[Senate Hearing 118-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


 
    ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                              ----------                              


                       WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2023

                                       U.S. Senate,
           Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The subcommittee met at 2 p.m., in room SD-138, Dirksen 
Senate Office Building, Hon. Patty Murray, (chair) presiding.
    Present: Senators Murray, Heinrich, Kennedy, Hoeven, Hyde-
Smith, and Britt.

                      DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE--CIVIL

                         Department of the Army

                       Corps of Engineers--Civil

STATEMENT OF THE HON. MICHAEL L. CONNOR, ASSISTANT 
            SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)


               opening statement of senator patty murray


    Senator Murray. The hearing of the Senate Appropriations 
Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development will please come 
to order.
    We are here today to discuss President Biden's fiscal year 
2024 budget request for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and 
the Bureau of Reclamation.
    I know we are all thinking of Senator Feinstein and wishing 
her a speedy recovery and return and I want to thank Ranking 
Member Kennedy for being flexible and working with me to make 
this hearing happen today, I really appreciate it, so that we 
can keep our appropriations process on track.
    Today's hearing marks another important step as we work to 
return to regular order and pass in a timely bipartisan way our 
funding bills to keep our families safe, our economy strong, 
and our Nation competitive with adversaries like China.
    Defense spending tends to get a lot of attention, but we 
cannot forget that our rivers and our waterways are some of the 
most critical resources we have. Effective water management is 
essential to keeping our families healthy, our environment 
thriving and our economy competitive.
    We use our water resources managed by the Bureau and Corps 
to irrigate crops that feed families across the country, to 
transport those crops and other foods along our rivers and out 
of our ports to consumers around the world, and to provide 
habitat for keystone species that are essential to local 
economies and ecosystems alike, like salmon in my home State of 
Washington.
    We even count on water and hydroelectric power to literally 
keep the lights on in cities across the country. So when it 
comes to our Nation's competitiveness, this is something we 
can't take for granted. We have to keep our rivers and our 
waterways clean for wildlife and clear for transportation.
    We have to keep our faucets running, we have to keep our 
ports bustling, our farms irrigated, and our electric grid 
reliable, and we have to keep our communities safe and prepared 
for extreme weather events amid the worsening climate crisis 
with levies and seawalls and nature-based infrastructure to 
prevent flooding.
    The President's budget works to do that with key 
investments to strengthen our Nation's port and waterway 
infrastructure, water conservation, and climate change 
resiliency.
    But the President's request is less than we provided last 
year for the Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of 
Reclamation. I think it's clear we have to build on the 
progress we are making and not slow down.
    So I want to see us grow even bolder to make sure we are 
making the necessary investments to give these critical 
projects their due.
    I'm glad to see this budget does include much-needed 
resources for projects to improve navigation through dredging 
our ports and maintaining waterways, support ecosystem 
restoration, like in the Columbia River System in Washington, 
and protecting dangerous species, like the Fish Passage at the 
Howard Hanson Dam, which will open up a hundred miles of new 
habitat for our salmon.
    The Howard Hanson Project is critical in my State and I'm 
going to be watching the progress of that very closely because 
we have to see this work through and there's a lot left to do.
    But, in addition to what is outlined in the President's 
budget, there are other critical projects Congress has already 
said should be a priority, as well.
    So I want to make sure we get funding, like this committee 
appropriated in fiscal year 2023, for water infrastructure 
improvements for the Nation Act Programs focused on water 
storage desalination, water recycling, and environmental 
restoration projects.
    I also want to hear how the Bureau is using and building on 
drought mitigation funding we provided in the Inflation 
Reduction Act. This is an issue that is only growing more 
urgent each year.
    We have experienced historic drought conditions recently, 
which our farmers who are struggling to grow crops, threatens 
families and wildlife who are left at greater risk of 
wildfires, and undermines our economy.
    We need to tackle this crisis now before there is more 
lasting damage.
    Water is just too important to our families, our economy, 
and our Nation to take for granted. We cannot afford to 
shortchange these projects. So I'm glad to have this 
opportunity to hear from our witnesses today, assess our needs 
so that we can work in a bipartisan way to pass the funding 
bill that meets them.
    With that, I will turn it over to our Ranking Member 
Kennedy.


                   statement of senator john kennedy


    Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    First, before I turn to our witnesses, I want to tell 
Senator Feinstein, if she's listening, I hope you're feeling 
better today and come back soon. We miss you.
    Thank you for being here today. America has been blessed in 
many ways and sometimes I don't know if it's a blessing or a 
curse, maybe a little bit of both. In some parts of our country 
we have too much water and in other parts we don't have enough, 
and in some parts of our country it's a little bit of both, and 
we depend on you and your team to manage that and I know that's 
difficult and I know every member of Congress is an expert on 
how you ought to do your job. I appreciate that, as well. So 
let me begin by thanking you.
    One of the things I hope to achieve today is getting your 
thoughts on how we can fine-tune the process that we use to 
allocate scarce resources to do our cost-benefit analysis.
    Sometimes I think we don't spend enough time, our 
shortcoming, not yours, analyzing the benefit, that we focus 
too much on the cost. I'll give you an example and I know the 
Secretary and the General won't recognize this.
    We have a levy project in Louisiana called the Morganza to 
the Gulf Project. Now it's not complete. It's a work in 
progress, but that's been done, completed rather thus far 
through a combination of State, Federal, and local money. My 
people tax themselves to build this levy system.
    In 2005 Hurricane Rita came through, terrible, terrible 
storm, nine-foot storm surge, 11 to 12,000 homes of my people 
were damaged. That's a lot of people and a lot of homes and a 
lot of human misery.
    In 2019, after we had made progress on the Morganza to the 
Gulf levy system, another storm, this one Barry, came through, 
just as bad, same level of storm surge, same level, nine feet, 
11 homes were damaged.
    So we went from 12,000 homes damaged to 11 as a result of 
your good work, and I want to talk today about how we factor 
into our cost-benefit analysis that kind of good work that you 
have done. So thank you for being here.
    Senator Murray. Thank you, Ranking Member Kennedy.
    And I will now introduce our panel. We have Mr. Michael 
Connor, who is the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil 
Works; Lieutenant General Scott Spellmon, the Chief of 
Engineers for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and finally we 
have Ms. Camille Touton, who is Commissioner of the Bureau of 
Reclamation.
    I want to thank all of you and the public servants in your 
agencies for their dedication to our Nation's leadership in 
water infrastructure, water conservation, and commitment to 
climate change resiliency.
    With that, we will proceed with our witness testimonies, 
starting with Assistant Secretary Connor.


              summary statement of hon. michael l. connor


    Mr. Connor. Thank you, Madam Chair, Ranking Member Kennedy, 
distinguished members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the 
opportunity to be here to discuss the President's request for 
the Army Civil Works Program. I'll quickly summarize my written 
statement.
    The fiscal year 2024 budget request includes over $7.4 
billion for the Army's Civil Works Program, the largest budget 
request in history, complemented by an additional $1.05 billion 
allocated from the bipartisan Infrastructure Law.
    These investments demonstrate President Biden's ongoing 
commitment to funding the construction of critical 
infrastructure projects that will strengthen our economy, 
protect people and property, and restore key ecosystems.
    I appreciate just as a threshold matter the robust funding 
levels from this subcommittee and the bipartisan support that 
there is for the Army Civil Works Program.
    It's important to note that the water resource challenges 
of today and tomorrow are not like yesterday's. Extreme weather 
events, whether precipitation, drought, or hurricane-driven 
storm surge, are increasingly the norm, creating risk to 
communities, the economy, and natural systems. As a result, 
understanding vulnerabilities and increasing our preparedness 
is paramount.
    For that reason, the budget provides $86 million, the 
largest request again in the Corps' history, for research and 
development, over $100 million when accounting for applied R&D 
activities.
    The focus of this work will be on innovative solutions that 
address the emerging water resource challenges of the 21st 
Century and achieve cost savings in the Civil Works Program.
    The budget focuses on the highest-performing work within 
the three main missions of the Civil Works Program: commercial 
navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and aquatic 
ecosystem restoration.
    In developing the budget, consideration was also given to 
advancing three key objectives that reflect Administration 
priorities. First, decreasing climate risk for communities and 
the environment; (2) promoting environmental justice in 
underserved communities and Trial nations; and (3) 
strengthening the nation's supply chains.
    With respect to climate, the Corps has always been in the 
resilience business and the budget's proposed investments 
include more than $1.4 billion for construction of flood and 
storm damage reduction and aquatic ecosystem restoration 
projects.
    For the second priority, the budget supports the 
Administration's Justice 40 Initiative through investments in 
23 studies and in the construction of 33 projects to help 
disadvantaged and Tribal communities address their water 
resources challenges.
    Supply chains remain a priority which Civil Works supports 
through its Commercial Navigation Program. The budget 
facilitates safe, reliable, and sustainable commercial 
navigation to support U.S. competitiveness and improve the 
resilience of our Nation's manufacturing supply chain.
    Overall, the budget includes over $3.4 billion for the 
study, design, construction, and operation and maintenance of 
inland and coastal navigation projects. Of this amount, over 
$1.7 billion is derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund.
    As alluded to earlier, flood and storm damage reduction is 
at the center of the Army Corps' actions to support the 
Administration's goal of tackling the climate crisis.
    Accordingly, the budget contains nearly $2 billion for 
flood and storm damage reduction, including funding to provide 
technical and planning assistance to local communities to 
enable them to understand and better manage their flood risks.
    Equally important to building community resilience is the 
work of the Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration Mission. The budget 
includes $653 million for AER, including $415 million to 
continue progress in restoring America's Everglades while 
building climate resilience in South Florida.
    We've also included $93 million to support salmon recovery 
efforts in the Columbia River Basin.
    Other significant investments include $655 million for the 
construction of a critical dam safety project at Prada Dam in 
California and $350 million for replacement of the Cape Cod 
Canal Bridges. Importantly, the budget also includes $235 
million to continue construction of the Sioux Locks Project.
    In total, the fiscal year 2024 Construction Program is 
funded at more than $2 billion.
    Of course, the budget also focuses on maintaining the key 
features of the vast water resources infrastructure that the 
Corps owns and manages. Specifically, the 2024 budget funds the 
O&M (operation and maintenance) Program at over $4.4 billion. 
For the Investigations Program, the 2024 budget provides a $139 
million, including $36 million for technical and planning 
assistance.
    Wrapping up the budget summary, it's significant that the 
2024 Regulatory Program is funded at $221 million to protect 
the Nation's waters and wetlands and provide efficiency in 
permanent processing, a very high priority for the 
Administration.
    The Recreation Program is funded at $275 million to ensure 
the Corps, as one of the leading providers of the Nation's 
outdoor recreation, can continue to effectively serve the 
public's desire to experience the great outdoors.
    In summary, the Civil Works budget makes critical 
investments in water resources that will benefit the American 
people and promote greater prosperity and economic growth for 
decades to come.
    I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
    [The statement follows:]
              Prepared Statement of Mr. Michael L. Connor
    Chairman Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and distinguished 
members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to be here 
today to discuss the President's Budget request for the Army Civil 
Works program.
    The fiscal year 2024 Budget request includes over $7.4 billion for 
the Army Civil Works program--which is the largest request in history--
complemented by an additional $1.05 billion from the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act--or IIJA. These investments demonstrate 
President Biden's ongoing commitment to funding the construction of 
critical infrastructure projects that will strengthen our economy, 
protect people and property, and restore key ecosystems. It will also 
create good paying jobs that provide the free and fair chance to join a 
union and collectively bargain. Overall, we believe in smart 
investments that yield high economic and environmental returns, while, 
also reducing deficits and improving our country's long-term fiscal 
outlook.
    It's important to note that the water resources challenges of today 
and tomorrow are not like yesterday's. Weather extremes are 
increasingly the norm, creating risk to communities, the economy, and 
natural systems. As a result, understanding vulnerabilities and 
increasing our preparedness is of paramount importance. For that 
reason, the Budget provides $86 million--the largest request in Corps' 
history--for research and development. The focus of this work will be 
on innovative solutions that would help achieve significant cost 
savings in the civil works program and address the emerging water 
resources challenges of the 21st Century, including climate change.
    The Army Civil Works Budget focuses on the highest performing work 
within the three main missions of the Civil Works program:
  --commercial navigation,
  --flood and storm damage reduction, and
  --aquatic ecosystem restoration.
    In developing the Budget, consideration was also given to advancing 
three key objectives that reflect the Administration's priorities: (1) 
decreasing climate risk for communities and increasing ecosystem 
resilience to climate change based on the best available science; (2) 
promoting environmental justice in underserved and marginalized 
communities and Tribal Nations in line with the Justice40 Initiative; 
and (3) strengthening the supply chain.
    With respect to the first Administration priority, climate-focused 
investments include more than $1.4 billion for construction of flood 
and storm damage reduction and aquatic ecosystem restoration projects, 
over $64 million to improve climate resiliency and/or sustainability at 
existing Corps-owned projects, and $35.5 million for technical and 
planning assistance programs with an emphasis on actions to help local 
communities identify, understand, and address their flood risks 
including work that would directly benefit disadvantaged communities by 
improving their resilience to climate change. The Budget also funds the 
continuation of studies to investigate climate resilience along the 
Great Lakes coastlines as well as in Central and Southern Florida.
    For priority two, the Budget supports the Administration's 
Justice40 Initiative through investments in 23 studies, and in the 
construction of 33 projects to help disadvantaged and tribal 
communities address their water resources challenges--including funding 
for the Tribal Partnership Program. The Army is committed to helping to 
achieve the broader goals of the Administration regarding equity and 
environmental justice and will continue to improve outreach and access 
to Civil Works information and resources, including technical and 
planning assistance programs; maximizing the reach of Civil Works 
projects to benefit disadvantaged communities; and, ensuring that 
updates to Civil Works policies and guidance will not result in a 
disproportionate negative impact on disadvantaged communities.
    Supply chains remain a priority, which the Civil Works supports 
through its Commercial Navigation program. The Budget facilitates safe, 
reliable and sustainable commercial navigation to support U.S. 
competitiveness and improve the resilience of our nation's 
manufacturing supply chain to support American jobs and the economy. In 
support of the Administration's commitment to our nation's coastal 
ports and inland waterways, the fiscal year 2024 Budget includes over 
$3.4 billion for the study, design, construction, operation and 
maintenance (O&M) of inland and coastal navigation projects. Of this 
amount, over $1.7 billion is derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust 
Fund for eligible projects with an emphasis on operation and 
maintenance, including dredging, of completed projects and over $1 
billion will be used to maintain and improve navigation on the inland 
waterways.
    Flood and storm damage reduction is at the center of the Civil 
Works program's actions to support the Administration's goal of 
tackling the climate crisis. Accordingly, the Budget contains nearly $2 
billion for flood and storm damage reduction, including funding to 
provide technical and planning assistance to local communities to 
enable them to understand and better manage their flood risks. The 
Budget proposes to assist these local efforts, with emphasis on non-
structural approaches.
    Equally important to building community resilience is the work of 
the aquatic ecosystem restoration mission (AER). The Budget includes 
$653 million for AER, including $415 million for the South Florida 
Ecosystem Restoration (SFER) program, which will enable significant 
progress in restoring America's Everglades while building ecosystem 
resilience to climate change in South Florida. The Budget also includes 
$93 million to support salmon recovery efforts in the Columbia River 
basin, another priority within the AER program.
    Other significant initiatives include $655 million for construction 
of a critical dam safety project at Prado Dam, and $350 million for 
replacement of the Cape Cod Canal Bridges. Additionally, to facilitate 
action on Cape Cod, the Budget includes a legislative proposal that 
would allow the Corps to transfer funds to the Commonwealth of 
Massachusetts to design and construct the replacement bridges. 
Ultimately, the ownership of these bridges will be conveyed to 
Massachusetts, which will be responsible for future operation and 
maintenance. Also, of significant note, the Budget includes $235 
million to continue construction of the Sault Ste. Marie (Replacement 
Lock) project in Michigan.
    In total, the fiscal year 2024 Construction program is funded at 
more than $2 billion. While most of this funding is in the Construction 
account, over $37 million is in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund 
account, and nearly $64 million is in the Mississippi River and 
Tributaries account. By significantly increasing funding of 
construction for crucial infrastructure projects, this budget will help 
us get things done and ensure momentum on much needed infrastructure 
improvements across the nation. The Army also has allocated the $50 
million provided for construction in 2024 in the IIJA for shore 
protection projects that will support coastal communities and improve 
their resilience to storm and climate change impacts.
    As I wrap up the discussion on construction, I want to acknowledge 
that there is no funding proposed from the Inland Waterways Trust Fund 
(IWTF) in this year's budget in view of the $2.5 billion made available 
in the IIJA for construction, replacement, rehabilitation, and 
expansion of inland waterways projects. The IWTF is a very valuable 
funding source and I anticipate there will be ongoing and significant 
use in the future beyond the investments provided by the IIJA.
    Of course, in addition to new projects, the Budget focuses on 
maintaining the key features of the vast water resources infrastructure 
that the Corps owns and manages, and on finding innovative ways to 
rehabilitate it or divest it to others. The Budget invests in operating 
and maintaining the Corps' existing infrastructure and improving its 
reliability and performance. Specifically, the fiscal year 2024 Budget 
funds the Operation and Maintenance program at over $4.4 billion, 
consisting of over $2.6 billion in the Operation and Maintenance 
account, nearly $1.7 billion in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund 
account, and nearly $154 million in Mississippi River and Tributaries 
account. The allocation of funding among projects for maintenance 
reflects a risk-informed approach that considers both project and 
project component conditions and the potential consequences of a 
failure. The Budget also gives priority to the maintenance of coastal 
ports and inland waterways with the highest commercial traffic. 
Additionally, the Budget is complemented by $1 billion for operation 
and maintenance in 2024 from the IIJA.
    For the Investigations program, the fiscal year 2024 Budget 
provides $139 million, consisting of nearly $130 million from the 
Investigations account and over $9 million in Mississippi River and 
Tributaries. Within those amounts, the Budget includes $35.5 million 
for technical and planning assistance programs. These programs help 
local communities, including disadvantaged communities, identify and 
address their flood risks, including flood risks associated with 
climate change.
    Continuing with the budget summary, it's significant that the 
fiscal year 2024 Regulatory Program is funded at $221 million to 
protect the nation's waters and wetlands and provide efficiency in 
permit processing. And the Recreation program is funded at $275 million 
to ensure the Corps--one of the nation's leading Federal providers of 
outdoor recreation--can continue to effectively serve the public's 
desire to experience the great outdoors.
    To summarize, the Budget makes critical investments in water 
resources that will benefit the American people and promote greater 
prosperity and economic growth for decades to come. From solving water 
resources challenges facing communities, to nurturing sustainable 
aquatic ecosystems, the Corps is delivering on its mission to serve the 
public.
    I am very honored to implement the President's priorities for the 
Army Civil Works program and excited to be a part of a great team--
serving our Nation.
    Thank you for inviting me here today. I look forward to your 
questions.

