[Senate Hearing 118-169]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]







                                                        S. Hrg. 118-169

                  THE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT
                 OF 2024: NON-FEDERAL STAKEHOLDER VIEWS

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

                                HEARING

                               before the

                              COMMITTEE ON
                      ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             JULY 20, 2023

                               __________

  Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works









[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]









        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov  
                             _________
                              
                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
                 
54-124 PDF               WASHINGTON : 2023
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
               COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                  THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
          SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Ranking Member

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland         KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont             CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island     MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon                 PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts      JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan            ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
MARK KELLY, Arizona                  DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
ALEX PADILLA, California             LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania

               Courtney Taylor, Democratic Staff Director
               Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director 
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
               
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

                             JULY 20, 2023
                           OPENING STATEMENTS

Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware..     1
Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West 
  Virginia.......................................................     3

                               WITNESSES

Aryan-Zahlan, Dina, P.E., Chief Harbor Engineer of the 
  Engineering Division, Port of Los Angeles......................     6
    Prepared statement...........................................     8
Paulsen, Joel, P.E., Executive Director, Metro Flood Diversion 
  Authority; Fargo, North Dakota.................................    29
    Prepared statement...........................................    31
Pratt, Tony, Executive Director, Bay Beach Association...........    36
    Prepared statement...........................................    38
    Response to an additional question from Senator Cardin.......    42
Blanchard, Chris, Executive Director, Cooper Consolidated........    44
    Prepared statement...........................................    46

                          ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

Statement for the Record of the American Society of Civil 
  Engineers, July 20, 2023.......................................    72

 
 THE WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2024: NON-FEDERAL STAKEHOLDER 
                                 VIEWS

                              ----------                              


                        THURSDAY, JULY 20, 2023

                                       U.S. Senate,
                 Committee on Environment and Public Works,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m. in room 
406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R. Carper 
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
    Present: Senators Carper, Capito, Kelly, Cramer, Boozman, 
and Ricketts.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER, 
            U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

