times, but businesspeople will 
tell you that predictability is very important. Our ports will 
tell you.
    My colleague, Hydi, who is the great leader of the Port of 
Miami, we are very dependent on this committee and your 
authorization process for the projects that we are planning to 
expand our port capacity to stay competitive in the global 
marketplace. And again, just one of the most important things 
the committee can do is have that predictability. Thank you.
    Ms. Wilson of Florida. Thank you. I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. LaMalfa.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    We have, in California, obviously great challenges with our 
water supply and our ability to enhance that supply, whether it 
is aboveground storage or underground groundwater.
    So, Mr. Mitamura, thank you for being here today and for 
your insight.
    An example down in Orange County, with their water district 
and Army Corps, they are working on a Prado Dam implementation 
under SGMA. So, they are trying to enhance that situation there 
to be able to have more storage, either groundwater or above 
ground.
    Of course, I have been a long-time advocate of building 
more surface water storage in the Western States and, in my own 
district, we have opportunities with what is called Sites 
Reservoir in northern California and the raise of the Shasta 
Dam, 18 feet, which, feasibility was being looked at just a few 
years ago.
    And also, the amount of water we are losing to the Pacific 
with the opportunity--on any given month, with the rainfall and 
snowpack melts, we might be losing anywhere between 77 and 95 
percent of the water flowing from the watershed might be going 
through the delta straight into the Pacific. And then somewhere 
else along the line, they want to try and convert that now 
salty water back into freshwater. Why don't we just catch it 
before it leaves?
    So, Mr. Mitamura, in addition to Army Corps--and we are 
working with Mrs. Napolitano on looking at an idea on Army 
Corps' scope of work, maybe expanding the storage. So, I hope 
to work with her some more on that.
    What are the Federal agencies that would have a role to 
play so we can accelerate groundwater recharge and storage 
projects? We lost some opportunity in this massive amount of 
rain and snow we had last year with--the State water folks were 
not ready to allow us to divert water into retention and 
groundwater recharge ponds. We were waiting on permits in the 
middle of the massive water flow.
    So, what ideas do you have, sir, on--besides Army Corps? 
Who can we get to be more helpful?
    Mr. Mitamura. Representative LaMalfa, thank you for the 
question. Your reference to Prado Dam is a good one. That is an 
example of where the Corps has approved operations to allow 
what is a flood control dam to capture water for groundwater 
recharge in certain cases. Mrs. Napolitano's proposed 
legislation would hopefully allow that to be more widespread.
    I should also mention that our organization focuses on 
Corps of Engineers projects. So, I am not totally familiar with 
reclamation, but I would assume that those types of actions 
could be done at other Federal reservoirs.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Well, we were going to talk previously in 
another committee hearing on the 2014 WRRDA where there was a 
section, 1043 pilot programs. There were two sections of it 
that allow the non-Federal project sponsor to carry out the 
feasibility studies for a project with the same standards as 
the Corps would. It was intended to evaluate the cost-
effectiveness and project delivery efficiency. Section 1043(b) 
allowed the non-Federal project sponsor to carry out the 
construction of a project--again, with the same standards as 
the Corps--in order to evaluate alternatives.
    So, have you had any experience with these pilot programs, 
Mr. Mitamura, and are you seeing that they are taking advantage 
of them? Because we are going back to 2014 WRRDA, which, I have 
got to say, this committee has been pretty good on getting with 
the program on WRDA the last 10 years, and getting that back is 
an important part of our process here.
    So, any experience with the section 1043(a) or (b) 
sections?
    Mr. Mitamura. Absolutely. Allowing non-Federal sponsors to 
take the lead on some of these studies helps not only produce 
more efficiency in the process--in other words, time--and cost.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Which is what we are after.
    Mr. Mitamura. And I should add, though, that under the 
Corps' interpretation, reallocation studies are not allowed 
that same luxury. So, that is why this legislation proposed by 
Mrs. Napolitano would help with reallocation studies as well.
    Mr. LaMalfa. Yes. I hope we can iron that out.
    So, would it be good to extend that authority to 
reallocation and upgrading existing reservoirs? Quickly, 
please.
    Mr. Mitamura. I am sorry?
    Mr. LaMalfa. Upgrading existing reservoirs. Would it be 
good to extend the authority to that?
    Mr. Mitamura. That is correct.
    Mr. LaMalfa. OK.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Ms. Norton.
    Ms. Norton. I thank the chair and ranking member for 
holding this hearing on stakeholder priorities for the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2024.
    The District of Columbia, which I represent, is wholly 
reliant on the Potomac River for its drinking water, but 
natural or man-made events could render the river unusable for 
drinking water. This poses a grave risk, both to the operations 
of the Federal Government, and, of course, to DC residents.
    The federally owned and operated Washington aqueduct 
produces drinking water from the Potomac River for DC and parts 
of Virginia, and maintains only a single day of backup water 
supply.
    To address this risk to the Federal Government and DC 
residents, I included a provision authorizing the Army Corps to 
conduct a feasibility study on a secondary drinking water 
source and additional drinking water storage capability for the 
District of Columbia in the Water Resources Development Act of 
2022.
    At our last water resources hearing, the Chief of Engineers 
and Commanding General of the United States Army Corps of 
Engineers, Lieutenant General Spellmon, indicated the Army 
Corps supports funding 100 percent of the cost of the 
feasibility study on a secondary drinking source and additional 
drinking water storage capability for the District of Columbia.
    Mr. Mitamura, do any other jurisdictions have multiple 
water sources, and do you consider it a risk to the Federal 
Government and the District of Columbia residents to have only 
one drinking water source and only 1 day of backup water supply 
for the Nation's capital?
    Mr. Mitamura. Absolutely. The best managed water supply 
sources have a diverse portfolio of sources to meet the needs 
of their customers.
    In this case, I don't know all the ins and outs of the 
Washington system, but I do understand that, if it goes down, 
the city would be without water for quite a long time. So, 
making that a priority to not only find additional water 
sources, but to prepare for any type of contingency, would be 
wise, and I think Mrs. Napolitano's legislation would help 
prioritize that type of issue within the Corps.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you. And I will add that the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2022 also included my provisions 
authorizing studies of flood risk management in the Federal 
Triangle area of the District of Columbia and recreational 
access to the Potomac and Anacostia Rivers.
    Storms in the Federal Triangle in 2018, 2019, and 2020, 
resulted in closures of Constitution Avenue, power and 
transportation disruptions, and floodings of buildings. With 
heavy rain projected to become more frequent due to climate 
change, this area is increasingly susceptible to flooding.
    The project for flood risk management, including 
construction of improvements to interior drainage in the 
Federal Triangle, is vital to the Federal Government, given the 
many key Federal assets located right there. As with the study 
for a secondary drinking water source, we must consider the 
Army Corps' funding 100 percent of this study.
    DC's clean water project has dramatically reduced combined 
sewer overflows into the Anacostia and Potomac Rivers. As a 
result, bacterial levels are at a level that swimming in the 
rivers may be safe some days now and regularly in the future. 
The study for recreational access in the Potomac and Anacostia 
Rivers would assess the safety of swimming in the rivers, which 
would benefit residents of the DC area and visitors.
    I yield back my time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Ezell.
    Mr. Ezell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Commissioner Anderson, thank you for joining us today.
    And all our witnesses on here, it is very much appreciated 
that you came out here and took this opportunity.
    But, Mr. Commissioner, I want to thank you for your prior 
service as a Federal Maritime Commissioner, and being a 
freshman Member, I am glad to learn from some of your 
experiences. It is clear that your past work gives you the 
qualifications needed to provide effective leadership at one of 
our Nation's major seaports.
    Also, I believe it is obvious from your background in both 
the public and private sectors, you truly understand the 
importance of establishing the public-private partnership, or 
P3, at our Nation's ports. Take, for instance, the one between 
Ports America in the Port of Gulfport, which is in my district.
    Before we get into the water projects, can you expand just 
a little bit on the importance of the P3s and how it helps meet 
the demands of maritime commerce?
    Mr. Anderson. Yes. Thank you, Congressman. Very important 
to ports is the ability to have effective public-private 
partnerships. I am sure, again, my colleague at Gulfport, Jon 
Nass, would agree.
    Ports America is also our strategic operating terminal 
partner, and as such, we do co-investing on much of our port 
operating equipment. We have other P3s where we have had 
private investors invest. We will invest in the land. They will 
invest in the equipment. So, we improve the bulkheads, the 
public-use facilities. We arrange for the business contract 
that will allow them to be very profitable, hopefully, and 
bring new businesses to our port and utilize the public asset 
and throw off taxes, jobs, job creation.
    So, it is critically important. I know in Gulfport, we also 
have mutual customers in our refrigerated produce and other 
products that we serve, and those in our port is a public-
private partnership. So, I would say they are extremely 
important to ports around our Nation, your port, and my port as 
well.