    Senator Murray. Thank you.
    General Scott.
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL SCOTT A. SPELLMON, 
            CHIEF OF ENGINEERS AND COMMANDING GENERAL, 
            U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
    General Spellmon. Good afternoon, everyone.
    Chairwoman Murray and Ranking Member Kennedy and 
distinguished members of the subcommittee, I am honored to 
testify before you today and thank you for the opportunity to 
discuss the fiscal year 2024 budget of the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers, another record appropriation for our Nation's Civil 
Works Program.
    So today I look forward to discussing the status of 
important Corps projects and programs as well as answer any 
questions the committee may have regarding our fiscal year 2024 
budget.
    Most importantly, I look forward to continuing to work with 
this committee, the Congress, and the Administration to address 
the Nation's critical water resource infrastructure needs.
    We greatly appreciate the committee's continued support of 
the Corps program with recent record high appropriations, 
including the $1.4 billion of additional funding provided late 
last year as part of the Disaster Relief Supplemental 
Appropriations Act of 2023.
    The Corps Civil Works Program has experienced significant 
growth over the past several years. This substantial level of 
investment enables critical water resource projects to be 
studied and constructed and it allows us to further develop 
innovative approaches to address some of our most pressing 
challenges through focused research and development.
    The fiscal year 2024 budget reflects a targeted approach to 
continued investing in our water resources programs, to promote 
climate resiliency which will benefit the Nation's economy, 
environment, and public safety now and well into the future.
    The budget also supports the Assistant Secretary's 
priorities for the Corps by upgrading our Nation's waterways, 
protecting communities and ecosystems, better serving 
disadvantaged communities, investing in science and research 
and development, and, finally, sustaining and improving our 
communications and relationships with our many partners.
    The 2024 budget, taken with other recent funding, provides 
the Corps with what the Secretary calls a transformational 
opportunity to deliver water resource infrastructure projects 
that will positively impact communities across our great 
Nation.
    We are also taking advantage of this opportunity to do two 
things. First, transform our organization and our 
decisionmaking processes to safely deliver quality projects on 
time and within budget and, secondly, to identify risks to how 
we are delivering our program.
    Our teams are hard at work seeking out new and better ways 
to mitigate or eliminate these risks so we can further 
strengthen the safety and security of communities across the 
country and territories.
    By evolving our policies, programs, and operations and 
placing increased focus on research and development, we are 
working to overcome impacts of challenges, such as sea level 
rise, changes to precipitation patterns and hydrology, and 
other effects of climate change, including improvement to the 
resilience of Corps-owned and operated infrastructure.
    I will conclude by saying the Corps does not accomplish 
anything on its own. Delivering successful Civil Works projects 
is a shared responsibility. It's a team sport. We draw from our 
engineering expertise and build upon our relationships with our 
non-Federal partners, our project stakeholders, and Congress to 
enable us to succeed.
    I look forward to continuing our great collaboration as we 
continue to pursue our vision engineering solutions for our 
Nation's toughest challenges.
    So thank you, Chairwoman Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, 
and Members of the Committee. Again, I look forward to 
answering any questions you may have.
    [The statement follows:]
       Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon
    Chair Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and Members of the 
Subcommittee, I am honored to testify before your committee today, 
along with the Honorable Michael Connor, Assistant Secretary of the 
Army for Civil Works, regarding the President's Fiscal Year 2024 (FY 
2024) Budget (Budget) for the Army Civil Works Program.
    Through the Civil Works program, the United States Army Corps of 
Engineers (Corps) works with other Federal agencies, and with state, 
tribal, and local agencies, as well as others, to develop, manage, 
restore, and protect water resources, primarily through the study, 
construction, and operation and maintenance of water-related 
infrastructure projects. The Corps focuses on work that provides the 
highest economic, environmental, and public safety returns to the 
Nation. The Corps also regulates development in waters of the United 
States and works with other Federal agencies to help communities 
respond to, and recover from, floods and other natural disasters.
    The Corps uses its engineering expertise and its relationships with 
project sponsors and stakeholders to develop innovative approaches to 
address some of the most pressing water resources challenges facing the 
Nation. I am committed to the Secretary's priorities for the Army Civil 
Works program, including investing in the Nation's coastal ports and 
inland waterways to facilitate waterborne transportation and strengthen 
economic growth; helping communities to manage their flood risks and 
adapt to climate change; restoring aquatic ecosystems in ways that will 
make them more sustainable and more resilient to climate change; 
ensuring that the Civil Works program will better serve the needs of 
disadvantaged communities; investing in science, research, and 
development to deliver enduring water-resources solutions; and 
strengthening communications and relationships to solve water resources 
challenges. I am absolutely focused on ensuring that we deliver studies 
and finish quality projects safely, on time, and within budget. These 
priorities will ensure a better return on taxpayer investment and 
improve the lives of all Americans. Under my oversight and direction, 
and with the leadership of Assistant Secretary Connor and his team, the 
Corps is committed to efficiently and effectively executing the Civil 
Works program.
                   summary of fiscal year 2024 budget
    The Civil Works program is performance-based and focuses on high-
performing projects and programs within its three main water resources 
missions: commercial navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, and 
aquatic ecosystem restoration. It uses a targeted approach to invest in 
our water resources and promote climate resilience, which will benefit 
the Nation's economy, environment, and public safety--now and in the 
future. This Budget invests in Tribal Nations, as well in economically 
disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, underserved, or 
overburdened by pollution, including those in rural areas.
    The Budget includes $7.413 billion in discretionary funding for 
Civil Works activities throughout the Nation, the largest budget in 
history.
                             investigations
    For the Corps Investigations program, the FY 2024 Budget includes 
$130 million in the Investigations account and $9 million in the 
Mississippi River and Tributaries account. The Corps uses these funds 
to evaluate water resources problems and opportunities, design projects 
within the three main Civil Works mission areas, and support related 
work. The Budget includes $35.5 million for planning and technical 
assistance programs, where the Corps shares its expertise with local 
communities including disadvantaged communities to help them identify 
and understand their water resources problems and increase their 
resilience to, and preparedness for, flood risks.
                              construction
    For the Corps Construction program, the Budget includes $2.015 
billion in the Construction account, $37.152 million in the Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund account, and $64 million in the Mississippi 
River and Tributaries account.
    The goal of the Civil Works program is to produce as much value as 
possible for the Nation from the available funds. Projects are 
primarily funded based on their economic, environmental and safety 
returns. The selection process includes giving priority to investments, 
on a risk-informed basis, in dam safety assurance, seepage control, and 
static instability correction work at dams that the Corps owns and 
operates, and work to address significant risk to human safety, as well 
as construction of dredged material disposal facilities for high and 
moderate use segments of commercial deep-draft, shallow-draft, and 
inland waterways projects.
    In developing the FY 2024 Budget, we also gave consideration to 
projects that provide climate change benefits to disadvantaged 
communities. To advance priorities in community resilience, 
environmental justice, and with Tribal Nations, FY 2024 is the first 
time construction funding for Environmental Infrastructure and the 
Tribal Partnership Program has been included in the Budget .
    The Budget provides $415 million for the South Florida Ecosystem 
Restoration (SFER) program, the Everglades, as well as $93 million to 
support salmon recovery efforts in the Columbia River basin and $235 
million for the Sault Ste. Marie (Replacement Lock) project in 
Michigan. The largest request within the Construction Account is for 
$655 million for the construction of a critical dam safety project at 
Prado Dam in California.
                    operation and maintenance (o&m)
    All structures age and can deteriorate over time, causing a 
potential decline in reliability. As stewards of a large portfolio of 
water resources projects, the Corps is working to sustain the benefits 
that the key features of this infrastructure provide.
    The Corps continues to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of 
the operation and maintenance of its large portfolio of water resources 
projects. The Corps does so by targeting its investments in 
infrastructure maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation on a risk-
informed basis. It invests in the highest priority needs with emphasis 
on the key features of the infrastructure that the Corps owns and 
operates, and in work that will reduce long-term O&M costs in real 
terms.
    Generally, the O&M program supports completed works owned or 
operated by the Corps, including operation and maintenance of locks and 
dams along the inland waterways; maintenance dredging of inland and 
coastal Federal channels; operation and maintenance of multi-purpose 
dams and reservoirs for flood risk reduction and related purposes such 
as hydropower; monitoring of completed navigation and flood damage 
reduction projects; and management of Corps facilities and associated 
lands, including serving as a responsible steward of the natural 
resources on Corps lands.
    For the Corps O&M program, the Budget includes $2.630 billion in 
the Operation and Maintenance account, $1.688 billion in the Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund account, and $154 million in the Mississippi 
River and Tributaries account. These funds will be used in conjunction 
with the $1 billion provided in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs 
Act for operation and maintenance work in FY 2024.
                        research and development
    Through the research and development program, we are making 
investments to tackle future challenges and advance technological 
development in support of the Corps Civil Works mission. The Budget 
includes a historic $86 million investment in research and development 
activities, or over $100 million including technology transition and 
data collection. This investment demonstrates the Administration's 
commitment to engineering innovation to deliver enduring water resource 
solutions for the Nation. This investment will allow the Corps to 
continue addressing the most pressing knowledge gaps practitioners face 
while doing their jobs in the field, such as operational, data-driven 
methods to improve navigation channel maintenance, the beneficial use 
of dredged material, and flood and storm risk management modeling. This 
investment also includes funding to advance longer-term research and 
development needs including: $10 million to accelerate the Forecast-
Informed Reservoir Operations Assessment, which will further our 
understanding of atmospheric river impacts on flood risk management, 
water supply, and other water uses; and $25.5 million to inform and 
improve our overall asset management strategy, with a focus on work 
that has the potential to achieve significant cost savings in the civil 
works program.
                           regulatory program
    Through the Regulatory program, the Corps protects the Nation's 
waters including wetlands, and regulates development that could impede 
navigation, while allowing reasonable development to proceed. The 
Budget proposes funding for the Regulatory program to enable the Corps 
to protect and preserve these water resources. The FY 2024 Budget 
provides $221 million for this program.
                          emergency management
    The FY 2024 Budget includes $40 million in funding for the Flood 
Control and Coastal Emergencies account to enable the Corps to prepare 
for emergency operations in response to natural disasters. The Budget 
for the emergency management program also includes $5.5 million for the 
National Emergency Preparedness Program.
            formerly utilized sites remedial action program
    The FY 2024 Budget provides $200 million to clean up specific sites 
contaminated as a result of the Nation's early atomic weapons 
development program.
                               conclusion
    The FY 2024 President's Budget for the Army Civil Works Program 
represents a continuing, fiscally prudent investment in the Nation's 
water resources infrastructure and restoration of aquatic ecosystems. 
The Army is committed to a performance-based Civil Works program, based 
on innovative, resilient, and sustainable risk-informed solutions.
    Thank you, Chair Feinstein and Members of Subcommittee. This 
concludes my statement. I look forward to answering any questions you 
and other Members of the Subcommittee may have.