    Senator Carper. Good morning, everyone. I am pleased to 
call this hearing to order today.
    I want to begin by taking a moment to acknowledge our 
Ranking Member, Senator Capito, other members of our Committee, 
and our staffs on both sides of the aisle as we commence 
discussions of the 2024 Water Resources Development Act, 
affectionately known to all of us as WRDA. And I want to thank 
all the folks that are here and those who aren't here, but have 
a hand in this, not just this year, but over the years, and for 
your commitment to working together on water resources 
infrastructure and solutions in a bipartisan way.
    As many of you will recall, the biennial WRDA legislation 
is an opportunity for us to once again consider the policies, 
the projects, and the programs of the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers. Our most recent WRDA legislation passed the Senate, 
as you may remember, in 2022 with a vote of 93 to 1. I will say 
it again: 93 to 1. To the amazement of many, our bill became 
the engine that literally helped carry the annual defense 
authorization bill to President Biden's desk. Ninety-three to 
one. That is a level of bipartisanship not often seen in 
Congress these days.
    Today, in that same bipartisan spirit, we start WRDA 2024 
by hearing from several stakeholders who work closely with the 
Army Corps of Engineers to carry out that agency's multiple 
missions. As we know, the Corps collaborates with non-Federal 
sponsors and stakeholders across the country, including States, 
including Tribes, including the industry associations and local 
organizations as well. These partnerships maximize the benefits 
of Army Corps studies and projects and ensure that projects 
address community needs.
    As many on this Committee have heard me say more than a few 
times, everything I do, I know I can do better. I think the 
same is true for all of us. Today, we are particularly 
interested in hearing from our witnesses about your 
experiences, your perspectives on working with the Army Corps 
of Engineers: What is going well, and where there are some 
opportunities for improvement.
    As we begin the WRDA process with this hearing, I can't 
overstate the importance of collaboration between the Army 
Corps of Engineers and its non-Federal partners. These 
partnerships are essential, especially as our Nation continues 
to experience increasingly powerful storms, more devastating 
floods, and more intense and frequent droughts due to climate 
change.
    For example, just last week, we witnessed catastrophic 
flooding in Vermont and upstate New York. I have heard from our 
colleagues, maybe you have heard from our colleagues too, from 
Vermont and New York what they have experienced and what their 
constituents have experienced and are experiencing.
    In the first half of 2023, the Federal Government responded 
to more than 30 extreme weather events, including the record 
breaking heat wave in much of the country. I am told that the 
temperature on our planet a week ago may have been the highest 
temperature on our planet ever. That certainly got my 
attention. I suspect it has gotten the attention of all the 
rest of us, as well. This is staggering news when we consider 
that just 30 years ago, we expected to respond not to 30 
extreme weather events, but to maybe two in the course of a 
year.
    We will discuss today how the Army Corps' projects serve as 
our primary line of defense against these now all too frequent 
events and help protect vulnerable communities as well as our 
economy. The Corps' work to enhance and restore our Nation's 
coastline demonstrates how the agency's mission is critical in 
the fight not just against climate change, but certainly there, 
but increasingly powerful storms lead to the erosion of 
beaches, which make coastal communities more vulnerable to 
flooding. The Corps safeguards coastal towns from flooding by 
restoring, or ``nourishing,'' beaches.
    Coastal restoration not only helps to stabilize those 
beaches, but also prevents saltwater intrusion into inland 
areas, including valuable agricultural lands. Agriculture, 
along with tourism, are primary industries in my State along 
with tourism, and they are primary industries in many other 
States, as well. That is a major reason why, like so many other 
coastal States, we are so grateful to the Corps for its 
restoration of the entire Atlantic Ocean coastline in our 
little State, a massive project that was completed just a few 
weeks ago, I am told. This morning, we are going to hear a 
little bit more about that work to restore our bay beaches from 
Tony Pratt.
    Tony, welcome; it is nice to see you again.
    It is not just the coastal towns that need protection from 
flooding, though. Last year, a spring blizzard hit North 
Dakota, leading to the worst flooding, I am told, of the Red 
River in more than a decade. That flooding resulted in 
considerable damage not only to homes, but to businesses and to 
agricultural fields. The incident could have been even more 
devastating if not for the Army Corps' flood mitigation 
measures like the Fargo-Moorhead project, which we are going to 
hear about here today.
    And the Army Corps' vital work is not limited to protecting 
against extreme weather events. The agency and its partners 
also maintain our Nation's inland waterways, as many of us 
know, and navigation systems for our ports, which play a 
critical role in keeping our Nation's economy moving. In fact, 
99 percent of our overseas trade moves through channels that 
the Army Corps of Engineers maintains. That is worth repeating. 
Ninety-nine percent of our overseas trade moves through 
channels that the Army Corps maintains. Without the Army Corps, 
we would be dead in the water, and so would our economy. 
Literally.
    With that in mind, we are going to hear today from the Port 
of Los Angeles, the City of Angels, which is the largest port 
in the United States, handling some 20 percent of all incoming 
cargo shipments to our country.
    We are also going to hear about the Upper Ohio Navigation 
Project. I am a graduate of Ohio State. I have a special 
interest in hearing about that. Thanks to receiving more than 
$857 million from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, this 
project is repairing locks on the Ohio River, which facilitate 
commerce and support the economies of both Ohio and our 
neighboring Pennsylvania.
    Last Congress, through critical funding from the Bipartisan 
Infrastructure Law and WRDA authorizations, we made historic 
progress in advancing the Army Corps' ability to support 
infrastructure that is vital to commerce and vital to job 
creation. WRDA empowered the Corps to better account for 
climate change, to also support disadvantaged communities, and 
to improve infrastructure while also protecting our 
environment.
    Having said that, we still have more work to do. Today's 
hearing will allow us to assess the Corps' progress from prior 
WRDA legislation. It will also allow us to determine where and 
how Congress can assist the Corps with our water resources 
needs in WRDA 2024.
    Let me just close by saying that our Committee members and 
our staffs on both sides of the aisle look forward to hearing 
testimony from our witnesses today as our Committee sets 
priorities for the next authorization.
    Three of our four witnesses are in person. We will be 
joined remotely by a fourth witness.
    With that, let me turn to Senator Capito. Again, our thanks 
to you and your staff for helping us tee up this hearing and 
for all the great work we have done on WRDA.

        OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, 
          U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA

    Senator Capito. Thank you.
    Thank you, Chairman Carper, and welcome to our witnesses.
    As the Chairman has said, our hearing serves as the 
Committee's official kickoff for the development of the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2024. Since 2014, this Committee 
has kept to the biennial schedule of passing bipartisan 
legislation that authorizes water resources studies and 
projects and also sets our national policies for the Civil 
Works Program of the U.S. Corps of Engineers. I look forward to 
continuing this track record for next year.
    This hearing will provide us with on the ground 
perspectives from a diverse group of stakeholders who 
understand how this legislation advances water resources 
projects across our country. At prior hearings, my colleagues 
and I have heard me describe the successes of our most recent 
water resources legislation of WRDA 2022. So I won't belabor 
that point, but instead, simply remind my colleagues that WRDA 
2022 authorized a significant number of new projects and 
studies, made important modifications to existing projects, and 
included several important policy changes that will help the 
Corps better succeed in the Civil Works Program.
    The legislation also included a number of provisions that 
are important to my home State of West Virginia. These 
provisions will facilitate critical flood risk management 
projects and environmental infrastructure projects across the 
State.
    The staff at the Corps and the Assistant Secretary's office 
are hard at work implementing the provisions of prior WRDA 
legislation, and I want to thank them for their tireless 
efforts.
    Last week, Chairman Carper and I sent a letter to our 
Senate colleagues soliciting requests for WRDA 2024. I look 
forward to reviewing the proposals for the Committee's 
consideration in the coming months. We always want to listen to 
our Senate colleagues and how they are feeling about this as we 
share with our colleagues.
    We do not anticipate that WRDA 2024 will be a policy heavy 
bill. Instead, the bill will focus on authorizing new or 
modifying existing studies and projects, as well as making 
needed technical changes to prior provisions in order to 
reflect the intent of Congress. This limited scope will enable 
the Corps to fully implement the provisions of prior WRDA 
legislation and help ensure that the agency can be responsive 
to the water resources needs of all communities.
    As I have said previously, it is important that any WRDA 
bill supports the timely and efficient delivery of water 
resources projects, while continuing to meet our national 
priorities. Flexibility is key to ensuring that the Corps can 
identify and carry out solutions that are tailored to address 
the needs of each community. Our Nation's water resources 
challenges are diverse, and communities know more about their 
unique needs than the policymakers here in Washington, DC.
    We must also continue to preserve the role of non-Federal 
sponsors in the project delivery process and maintain the 
Corps' focus on its three primary missions: Navigation, flood 
and coastal storm risk management, and aquatic ecosystem 
restoration.
    Last month, the Committee held a hearing on one of those 
missions: Aquatic ecosystem restoration. At the hearing, we 
heard from non-Federal sponsors about three ongoing or 
completed aquatic ecosystem restoration projects. Our 
witnesses' project specific stories helped us understand how we 
can balance our water resources needs and maximize the use of 
taxpayer dollars. I look forward to continuing that dialogue.
    Today, we will discuss four projects in two other primary 
mission areas: Navigation and flood and coastal storm risk 
management. The projects highlighted in our hearings last month 
and today collectively showcase the Corps' really wide ranging 
portfolio of projects and their overall value to our Nation. In 
my opinion, these projects demonstrate the different needs 
across the country, and why maintaining a balance across all of 
the Corps' main missions is so very important.
    While aquatic ecosystem restoration projects produce many 
benefits, the importance of flood and storm risk management 
projects and navigation projects cannot be overstated, 
certainly in my region of the country, for sure, as we are 
right on that Ohio River. The protection of life and property 
while bolstering our economy must continue to be prioritized as 
the Corps develops and executes projects.
    We will also hear about the successes that are possible 
when the Corps and non-Federal sponsors work collaboratively to 
find innovative solutions. Insight from completed and ongoing 
projects is important to informing what, if any, modifications 
are needed to the Corps' existing authorities in future WRDA 
legislation.
    I am hopeful that we can take the lessons learned from the 
projects discussed today and use them to advance water 
resources projects of all types across the country. As I have 
said previously, the work of the Corps is more critical now 
than ever. The testimony we will hear will help this Committee 
as it continues its integral role in improving our Nation's 
infrastructure.
    Mr. Chairman, I do look forward to continuing our 
partnership on this important legislation. And I yield back my 
time.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for getting our hearing going 
with a smile on our faces. Thank you.
    I thank my colleagues for joining us. We will have others 
who will join us. We have a bunch of stuff going on on the 
floor today, as you may know, and a number of committees are 
meeting. We will look forward to their arrival and 
participation in this hearing as well.
    My thanks again to the members of our staffs, Senator 
Capito, you and your team, to our folks on the majority side, 
we are very grateful. This wouldn't be happening without your 
efforts.
    Now, we are going to turn to our panel of witnesses. Thank 
you all for joining us today, three in person and one remotely, 
I believe.
    The first person that I am going to introduce of our 
witnesses is, I think, joining us remotely. I am not sure where 
she is.
    Dina Aryan-Zahlan, Dina, where are you today?
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. Good morning. I am in the Port of Los 
Angeles here in Los Angeles, California.
    Senator Carper. Good. It is wonderful to see you.
    Dina has worked with the Port of Los Angeles for more than 
20 years. Her experience, or rather, expertise, has been 
instrumental, I am told, in many of the improvements at the 
port over those years.
    She is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 
American Public Works Association, and the Project Management 
Institute, and was named Woman of the Year in 2022 by the Los 
Angeles Chapter of Women's Transportation Seminar.
    Thank you for joining us today. Please proceed with your 
statement. Thanks, Dina.