    Mr. Ezell. Thank you very much.
    I have got a bill which would incentivize some private 
investment by expanding the use of the Capital Construction 
Fund, or CCF, to allow port operators to upgrade their cargo 
handling equipment without appropriating any funds.
    Do you think this bill and similar ideas would give our 
ports an additional resource needed to be more efficient and 
provide other solutions, like some of the supply chain issues 
that we have seen over the last couple years?
    Mr. Anderson. Yes. We believe that would be very helpful 
for ports. The WRDA bill expands the waterside infrastructure. 
Your bill would allow ports to get the capital investment for 
the operating equipment on the landside.
    Mr. Ezell. Thank you. Another interesting point I noticed 
in your testimony is the reference to the Nation's 18 strategic 
ports. The Port of Gulfport is included in that list.
    I am impressed at the work that is being done in south 
Mississippi to advance technology, particularly in the maritime 
drone industry. That will ultimately support our national 
security as well.
    These developers utilize the port's convenient access to 
deep and shallow water in the gulf, and I hear from the 
research community that deepening the port would provide even 
more research benefits.
    Do you agree that deepening a port, such as the Port of 
Gulfport, would provide not only some better supply chain 
benefits, but also benefit our national security, such as 
increased R&D and training facilities?
    Mr. Anderson. Well, Jon would be very upset if I said no.
    Mr. Ezell. So would I.
    Mr. Anderson. I absolutely agree. We are at Port Tampa Bay. 
Although we are not under one of those 18 ports, they are 
critical seaports to the strategic protection of our Nation. 
Deepening those ports along with other ports so that we can 
stay competitive in the global environment is very important.
    Mr. Ezell. Do you believe the military research and 
development, R&D, and training should be a determining factor, 
as well, when the Corps reviews the benefits of dredging these 
projects?
    Mr. Anderson. Beneficial dredge materials--as I mentioned 
in my testimony--are going to be used, and it is really a win-
win when you can use those--we like to say beneficial materials 
instead of spoils because they are beneficial.
    Mr. Ezell. Again, thank you all very much for being here 
today and providing us with so much information.
    And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Ms. Maloy. Again, welcome to the subcommittee.
    Ms. Maloy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you all for being here.
    I am hearing you talk about how essential it is that we do 
WRDA on a 2-year cycle, and that the infrastructure is aging, 
and Mr. Mitamura said in his testimony that agencies focus on 
the missions given them from Congress.
    I hear from my constituents all the time how difficult the 
Army Corps of Engineers is to work with, because they don't 
hear back from them. They are not super responsive. And the 
Corps of Engineers' website for the 2022 WRDA has almost 200 
provisions from the bill on there, but only 4 of them have 
implementing guidance or anything tracking.
    I am just wondering, for the whole panel, are you having 
difficulties with implementation, and if so, what can we, as 
Congress, do in the 2024 WRDA to make sure that agencies are 
focusing on the mission Congress has given them?
    Mr. Mitamura. Ms. Maloy, I would say that we have been 
working very closely with the Corps staff on their water supply 
team to make sure these delays don't continue. Now, that 
doesn't mean we are not still seeing delays. We think working 
directly with the Corps, in a good-faith manner, has helped us 
to make some improvements, but across the board, I think folks 
would agree that it is really not a timely process.
    If you go back to past WRDAs, some of those provisions 
still have not been implemented, or even have implementation 
guidance, and I think the Corps needs resources to do some of 
that. But in our case for water supply, making it a higher 
priority would really help.
    Ms. Maloy. Thank you.
    Go ahead.
    Mr. Weakley. I will go, ma'am.
    I literally argued with the Army Corps of Engineers for 10 
years, over a decade, on a flawed benefit-to-cost ratio at the 
Soo locks. That is why that project languished from 1986 until 
just the past couple of years.
    It was critical that we overcame that obstacle. It was 
critical that WRDA reauthorized it at the higher costs. But I 
will say, once the Army Corps got their mission orders, once 
WRDA authorized it, they are executing at this new Soo lock at 
an incredible rate. I have nothing but tremendous respect and 
appreciation for the project and the work that they are doing 
at Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan.
    But it took me 10 years to convince them that there was no 
railroad connection between the mines and the mills, and there 
was no alternative mode of transportation. But, like a good 
Service, they salute, and I have tremendous respect for General 
Spellmon personally and for the people that we work with in the 
Detroit District and the Buffalo District in Chicago.
    So, it is a matter of getting the ships set on the proper 
course, and WRDA is the best way to do that.
    Ms. Maloy. Thank you.
    Mr. Kinne. I will just add similar to the other comments.
    Historically, we have heard via the Kansas City District 
and the Omaha District very similar sentiments to what your 
constituents have shared with you.
    I would echo other comments, though. Most recently, 
communications have significantly increased and improved with 
both districts as well as implementation. And I mentioned the 
two big studies happening in our district, and I would say that 
the Kansas City and Omaha District are doing significant public 
outreach on those studies, and also have been very openminded 
to our feedback and suggestions on how to improve--make that 
outreach more effective.
    At the end of the day, we will get to see how constituents 
are listened to and how those studies come out, but we are 
encouraged that they are at least taking the time to kind of 
implement those studies in a way that they talk about the local 
solutions being their priorities. So, that is positive to hear.
    Ms. Maloy. Thank you.
    Ms. Batts. Ms. Maloy, the Corps has been very good and a 
wonderful partner to work with through our very long process. 
We started our project over 20 years ago; 2014, we got 
authorization; 2019, we got funded. The Corps was working on 
this very diligently and continues to work on it, but we just 
need the WRDA 2024 to make it a Surf City-only project. Thank 
you.
    Ms. Maloy. Thank you.
    Mr. Anderson. And I would say that the WRDA process gives 
the Corps the guidance that they need. That is why, every 2 
years, it is so important. You can make tweaks, improvements. 
Congress can direct what they want to do, and it doesn't let 
them make their own interpretations in many cases. They have 
improved under the 3x3x3 process. There is always room for 
continuous improvement.
    Ms. Maloy. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Ms. Scholten.
    Ms. Scholten. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you so much.
    I want to thank you for taking the time today. We are 
coming to the end of our session, but nonetheless, these WRDA 
reauthorizations are of critical importance, especially for 
districts like mine. I represent Michigan's Third Congressional 
District in Congress, which has miles of Lake Michigan 
shoreline. It is essential for WRDA projects.
    Water is a way of life in west Michigan. The Great Lakes 
are a major economic engine, both in Michigan and throughout 
our region, generating over $3 trillion in GDP and providing 
jobs for over 25 million people.
    Since water knows no physical boundaries, Congress must 
work together to ensure that we continue maintaining and caring 
for the vital resources of the Great Lakes for generations to 
come.
    My first question is for Mr. Weakley. As you are aware, the 
Federal Government taxes maritime cargo, and those taxes are 
then put into the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. In WRDA 2020, 
we authorized that 13 percent of the Harbor Maintenance Trust 
Fund should be allocated to the Great Lakes Navigation System, 
which includes dredging efforts that keep harbor towns, such as 
Grand Haven and Muskegon, thriving. Those are the two in my 
district.
    Can you please speak to whether those funds have, indeed, 
been used for the Great Lakes Navigation System and whether the 
percentage is still enough to keep up with the dredging efforts 
that the Corps needs to continue?
    Mr. Weakley.Yes, ma'am. Thank you for the question.
    So, before we had the Great Lakes set-aside, but more 
importantly, before the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund was 
opened up, Congress would only appropriate 50 percent of what 
was brought in, and that is why we have a $10 billion surplus.
    So, those two changes have been instrumental in 
resuscitating the Great Lakes Navigation System, particularly 
when we see those western Michigan ports. They are vulnerable 
to storm incidents, and we see a lot of littoral movement of 
sand and sediment. So, it has been a game-changer.
    What I worry about is the cost escalation of dredging, 
particularly on the Great Lakes, with some of the management 
material. It is what I call doing less with more. Doing less 
dredging with more dollars. What we need to do is make sure the 
project is more efficient.
    Sometimes we will not dredge even post the 13 percent set-
aside to 3.3 million cubic yards of sediment. More often than 
not, they are hitting that target, but we have seen years where 
they haven't, and the backlog has gone from 18 million cubic 
yards, and I believe it is probably down to the 15 million 
cubic yards, but I would have to check with the Corps to get 
you an exact figure, ma'am.
    Ms. Scholten. OK. OK. You can get back to me on that.
    I want to continue with you just a little bit talking 
about, when proper dredging doesn't happen--you were 
referencing it a little bit--but it prevent vessels from being 
able to carry the loads that they were intended to carry, and 
they have to go elsewhere, and it leads to light-loading. This 
lack of efficiency when transporting goods is also worrisome 
for the larger Great Lakes economy.