    Senator Murray. Thank you.
    And Commissioner Touton.

                       DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


                         Bureau of Reclamation

STATEMENT OF THE HON. CAMILLE CALIMLIM TOUTON, 
            COMMISSIONER
    Ms. Touton. Good afternoon. My name is Camille Calimlim 
Touton, and I'm the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation.
    Thank you, Chair Murray, Ranking Member Kennedy, and 
members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss the 
President's budget for the Bureau of Reclamation, and thanks 
to, Chair Feinstein for her continued leadership on Western 
Water.
    The Bureau of Reclamation is the largest supplier and 
manager of water in the Nation and the second largest producer 
of hydropower. Reclamation's mission is to support $66.5 
billion in economic activity and 472,000 jobs.
    Meeting our mission means addressing drought resilience, 
water security, climate change adaptation, ecosystem health, 
and issues of equity.
    The need to secure, maintain, and modernize our Nation's 
infrastructure is an Administration priority and we have a 
once-in-a-generation opportunity to utilize our fiscal year 
2024 $1.4 billion budget request with that of the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law (BIL) and the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). 
The issues we face today are unprecedented, as we experience 
the worst drought in the 120-year history of this organization. 
Record snowfall and rain across parts of the West this year, 
and particularly in California, have brought some relief but 
are not a resolution to our years-long, if not decades-long 
drought.
    Snowpack is at 164 percent of average in the Colorado River 
Basin, but the reservoirs are collectively at 30 percent. In 
California's Central Valley we experienced the 3 driest 
consecutive years on record, only to be followed with 9 
atmospheric rivers in late December and January.
    The cyclical nature of Western hydrology highlights the 
need for immediate actions as well as thoughtful planning and 
on-the-ground work to make both our infrastructure and our 
operational decisions more resilient to withstand future water 
resource variability.
    Reclamation's 2024 budget priorities reflect our commitment 
to drought planning and response activities to promote water 
security, and this budget acknowledges the need to continue to 
develop and deploy science-based drought and climate change 
adaptation strategies.
    Reclamation's WaterSMART and Science Technology Programs 
directly contribute to these Administration priorities, 
including $22.5 million for R&D (Research and Development) 
science and tech.
    We must also plan for our infrastructure. Our dams and 
reservoirs, water conveyance systems, and power generation 
facilities serve as the water and power infrastructure backbone 
of the American West. However, as with all infrastructure, 
these features are aging and in need of critical maintenance.
    Our 2024 budget includes $105.3 million for extraordinary 
maintenance combined with our BIL investments of $825 million 
in 2022 and 2023--and that includes our aging infrastructure 
announcement of $585 million earlier this month.
    We are constructing our largest dam safety modification 
project at BF Sisk Dam in California, supported by our 2024 
budget request of $210 million for dam safety, which includes 
$182.6 million for the implementation of dam safety 
modification actions.
    This funding not only addresses BF Sisk Dam but also El 
Vado in New Mexico and 10 additional projects in the West, in 
Washington, Oregon, Montana, and North Dakota.
    We are able to leverage this funding to more effectively 
address West-wide needs in an accelerated manner due to the 
$500 million in BIL funding.
    We must also address our infrastructure needs and consider 
economic inequities and the needs of rural and underserved 
communities. Reclamation is establishing and rebuilding water 
infrastructure for underserved populations by ensuring that 
clean drinking water is provided to our communities through our 
rural water investments.
    Our 2024 budget request includes $57.8 million and as with 
our Dam Safety and Aging Infrastructure Programs, our Rural 
Water Program leverages the one billion in BIL funding to 
accelerate completion of these long-needed projects, of which 
we've allocated $698 million.
    Our budget also includes $35.5 million for Reclamation's 
American Affairs Program to enhance our technical assistance to 
Tribes. And, lastly, Reclamation's budget request supports the 
Administration's legislative proposal for Indian Water Rights 
Settlement implementation efforts.
    Reclamation will continue to manage the drought in real 
time and plan for the future with a focus on people, 
partnerships, and investments, and Reclamation is committed to 
working with Congress and our partners and stakeholders in 
carrying out our mission, and our fiscal year 2024 budget 
supports these actions.
    I again thank the subcommittee. I'm happy to answer any 
questions.
    [The statement follows:]
             Prepared Statement of Camille Calimlim Touton
    Thank you, Chair Feinstein, Ranking Member Kennedy, and members of 
the Subcommittee for the opportunity to discuss with you the 
President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 Budget for the Bureau of Reclamation. 
I am Camille Calimlim Touton, Commissioner for the Bureau of 
Reclamation.
    The issues we face today are unprecedented as we experience the 
worst drought in the 120-year history of this organization. This 
challenges Reclamation's ability to deliver water and produce 
hydropower in the way we have in the past. Climate change has made it 
likely that we will continue to experience the same, or worse, 
hydrology in the future. Record snowfall and rain across parts of the 
West--and particularly California--have brought some relief. While we 
are thankful for the benefits, we must not forget the cyclical nature 
of western hydrology. Therefore, this is not a time for Reclamation, 
the States and Tribes to take our foot off the gas. It is an 
opportunity to get ahead of the planning. Reclamation will continue to 
manage the drought in real time, focusing on our enduring priorities of 
People, Partnerships, Investments--and Hydrology in the West.
    Reclamation manages water for agriculture, municipal and industrial 
use, the environment, and provides flood control and recreation for 
millions of people. Reclamation's projects and programs serve as the 
water and power infrastructure backbone of the American West, 
constituting an important driver of economic growth in hundreds of 
basins through the Western States. Reclamation's activities support 
economic activity valued at $66.6 billion, and support approximately 
472,000 jobs.\1\ Reclamation delivers 10 trillion gallons of water to 
millions of people each year and provides water for irrigation of 10 
million farmland acres, which yields approximately 25 percent of the 
Nation's fruit and nut crops, and 60 percent of the vegetable harvest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ U.S. Department of the Interior Economic Contributions Report--
Fiscal Year 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Reclamation's fundamental mission and programs--modernizing and 
maintaining infrastructure, conserving natural resources, using science 
and research to inform decisionmaking, serving underserved populations, 
and staying as nimble as possible in response to the requirements of 
drought and a changing climate--position it as an exemplar for the 
Biden-Harris Administration's core tenets. The Bureau of Reclamation's 
Fiscal Year 2024 budget provides the foundation to meet our mission, 
and to manage, develop, and protect water resources, consistent with 
applicable State and Federal law, and in a cost-effective and 
environmentally responsible manner in the interest of the American 
public. Reclamation remains committed to working with a wide range of 
stakeholders, including water and power customers, Tribes, State and 
local officials, and non-governmental organizations, to meet its 
mission.
    Reclamation is requesting a gross total of $1,449,314,000 in 
Federal discretionary appropriations, which is anticipated to be 
augmented by over $2.4 billion in other Federal and non-Federal funds 
for FY 2024. Of the total, $1,301,012,000 is for the Water and Related 
Resources account, which is Reclamation's largest account, $66,794,000 
is for the Policy and Administration account, and $33,000,000 is for 
the California Bay Delta account. A total of $48,508,000 is budgeted 
for the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund.
    Activities to Support Tribal Programs & Tribal Water Rights 
Settlements: Reclamation tackles the challenges of racial equity and 
underserved communities through investments in Tribal water rights 
settlements, continuation of the Native American Affairs technical 
assistance program, rural water projects, and investments in specific 
projects for underserved communities through programs such as 
WaterSMART. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law PL 117-58 (BIL) and 
Inflation Reduction Act appropriations both invest substantial portions 
of its funding to underserved populations, and rural and Tribal 
communities.
    The Fiscal Year 2024 discretionary request also includes $35.5 
million for the Native American Affairs program to improve capacity to 
work with and support Tribes in the resolution of their water rights 
claims and to develop sustainable water sharing agreements and 
management activities. This funding will also strengthen Department-
wide capabilities to achieve an integrated and systematic approach to 
Indian water rights negotiations to consider the full range of 
economic, legal, and technical attributes of proposed settlements. 
Finally, funding also supports Reclamation efforts for Tribal nations 
by supporting many activities across the Bureau, including some rural 
water projects, the Yakima River Basin Water Enhancement Project, the 
Klamath Project, and the Lahontan Basin project, among others.
    Conservation and Climate Resilience: Reclamation's projects are 
able to address the Administration's priorities to address conservation 
and climate resilience through funding requests for the WaterSMART 
program, funding to secure water supply to our refuges, and proactive 
efforts through providing sound climate science, research and 
development, and clean energy.
    The WaterSMART Program serves as the primary contributor to 
Reclamation's and the Department of the Interior's Water Conservation 
Priority Goal. Since 2010, projects funded under contributing programs, 
including WaterSMART Grants, Title XVI (Water Recycling and Reuse 
Program), California Bay-Delta Program, Yakima River Basin Water 
Enhancement Project, and Desalination construction projects have 
achieved a total of 1,682,005 acre-feet water savings.
    Through WaterSMART, Reclamation works cooperatively with States, 
Tribes, and local entities as they plan for and implement actions to 
address current and future water shortages, including drought; degraded 
water quality; increased demands for water and energy from growing 
populations; environmental water requirements; and the potential for 
decreased water supply availability due to climate change, drought, 
population growth, and increased water requirements for environmental 
purposes. This includes cost-shared grants for water management 
improvement projects; water reclamation and reuse projects; watershed 
resilience projects; the Basin Study Program; and drought planning and 
implementation actions to proactively address water shortages. The FY 
2024 request includes $62.9 million for the WaterSMART Program.
    Climate Science: Reclamation's FY 2024 budget for Research and 
Development (R&D) programs includes $22.5 million for the Science and 
Technology Program, and $7.0 million for Desalination and Water 
Purification Research--both of which focus on Reclamation's mission of 
water and power deliveries. Climate change adaptation is a focus of 
Reclamation's R&D programs, which invests in the production of climate 
change science, information and tools that benefit adaptation, and by 
yielding climate-resilient solutions to benefit management of water 
infrastructure, hydropower, environmental compliance, and water 
management.
    The Desalination and Water Purification Research program addresses 
drought and water scarcity impacts caused by climate change by 
investing in desalination and water treatment technology development 
and demonstrations for the purpose of more effectively converting 
unusable waters to useable water supplies. The Science and Technology 
program invests in innovation to address the full range of technical 
issues confronting Reclamation water and hydropower managers and 
includes the Snow Water Supply Forecasting Program that aims to improve 
water supply forecasts through enhanced snow monitoring and water 
management to address the impacts of drought and a changing climate.
    Modernizing and Maintaining Infrastructure: Reclamation's water and 
power projects throughout the western United States provide water 
supplies for agricultural, municipal, and industrial purposes. 
Reclamation's projects also provide energy produced by hydropower 
facilities and maintain ecosystems that support fish and wildlife, 
hunting, fishing, and other recreation, as well as rural economies.
    Dam Safety: Reclamation manages 489 dams throughout the 17 Western 
States. Reclamation's Dam Safety Program has identified 361 high and 
significant hazard dams at 241 facilities, which form the core of the 
program. Through constant monitoring and assessment, Reclamation 
strives to achieve the best use of its limited resources to ensure dam 
safety and maintain our ability to store and divert water and to 
generate hydropower.
    The Dam Safety Program helps ensure the safety and reliability of 
Reclamation dams to protect the downstream public. Approximately 50 
percent of Reclamation's dams were built between 1900 and 1950, and 
approximately 90 percent of the dams were built before adoption of 
currently used, state-of-the-art design and construction practices. 
Reclamation continuously evaluates dams and monitors performance to 
ensure that risks do not exceed the Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety 
Risk Management and the Public Protection Guidelines. The Dam Safety 
Program represents a major funding need over the next 10 years, driven 
largely by necessary repairs at B.F. Sisk Dam in California. The B.F. 
Sisk Dam is a key component of the Central Valley Project, providing 2 
million acre-feet of water storage south of the California Sacramento-
San Joaquin River Delta. Reclamation is modifying the dam to reduce the 
risk of potential failure resulting from potential overtopping in 
response to a seismic event, using the most current science and 
technology to develop an adaptive and resilient infrastructure. In 
addition to B.F. Sisk, Reclamation has identified 12 projects with 
anticipated modification needs through 2030, as well as 5 additional 
projects that will be assessed for potential risk reduction efforts 
prior to 2025.
    The proposed budget also requests $105.3 million for specific 
Extraordinary Maintenance (XM) activities across Reclamation in FY 
2024. This request is central to mission objectives of operating and 
maintaining projects to ensure delivery of water and power benefits. 
Reclamation's XM request relies on condition assessments, condition/
performance metrics, technological research and deployment, and 
strategic collaboration to better inform and improve the management of 
its assets and deal with its infrastructure maintenance challenges. 
Reclamation was also appropriated $3.2 billion in the BIL, and the 
allocation plan for FY 2024 funding has been provided to Congress as 
mandated.
    Renewable Energy: Reclamation owns 78 hydroelectric power plants. 
Reclamation operates 53 of those plants to generate approximately 15 
percent of the hydroelectric power produced in the United States. Each 
year on average, Reclamation generates about 40 million megawatt hours 
of electricity and collects over $1.0 billion in gross power revenues 
for the Federal Government.
    Reclamation's FY 2024 budget request includes $3.5 million to 
increase Reclamation hydropower capabilities and value, contributing to 
Administration clean energy and climate change initiatives and 
enhancing water conservation and climate resilience within the power 
program.
    Section 70101 of the BIL established the Indian Water Rights 
Settlement Completion Fund (Completion Fund), making $2.5 billion 
available to the Secretary of the Interior to satisfy Tribal settlement 
obligations as authorized by Congress prior to enactment of the BIL. In 
FY 2022 and FY 2023, the Department allocated $2.26 billion of those 
funds, $608.5 million of which supported Reclamation's Tribal 
settlement implementation actions. Additional funding from the 
Completion Fund will be allocated in FY 2024. In addition to the 
Completion Fund, FY 2024 represents the fifth year of Reclamation Water 
Settlements Fund (RWSF) allocations, which provide $120 million in 
annual mandatory authority for Reclamation Indian water rights 
settlements. Funding made available by previous mandatory authorities, 
such as that authorized in the Claims Resolution Act, remain available 
for settlement implementation, while the ongoing operations and 
maintenance requirements of the Arizona Water Settlement Act are 
expected to continue to be supported within the Lower Colorado River 
Basin Development Fund.
    The investments described in Reclamation's FY 2024 budget, in 
combination with BIL and the Inflation Reduction Act implementation and 
prior year efforts will ensure that Reclamation can continue to provide 
reliable water and power to the American West. Water management, 
improving and modernizing infrastructure, using sound science to 
support critical decision-making, finding opportunities to expand 
capacity, reducing conflict, and meeting environmental responsibilities 
are all addressed in this FY 2024 budget request. Reclamation continues 
to look at ways to plan more efficiently for future challenges faced in 
water resources management and to improve the way it does business.
    Thank you for the opportunity to summarize the President's Fiscal 
Year 2024 Budget Request for the Bureau of Reclamation.