STATEMENT OF DINA ARYAN-ZAHLAN, P.E., CHIEF HARBOR ENGINEER OF 
         THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, PORT OF LOS ANGELES

    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. Thank you.
    Good morning, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Capito, and 
to the members of the Committee; thank you to Senator Padilla 
for inviting the Port of Los Angeles today to testify. My name 
is Dina Aryan-Zahlan, Chief Harbor Engineer for the Port of Los 
Angeles.
    As mentioned, the Port of Los Angeles is the Nation's 
largest and busiest container port. Together, with the Port of 
Long Beach, we make up the San Pedro Bay Port Complex. San 
Pedro Bay Port Complex handles nearly 40 percent of all 
containerized imports and 30 percent of all containerized 
exports for the United States. Cargo through the complex flows 
to and from over 160 countries across the globe and reaches 
every congressional district in the Nation.
    In 2022, the Port of Los Angeles managed 9.9 million 
container units, which facilitated $311 billion in trade and 
nearly 1.6 million jobs nationwide. I have included the trade 
value impacts to the States that each Committee member 
represents as part of my written testament.
    Economic activity at the ports and inland ports generates 
many direct and indirect jobs, and it is an important source of 
tax revenue for communities. The more goods and passengers that 
travel through seaports year to year, the more infrastructure 
provisions and associated services are required. That is why 
WRDA continues to be important for the maritime industry.
    When our supply chain works well, they operate largely 
unnoticed, delivering essential goods, creating jobs, and 
driving economic growth and prosperity across the Nation. 
However, this has not been the case for the last 3 and a half 
years due to the pandemic.
    Working with the Biden administration, Congress, the 
longshore work force, and other key stakeholders, we 
successfully resolved the backlog of container vessels at our 
Nation's ports, handled record breaking cargo volumes while 
implementing environmental initiatives that move the San Pedro 
Bay Port Complex closer to our zero emission goals.
    A well functioning supply chain is in the national 
interest, and effective Federal support to improve the 
performance of our supply chain is dependent on the passage of 
the Water Resources Development Act every 2 years and the Army 
Corps' full implementation of WRDA 2020.
    Across the country, the Corps plays a critical role, as 
mentioned, protecting, enhancing, and restoring coastal and 
inland waterways from climate impacted flooding and ultimately 
supports our national intermodal freight system. In turn, a 
well maintained freight system supports our economy by lowering 
costs to businesses and consumers and increasing 
competitiveness for American ports.
    That is why it is important for Congress to consider WRDA 
biennially to provide consistent support from the Corps for 
ports that require frequent dredging to maintain their 
dimensions, which has been critical for moving cargo through 
the national intermodal freight system. It will benefit ports, 
harbors, and by extension, the entire national supply chain.
    It is equally important to provide the operations and 
maintenance of naturally deepwater ports, like the Port of Los 
Angeles. We don't require major dredging maintenance. However, 
the Corps does have ongoing projects at our ports requiring 
some dredging needs and routine wharf maintenance, like the 
replacement of piles, fenders, decks, and wharf structural 
improvements. To that end, we appreciate our colleagues at the 
Army Corps Los Angeles District Office, and their ongoing 
partnership and collaborative efforts have been crucial to 
maintaining operations here at the port.
    We appreciate the work this Committee has done to open the 
use of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund through the passage of 
WRDA 2020. This landmark legislation included reforms for full 
use of HMTF revenues, a fair and equitable allocation framework 
for donor and energy ports and expanded uses that cover our 
maintenance needs.
    As a donor port, each year the Port of Los Angeles accounts 
for over $200 million per year in the HMTF revenue yet has 
traditionally received a small fraction of that in return 
investment. We thank Congress for including in last year's 
budget and the Corps for including in their 2023 work plan $56 
million for Section 2106, the Donor and Energy Transfer Port 
Program.
    Also, the new expanded uses definition established by WRDA 
2020 assisted donor ports like Los Angeles by funding in water 
maintenance projects that are needed most. We are able to 
access the $26.6 million in unspent Section 2106 funds with 
this reform. The port has spent these funds within 2 years and 
has identified wharf repairs and seismic upgrades, totaling 
nearly $2.5 billion of newly eligible container wharf projects 
for expanded use funding.
    Unfortunately, the 2023 work plan did not include the HMTF 
revenue allocation providing 12 percent of HMTF revenue to 
donor and energy ports that was adopted by this Committee in 
WRDA 2020. We do look forward to working closely with this 
Committee, appropriators, and the Corps to incorporate all the 
reforms authorized in WRDA 2020 moving ahead.
    When funding is allocated, the port will be able to invest 
in expanded use operations and maintenance projects, which 
include repair to damaged concrete wharfs at seven of our 
container terminals, replacement of deteriorated berthing 
structures at five marine oil terminals, and to seismically 
upgrade our dry bulk terminals, our cruise ship, and ferry ship 
facilities.
    When the Port of Los Angeles does well, so does the Nation. 
Once again, thank you for the opportunity to testify on the 
importance of WRDA. With that, I will conclude my testimony, 
and would be happy to entertain any questions from the 
Committee.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Aryan-Zahlan follows:]  
    