    Can you please speak to the impact it would have 
economically speaking, broadly, if these lakes and river 
bottoms are not properly dredged?
    Mr. Weakley. So, for each inch of lost navigation depth, we 
lose 270 tons of cargo, and that is just a matter of the size 
of our vessels. And in some instances, particularly before 
WRRDA 2014, we were losing feet. So, it was a significant 
economic loss systemwide.
    The worst situation I can recall is Dunkirk, New York, 
where the channels had gotten to the point where it was no 
longer economical to move cargo, so, we were light-loading. And 
the challenge there was we would do a split load, so, it would 
go to Tonawanda, New York, and Dunkirk. Once Dunkirk 
disappeared, Tonawanda was closed as a port.
    And that is part of my fear, particular for some of the 
Ohio ports, is that if we don't dredge them, they are not going 
to be economical.
    Ms. Scholten. Thank you. That was incredibly helpful.
    My third question is for Mr. Mitamura. I understand that 
you helped develop a three-State partnership between Texas, 
Oklahoma, and Kansas to engage with the Army Corps of Engineers 
on water planning, management, and policy issues.
    Again, given that water knows no physical boundaries, can 
you please speak to how important it is that we engage across 
State lines under the WRDA authority?
    Mr. Mitamura. Yes. Thanks for the question.
    I was actually one of the members who initiated that 
process, but it no longer exists. It requires a lot of 
attention, coordination. But we did find results from the 
Corps. The districts and divisions both participated on a 
regular basis.
    So, it does make a difference. The volume, the voices are 
helpful, and Oklahoma, Texas, and Kansas both benefited from 
that relationship. And it is still ongoing today even though 
the tri-States doesn't operate anymore.
    Ms. Scholten. All right. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Westerman.
    Mr. Westerman. Thank you, Chairman Rouzer and Ranking 
Member Napolitano.
    And, Chairman Rouzer, I hope you are working as well with 
Ranking Member Napolitano as she worked with me when I was 
ranking member and she was chair, and she has got a lot of 
experience on WRDA. I think this is her last WRDA, so, we need 
to make it a good one.
    Thank you to the witnesses for being here today.
    I have got an issue, and you may or may not be able to 
address this, but it was brought to my attention by a retired 
colonel from the Little Rock District who made me aware of some 
archaic laws, and one of them happens to be with the Davis-
Bacon Act with a provision that was put in in 1931 that 
requires contractors and subcontractors performing federally 
funded or assisting contracting in excess of $2,000 to 
competitively bid the work. So, they don't have any purchasing 
authority for anything above $2,000 without going out for bids.
    In practicality, that means if they have a backhoe and they 
need to put a new set of tires on it, they have to 
competitively bid it. So, it takes a lot of time and ends up 
costing a lot of money.
    And this isn't about changing any kind of prevailing wage. 
It is just raising that limit to be able to do purchases 
without competitively bidding. If you just used inflation, that 
would be over $30,000, with what $2,000 was back in 1931. Not 
even saying we need to raise it that high, but I think we 
should use some common sense in that.
    Also, the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act of 1965 
requires service on prime contracts in excess of $2,500 to pay 
service employees in various classes no less than the 
prevailing wage. Again, not to mess with the prevailing wage, 
but maybe look at some adjustment for inflation on that.
    The bottom line is, I asked for a report just in the Little 
Rock and Tulsa Districts over a 2-year timeframe. These two 
provisions cost $18 million.
    Are you familiar with this happening in other areas, or do 
you think it would be a problem to adjust this or a benefit to 
adjust it?
    Mr. Weakley. I am not familiar, sir, but you sold me.
    Mr. Westerman. When we are stretched for dollars and we 
want the dollars to actually go towards projects, it seems to 
be very common sense.
    Mr. Anderson. Congressman, you used common sense as part of 
it. I think we all agree common sense, in any law, makes sense. 
And you said it was an archaic law, and no inflation adjustment 
or what have you, but I would say it is very similar to the 
challenges that we are facing with grants we receive. It is 
taking several years to receive those dollars, and meanwhile, 
the projects are getting serious inflation costs added to the 
cost.
    So, if there is common sense in how we deliver dollars or 
how we do the--how we bid----
    Mr. Westerman [interrupting]. Streamlining the permitting 
would help lower costs as well.
    Mr. Anderson. Streamlining the permitting would be very 
helpful as well.
    Mr. Westerman. There are a lot of opportunities to be more 
cost-effective on our projects.
    Shifting gears a little bit--and, again, this may be a 
topic you may or may not be able to address--but I got the 
chance to go with Ranking Member Napolitano and visit the ports 
in California. I visited other ports across the country. And it 
appears to me there is a demand for more ports on the west 
coast, more deepwater ports on the west coast, and even some 
deepwater ports on the west coast of Alaska.
    But if anybody has got any knowledge to how beneficial it 
would be for us to build new ports to be able to move our 
goods, I would like to hear your thoughts on that.
    Mr. Anderson. Well, if you saw the west coast ports--and 
Mrs. Napolitano's port is a great port in Los Angeles and Long 
Beach, that port complex.
    I would be remiss if I didn't say we are here to focus on 
increasing and improving our existing port complexes. I can't 
imagine what it would require. Some of the projects--the WRDA 
projects--some of our ports are facing due to excessive 
environmental review, lengthening the process of their GRR 
studies, building a new port would seem almost impossible to 
me.
    But we would strongly advocate for investing in our 
existing ports.
    Mr. Westerman. I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. James.
    Mr. James. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member 
Napolitano. I appreciate this opportunity to speak.
    I would like to thank the witnesses for being able to make 
it up to Capitol Hill today to testify in front of the 
committee regarding the state of clean water infrastructure.
    Today, we gather with the shared understanding of the 
critical importance of preserving and safeguarding our precious 
water resources. Among the jewels of our national heritage, the 
Great Lakes system and the interconnected beauty of Lake Saint 
Clair stand as vital components of our environmental legacy.
    As only one of the many stewards of the Great Lakes, it is 
our collective responsibility to champion the protection of 
these majestic bodies of water and ensure they thrive for 
generations to come. These interconnected bodies of water not 
only form the bedrock of our environmental heritage, but also 
serve as economic linchpins for countless communities.
    The Nation's aging water infrastructure is in desperate 
need of modernization. It is going to take significant 
resources and our collective effort to make this happen.
    Mr. Weakley, you mentioned your advocacy for the Soo locks. 
I want to thank you. My very first bill that passed the House 
was H.R. 3399, the Soo Locks Security and Economic Reporting 
Act, this summer.
    The DHS came out with a report in 2015, which identified 
the fact that, due to 90 percent of the world's iron ore coming 
through the Soo locks, a shutdown for any reason would result 
in economic depression in the United States, and within 6 
months, we would lose over 11 million jobs. The economic impact 
to the State of Michigan would be incalculable.
    The Soo locks has 7,000 ships and vessels pass through 
annually, and it is widely referred to as the linchpin of the 
Great Lakes. I would like to speak with you about not just how 
the Soo locks--but as a part of the network, I am very 
concerned about navigation. I do want to put this to listen.
    Are there any specific regulations or policies that Great 
Lakes carriers believe could be revised or improved to better 
support the Great Lakes growth and sustainability?
    Mr. Weakley. That is a very difficult and broad question, 
sir. And I would say that I----
    Mr. James [interrupting]. Intentionally broad because we 
need you to educate us.
    What can we go after to make the Great Lakes more clean and 
make it easier for economic and environmental sustainability?
    Mr. Weakley. So, I do give the Corps a lot of credit for 
their executing on the Soo lock project, and I thought your 
bill was well-placed, particularly with the cyber threat. I 
think that is something that is underanticipated in 
infrastructure. Infrastructure is key. It is part of what keeps 
our economy moving, and I always say transportation is the 
grease that keeps our economy moving.
    I think there are opportunities to streamline some of the 
permitting process. I think another key is focusing on dealing 
with the dredge material management, particularly in some of 
our Lake Erie ports. There are challenges of dealing with it 
and complying with some of the State requirements.
    And as I mentioned to an earlier question, I worry about 
doing less with more. As the Congressman previously talked 
about, the 1930s act, efficiency is a big deal. We have got a 
$10 billion surplus, which sounds like a lot of money, but when 
you look at, nationwide, how that can be used on----
    Mr. James [interrupting]. Mr. Weakley, how can we be more 
efficient at dredging?
    Just in the past few months, there was an incident--I 
believe in November, there was a stuck ship carrying wheat in 
the Detroit River. Six months, I think there was another one on 
May 17. It ran aground just feet from the Belle Isle shoreline. 