    Senator Murray. Thank you so much.
    We will now begin our round of 5-minute questions and I ask 
my colleagues to keep track of the clock.
    Commissioner Touton, I want to start with you. Last 
Congress, as you know, we passed the Inflation Reduction Act, 
which included $4 billion in funding for Reclamation to address 
declining water levels because of the drought primarily, of 
course, in the Colorado River Basin.
    We're all thankful, of course, this year for much-needed 
rain and snow and as you and I have talked about, one wet 
season does not counter the driest 23-year period ever recorded 
in that basin.
    We do need long-term solutions to effectively manage that 
water and adjust for the impacts of climate change.
    Can you explain how the supplemental environmental impact 
statement that was released earlier this month fits into those 
efforts and highlight other steps that you are taking to 
increase our water security and resilience?
    Ms. Touton. Thank you for that question, Madam Chair.
    With regard to the Colorado River Basin and the Inflation 
Reduction Act, within 60 days of the President signing the 
Inflation Reduction Act into law, we had a request for 
proposals for what we call short-term bridging water and we're 
happy to announce as part of that, earlier this month, we 
announced a 125,000 acre-feet commitment by the Gila River 
Indian Community which amounts to about $50 million. What that 
means in Lake Mead is about two feet of elevation in the short 
term.
    We've also committed $250 million for the Salton Sea to 
mitigate impacts to the Sea as the result of conservation 
efforts and less water in the system, and we've also committed 
$125 million for our System Conservation Program in the Upper 
Basin.
    As it relates to the Supplemental EIS (Environmental Impact 
Statement) that we released earlier this month, the efforts 
that we have--whether in short-term bridging water or our long-
term investments in sustainable infrastructure--help to keep 
water levels higher in Mead and our ability to keep levels high 
so that we can continue to operate, whether that's through 
voluntary measures or investments in infrastructure. Moreover, 
they help with the process of coming to a consensus solution in 
the basin, to which we remain committed.
    Thank you for your support.
    Senator Murray. Thank you.
    As you know, the Columbia River Basin provides significant 
habitat for salmon and other endangered species. It irrigates 
600,000 acres of farmland. It serves as a water highway and 
provides electricity to the majority of the region.
    I wanted to ask Commissioner Touton and Assistant Secretary 
Connor. I know your teams have been working diligently to reach 
a new agreement with Canada on the Columbia River Treaty. As 
those negotiations continue, would you commit to keeping me 
updated on the progress of that and let us know if there's 
anything we can do to assist your efforts?
    Commissioner? Assistant Secretary?
    Mr. Connor. Madam Chair,----
    Senator Murray. Yes?
    Mr. Connor [continuing]. Yes, absolutely, a modernized 
treaty is incredibly important. We will keep you informed. I'm 
committed to that.
    Ms. Touton. Yes, as well, Madam Chair. Thank you.
    Senator Murray. Thank you.
    This is so important. We have to stay apprised of this 
progress and we need to keep moving on this. So I appreciate 
that.
    Assistant Secretary Connor, I consistently hear from our 
ports and harbors across the country about the importance of 
the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. That is exactly why I 
reached across the aisle to unlock some additional Trust Fund 
dollars for some of our critical harbor work.
    I worked with the donor ports, like Seattle and Tacoma, to 
find targets for distributing those Trust Fund dollars. That 
funding is really key to ensuring high-quality port 
infrastructure and maintaining our national competitiveness.
    But the budget this year does not appear to meet all the 
Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund targets. What steps are you 
taking to make sure the targets are met?
    Mr. Connor. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    I will just say I appreciate our conversation on this very 
subject about a month ago. We did not include the 12 percent 
set-aside for energy and donor ports and I appreciate the 
sensitivity of the dialogue that you engaged in and the 
statutory provision that was included that reflects the balance 
that Congress feels is important.
    So I'm committed now to ensuring as we move forward, you 
know. The threshold issue is our priority has always been to 
maintain authorized channels at their authorized depths and 
widths and that's going to be an ongoing effort as priority 
one, but understanding the balance that the Congress has sought 
through those provisions in WORDA I'm committed to ensuring 
that in the next budget cycle we are looking--and I think this 
will help in the next work plan cycle, that we identify the 
donor ports and the energy supporting ports, that we identify 
what are those expanded uses that they anticipate that they've 
identified as needs so that we have that roster, that inventory 
of needs, and I'm committed to doing that and issuing guidance 
to ensure that we have that information available for the next 
decisionmaking process.
    Senator Murray. Well, as you know, I'm going to be watching 
that very closely.
    Mr. Connor. Yes.
    Senator Murray. All right. Thank you.
    Senator Kennedy.
    Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Could you put that up for me right quick? Thank you, ma'am.
    General, I know you can't see that, but it's a page from 
your website and let me read you the relevant sentence. It 
says, ``The Mississippi River and Tributaries Project,'' which, 
of course, is how we pay for flood control and levies, ``The 
Mississippi River and Tributaries Project has prevented more 
than $1.5 trillion,'' not billion, trillion, ``in flood damages 
since 1928 or $95 for every $1 invested.''
    This is from your website. How was this compiled, that data 
compiled, General?
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So it's simply taking the cost 
of the project and comparing it to the benefits that you're 
describing, structures saved, acres preserved, recreation 
opportunities. So it's a comparison between the--simple math 
between the cost and benefits.
    Senator Kennedy. So you have the ability at the Corps, your 
economists and others, to calculate losses, potential losses?
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir, we do.
    Senator Kennedy. And what this is telling me is that 
without the Corps of Engineers work funded as I described with 
respect to levies and flood control, the American people would 
have sustained damages of $1.5 trillion, is that right?
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir, I believe that's correct.
    Senator Kennedy. Okay. Here's what I'm getting at, General. 
If you have this ability and I believe you do, I'm not 
suggesting this isn't accurate, I'm very grateful that this is 
accurate, and I'm very grateful to the Corps, but if your folks 
have this ability to put a value on the potential losses that 
we are averting, why doesn't that play a bigger role in your 
cost-benefit analysis when you're looking at the feasibility of 
a project?
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir. So this is clearly--it's a 
great question. Clearly something the Corps has to get better 
on in comprehensive benefits.
    So I'll just give you two areas, sir, where we are trying 
to improve. We have a number of fund risk management projects 
and navigation projects that have national security 
implications. We're working on one in North Dakota, in Minot. 
You could use this Sioux Locks as an example.
    The Port of Nome in Alaska, it's a remote subsistence 
harbor, but the Coast Guard and Navy can use that. So we're 
challenged on those type of projects to quantify the national 
security benefit.
    We have flood risk management projects today in Selma, 
Alabama, or in Princeville, North Carolina, that preserve 
cultural and historic properties, and we struggle to put a 
monetary value on that, but it's something with the Secretary's 
leadership, sir, we absolutely get--it's something we have to 
improve upon.
    Senator Kennedy. Well, General, I misspoke. I said $1.53. 
The real figure is $2.73, which your work has prevented, $2.73 
trillion in damages, and your economists-- you stand by that 
number, I assume?
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir.
    Senator Kennedy. And your economists have a way to come up 
with that number.
    General Spellmon. That's correct.
    Senator Kennedy. It just makes no sense to me if we can 
quantify the losses that would be prevented by building a flood 
control project that we wouldn't make that one of the 
determining factors in the cost-benefit analysis. I mean, I 
gave you the statistic, the Morganza to the Gulf Levy System 
prevented damage, flooding, to 12,000 homes, and you can 
quantify that. Don't you think we ought to change the formula a 
little bit?
    General Spellmon. Well, sir, the way you're describing a 
loss prevented is a benefit of these projects. The Morganza 
example, I would argue, sir, we have many of those--we have 
many Morganzas across the country that we have to get better on 
in resourcing.
    Senator Kennedy. Let me ask you one quick question in the 
time I have left.
    The price of the Comite River Diversion Canal has gone up 
$500 million. How? I know inflation, but wow!
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir.
    Senator Kennedy. What are we going to do about that?
    General Spellmon. Sir, you've inflation down. The thing 
that we were taking on--this is a great example where we have 
to get better at communicating to the committees and to 
Congress and the Administration the cost estimates that we give 
you in the Chief's Report in Paragraph 11 and we give you a 
number with some decimal points on it for a project that may be 
constructed down the road, but what we don't give you is the 
percent design that that cost estimate is based on.
    So in a 3-year study, a district might get to a 10 percent 
level design or a 4-year study, they might get to 25 percent, 
and then as that design is matured, like it is now today in 
Comite, you're finding that there are additional requirements 
that we get as we get deeper into the geotech, into the sizing 
of some of these structures. That's what we're experiencing 
here and it's something we've got to get better on in 
communicating to you.
    Senator Kennedy. How do we get that number? We got a hell 
of a mess here, General. Okay. My people expect this to be 
done. We brought it in on time. I mean, then all of a sudden, 
bam, $500 million. How we going to get this price down?
    General Spellmon. Sir, you have our commitment that we're 
going to work through this. We're committed to finishing this. 
I don't have all the answers here today. I can share my 
commitment that we will get this done.
    Senator Kennedy. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Murray. Thank you.
    Senator Heinrich.
    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Commissioner Touton, I want to ask you about how you're 
balancing the drought relief efforts across the West and I 
think it's clear that as reservoir levels in the Colorado Basin 
have dropped, it's really captured the attention of the 
country, but for the Colorado Basin there are many other basins 
in the West that are experiencing the same dynamic, right?
    We are just dealing with less precipitation, less snow 
pack, less water in these systems than we were 50 years ago.
    Ms. Touton. Yes.
    Senator Heinrich. And that's not drought because it's not 
temporary. It is aridification. It is the result of climate 
change and it is going to be at that level or potentially worse 
for the foreseeable future.
    So how are you making sure that you're addressing that 
issue across basins in places like the Rio Grande that have 
equally stressing situations in their systems right now?
    Ms. Touton. Thank you for that question, Senator.
    What you have outlined is exactly what we're--not only are 
we seeing in the Colorado River Basin but across the West. Our 
facilities were built in the notion that our largest reservoir 
would be snowpack, that it would fall, that it would stay there 
and not melt early and that when it would melt, it would end up 
in our rivers and therefore our reservoirs. That is not what 
we're seeing for the most part. It's drier, snow is falling at 
higher elevations, and when it does melt, it's sooner and the 
grounds are dry.
    Taking into account what you saw in your home State last 
year with the Rio Grande, for the first time in 40 years, parts 
of the Rio Grande ran dry. So, what are we doing about it? 
First, we're maximizing the efforts that we have in the short- 
and long-term both in our budget request but also with 
investments from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, with 
WaterSMART efficiencies, and the lining of canals being more 
efficient for water usage.
    But we're also looking at it from a long-term perspective. 
You and I have talked about how that's not necessarily the 
solution for every place and that our ability to recharge our 
aquifers also means that we have an ability to make sure our 
streams are available.
    So, part of our announcements that we made, as well, is a 
NOFO (Notice of Funding Opportunity)--a Notice of Funding--for 
Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration.
    So our ability to look at these holistically and these are 
short-term tools, but then we're investing in the 
infrastructure. We're really proud of our aging infrastructure 
investments. We had as part of that $30 million for the Rio 
Grande for aging infrastructure and we are looking at the 
Inflation Reduction Act. It says $4 billion for the Colorado 