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

   
    Senator Carper. Ms. Aryan-Zahlan, thank you for that 
testimony. You are out on the West Coast. What time is it out 
there this morning?
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. It is a little after 6:30 in the morning.
    Senator Carper. What time did you get up?
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. A quarter to 5.
    Senator Carper. What time did you go to bed?
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. In any event, we are glad you are here. We 
are missing you in person but delighted you could join us from 
afar.
    Our next witness is going to be introduced by our colleague 
from North Dakota, Senator Cramer. He is going to introduce 
Joel Paulsen of the Metro Flood Diversion Authority in Fargo, 
North Dakota.
    Senator Cramer. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking 
Member Capito, for having this important hearing. I enjoyed, as 
always, working with you and Senator Cardin and the other 
members of the Committee on the last couple of WRDA bills, as 
well as all things infrastructure, evidence that is really is a 
bipartisan effort.
    I was also reminded, as Senator Capito was emphasizing, the 
2 year authorizations, back to my freshman term in the House 
with you, Shelley, you were in the House at that time when 
Chairman Shuster insisted on returning to that discipline of 2 
year authorizations. We have a lot of things in law that we 
don't do, but we have stuck to that one really, really well. 
Kudos again to this Committee for that.
    I also remember his insistence on forming a public-private 
partnership program, which is what is going to be highlighted 
today by Joel Paulsen, so thank you for the opportunity to 
introduce Joel.
    As you said, he is the Executive Director of the Metro 
Flood Diversion Authority. We just call it the Diversion 
Authority, and I will, from now on, encompassing Fargo, North 
Dakota, and Moorhead, Minnesota. The two States, North Dakota 
and Minnesota, are separated by the Red River of the north. It 
is a multi-State project for sure.
    He has had this position at the Diversion Authority since 
2019. He is the first to have it, following an extensive--this 
is always fun--following an extensive nationwide search, we 
found someone local. Isn't that always the best?
    In this role, he oversees the delivery, operations, and 
maintenance of the non-Federal portions of the Fargo-Moorhead 
Area Flood Diversion Project, including managing the 
construction of $1 billion, 30 miles, of diversion channel to 
carry Red River flood waters around the Fargo-Moorhead metro 
during severe floods. Over the decades and centuries, there 
have been several.
    Joel has more than 20 years of experience in engineering, 
civil works, and traffic projects. He has worked on a wide 
range of projects, including utility replacements, 
transportation improvements, levee systems, and community 
planning. He has served on the Moorhead City Council, almost as 
tough as being on church council, but that is where the rubber 
meets the road in politics. The Moorhead City Council was 
appointed by Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton to the FM, Fargo-
Moorhead, Area Flood Diversion Task Force in 2018.
    As a member of the task force, he is one of 16 local 
residents and experts working to find solutions to achieve 
permanent flood protection for Fargo, Moorhead, and the 
surrounding communities. He holds a bachelor's degree in civil 
engineering from North Dakota State University.
    Joel, welcome, and we are glad you are here.
    Senator Carper. Thanks very much for providing that 
introduction.
    What was the role that Mark Dayton played in your life?
    Mr. Paulsen. So Mark Dayton appointed a group of Minnesota 
residents to basically find solutions for permanent flood 
protection. We were at a stalemate with a number of mitigation 
programs and impacts for the flood program, and the Governors 
of North Dakota, Governor Burgum and Governor Dayton, came 
together to basically find a solution, and I was part of that 
task force.
    Senator Carper. That is great. Mark used to be one of our 
colleagues here. I think he served 6 years and then became 
Governor. He is a lucky guy.
    Senator Cramer. Some people do it that direction. Others go 
the other way.
    Senator Carper. That is what I hear.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. We are happy you are here. Please proceed 
with your testimony. Thank you.