And over--I think the Mark W. Barker was carrying salt from 
Milwaukee coming on this side. And we seem to have these 
recurring themes of ships running aground. We haven't even 
gotten to the point of icebreakers in the winter months and 
navigation.
    Can you talk to us about how we can speed up and make the 
process more efficient on dredging? And then if we have time in 
the last minute, talk about how ice may be a factor in 
navigation in the Great Lakes.
    Mr. Weakley. So, I think another way to make dredging more 
efficient is to broaden the dredging windows. There are 
challenges, particularly with some of the State permits that 
are based, in my opinion, on some questionable science. So, we 
need to make it more efficient so that they have a larger 
window with which they can use their existing capital 
equipment.
    I think what we saw in the State of Michigan is a perfect 
example. When the State of Michigan was paying for the 
dredging, the situation was so bad they were dredging 
recreational harbors with State money, they waived and expanded 
those dredging windows.
    So, the States are more frugal with the State money than 
they are with Federal money, and I think that is a challenge 
that could be addressed, sir.
    Mr. James. Thank you. I will follow up with you offline. I 
appreciate your time here, sir.
    Mr. Weakley. I was hoping you were going to get to 
icebreaking. I apologize for talking too long.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Babin.
    Dr. Babin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you, witnesses, for being here.
    I represent the 36th Congressional District of Texas, 
basically Houston over to Louisiana, where we have many 
critical ports and waterways, really an unmatched number of 
chemical plants and refineries, and a number of communities 
that are very, very sensitive to natural disasters. We are no 
strangers to hurricanes.
    I would like to thank you all of you for your commitment to 
protecting and improving our Nation's water resources and our 
infrastructure.
    Just like many of you in your respective roles, my district 
relies heavily on the Army Corps of Engineers. One key issue I 
hear from constituents and community leaders is on the 
communication with the Army Corps. My constituents pay close 
attention to how projects might impact their communities and 
quality of life, so, naturally, when we are trying to help 
coordinate between the Army Corps and our constituents, we 
encourage them to leave no stone unturned and listen very 
closely to their concerns.
    And this question is going to be open to all of you, if you 
feel like you can answer. Do you feel like your engagements and 
conversations with the Army Corps are well received and heard? 
And when you have concerns with the way things are being done 
and flag these concerns with the Corps, do you feel like that 
your concerns result in some changes? If you would like to take 
a stab at it.
    Mr. Kinne.
    Mr. Kinne. Yes, I am happy to start. I think we have a 
fairly recent example of kind of how to answer that question 
for you.
    Dr. Babin. Sure.
    Mr. Kinne. As I mentioned to the committee, we have two 
kind of historic generational studies happening on the Missouri 
River in regard to flood control, as well as navigation, and 
those studies include a significant amount of stakeholder 
engagement and outreach and comment.
    And the Kansas City and Omaha Districts have done a very 
good job of setting up those meetings, but as you all know, I 
am sure as you go talk to constituents, sometimes getting 
public input at a meeting can be challenging, and getting folks 
to talk and give real substantive feedback can be challenging 
as well.
    And so, I will say, as we observe these meetings, we have 
given feedback to the Corps of Engineers on how to better 
facilitate them, on how to break them up and have smaller 
meetings so individuals are willing to talk, and items like 
that. And I will say, they have been responsive to that 
feedback and have made adjustments in working with us to 
facilitate those types of discussions.
    And so, that would be kind of my feedback and suggestion.
    Dr. Babin. OK.
    Mr. Kinne. Just urging them to facilitate those in those 
ways.
    Dr. Babin. Thank you very much.
    And as Representatives in Washington, we are tasked with 
representing the various constituents, stakeholder, community, 
and advocacy groups in our home States and our districts, and 
obviously, we receive a lot of request for assistance.
    And I am sure I am speaking for everyone sitting up there 
where you are, we try our best to do everything we can to 
improve our water resources, our storm preparedness, flood 
resilience, et cetera.
    Would some of you please share some best practices for 
working with congressional offices? What sort of tips, 
suggestions, recommendations, et cetera, do you have for both 
other stakeholders and congressional offices working to put 
together strong WRDA bills?
    Who'd like to take a stab at that?
    Mr. Anderson.
    Mr. Anderson. I will take that or attempt to.
    I think it is really important, communication. And in our 
case, we have probably had 20 Members of Congress visit our 
port in the last year. It is very important for us to--we can 
show you slides and show you videos, but there is nothing that 
beats showing somebody in person what the port is.
    And to that end, I invite any member of the committee to 
come down and visit in Tampa in January when it is really nice, 
and we will show you our port. I think that is really 
important, though, the communication aspect, and working as a 
team.
    Going back to your previous question, many times, you on 
this committee and other Members--Mr. Webster was here 
earlier--there have been many Members--are very helpful in 
getting the communication to the Corps unstuck. So, thank you 
for that.
    Dr. Babin. You are welcome. And I thank all of you for your 
service. I am looking forward to continuing our collaboration 
on WRDA projects to improve our Nation's water resources.
    With that, I will yield back, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Rouzer. Mr. Duarte.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thank you to the panel for being here today. I appreciate 
you being available to advise us a bit.
    I represent a district in the San Joaquin Valley of 
California where we were, just last year and seemingly every 
couple of decades, threatened with torrential flooding, and 
there have been a lot of challenges in our district with 
siltation and channel flow capacities.
    I know Mr. Mitamura has worked on water supply issues in 
the past. Our channel flow actually relates directly to our 
water supply in that all of our reservoirs need to keep head 
space in them for flood emergency events.
    I will start with Mr. Mitamura, but I will take volunteers.
    How can we best use this WRDA bill to get the dredging we 
need executed in as near term as possible--on Army Corps time, 
anyway--to increase our flood channel flow and hopefully 
increase our dam storage carryover capacities?
    Mr. Mitamura. Yes. Very good question.
    In the past, the Corps has probably put less focus on 
dredging those types of channels and making sure our reservoirs 
are not silting up. The State of Kansas actually took it upon 
themselves to do the dredging at their reservoirs because they 
couldn't wait for the Corps.
    I think the Corps is starting to pay more attention on that 
issue. Maybe it needs a little bit more of a nudge. But in your 
case, the issue is so much more urgent that--going directly to 
the Corps, to the Chief, to get some attention on that.
    I think--I am just assuming here--that, generally, that is 
not something that is top of mind for the Corps----
    Mr. Duarte [interposing]. Sure.
    Mr. Mitamura [continuing]. Unless it's at a port.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you.
    Other input on that? Because I have got other questions.
    Mr. Anderson, I understand in a past life you worked for 
the Corn Growers Association representing farmers. Is that the 
case?
    Mr. Anderson. No.
    Mr. Duarte. It is not? Oh, I am sorry. Glad I doublechecked 
that.
    Mr. Kinne. That was me, sir.
    Mr. Duarte. That was you. OK. Mr. Kinne down there. Sorry. 
I misplaced that. You did. It is not an accusation.
    I live in California, and much of my district has what are 
called vernal pools. I know in many corn-growing and crops 
areas in America, we have great prairie potholes. These have 
been distinctly excluded from the Army Corps of Engineers' 
jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act.
    Do we still see the Army Corps of Engineers being 
distracted around the country with minor wetlands and things 
that are not clearly navigable waters of the United States and 
adjacent as defined by the recent court decisions? And how 
would you advise that we direct the Army Corps to focus on the 
many important things they could be doing that are 
jurisdictional, and away from harassing farmers?
    Mr. Kinne. Yes. As I think about this issue, we have, 
obviously, several members of our organization that are 
concerned about this topic, and it does continue to be a 
concern, especially as you think about WOTUS and that 
regulatory focus.
    I will say--and I think it was mentioned previously--as you 
think about directing the Corps of Engineers to focus on 
priority projects, passing a WRDA every 2 years is a critical 
tool. It gives them that direction to focus them accordingly.
    I think it was mentioned earlier. The more time that passes 
between WRDA bills, the more----
    Mr. Duarte [interrupting]. Bring that microphone a little 
closer to you.
    Mr. Kinne. Yes. The more time that passes between WRDA 
bills, the more gap there is for interpretation of 
implementation and things like that.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you very much.
    In any of your expertise, are there specific pieces of 
language we can put in this WRDA bill that direct the Army 
Corps of Engineers away from isolated wetlands and towards the 
navigable waters issues that are so important to so many 
districts around the U.S.?
    Mr. Kinne. Yes. One of our priorities in WRDA 2024 is 
focused on sideboards around habitat projects for the Missouri 
River. And so, historically, these experiments within the river 
channel have had a significant impact on industry while not 
knowing whether there is a positive benefit for the species or 
not, and so, we are very focused on increasing those sideboards 
to ensure that, if any type of endangered species acts are 
happening within the river, that human interests and industry 
interests are strongly considered in a way that is a part of 
that process.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you.