River and basins at comparable levels of drought.
    So, as we're working through the Colorado River, we're 
working on a lot of things, including that provision, on how we 
can utilize that for long-term projects.
    Senator Heinrich. Assistant Secretary Connor, I want to ask 
you. You're super-familiar with the infrastructure in the Rio 
Grande Basin, with your background, but when we authorized all 
of that infrastructure and I suspect this is true across many 
basins in the West, you kind of had a one-off approach.
    You might have one reservoir that was for flood control, 
you had a different reservoir that was for storage, and as we 
come under more and more pressure and there's less and less 
water in the system as a whole, we really need to be able to 
manage the basin as a whole, coordinating all those pieces of 
infrastructure.
    Last year the Corps was directed to work with the National 
Academies to study reservoir management and operational issues 
within the Rio Grande Basin so that we could come up 
potentially with a more comprehensive management strategy. How 
is that progressing?
    Mr. Connor. It's progressing in pieces rather than that 
holistic approach that you've described, Senator, and I 
absolutely agree and I think this builds upon the 
Commissioner's point.
    We don't have the luxury anymore of having single purpose 
projects doing individual things. So we've got to tie this 
together and that requires the Bureau working with the Corps of 
Engineers and vice-versa so that we can make our current 
infrastructure work harder, that we have better science and 
understanding of the system, that we ensure when we're doing 
flood control that we no longer just channel water away that 
can't be used, we need to incidentally restore our ground water 
for environmental benefits, and we have to look if we can't 
pick up water and specifically incorporate that in managed 
aquifer recharge.
    So I get back to your fundamental question, we've got 
authorities for studies, the Upper Rio Grande Water Operations 
Manual. We're proceeding to continue to refine that based on 
new authorities. Now we can use Abiquiu for water storage as 
well as flood control purposes. We're storing water from El 
Vado under a deviation now because that's undergoing a safety 
of dam project.
    We just need, I think, to think about an overarching study 
or approach that ensures we're integrating. In the meantime, 
we're going to cobble these things together and talk to each 
other and figure out these multi-benefit approaches we can move 
forward with the current infrastructure system.
    Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Madam Chair.
    Senator Murray. Thank you.
    Senator Hyde-Smith.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank 
you for convening this meeting, and thank you guys for being 
here and your willingness to serve, as well.
    I want to talk a bit about the Yazoo Backwater Levy 
Enlargement, specifically the need to enlarge the existing 
Yazoo Backwater Levy.
    Often when people hear Yazoo Backwater Project, they 
immediately assume we're talking about the unconstructed 
pumping station which is a very important issue that must be 
resolved, but the pumps are just one part of the comprehensive 
Yazoo Backwater Area Project.
    Authorized features include levies, floodgates, drainage 
channels, and the pumping stations, but the Yazoo Backwater 
Levy was completed in 1978. It is essentially an extension of 
the Mainline Mississippi River East Bank Levy and it runs along 
the West Bank of the Yazoo River.
    This latest system, along with the Steele Bayou Floodgate, 
serves as the first line of defense of the nearly 2,000 square 
miles of the Yazoo Backwater Area when the Mississippi River is 
high and backs up into the Yazoo River.
    When the river is high and the area receives above average 
rainfall, interior water is trapped inside the levy system 
almost like a bathtub and we have a destructive backwater 
flood. As we've seen time and time again, like the catastrophic 
flood of 2019 and many others since 2008, until a pumping 
station is constructed and operational in the Yazoo Backwater 
Area, we have to ensure the structures we have in place are as 
strong as possible and during that historic flood of the 
Mississippi River in 2011, the historic Backwater Levy came 
within inches of over topping.
    If that happened, the area would have been inundated with 
more than 16 feet of water. Let me repeat that. The area would 
have had more than 16 feet of water.
    From the beginning, the Corps has said the Yazoo Backwater 
Levy would need to be raised at some point during the 50-year 
project life in the recommended plan, but unfortunately the 
President's fiscal year budget in 2024 does not include any 
funding to enlarge the Yazoo Backwater Levy but two million 
could be used for that purpose according to the Corps' fiscal 
year 2024 Total Capability Estimate.
    Secretary Connor or Lieutenant General Spellmon, either 
one, please explain to the subcommittee the magnitude of the 
flooding that would occur should the Yazoo Backwater Levy ever 
overtop.
    Mr. Connor. Yes, ma'am, I'll start. So you're correct that 
we became within two inches of this occurring in the 2011 
event. This would be major flooding. So you have to assume in 
these conditions that the Steele Bayou structure is closed and 
the Yazoo River is high and so we would have a condition where 
the precipitation is gathering behind the other structure in 
those communities in addition to water coming over top of the 
levy.
    As you described in 2019, those conditions in the current 
arrangement could last for months.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Okay. And I've submitted a fiscal year 
2024 funding request to enlarge the Yazoo Backwater Levy.
    Please explain to the subcommittee that the Yazoo Backwater 
Levy is a separate completed feature of the Yazoo Backwater 
Project and said funds would indeed be used to enlarge the 
levy, which has nothing to do with the construction of the 
pumps.
    Mr. Connor. Yes, ma'am. The levy enlargement is a separate 
feature of the system and we would use the money provided to 
begin the design of that levy enlargement.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Okay. In other words, comparing funding 
to enlarge the levy to funding to construct the pumps is like 
comparing apples and oranges. They are completely different 
project elements. Am I correct in saying that?
    Mr. Connor. Yes, ma'am. They are different project 
features.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. And do you agree the Yazoo Backwater 
Levy needs to be enlarged?
    Mr. Connor. Ma'am, today it's just under six feet below its 
designed height and so this next enlargement would take it up 
another two feet, consistent with the MR&T System. That's the 
next planned levy raise for this system, but, yes, I agree.
    Senator Hyde-Smith. Great. Thank you so much. My time is 
almost up. I'll yield.
    Senator Murray. Senator Hoeven.
    Senator Hoeven. Thanks, Madam Chairman.
    Commissioner Touton, thanks for coming. We appreciate it 
very much. You've reviewed the issue in North Dakota, the water 
supply project. It's very important that Reclamation help us 
with funding that project.
    Are you willing to continue to work to help us fund that 
project?
    Ms. Touton. It was great to see you. North Dakota is 
beautiful in the summer and I look forward to working with you 
on that project.
    Senator Hoeven. Well, you're invited again. It was great to 
have you out there.
    One more technical question is the funding to comply with 
the Boundary Waters Treaty for biota treatment is being taken 
out of Section 7 instead of out of Section 1, which is taking 
away some of the ongoing funding in Section 7.
    Are you willing to work with us on that see if you can't 
get that addressed?
    Ms. Touton. Our teams are already working on that, Senator, 
and I'm happy to report back and continue to work with you on 
that issue.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, and I want to note and thank 
your responsiveness. I appreciate it very much. Thank you.
    Ms. Touton. Thank you.
    Senator Hoeven. Secretary Connor, Dakota Access Pipeline, 
with which you're very familiar, moving more than half a 
million barrels a day of energy, by the way, sweetest crude 
from North Dakota that our Nation badly needs right now.
    Please, give a status update on getting the EIS process 
completed. As you know, it's been operating safely now for 
years, and what do you anticipate for completion of the EIS 
process?
    Mr. Connor. Absolutely. I'll provide an update, Senator. So 
as a result, as you know, but just for the record, in 2000 the 
Corps was ordered to go back and do a full EIS. So right now we 
are at the stage where we have produced an administrative draft 
EIS, shared that with cooperating partners, such as the State 
of North Dakota, and also we went ahead and shared that with 
all the Tribes who have registered interest. So we've got about 
six cooperating agencies as well as 30 Tribes now who have 
reviewed it, provided us comments.
    We are currently taking into account and incorporating 
those comments, having some additional technical discussions 
with the goal of coming out with a draft environmental 
statement for public review by the end of June. So it's a 
little shift from the schedule that you and I have previously 
talked about and it was because of the request for an 
additional review period of the administrative draft EIS.
    So we will put it out for review, probably 45 or 60 days. I 
anticipate we'll get additional requests for time. We're 
prepared to go out a little longer than that but my 
conversations with you and the Governor, I know we need to get 
our work done here and do the full analysis and we've tried to 
incorporate, you know, a better assessment of spill risks, 
spill response, Tribal trust interests, so that we can fully 
evaluate potential impacts as well as disclosing just the 
overall greenhouse gas emissions and social costs to carbon 
parties of the administration.
    So we've now done that. We're taking comments. We'll get it 
out the end of June and hopefully move forward to get to a 
final EIS.
    Senator Hoeven. And you understand the importance of the 
project and getting the EIS completed?
    Mr. Connor. Absolutely understand, Senator.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
    General, I'm looking forward to your visit to the Fargo-
Morehead region next month and your meeting out there, and I 
want to thank you for having your meeting, your Corps USACE 
meeting out there for three days next month.
    This is an incredible project and frankly do you consider 
this, the Red River Valley Flood Protection Project, really a 
national model and are you committed to completing it and 
getting it done on time and as planned?
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir. We're absolutely committed to 
completing this project. I don't often get to report on 
schedule within budget, but this was our project delivery team 
of the year. So we're going to take all 42 district commanders 
and our 13 general officers out there to see how they did it 
but looking forward to this visit, sir.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you. And in the case of Minot, you 
mentioned Minot earlier, your continued creativity is going to 
be needed in Minot. You've shown that in working with the Minot 
Air Force Base, the only dual nuclear base in the Nation, so it 
truly is a national security issue, but also for completing the 
flood protection particularly for the lower-income areas with 
some of those back channels and some of those kind of things, 
you have some programs that we're going to need to use, as 
well.
    Your people in the region have identified them and so your 
strong support for some of the ideas the region's bringing 
forward from your office would be very helpful in completing 
that comprehensive flood control project.
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir. We certainly want to get after 
resourcing some of the innovation that the district has come up 
with in some of these communities that you're describing.
    Senator Hoeven. And you're committed to supporting that?
    General Spellmon. Yes, sir.
    Senator Hoeven. Thank you, appreciate it. Thank you, Madam 
Chair.
    Senator Murray. Senator Britt.
    Senator Britt. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Thank you all for being here today. We certainly appreciate 
your time and your willingness to be in front of this 
committee.
    We know that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is 
responsible for the design, construction, and maintenance of 
both military construction and Civil Works projects across our 
great Nation.
    I appreciate your consistent commitment to construction 
projects at military installations, including those at Fort 
Novosel outside my home town of Enterprise, Alabama.
    Secretary Connor, thank you for visiting the Port of Mobile 
last week. I know that the Port and the Mobile District 
welcomed the opportunity to show you around.
    In 2019 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers approved what was 
called the General Re-Evaluation Report, examining the costs 
and benefits and the environmental impacts of deepening and 
widening the Mobile Bay Ship Channel to accommodate larger 
vessels and allow two-way traffic.
    In June of 2020 the U.S. Army Corps and the Alabama State 
Port Authority signed a Project Partnership Agreement and the 
fiscal year 2020 U.S. Army Corps Work Plan fully funded the 
Channel Deepening and Widening Project.
    In September of 2020 the Mobile District of the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers awarded the first of now seven phases of 
construction for this project. As of today, Phase 1 and Phase 3 
of the project is complete. Phase 4 of the project is scheduled 
for completion in June of 2024, while the remaining four phases 
are scheduled to be done concurrently starting later this year.
    The full project is scheduled to be completed by March 
2025. The deepening and widening of the Mobile Ship Channel 
will bring unprecedented economic growth of the entire State of 
Alabama and to the communities surrounding the Mobile Bay.
    Once deepened, the public and private terminals of the Port 
of Mobile will be able to accommodate larger ships and more 
frequent scheduling, handling a wide range of cargo, including 
mined materials, manufactured goods, bulk cargo, containerized 
cargo, and agro-business cargo.
    Mr. Secretary, from your standpoint, is the project to 
deepen and widen the Mobile Ship Channel on schedule for 
completion by March of 2025?
    Mr. Connor. Senator, yes, the project is still on schedule. 
Can I just say fantastic facility, fantastic tour last week, 
pretty impressive the capabilities there, and the 
diversification in the port as far as the cargo that it brings 
in and out.
    I know there is an issue with utility easements that we're 
working through with Phase 4 and that's the other thing I just 
wanted to mention. I think it's great levels of communication 
with the port as well as State officials all helping to work 
through those utility issues.
    So I think we need to keep up attention on that to be able 
to get to ensure that we get the construction activity done, 
but everything that I learned last week is we're still on 
progress.
    Senator Britt. Thank you so much and thank you for your 
compliments to the great work that's done there.
    There have been many men and women who've been very 
intentional about how we can grow and how we can make sure that 
it was benefiting a multitude of people and places and 
servicing that community and the surrounding States. So thank 
you so much for saying that and I know that all parties are 
committed to working through any necessary paperwork, anything 
that needs to be done to make sure that we stay on time and we 
meet that March 2025 deadline.
    The Port of Mobile is expected to receive $5.4 million in 
fiscal year 2023 in the work plan for the Port Energy Funds. 
Port Energy Funds are funds provided to ports across the Nation 
at which energy commodities comprise more than 25 percent of 
the tonnage moved through the port.
    This year it is my understanding that the U.S. Army Corps 
has revised guidance for the use of Port Energy Funds, such 
that if a port is receiving these funds and it wishes to use 
them for dredging material and management activities, it is 
either not allowed or requires the U.S. Army Corps Headquarters 
to sign off.
    This is different from past practices. In past MOUs 
(Memoranda of Understanding) the Port of Mobile has been able 
to use the Port Energy Funds for berth dredging and surveying, 
post-dredging, hauling, berth dredge materials, and offsite 
upland sites requiring testing of these materials and just a 
wide variety of things.
    I believe that the U.S. Army Corps should maintain its past 
practices of allowing energy ports like the Port of Mobile to 
be able to use their Port Energy Funds to dredge and engage in 
dredge material management activities and that this new 
guidance is overly restrictive to operations and maintenance of 
the Port of Mobile.
    Mr. Secretary, will you commit to reviewing this new 
guidance and ensuring that the Port Energy Funds can be used 
for both dredging and for dredged material management 
activities?
    Mr. Connor. I will absolutely----
    Senator Murray. Before you give an answer to that question, 
Senator Britt, I have to go to another committee hearing. 
Senator Murkowski's on her way. I know you'll not say no, but 
would you mind holding the gavel until Senator Murkowski gets 
here?
    Senator Britt. I would be honored. Thank you.
    Senator Murray. Thank you very much.
    Senator Britt. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
    Senator Murray. I will turn that over to you until she gets 
here.
    Senator Britt. Thank you so much.
    Senator Murray. Thank you.
    Senator Britt [presiding]. This is the first time, Number 
99 out of 100.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Britt. It's going to take quite some time before I 
get to do something like that again. Thank you.
    Mr. Connor. Senator, I'll just say I was a staff person in 
the Senate when I think Barack Obama was 99th.
    Senator Britt. Okay. Well, there you go, there you go.
    Mr. Connor. I'm absolutely committed to relooking at the 
guidance. I think there's two questions. The beneficial use of 
dredged material, dredged material management is that within 
the definition of expanded uses under the statute, and then I 
think my predecessor, we might have some guidance out there 
that might be causing issues.
    So I will go back and look at that because, quite frankly, 
one of the most impressive aspects of last week's tour was 
the--and General Spellmon gets all the credit for setting a 
high goal for beneficially using dredged material and that has 
a lot of advantages and environmental benefits and I saw a lot 
of that last week.
    We want to incentivize that. We don't want to minimize 
that. So I will go back and look at that guidance.
    Senator Britt. No, and we're really proud. That's something 
that we've tried to do and, you know, I'm sure you saw it there 
with the creation of the island and creating the ecosystems, 
you know, allowing thousands of birds to nest and including the 
Brown Pelican there that was removed from the Federal 
Endangered Species List in 2009.
    So certainly want to make sure that we're being responsible 
and so I appreciate you leaning into that, as well.
    And on that note, you know, I'm going to raise this issue. 
I know that permitting approvals do take time and that you and 
your staff continue to work with the Port of Mobile just to 
make sure that we're doing what we need to do to get this done 
on time and meeting the needs of the community.
    General Spellmon. Ma'am, I'll just say we completely 
acknowledge the space requirements there. So this is a 1,200 
acre beneficial use site. We are working with EPA 
(Environmental Protection Agency) and the port on the 
permitting requirements.
    Ma'am, I don't see any issues. We'll get this done.
    Senator Britt. Okay. Thank you so much.
    I'll tell you what. That concludes my questions. We have 
General Hubbard waiting and I'm not used to even getting 
through a portion of my questions. So this is--you know, who 
knew, but would love to talk to you. I know that you're 
responsible not only for Civil Works but Military Construction, 
as we mentioned earlier.
    Can you share with the committee any challenges that you're 
having in this space, anything that you believe that needs to 
be brought to our attention?
    Mr. Connor. Ma'am, the Number 1 challenge and the Number 1 
opportunity that we have in the Corps of Engineers today is our 
workload. If you go back to the early '90s through 2000, we had 
about a $15 billion program that was across Civil Works, 
Military Construction, and all the other government agencies 
that we do work for and today's not $15 billion. If you add 
that all up, it's about $92 billion and we largely have the 
same size workforce, slightly larger.
    Last year we hired 5,000 new engineers on to our team and 
we lost 4,000 to retirements and transfers. So it's certainly 
the Number 1 challenge but it's also an opportunity in that 
we're looking for more innovative ways to get after our 
projects. We're working more with industry, working more with 
architect-engineer firms in our designs, and we're having to 
break a little bit of internal culture, but I think it's all 
healthy.
    Senator Britt. Yes, Mr. Secretary, thank you.
    General Spellmon. If I could just add on to that, I think, 
you know, in addition to the issues and the workload and the 
ways the organization is trying to adjust and using our assets 
across the entire enterprise, those are incredibly important.
    I think also one of the challenges that we face is not just 
the magnitude of the costs and cost increases and the personnel 
to carry out the work, but, quite frankly, we have some very 
well-intended rules that we operate under with respect to fully 
funding projects or investigations, such as through the 
bipartisan Infrastructure Law, such as BBA-2018, and, quite 
frankly, we've had significant cost increases not just in 
construction activity but even in the investigations as the 
work gets more complex.
    So I think, you know, some flexibility or just recognition 
and Congress has already done this. We had some restrictions of 
having to finish projects with BBA-2018 funding. We got some 
relief in the last Omnibus Appropriations Bill. So we were able 
to supplement those BBA-2018 funds with additional resources 
from the bipartisan Infrastructure Law and move forward with 
the critical project on California's shorelines.
    So I would just say I think that's a dialogue that we need 
to continue to have with the professional staff and with 
Senators about where we're not able to complete work, which 
just gets us high centered and that's in nobody's best 
interests, whether it's investigations or construction 
activity.
    Senator Britt. Absolutely. And, General, can I dig down? So 
you had 4,000 people retire.
    Mr. Connor. Ma'am, it was an arrangement of retirements, 
folks transferring to private construction work, folks going to 
work for other Federal agencies, so a large transition over the 
past year and a half in our workforce.
    Senator Britt. And so what all does the plan entail to 
recruit and to kind of fill that gap?
    Mr. Connor. Yes, ma'am. So we have really energized not 
only our recruiting campaign, I mean, we were advertising in 
Time Square here just a few months ago, but also our retention 
campaigns within the--I mean, this is a unique agency within 
the Federal Government. Seldom are our projects alike. They're 
very, very complicated and that's how we sell when we recruit. 
This is rewarding work that we're doing on behalf of the 
Nation.
    Senator Britt. Excellent, excellent. Thank you.
    General Spellmon. Can I just say I'm attending 
Infrastructure Task Force meeting later on after this hearing 
and so I was just getting the read-out on some of these 
statistics with respect to engineers in particular.
    So I think we anticipate, you know, based on the levels of 
resources we have normally and even increasing that we would, 
you know, have an 8 percent increase on the number of engineers 
that we need and I think even anticipating that, the statistic 
that I was just given earlier today was that we're still going 
to be something across not just government but the private 
sector something like 40,000 engineers short of where we need 
to be to carry out the anticipated level of infrastructure 
design/construction activity over the next several years and 
we're graduating less engineers and so we're losing ground in 
that way.
    So, in addition to hiring and I think we're competing well, 
it's the retirements and the exit that a lot of folks are 
making. We need to somehow get the younger generation more 
interested, more willing to enter into the engineering field 
and profession because we need them.
    Senator Britt. Yes, absolutely. We'll do a little 
recruitment tool then and tell people we need more engineers 
and certainly what an incredible way to serve our country.
    You mentioned Selma earlier in your remarks. Can you tell 
me a little bit about what is going on there and what the plans 
are?
    Mr. Connor. Yes, ma'am. The good news is we're fully funded 
for preliminary engineering and design and we'll have our 
designs complete in October of this year and we'll use that 
design, ma'am, to fully inform what our first size of the first 
construction contract.
    I've had the opportunity to visit this project. Everybody 
on this project is excited about this work ahead. The next task 
is to wrap up the designs and then we look forward to moving 
out on construction.
    Senator Britt. Excellent. As you know, Selma is not only an 
important place in Alabama but obviously a historic marker for 
our Nation and so certainly appreciate your attention to that 
project.
    And you also have responsibilities to manage recreational 
areas. Am I right in saying that?
    Mr. Connor. Yes, ma'am. Hundreds of them across the 
country.
    Senator Britt. Yes. So tell me, I know a lot of those are 
subject to damage and other things. Can you share with the 
committee how you prioritize those fundings, kind of across 
your business line, particularly within that area?
    Mr. Connor. Yes, ma'am. Very challenging mission and we 
have some great rangers in the Army Corps of Engineers that get 
a lot of mileage out of the dollars that we appropriate--we 
give them, and certainly it's just always very, very 
competitive.
    When I give my recommendations to the Secretary every fall 
for the next year's budget, life safety always goes to the top 
and then we have legal mandates, national security requirements 
that lead into our economic and environmental returns, and we 
certainly always want to finish what we start and that's very, 
very challenging for our recreation sites.
    We do the best we can. We try to get the maximum use out of 
every dollar that we are given. It is challenging, but the 
public, the amount of public that comes out to our recreation 
sites along the water just seems to grow every year and it's a 
program that we're extremely proud of.
    Senator Britt. Excellent. Well, I think this was part of 
being new. I think this was a test to see if I could finish 
this out.
    I wanted to thank you all for coming today. This will end 
our hearing. I'd like to thank the witnesses and my colleagues 
for participating in today's hearing.
    I look forward to working together on this year's 
appropriations bill to ensure that we are providing the Army 
Corps and the Bureau the resources that they need.