    And, Mr. Anderson, any quick advice you can give me on 
getting private operators to take care of some of the port 
dredging and siltation issues around the country?
    Mr. Anderson. In our case, we have private terminals that 
connect to public waterways, Federal channels, and in those 
cases, when we do dredging projects, we will include those--can 
include those with tipping fees, so that the revenue--because 
as it connects to the Federal channel, up to that point, it has 
to be paid for by the private companies, and that regularly 
happens where we do have private terminals off the public 
waterways.
    So, that's clearly a way that you can dredge non-Federal 
channels and derive revenue from doing it to pay back the cost.
    Mr. Duarte. Thank you.
    I yield back.
    Mr. Rouzer. The gentleman yields back.
    Thank you all very much. I appreciate every single one of 
our panelists being here today. A very helpful and informative 
hearing.
    I see no other Members that have not already been 
recognized before us. That being the case, this will conclude 
our hearing for today.
    And again, I thank each of our witnesses for being here 
with us.
    The committee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 3:50 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]


                       Submissions for the Record

                              ----------                              


 Statement of Torey Carter-Conneen, Chief Executive Officer, American 
Society of Landscape Architects, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Grace 
                             F. Napolitano
                              Introduction
    Thank you Chairman Rouzer, Ranking Member Napolitano, and Members 
of the House Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment for the 
opportunity to provide written testimony on the Water Resources 
Development Act (WRDA) and the valuable work the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers (USACE) performs to improve our nation's navigable channels, 
reduce flood and storm damage, restore aquatic ecosystems, and more. 
The American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) applauds your 
leadership in ensuring a biennial WRDA process to plan, design, and 
implement USACE projects and studies to meet our nation's water 
resources needs.
    ASLA appreciates USACE's collaboration with landscape architects to 
improve and safeguard our nation's water infrastructure, while also 
addressing water quality and quantity issues, climate resilience, 
biodiversity, public health, and equitable economic development.
    Founded in 1899, ASLA is the professional association for landscape 
architects in the United States, representing more than 15,000 members. 
ASLA members span nationwide, with landscape architects representing 
all 50 states and U.S. territories among ASLA's 49 chapters. ASLA 
promotes the profession of landscape architecture and advances the 
practice through advocacy, education, communication, and fellowship.
    Landscape architecture encompasses the analysis, planning, design, 
management, and stewardship of the natural and built environment 
through science and design. The profession is broad in scale and scope, 
with most practitioners focusing on designing water and stormwater 
management infrastructure projects, multimodal transportation networks, 
community master plans, and parks and recreation spaces.
    Landscape architects often play a lead role in large public and 
private projects that significantly impact public health, safety, and 
welfare.\1\ The technical complexity of landscape architecture and its 
impact on public health, safety, and welfare have led all 50 states and 
the District of Columbia to license landscape architects. In addition 
to meeting STEM education and experience requirements, candidates for 
landscape architecture licensure pass a national registration exam--the 
Landscape Architecture Registration Exam (LARE)--before they can be 
licensed by the state boards of registration. This rigorous four-part 
exam includes a section on Grading, Drainage, and Stormwater 
Management, requiring candidates to demonstrate mastery of grading and 
earthwork design considerations for small-to-large scale sites and 
detailed site-specific circulation, including addressing design 
alternatives, adherence to national codes, and more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Schatz, Alex P., JD, and Josh Sundloff JD, ASLA. ``Landscape 
Architecture Licensure Handbook: Ensuring Safe, Healthy, and Resilient 
Natural and Built Environments,'' January 2017.
    https://www.asla.org/uploadedFiles/CMS/Government_Affairs/
LA_Licensure_
Handbook.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Landscape Architects Successfully Collaborate with the U.S. Army Corps 
                              of Engineers
    As you are aware, Congress first enacted WRDA in 1974 to provide 
policy and guidance to help strengthen our nation's water 
infrastructure. The 1986 WRDA began to identify and authorize funding 
for specific USACE civil works projects. Since its inception, WRDA has 
been updated to allow USACE to move beyond constructing water 
infrastructure projects that only address traditional irrigation, 
navigation, and flood control issues. Today, USACE projects also focus 
on numerous community concerns, including environmental protection, 
climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts, biodiversity, 
recreation \2\ economic development, and other community benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ ``Tom Hanafan River's Edge Park,'' Sasaki, n.d., https://
www.sasaki.com/projects/tom-hanafan-rivers-edge-park/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Throughout the years, landscape architects have been collaborative 
partners with USACE. The profession's STEM-focused education and 
training with an emphasis in hydrology, geology, botany and 
horticulture, engineering site design, water management, drainage, and 
climatology \3\ has positioned landscape architects to be uniquely 
qualified to collaborate on and lead USACE projects. From coastal 
resilience to wetlands restoration, flood control, sea-level rise, and 
more, landscape architects work with USACE to create and manage our 
nation's critical water infrastructure. During USACE's Engineering With 
Nature (EWN) Podcast, Dr. Jeff King, deputy national lead of the EWN 
program, discussed how landscape architects have joined forces with 
USACE to explore innovative solutions to coastal resilience.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\ American Society of Landscape Architects. ``Landscape 
Architecture Is a STEM Discipline,'' 2023. https://www.asla.org/
uploadedFiles/2022_ASLA_STEM_White_Paper.pdf.
    \4\ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Headquarters, ``Expanding the 
Practice of EWN through Landscape Architecture,'' n.d., https://
www.usace.army.mil/Media/News/NewsSearch/Article/
2584446/expanding-the-practice-of-ewn-through-landscape-architecture/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Recently, landscape architects, firms, and university programs have 
contracted and collaborated with USACE on cutting-edge projects and 
research to help manage our nation's water infrastructure:
      Landscape architecture faculty at the University of 
Virginia are collaborating with USACE to study several sites in the 
Chesapeake Bay to find ways of stopping or mitigating the damage from 
changing environments and ecosystems. The research team will help 
develop methods of evaluating the performance of nature-based efforts, 
tracking characteristics such as vegetation growth patterns, indicator 
species, and plant health.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\ ``UVA Landscape Architects Seek to Fight Flooding the Natural 
Way,'' UVA Today, December 6, 2023, https://news.virginia.edu/content/
uva-landscape-architects-seek-fight-flooding-natural-way.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      USACE contracted with Biohabitats, a landscape 
architecture and design-build firm in Baltimore, Maryland, to provide 
ecosystem restoration and environmental services to support the Great 
Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) within the Buffalo, Detroit, and 
Chicago Districts. Launched in 2010, the GLRI was designed to 
accelerate efforts to protect and restore the health of the Great 
Lakes, the largest system of fresh surface water in the world. The GLRI 
supported projects to restore habitat and wetlands, clean up toxic 
pollution, combat invasive species, and prevent runoff from farms and 
cities.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\ Younts Design Inc., ``Biohabitats: Indefinite Delivery Contract 
to Provide Ecosystem Restoration and Environmental Services to Support 
the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative within the Buffalo, Detroit and 
Chicago Districts,'' n.d., https://www.biohabitats.com/project/
indefinite-
delivery-contract-to-provide-ecosystem-restoration-and-environmental-
services-to-support-
the-great-lakes-restoration-initiative-within-the-buffalo-detroit-and-
chicago-districts/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      CMG Landscape Architecture worked with the Port of San 
Francisco and USACE to develop the San Francisco Draft Waterfront 
Adaptation Strategies, which will identify a preferred approach to 
reduce flood risks from sea level rise and extreme storms and to guide 
the transformation of the city's shoreline and bayside 
neighborhoods.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\ CMG Landscape Architecture, ``San Francisco Draft Waterfront 
Adaptation Strategies--CMG Landscape Architecture,'' February 3, 2023, 
https://www.cmgsite.com/places/san-francisco-draft-waterfront-
adaptation-strategies/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Landscape architecture faculty at Auburn University 
implemented a project--funded in part by USACE--to help improve the 
design, function, and efficacy of coastal infrastructure like levees, 
jetties, and dams.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\ American Society of Landscape Architects. ``Landscape 
Architecture Is a STEM Discipline,'' 2023. https://www.asla.org/
uploadedFiles/2022_ASLA_STEM_White_Paper.pdf.

    These are just a few examples of the myriad projects that highlight 
the unique role landscape architects play in collaborating with USACE.
  ASLA Recommendations for the Water Resources Development Act of 2024
1. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should enhance the use of nature-
        based solutions in its water resources projects.