                     ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS

    I will keep the hearing record open for 1 week. Committee 
members who would like to submit written questions for the 
record should do so by 5 p.m. Wednesday, May 3.
    We appreciate the Army Corps and the Bureau for responding 
to them in a reasonable time period.
    [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but 
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the 
hearing:]
             Questions Submitted to Hon. Michael L. Connor
             Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
    Question. Port of Nome: The Port of Nome project is a strategic 
asset for national security, search and rescue, maritime commerce and 
environmental protection. In recent weeks, we have heard senior 
military leaders testify before Congress as to the need for a deep 
draft arctic port. Yet, this project is a civil works project and I 
worked to deliver the $250mm from the IIJA to fund the first phase of 
the project and good progress has been made on that. Meanwhile, section 
8312 of WRDA 2022 amended the cost share to change the project 90% 
Federal and 10% non-Federal sponsor.
    Mr. Connor and General Spellmon, will the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers fully fund the completion of the project through its 
construction budget and workplan from FY25 on?
    Answer. The Administration is committed to considering this project 
for funding, along with other programs, projects, and activities across 
the Nation that are competing for the available Federal resources. The 
Corps is committed to completing the Port of Nome Modification project.
    Question. Considering the cost share modification, I expect the 
administration's budget requests and construction work plan funding to 
account for this change with no delay in budgetary resources. Will the 
Administration honor the WRDA provision for budgeting purposes?
    Answer. Budgeting for this project will be in accordance with the 
new cost share under the amended authority.
    Question. Congressionally Directed Spending. Mr. Connor, last year 
I was able to secure Congressionally Directed Spending for a couple of 
worthy projects in Alaska that had been languishing in the Civil Works 
queue for years. Obviously, this was much appreciated and a good 
example why this CDS process is good for states, like Alaska, whose 
projects do not compete well in the overall Corps budget process. We 
were excited to see them in the FY23 Omnibus, only to be surprised to 
find these projects were not included in the President's FY24 Budget 
Request. If there is no money in the President's Budget request, I do 
not see how these projects can be continued in the FY24 work plan. My 
expectation, and I believe the expectation from my colleagues in 
Congress, was that the Corps would pick-up these projects once they 
received a CDS.
    Whose decision was it to abandon these CDS requests in the Budget 
Request and why were they not included in the President's Budget 
Request?
    Answer. The FY2024 Budget was completed before the FY2023 
appropriations were passed; therefore, CDS projects newly funded in 
FY2023 were not considered for funding in the FY2024 Budget but will be 
considered for future budgets and potential work plans.
    Question. I think we can all appreciate the substantial risks 
intermittent funding poses to projects especially in my state. Do you 
intend on funding my CDS requests to completion?
    Answer. Enacted CDS projects will be considered for funding in 
future President's Budget request and potential work plans, along with 
all other worthwhile programs, projects, and activities across the 
Nation in competition for limited Federal resources.
                                 ______
                                 
      Questions Submitted to Lieutenant General Scott A. Spellmon
          Questions Submitted by Senator Christopher A. Coons
    Question. As expressed in the Federal statute that formed the 
Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC), Public Law 87-328, the 
Commission's five members are responsible for financially supporting 
DRBC's operations. The United States share of this signatory member 
funding is $715,000, representing 20 percent of member contributions. 
This percentage is based upon an equitable agreement among the 
Commission's four member states and the United States, and the Corps of 
Engineers is the Federal member.
    Section 5019 of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007 as 
amended (121 Stat. 1201, 128 Stat. 1306) reads:

    ``The Secretary shall allocate funds to the Susquehanna River Basin 
        Commission, the Delaware River Basin Commission, and the 
        Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin to fulfill the 
        equitable funding requirements of the respective interstate 
        compacts.''

    As recently as the FY2023 appropriations bills, Congress included 
the following phrase in the Joint Explanatory Statement:

    ``The Congress has made clear its intent that the Susquehanna, 
        Delaware, and Potomac River Basin Commissions be supported, and 
        the Corps is encouraged to budget accordingly in future budget 
        submissions.''

    Since this payment is a statutory obligation, why does the 
President's Budget not include funding for the DRBC, or any other river 
basin commission or interstate compact where the Corps is a signatory?
    Answer. Consistent with statutory requirements, the Corps has 
requested funds for the River Basin Commissions through its yearly 
budgetary process as part of the General Expenses account for 
participation in the commission meetings. As part of the President's 
budget development process, the River Basin Commissions are considered 
for funding, along with many other worthwhile programs, projects, and 
activities across the Nation in competition for limited Federal 
resources.
    Question. Since the Corps of Engineers has not included funds for 
the River Basin Commissions in almost 30 years, in complying with the 
statute, have you or any of your predecessors filed the report required 
by section 5019? If not, why not?
    Answer. The Administration budgets for the Corps' participation in 
the Commission meetings in the General Expenses account.
                                 ______
                                 
             Questions Submitted by Senator Lisa Murkowski
    Question. Tribal Consultations and Craig Harbor: General Spellmon, 
my understanding is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has adopted Tribal 
Policy Principles to guide your work. These principles are included on 
your website and characterized as part of your mission. I want to focus 
on the principles that deal with tribal consultation specifically. The 
Corps has committed to both pre-consultation which requires the U.S. 
Army Corps of Engineers to involve Tribes collaboratively, before and 
throughout decisionmaking, to ensure the timely exchange of 
information, the consideration of disparate viewpoints, and the 
utilization of fair and impartial dispute resolution processes. The 
Corps is also committed to government-to-government consultation to 
fulfill its obligations to consider the potential effects of Corp 
programs on natural and cultural resources, and Section 810 of the 
ANILCA outlines the procedures for all Federal agencies to evaluate 
impacts on subsistence uses and needs, and means to reduce or eliminate 
such impacts (16 USC 3120). I am concerned that the Corps does not 
appear to have followed these principles regarding the Craig Harbor 
project in Southeast Alaska to the detriment of the community there and 
the Craig Tribal Association ending the project for the near future 
after millions of dollars of Federal, state and city money was spent. 
In this specific case, the feasibility report was completed in 2015 and 
did not include tribal consultation. Six years later tribal 
consultation was attempted retroactively in the context of the 
Validation Report, which I think you will agree is not the ideal 
context for conducting tribal consultation on a project.
    Is there a process or procedure for how to conduct tribal 
consultations for projects that are midstream in the Army Corps 
process?
    Answer. Tribal consultation under Section 106 occurred throughout 
the feasibility phase of the project. The Alaska District consulted 
with Craig Tribal Association four times under Section 106 consultation 
efforts and three times under informal, in person nation-to-nation 
consultation efforts between 2012--2015. Consultation under Section 106 
was reinitiated in 2020, during the start of the pre-construction 
engineering and design (PED) phase. An in-person meeting to continue 
negotiations on the Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement was held in 
2020 and two additional Section 106 consultation efforts led to the 
formal request for nation-to-nation consultation in 2021.
    Question. Can you--should you--proceed with a project, at whatever 
phase, if consultation obligations have not been fulfilled or if all 
parties have not responded to requests for participation.
    Answer. Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act (Section 106), the Corps is legally required to 
consult with federally recognized Tribes at certain phases of all Corps 
activities; initial project phases cannot be concluded without 
fulfilling this required Tribal consultation. It would be inconsistent 
with Federal statutory requirements for a Corps project to proceed 
without consultation or without robust evidence of attempts to provide 
Tribes the opportunity to respond to requests for participation. In 
this instance, Tribal consultation under Section 106 occurred four 
times during the feasibility phase of the project and four times during 
the Pre-construction Engineering and Design phase of the project.
    Question. Is there a requirement for a Memorandum of Agreement to 
be signed before proceeding? Would it be prudent to make that a Corps 
policy if it isn't already?
    Answer. Corps policy is to follow all applicable legal requirements 
under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). A 
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is required to resolve adverse effects to 
historic properties as the project was designed at the time of the Pre-
construction Engineering and Design phase and Validation Study. In 
accordance with the regulations for the Protection of Historic 
Properties at 36 C.F.R. Part 800, the MOA for this project needs to be 
executed prior to non-planning actions. If the location, size, scope, 
or other factors in the project design change, consultation under 
Section 106 of the NHPA would be re-initiated and the Corps' assessment 
of effects to historic properties revaluated to determine whether an 
MOA is required to resolve adverse effects to historic properties.
    Question. General Spellmon, a report from Congressional Research 
Services in 2021 stated, ``An ongoing challenge for USACE is that 
numerous authorized studies and construction projects remain unfunded. 
USACE has an estimated $109 billion total construction backlog.'' I 
heard about that, and as part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Framework my colleagues and I worked on clearing a small portion of 
that backlog--we provided $17.1 billion of supplemental appropriations. 
Another piece that may help clear that backlog would be to address some 
of these older reports and determine which are relevant.
    How many Chiefs Reports are over 10 years old? 50? 100 years old?
    Answer. The following is a list of projects authorized in Water 
Resource Development Acts based on recommendations from Chief's Reports 
and does not include projects that may have been authorized elsewhere. 
Of note, this list was developed based on resources and information 
available in a centralized manner; a more comprehensive response would 
require additional time and resources to conduct.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Chief's Reports
                     WRDA                              Authorized
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2022..........................................                       25
2020..........................................                       46
2018..........................................                       12
2016..........................................                       30
2014..........................................                       34
2007..........................................                       46
2000..........................................                 2(28\1\)
1999..........................................               30 (15\2\)
1996..........................................                31(13\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 28 projects were authorized subject to completion of a Chief's
  Report by December 31, 2000.
\2\ 15 projects were authorized subject to completion of a Chief's
  Report by December 31, 1999.
\3\ 13 projects were authorized subject to completion of a Chief's
  Report by December 31, 1996.