    Nature-based solutions are infrastructure that uses, restores, or 
emulates natural ecological processes and can be created by human 
design, engineering, and construction to act in concert with natural 
processes.\9\ Examples of nature-based solutions include living 
shorelines, green roofs, tree canopies, rain gardens, bioswales, 
retention basins, and permeable and pervious pavements.\10\ A USACE-
sponsored report highlighted that nature-based solutions \11\ may 
incorporate natural landscapes such as beaches, dunes, wetlands, reefs, 
and islands.\12\ Nature-based solutions can provide sustainable, cost-
effective, and resilient alternatives or complements to traditional 
gray infrastructure, which typically includes structures like buried 
pipes, sewers, and tunnels made of concrete or steel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\ In recognition that the term natural infrastructure is related 
to nature-based solutions as used or agreed to by the U.S. government 
as found in Public Law 117-58, Section 11103 (Nov. 15, 2021) (codified 
at 23 U.S.C. 101(a)(17)); https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-
117publ58/pdf/PLAW-117publ58.pdf.
    \10\ White House. Olander, Lydia, Krystal Laymon, and Heather 
Tallis. ``Opportunities for Accelerating Nature-Based Solutions: A 
Roadmap for Climate Progress, Thriving Nature, Equity, and 
Prosperity,'' November 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2022/11/Nature-Based-Solutions-Roadmap.pdf.
    \11\ In recognition that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers utilizes 
the terms natural and nature-based features to describe nature-based 
solutions as found in Todd S. Bridges et al., ``International 
Guidelines on Natural and Nature-Based Features for Flood Risk 
Management,'' September 15, 2021, https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/41946.
    \12\ Todd S. Bridges et al., ``International Guidelines on Natural 
and Nature-Based Features for Flood Risk Management,'' September 15, 
2021, https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/41946.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Traditionally, USACE and other infrastructure builders have looked 
solely to gray infrastructure to create our nation's water 
infrastructure projects. Generally, buried pipes, pump systems, sewers, 
and tunnels have successfully rerouted waters to manage stormwater, 
prevent flooding, address sea-level rise, and more. However, water 
infrastructure projects that incorporate nature-based solutions are 
known to be highly effective at managing water and simultaneously 
create multiple community-wide benefits that impact environmental, 
human, and economic health.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ White House. Olander, Lydia, Krystal Laymon, and Heather 
Tallis. ``Opportunities for Accelerating Nature-Based Solutions: A 
Roadmap for Climate Progress, Thriving Nature, Equity, and 
Prosperity,'' November 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2022/11/Nature-Based-Solutions-Roadmap.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Water infrastructure projects that incorporate vegetation or 
organic material such as seagrasses, mangrove forests, and floating 
ecosystems can also help to mitigate climate impacts and poor air 
quality through carbon storage and sequestration. Additionally, these 
projects can create or restore habitats and ecosystems that conserve 
and increase biodiversity while also improving community aesthetics.
    Nature-based solutions also improve human physical and mental 
health. Green spaces provide environments for physical activity, which 
helps prevent cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, and other chronic 
diseases. Nature-based solutions also improve air quality, which in 
turn may help prevent asthma and other lung conditions. These green 
spaces have also been shown to help reduce stress and address mental 
health issues.
    Communities may also reap economic benefits from recreational and 
tourist-focused water projects that utilize nature-based solutions, 
such as parks, managed shorelines, beaches, and more. Overall economic 
growth can increase through jobs, tourism, and recreation opportunities 
such as wildlife viewing, sportfishing, fishing, swimming, beach-going, 
and boating.\14\ The use of nature-based solutions in USACE's Missouri 
River Recover Program--which used levee setbacks to reconnect 
floodplains--provided co-benefits including ecosystem sustainability, 
increased recreational opportunities, improved aesthetics, and enhanced 
cultural and educational opportunities.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\ Todd S. Bridges et al., ``International Guidelines on Natural 
and Nature-Based Features for Flood Risk Management,'' September 15, 
2021, https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/41946.
    \15\ Todd S. Bridges et al., ``International Guidelines on Natural 
and Nature-Based Features for Flood Risk Management,'' September 15, 
2021, https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/41946.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Acknowledging the benefits of nature-based solutions in water 
projects, USACE introduced its EWN initiative in 2010 to highlight 
current and future capabilities for delivering nature-based 
solutions.\16\ EWN is the intentional alignment of natural and 
engineering processes to efficiently and sustainably deliver economic, 
environmental, and social benefits through collaboration.\17\ Since its 
inception, EWN has been successfully implemented to guide the planning, 
design, and construction of numerous USACE projects.\18\ The Oyster 
Reef Shoreline Stabilization Project at MacDill Air Force Base is one 
example of EWN's success and shows the need for increased nature-based 
solutions. In this project, a living shoreline made of oyster reefs was 
constructed to restore natural coastal vegetation, reduce wave energy, 
and encourage sediment accumulation that stabilized the shoreline, 
protected it from erosion, improved water quality, and enhanced habitat 
for wildlife.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\ Todd S. Bridges et al., ``Engineering With Nature: Supporting 
Mission Resilience and Infrastructure Value at Department of Defense 
Installations,'' October 5, 2021, https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/42207.
    \17\ Engineering With Nature, ``About EWN--Engineering with 
Nature,'' July 25, 2023, https://ewn.erdc.dren.mil/about/.
    \18\ Engineering With Nature, ``Built Projects--Engineering with 
Nature,'' March 29, 2023, https://ewn.erdc.dren.mil/built-projects/.
    \19\ Todd S. Bridges et al., ``Engineering With Nature: Supporting 
Mission Resilience and Infrastructure Value at Department of Defense 
Installations,'' October 5, 2021, https://doi.org/10.21079/11681/42207.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Further, due to mounting evidence demonstrating the effectiveness 
of nature-based solutions and the numerous co-benefits, the Biden 
administration introduced its Nature-Based Solutions Roadmap in 
November 2022, calling on federal agencies to prioritize these 
techniques in confronting our nation's most pressing challenges.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\ White House. Olander, Lydia, Krystal Laymon, and Heather 
Tallis. ``Opportunities for Accelerating Nature-Based Solutions: A 
Roadmap for Climate Progress, Thriving Nature, Equity, and 
Prosperity,'' November 2022. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/
uploads/2022/11/Nature-Based-Solutions-Roadmap.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Given the documented effectiveness of nature-based solutions, the 
ongoing success of EWN, and the administration's Roadmap 
recommendations, ASLA believes that WRDA 2024 is a unique opportunity 
to call on USACE to expand its use of nature-based solutions. 
Specifically, ASLA recommends that all new studies on the feasibility 
of USACE projects include consideration of nature-based solution 
alternatives or compliments. Further, Congress and USACE should 
prioritize the authorization and funding of projects beyond the 
feasibility phase that have successfully planned and designed for the 
implementation of nature-based solutions.
2. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should work to include more 
        landscape architects in its water resources projects.
    During a December 5, 2023, hearing before the House Water Resources 
and Environment Subcommittee, the Honorable Michael L. Connor, 
Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works at the United States 
Department of the Army stated, there is a ``need to have the next 
generation of skilled laborers in place'' to handle projects concerning 
flood control and mitigation and coastal resilience.\21\ Because of 
landscape architects' long-standing expertise in planning and designing 
resilient water projects, ASLA urges Congress and USACE to take steps 
to utilize more of the profession for the successful delivery of these 
projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\ ``Hearing--Water Resources Development Acts: Status of Past 
Provisions and Future Needs,'' House Transportation and Infrastructure 
Committee, December 5, 2023, https://transportation.house.gov/calendar/
eventsingle.aspx?EventID=406974.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since at least 1857, landscape architects have been designing with 
nature.\22\ Using plant and soil systems, wetlands, tree canopies, 
green and open spaces, and more, landscape architects harness the power 
of nature to manage stormwater, mitigate flooding, prevent coastal 
erosion, clean our waterways, and address other water resource needs. 
These and other nature-based solutions may be implemented at many 
scales, from individual residences, to a neighborhood, to a community, 
and to an entire region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \22\ ``Frederick Law Olmsted,'' Architect of the Capitol, n.d., 
https://www.aoc.gov/explore-
capitol-campus/frederick-law-
olmsted#::text=Olmsted%20retired%20in%201895.,scenic
%20reservations%20and%20university%20campuses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Landscape architects are particularly astute at addressing water-
related issues on a watershed scale, instead of ``one off'' project-
specific solutions. Landscape architects deploy holistic nature-based 
solutions like upstream wetlands and forest restoration to manage 
downstream flooding and erosion, as opposed to or in concert with gray 
infrastructure flood walls, dikes, river channel modifications, and 
others. Since water is by nature a dynamic force, failure to 
holistically consider the constant flow and cycle of water between 
individual project sites leaves communities increasingly susceptible to 
floods, droughts, and polluted bodies of water.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \23\ ``Jackson, Mississippi Water Crisis,'' Center for Disaster 
Philanthropy, February 15, 2023, https://disasterphilanthropy.org/
disasters/jackson-mississippi-water-crisis/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Further, landscape architects are leaders in community engagement 
processes that help build support for the project and lead to designs 
that meet the needs of diverse groups of residents and stakeholders. 