    Question. At what point do they become obsolete?
    Answer. Projects that have been authorized by Congress remain 
authorized until they are deauthorized by law, such as in accordance 
with the periodic deauthorization provisions found in Water Resource 
Development Acts.
    Question. Is there a process for reviewing these Chiefs Reports and 
removing them from the queue once they no longer reflect the need of 
that community?
    Answer. For those projects that have been authorized but have not 
been constructed, Water Resources Development Acts provide direction 
for the Secretary to undertake a process that may result in project 
deauthorizations. Criteria found in WRDA limited the projects subject 
to this deauthorization process to projects that were authorized by 
Congress prior to 2007 and have not had any obligation of funding for 
the past ten fiscal years. The number of authorized projects that fit 
the criteria is very small.
                                 ______
                                 
               Questions Submitted by Senator John Hoeven
    Question. The Army Corps of Engineers is conducting an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) for the Dakota Access Pipeline 
(DAPL) and the Line 5 Tunnel Project, two energy projects that are 
vital to our nation's economic and national security. For DAPL, the 
Corps is responsible for reviewing a 0.21-mile crossing of the Missouri 
River. For the Line 5 Tunnel, the Corps is reviewing a 4.5-mile tunnel 
under the Straits of Mackinac. The Corps currently estimates that it 
will take over 4 years to complete an EIS for each project. Why is the 
Army Corps unable to meet the Biden administration's own goal of 2 
years for completing an EIS for DAPL and the Line 5 Tunnel?
    Answer. Line 5 requires a Department of Army permit pursuant to 
Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 and Section 404 of the 
Clean Water Act. Following the end of the scoping period, the Corps 
established a detailed schedule with the steps needed for information 
gathering and review. These include the collection of information 
associated with compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act. The updated schedule includes more accurate review 
and comment periods on relevant documents for cooperating agencies, 
federally recognized Tribes, and Section 106 consulting parties. The 
updated schedule also provides for robust Tribal consultation as 
outlined in Presidential directives and in the memo from the Office of 
the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works. The updated 
schedule delivers an open, transparent and public process that 
objectively evaluates alternatives to render a decision within the 
scope of the Corps' authorities.
    DAPL has requested the Corps to issue an easement under the Mineral 
Leasing Act to cross Corps-managed Federal land at Lake Oahe. Tribal 
engagement and consultation regarding the DAPL crossing of Lake Oahe is 
critical to fulfilling the Corps' NEPA requirements, including 
coordinating with various Tribes and the State of North Dakota. The 
Corps extended the schedule to specifically ensure that Tribal concerns 
were heard, understood, and addressed in the Draft Environmental Impact 
Statement.
    Question. The U.S. Army Corps' mission is to, ``deliver vital 
engineering solutions, in collaboration with our partners, to secure 
our Nation, energize our economy, and reduce disaster risk.'' Do you 
agree that an efficient and reliable permitting process is needed to 
support this mission? Given that multiple projects under review by the 
agency are impacted by delays that drive up project costs, how can we 
make the permitting process more predictable and reduce the risk of 
litigation, while maintaining reasonable environmental safeguards?
    Answer. Yes, the Corps agrees that an efficient and reliable 
permitting process is needed to support Corps missions. The Section 408 
program verifies alterations to authorized Corps civil works projects 
will not be injurious to the public interest and will not impair the 
usefulness of the project. In September 2018, Engineer Circular 1165-2-
220 was issued, which provides clarification and a more formal process, 
including delegation of all decisions from Headquarters, elimination of 
the 60% minimum design requirement so information requirements can be 
scaled to the scope of the request, and a 30-day Completeness Review 
and 90-Day Technical review and decision timeline for each 408 request. 
The mission of the Regulatory Program is to protect the Nation's 
aquatic resources and navigation capacity while allowing reasonable 
development through fair and balanced decisions. The Program's ``end 
state'' is to issue balanced, timely, and transparent regulatory 
decisions, rooted in sound science and compliant with applicable laws. 
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law allocated an additional $160 million 
to the national regulatory program to assist in eliminating the backlog 
of old actions, re-invigorate initiatives that will ultimately help 
streamline the processes, become more transparent, technologically 
advanced, public focused, and timelier in making final permit 
decisions.
                                 ______
                                 
              Questions Submitted by Senator Bill Hagerty
    Question. Last time you were before this Subcommittee, we discussed 
border wall construction policy and contracts. At the time, you told me 
there were roughly 20 vendors with which the Corps of Engineers was 
negotiating with to terminate contracts related to a misguided 
executive order issued on January 20, 2021. I have heard from small 
businesses in Tennessee who have been affected by often contradicting 
directives--between USACE directed pauses and termination from the 
Corps. This company tells me that to date, no action has been taken on 
the Termination for Convenience Settlement Proposal. The Army Corps of 
Engineers failure has had real consequences and inflicted real pain on 
small businesses including those in Tennessee.
    Has USACE paid any contractor for ``standby time'' ordered under 
Section 1 of the Proclamation, which required a ``Pause in Construction 
and Obligation of Funds'' at the Border Wall. If the USG did issue a 
standby directive and contractors have not been paid for complying with 
the USACE directive, what authority does the USACE have to withhold 
payments?
    Answer. The agency is not withholding payments. We are evaluating 
requests, to include properly submitted requests for costs associated 
with ``standby time,'' following the process prescribed in the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation (FAR). As part of the process, requests must be 
submitted in compliance with the FAR and are audited by the Defense 
Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) before the contracting officer can make a 
determination regarding payment to prime contractors. The Corps has 
made payments to some contractors for standby costs in accordance with 
the process described above.
    Question. Are there funds included in the USACE appropriations 
funding requests, specifically intended to make Contractors whole for 
contract `pauses' and subsequent terminations in 2021 for work 
performed at the Border Wall?
    Answer. There are no Corps-specific appropriations requests to 
execute the southern border barrier program. The border barrier program 
is funded with Department of Homeland Security appropriations, Army 
Operations and Maintenance funds (through 10 USC 284), and Military 
Construction funds (through 10 USC 2808). Under each of these lines of 
appropriation, there are obligated, but unexpended funds that may be 
utilized to pay allowable, allocable, and reasonable suspension and 
termination costs.
    Question. What are the funding mechanisms available to ensure 
timely and prompt payment of outstanding monies due as a result of the 
USACE's contract `pauses' and subsequent termination of Contracts under 
the Proclamation?
    Answer. Prime contractors have an obligation to submit complete and 
fully supported termination and equitable adjustment requests in a 
timely manner in accordance with the FAR. Simultaneously, Federal 
agencies have an obligation to evaluate such requests with assistance 
from DCAA as needed. Incomplete or unsupported requests can delay 
evaluation. Once the Corps determines that a contractor is entitled to 
compensation, the contractor submits a formal request for payment, 
which would be subject to the Prompt Payment Act. All parties are 
expected to act in good faith to resolve equitable adjustment requests 
and termination settlement proposals.
    Question. Why has the Government failed to respond (pay, reject, 
etc.) to standby work invoices and or respond to numerous formal 
requests for Information concerning the status of these invoices?
    Answer. The Corps is evaluating termination settlement proposals, 
including any costs asserted in connection with ``standby time,'' 
following the process prescribed in the FAR. As part of the evaluation 
process, requests submitted in compliance with the FAR are audited by 
DCAA before the contracting officer can make a determination regarding 
payment to prime contractors. USACE strives to respond in a prompt 
manner to all prime contractor inquiries. All communication regarding 
subcontractor information requests and compensation must be with our 
prime contractors.
    Question. Why did USACE Fort Worth District mandate that all 
Contractors stop work and remain in standby mode on 20 January 2021, 
and also order them ``Not to demobilize,'' yet USACE refused to provide 
a new contract line item level (CLIN) or line item authorizing payment 
for the unilateral orders for this ``new'' standby mode, whereby all 
contractors would have been able to invoice and get paid for this work?
    Answer. Pursuant to the Presidential Proclamation dated 20 January 
2021, USACE temporarily suspended all border barrier contracts and 
paused immediately the obligation of funds related to construction of 
the southern border wall. The suspension notices covered demobilization 
activities to prevent or minimize further obligation of funds.
    Contractors seeking ``standby'' costs would do so by making a 
request under the suspension of work clause asserting an unreasonable 
period of suspension, or, if appropriate, as part of a termination 
settlement proposal. Establishing a new CLIN to reimburse contractors 
for valid suspension costs is not the appropriate mechanism to address 
this matter.
    Question. Does the USACE have sufficient funding to cover all costs 
associated with Executive Order 13767?
    Answer. The precise costs of suspension and termination of these 
contracts will be determined via negotiations with each prime 
contractor. As described above, the termination process includes a 
submission of a complete and adequate termination settlement proposal 
by each prime contractor, audit by DCAA, evaluation by the Corps, and 
culminates with negotiation of a fair and reasonable settlement amount. 
It is only when this process is completed for each contract that the 
Corps can determine whether the funds currently available are 
sufficient to cover all costs associated with the suspension and 
termination of these contracts.
    How does the USACE, plan to keep this committee informed on its 
progress to resolve these payment issues to small businesses negatively 
impacted by these contradicting directives?
    Answer. Upon request, the Corps can inform the committee as 
termination settlement negotiations for border barrier contractors are 
finalized and any required contract modifications executed. Any 
payments made by the Corps will be to prime contractors. Please note 
that most small businesses working on USACE border barrier contracts 
are subcontractors.
                                 ______
                                 
            Questions Submitted by Senator Susan M. Collins
    Question. Proposed Change to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Maine 
General Permit. I have heard concerns from constituents in Maine about 
changes proposed by the New England District (NAE) to the Maine General 
Permit. The NAE uses state general permits in each New England state 
rather than the nationwide regulatory permits. NAE is proposing updates 
to the Mitigation Standard Operating Procedures in a manner that would 
significantly affect the Maine General Permit, which was last updated 
in 2020. Under the changes being developed, the threshold at which 
compensatory mitigation for adverse impacts to aquatic resources is 
triggered in Maine would be reduced from 15,000 square feet to 5,000 
square feet. My constituents are concerned about the financial burden 
of these changes on many Maine residents and small businesses. 
According to one licensed site evaluator in Maine, if a home builder in 
Cumberland County wants to construct a driveway to his property that 
has a 5,200 square foot wetland impact, the home builder would owe the 
Corps $75 for the permit fee. Under the changes being developed, that 
same home builder would be faced with $30,576 in wetland compensation 
fees in addition to the $75 permit fee. NAE has told local stakeholders 
that this change is necessary because approximately 110 acres of 
wetlands, representing 0.00048% of the land area in Maine, have been 
lost over the last 5 years without compensatory mitigation.
    While conserving our wetlands is important, is the Corps aware of 
the substantial financial impacts this change to the mitigation 
threshold would have on Maine residents and businesses?
    Answer. The New England District has considered the regulated 
public's needs in its determination to modify its mitigation policy. 
The Corps' regulatory mission requires that the Corps balance 
reasonable development while protecting aquatic resources. The change 
to establish the compensatory mitigation requirement for impacts 
greater than 5,000 aligns with neighboring states and the Corps' 
national program. This consistency brings predictability, which has 
tremendous public service value. The Corps' mitigation policy does not 
preclude the need to consider mitigation requirements on a case-by-case 
basis. The Corps will make every effort to ensure that we work closely 
with the public during this transition.
    The fee referenced by the site evaluator is for the purchase of 
mitigation credits through Maine's compensatory mitigation provider, 
Maine Natural Resource Conservation Program (MNRCP). The Corps' 
affiliation with MNRCP is to ensure that the compensatory mitigation 
projects that are constructed as a result of the sale of credits are 
consistent with the 2008 Mitigation Rule. Applicants sometimes prefer 
this mitigation method as it is quick and shifts the responsibility to 
provide compensatory mitigation to MNRCP. However, there is no 
requirement from the Corps to utilize this program.
    Permit applicants can propose their own compensatory mitigation for 
impacts to aquatic resources. This can be fulfilled by restoring, 
enhancing, creating, or preserving wetlands onsite or offsite. 
Compensatory mitigation is only an option if unavoidable adverse 
impacts remain after all appropriate and practicable avoidance and 
minimization has been achieved.
    Question. Why is every state in New England required to have the 
same permit when the states have such vastly different financial, 
geographical, and natural resources?
    Answer. Every New England state operates under a different set of 
General Permits that considers the economic, geographic, and resource 
differences across the states, yet the programs of each state need to 
operate within the same framework within the New England district. 
General Permits can be tailored to a specific state to ensure the 
process is streamlined and reduces duplication with the State agencies. 
General Permits recognize the role that states play in addressing 
certain components of the Corps regulatory review, including compliance 
with laws governing water quality certification and coastal zone 
management. The General Permits are available for impacts that will not 
result in more than minimal individual and cumulative impacts to the 
aquatic environment.
    The New England District's accountability for consistency and 
transparency is not limited to the six states in its area of 
responsibility, but also with the other 41 Corps districts and nine 
divisions located throughout the United States and associated 
territories. In 2007, the Corps published the Nationwide Permits 
(NWPs), establishing that compensatory mitigation would be required 
when adverse impacts exceed 0.10 acre (4,356 SF) to ensure that no more 
than minimal individual and cumulative impacts occur. This standard 
remains in current NWPs. The NWPs mitigation threshold allows for 
reasonable development and provides a tool for avoidance, minimization, 
and compensation. The revision of the district's mitigation standard 
operating procedures would allow the district to be more consistent 
with national policy and ensure the continued use of all New England 
district General Permits.
    Question. Camp Ellis Beach. Section 8342 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 2022, enacted in December 2022, increased the 
maximum amount of Federal funds that may be expended for the Camp Ellis 
Continuing Authorities Program project in Saco, Maine. Work cannot 
begin on this project until a Project Partnership Agreement is signed.
    What is the timeline for signing the Project Partnership Agreement?
    Answer. The Corps is expeditiously developing a Project Partnership 
Agreement (PPA). Upon approval, the Corps will provide it to the City 
of Saco for review and execution.
    Question. Can you commit to prioritizing this project?
    Answer. Yes.

                          SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS

    Senator Britt. We stand adjourned. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 3:04 p.m., Wednesday, April 26, the 
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene subject to the call of 
the Chair.]