Conventional ``check-the-box'' models of engagement often fail to reach 
and build trust with individuals in the community, especially those who 
are underserved and often overlooked in design or policy 
considerations.\24\ In contrast, landscape architects account for the 
human experience when designing public projects and implement 
innovative forms of public engagement that are ``contextual, open, 
experiential, substantive, and holistic.'' \25\ Elevating community 
voices is critical because lives are directly affected by projects.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\ Siler, Emily, Major Professor, and Jessica Canfield. 2023. 
``Engaging Communities: A Primer for Landscape Architecture Practice.'' 
https://krex.k-state.edu/bitstream/handle/2097/43308/
EmilySiler2023.pdf?sequence=1.
    \25\ ``Design as Democracy: Techniques for Collective Creativity: 
De La Pena, David, Jones Allen, Diane, Hester Jr., Randolph T., Hou, 
Jeffrey, Lawson, Laura J., McNally, Marcia J.: 9781610918473: 
Amazon.Com: Books,'' n.d., https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/
1610918479/
ref=as_li_qf_asin_il_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=desiforthefut-
20&creative=9325&linkCode=as2
&creativeASIN=1610918479&linkId=3c0ccf42772bdcf0a92963b1ecf01a3a&asin=16
10918479
&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1.
    \26\ ``New York Rising Community Planning.'' Scape, May 16, 2019. 
https://www.scapestudio.com/projects/new-york-rising-community-
planning/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The design of WRDA projects must begin to utilize a comprehensive 
approach that values the interconnectedness of water systems, 
communities, and infrastructure. As such, landscape architects with 
their holistic design approach and unique community engagement skills 
are much needed on USACE projects.
            The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should recruit and hire 
                    additional landscape architects to meet the growing 
                    demands of designing and constructing water 
                    resources projects.
    As you know, Section 8116. Workforce Planning of WRDA 2022 \27\ 
called for the recruitment of individuals for careers at USACE. The 
section further allows USACE to enter into partnerships with colleges 
and universities, including historically Black colleges and 
universities (HBCUs), to help with recruiting efforts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\ Public Law 117-263, Section 8116 (Dec. 23, 2022). https://
www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ263/PLAW-117publ263.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Given the holistic design skills, community engagement techniques, 
and expertise in utilizing nature-based solutions for water resources 
projects, ASLA encourages USACE to take aggressive steps to recruit and 
hire landscape architects. ASLA has learned from its members that, 
while some USACE district offices have multiple landscape architects on 
staff, most district offices have few or no landscape architects, 
resulting in inconsistent processes, approaches, and efficiencies in 
project delivery. Congress should provide sufficient appropriations and 
other resources to allow USACE to increase the number of landscape 
architects in its workforce, thereby ensuring well-designed projects 
that manage water resources and meet the concerns of the hosting 
community.
    Further, ASLA strongly encourages USACE to partner with the 102 
landscape architecture programs at 76 universities and colleges across 
the country, including the HBCUs North Carolina Agricultural and 
Technical State University and Morgan State University, to help 
develop, recruit, and hire landscape architects to work with the 
agency. Landscape architecture students are educated in and routinely 
apply the physical and natural sciences, including site design, land 
planning, grading, drainage, stormwater management, hydrology, erosion 
control, and more,\28\ making them uniquely qualified to immediately 
contribute to the success of USACE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\ American Society of Landscape Architects. ``Landscape 
Architecture Is a STEM Discipline,'' 2023. https://www.asla.org/
uploadedFiles/2022_ASLA_STEM_White_Paper.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should incorporate 
                    landscape architecture in calls for Indefinite 
                    Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts.
    The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) is the primary regulation 
used by all executive agencies to acquire supplies and services.\29\ 
Governed by the FAR, Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) 
contracts--most often used for architect-engineering services--are used 
when the exact quantities of supplies or services the government will 
require during the contract period cannot be determined at the time of 
contract award.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\ ``Federal Acquisition Regulation,'' GSA, October 16, 2023, 
https://www.gsa.gov/policy-
regulations/regulations/federal-acquisition-regulation-
far#::text=The%20Federal
%20Acquisition%20Regulation%20(FAR,and%20services%20with%20appropriated%
20funds.
    \30\ ``Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity Contracts,'' GSA, 
November 9, 2020, https://www.gsa.gov/small-business/register-your-
business/explore-business-models/indefinite-delivery-indefinite-
quantity-idiq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ASLA has heard from its members that many USACE IDIQ solicitations 
do not always include a specific call for landscape architects when the 
requested services fall squarely within the scope of work for the 
profession. During the solicitation process, USACE should explicitly 
include landscape architects alongside other qualified professions, 
when appropriate. Because the federal government must select 
architectural and engineering services based on competence and 
qualifications rather than on price,\31\ it is imperative that 
landscape architects be included in IDIQ solicitations that involve the 
planning, design, and management of land. This will ensure that the 
most qualified professionals and firms may compete for contracting 
opportunities to work on USACE water resource projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\ ``40 USC Ch. 11: SELECTION OF ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS,'' 
n.d., https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title40/
subtitle1/chapter11&edition=prelim.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Congress should take action to ensure landscape architects' 
                    involvement in USACE projects impacting land 
                    management.
    To further incorporate more landscape architects in water resource 
projects, ASLA urges Congress to call on the executive branch to amend 
the FAR to include landscape architects' involvement in USACE water 
resource projects. While Congress typically does not take action to 
amend the FAR, the body can enact or amend legislation to prompt the 
executive branch to amend the FAR.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \32\ Congressional Research Service. Kate M. Manuel et al., ``The 
Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR): Answers to Frequently Asked 
Questions,'' November 16, 2012, https://www.secnav.navy.mil/rda/
Documents/FARfaq.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Department of Defense (DoD) Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC) 
provides documentation for the planning, design, construction, 
sustainment, restoration, and modernization of the Military 
Departments, Defense Agencies, and DoD Field Activities.\33\ The FAR 
governs DoD UFC 3-201-02, which establishes minimum landscape 
architectural requirements and best practices to promote consistent 
landscape architectural quality for all DoD facilities and specifically 
states: ``All DoD military construction (MILCON) projects with site 
improvement costs over $250,000, must include a landscape plan with 
supporting details and specifications prepared by a registered 
professional (Architect, Engineer, or Landscape Architect) as required 
by the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) (Subpart 2.1).\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\ ``Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC)--WBDG--Whole Building 
Design Guide,'' n.d., https://www.wbdg.org/ffc/dod/unified-facilities-
criteria-ufc.
    \34\ ``UFC 3-201-02 Landscape Architecture, with Change 1--WBDG--
Whole Building Design Guide,'' n.d., https://www.wbdg.org/ffc/dod/
unified-facilities-criteria-ufc/ufc-3-201-02.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Similar requirements for registered professionals such as landscape 
architects in USACE civil works projects do not appear to exist. ASLA 
therefore recommends WRDA 2024 include a request to the administration 
to incorporate the following language in the FAR: ``All USACE projects 
with site improvements must include a landscape plan with supporting 
details and specifications prepared by a registered professional 
(Architect, Engineer, or Landscape Architect).'' A FAR amendment can 
integrate DoD UFC 3-201-02 into the WRDA framework for USACE civil 
works projects to enhance coordination, efficiency, and more for 
federal water infrastructure projects.
3. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should work to expand opportunities 
        for small businesses to work on its water resources projects.
    Throughout the years, landscape architects have successfully 
collaborated with USACE through employment at USACE, but more often 
through contracting and subcontracting opportunities with the agency. 
However, due to their smaller size, many landscape architecture firms 
often lack the tools, resources, and opportunities of large firms that 
are needed to compete for and assist with large-scale USACE projects. 
Historically, federal mentorship programs have proven successful in 
assisting small businesses to become competitive federal contractors, 
which, in turn, helps small businesses create and retain jobs.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\ Congressional Research Service. ``Small Business Mentor-
Protege Programs,'' June 10, 2022. https://crsreports.congress.gov/
product/pdf/R/R41722.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The U.S. Small Business Administration's (SBA) Mentor-Protege 
Program (MPP) helps eligible small businesses (proteges) gain capacity 
and win government contracts through partnerships with more experienced 
companies (mentors).\36\ \37\ Specific program initiatives help 
proteges receive guidance on manufacturing and strategic planning, 
financial assistance, and navigation of the federal procurement 
process--one of the most significant hurdles small landscape 
architecture firms experience.\38\ In fiscal year 2022, SBA's MPP had 
1,426 active agreements creating successful partnerships with large 
companies and small businesses across the procurement spectrum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \36\ ``SBA Mentor-Protege Program,'' U.S. Small Business 
Administration, n.d., https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/
contracting-assistance-programs/sba-mentor-protege-program.
    \37\ Hagedorn, Mark. ``Consolidation of Mentor-Protege Programs and 
Other Government Contracting Amendments.'' Federal Register, October 
16, 2020. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/10/16/2020-
19428/consolidation-of-mentor-protg-programs-and-other-government-
contracting-amendments.
    \38\ ``SBA Mentor-Protege Program,'' U.S. Small Business 
Administration, n.d., https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/
contracting-assistance-programs/sba-mentor-protege-program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Currently, USACE utilizes SBA's MPP Program to pair large companies 
with smaller firms, including some small landscape architecture firms. 
These pairings are designed to help streamline and increase the 
participation of small businesses working with the USACE. This 
capacity-building initiative helps protege firms develop the necessary 
expertise and learn about resources to successfully compete for USACE 
contracts, which can lead to increased innovation and economic growth.
    ASLA urges the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to enhance its efforts 
in promoting the U.S. Small Business Administration's Mentor-Protege 
Program, particularly with small landscape architecture firms. Small 
landscape architecture firms have a proven track record of providing 
critical design, restoration, and public engagement services to USACE 
projects. Efforts to increase the profession's participation in 
contracting opportunities benefit all parties and the nation as a 
whole.
4. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers should adopt The Sustainable SITES 
        Initiative (SITES) to enhance its workforce and to help guide 
        and certify its water resources projects.
    SITES is a nationally recognized set of comprehensive, voluntary 
guidelines together with a rating system that assesses the sustainable 
design, construction, and maintenance of landscapes and other outdoor 
spaces. It is used by landscape architects, designers, engineers, 
architects, developers, policymakers, and others to guide land design 
and development. The SITES Rating System is produced by Green Business 
Certification Inc., which owns exclusive rights to the SITES Rating 
System, its publications, and trademarks. The material on which the 
SITES Rating System is based was developed through a collaborative, 
interdisciplinary effort of the American Society of Landscape 
Architects Fund, The Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center at The 
University of Texas at Austin, and the United States Botanic Garden.
    SITES projects include government facilities, university campuses, 
public parks, commercial buildings, hotels, mixed-use developments, 
military campuses, and more. As of fall 2023, more than 330 projects 
are participating in the SITES program, covering 1.28 billion square 
feet of landscapes and outdoor spaces that span 22 countries and 41 
U.S. states and the District of Columbia. SITES-certified projects lead 
to high-performing landscapes that mitigate flooding, drought and heat, 
reduce stormwater runoff, and improve water quality while also 
providing other community-wide benefits.
    In 2015, the General Services Administration (GSA)--the federal 
agency responsible for managing and supporting the basic functioning of 
federal agencies, property, and contract options--adopted SITES. The 
GSA's adoption of SITES is included in GSA's Facilities Standards for 
the Public Buildings Service (P-100) document, which establishes design 
standards and criteria for new buildings, site improvements, 
infrastructural projects, major and minor alterations, and work in 
historic structures for the Public Buildings Service (PBS) of the 
General Services Administration.\39\ ``The GSA determined that the 
incorporation of SITES offers a highly effective and efficient way to 
compel environmental performance and project efficiencies, including 
effective cost control, on various capital project types.'' \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \39\ ``Facilities Standards (P100) Overview,'' GSA, September 18, 
2023, https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/
engineering/facilities-standards-for-the-public-buildings-service.
    \40\ ``SITES Certification,'' U.S. General Services Administration, 
April 6, 2022, https://www.gsa.gov/real-estate/design-and-construction/
landscape-architecture/sites-certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Landscape architects led GSA's SITES pilot project at the Peter V. 
Domenici U.S. Courthouse in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The site's 4.4-
acre revitalization addressed irrigation issues affecting parking by 
switching to native plants that improved water management, decreased 
energy use, increased urban habitat, and enhanced community 
culture.\41\ GSA also achieved SITES certification for the new Federal 
Office Building in Miramar, Florida.\42\ The 20-acre project houses a 
federal building campus, which minimizes impacts and maximizes 
harmonization with the adjacent conservation areas and nearby Florida 
Everglades. Recently, landscape architects utilized SITES to help plan 
and design GSA's Columbus Land Port of Entry--a 28.65-acre expansion 
project in Columbus, New Mexico's Chihuahuan Desert Grassland. 
Landscape architects redesigned the original site to accommodate 
increased vehicle and pedestrian traffic and decrease stormwater runoff 
from roofs and pavement using native plants.\43\ A recipient of the 
2022 GSA Design Awards for landscape architecture and architecture, the 
Columbus Land Port of Entry was praised for its sustainability and 
melding high functionality with regional culture and resource 
stewardship.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\ ``SITES--Developing Sustainable Landscapes,'' n.d. https://
sustainablesites.org/pete-v-domenici-us-courthouse-sustainable-
landscape-renovation.
    \42\ ``SITES--Developing Sustainable Landscapes,'' n.d. https://
sustainablesites.org/us-federal-office-building.
    \43\ ``SITES--Developing Sustainable Landscapes,'' n.d. https://
www.sustainablesites.org/columbus-us-land-port-entry-expansion.
    \44\ GSA Design Awards 2022 (pg. 34). https://www.gsa.gov/system/
files/2022_GSA_Design_Awards_Book_final_508.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ASLA believes that SITES guidelines are complementary to and align 
with USACE's EWN program. Moreover, the SITES rating system would allow 
USACE to showcase its commitment to sustainable infrastructure 
practices and to systematically document projects' performance, both of 
which could be beneficial in working with policymakers to demonstrate 
cost-benefit and rate-of-return analyses.
    Further, ASLA urges USACE employees to consider becoming a SITES 
Accredited Professional (SITES AP). Similar to how a LEED credential 
denotes proficiency in sustainable design, construction, and operations 
standards for buildings, SITES AP provides professionals with the 
opportunity to increase and demonstrate their knowledge, expertise, and 
commitment to sustainable land development. The SITES AP credential 
applies to landscape architects, architects, engineers, sustainability 
consultants, planners, ecologists, urban designers, and others 
interested in nature-based solutions, optimizing ecosystem services, 
and ensuring outcomes of a development project are sustainable, 
resilient, and regenerative.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\ ``SITES--Developing Sustainable Landscapes,'' n.d., https://
sustainablesites.org/professionals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Given the success of SITES in general and at the U.S. General 
Services Administration, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could easily 
adopt SITES guidelines and certification for its water resources 
projects.
                               Conclusion
    Thank you again for the opportunity to provide written testimony on 
the reauthorization of WRDA and the valuable work the USACE. ASLA looks 
forward to working with Congress to implement these recommendations 
that enable landscape architects to continue to plan and design our 
nation's water resources projects.
    If you have any questions or would like to follow up on this 
legislative matter, please contact me or ASLA Director of Federal 
Government Affairs, Roxanne Blackwell.

                                 
  Letter of December 12, 2023, to Hon. Sam Graves, Chairman, and Hon. 
     Rick Larsen, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and 
 Infrastructure, from John D.S. Allen, President, Water Replenishment 
District Board of Directors, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Grace F. 
                               Napolitano
                                                 December 12, 2023.
The Honorable Sam Graves,
Chairman,
U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, 2165 Rayburn 
        House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Rick Larsen,
Ranking Member,
U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, 2165 Rayburn 
        House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515.
    Dear Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Larsen:
    On behalf of the Water Replenishment District's (WRD) Board of 
Directors, I writ e to express our support for enhancing the authority 
and flexibility of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to address local 
water supply needs in the Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) of 
2024. As Congress works to create a safer, more innovative and 
resilient infrastructure for our nation, we hope you will prioritize 
ensuring an adequate water supply for our communities.
    WRD manages groundwater for over four million people in forty-three 
cities in southern Los Angeles County. This region contains 11% of 
California's population. The 420-square mile service area uses 
approximately 72 billion gallons (220,000-acre feet) of groundwater per 
year. Nearly half of the water consumed within WRD's service area comes 
from groundwater sources. The other half comes from water imported from 
the Bay Delta and the Colorado River. For over sixty-one years, the 
District has successfully pioneered sustainable water strategies that 
reduce the strain on the state's limited supply of imported water.
    As California and the nation work to promote drought resilience, 
water independence is critical to both these efforts for long-term 
environmental and economic health. As you continue to consider WRDA 
2024, we hope that WRD can be a partner and resource.
    We appreciate your steadfast leadership on flood control, water 
supply and environmental restoration issues and look forward to working 
closely with you and your staff. Please consider this an open 
invitation to visit WRD's state-of-the-art water treatment facilities. 
If you have any further questions please contact Angelina Mancillas.
            Sincerely,
                                           John D.S. Allen,
        President, Water Replenishment District Board of Directors.
        
                                    [all]