  STATEMENT OF JOEL PAULSEN, P.E., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, METRO 
         FLOOD DIVERSION AUTHORITY; FARGO, NORTH DAKOTA

    Mr. Paulsen. Good morning, Chairman Carper and Ranking 
Member Capito and members of the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works. My name is Joel Paulsen, and I am 
the Executive Director of the Metro Flood Diversion Authority 
in the Red River Valley of North Dakota and Minnesota.
    I want to thank you all, and especially Senator Cramer, for 
inviting me to testify today as you begin crafting the Water 
Resource Development Act of 2024. Biennial passage of WRDA is 
crucial to advancing economically significant and life saving 
water resource projects like ours.
    I would like to first set the stage for the purpose and the 
need of our project. Plans for a diversion project started 
after the record setting 1997 flood just north of us, in Grand 
Forks, in the area of the Red River Valley. Ultimately, this 
flood caused $3.5 billion in damages to the region, and the 
Fargo-Moorhead community knew that something needed to be done 
to prevent this repeat of catastrophe.
    Our own major flood occurred in 2009, and we continue to 
live with threat of spring floods annually. The Metro Flood 
Diversion Authority was tasked with protecting the Fargo, North 
Dakota and Moorhead, Minnesota communities, and planning began 
for what would become the Fargo-Moorhead Area Diversion 
Project.
    Overall, this $3.2 billion project adds water control 
structures and a 30 mile stormwater diversion channel designed 
to divert water around the Fargo-Moorhead community during 
extreme yet increasingly frequent flood events. Additionally, 
the project includes 13 levee modifications, 27 lift stations, 
multiple bridge raises, and other infrastructure improvements.
    Completing a project of this magnitude under an expedited 
timeframe was nearly impossible, given the uncertainties of the 
conventional Federal funding process and the substantial Corps 
backlog. Again, our threat of serious flooding is annual. We 
needed to find a faster and more innovative path to project 
delivery.
    Thanks to the great work of this Committee, the 2014 Water 
Resources Development Act provided us with an exciting but 
untested solution: A new public-private partnership program 
through the Corps of Engineers. By allowing us to bundle 
various pots of public funding alongside private financing, as 
well as providing the MFDA with control over the program 
delivery, this P3 program has allowed us to save over $300 
million in construction costs and over 10 years in project 
delivery.
    With Jacobs as our project manager, we move forward with 
the P3 process where we leveraged our existing sales tax to 
attract private financing. In addition, we were thrilled to 
find other Federal partners to provide over $800 million in 
additional Federal financing, namely the USDOT through private 
activity bonds and the EPA through a WIFIA loan.
    As the very first Army Corps of Engineers P3 project, there 
have been countless small steps and learning opportunities 
along the way. While I won't be able to address everything in 
these remarks, I will leave the Committee with some initial 
thoughts for you to consider for your next WRDA bill.
    First, we encourage the Corps of Engineers to develop a 
user guide for new P3 applicants, a broad ``lessons learned'' 
document and a set of discussions to help set the tone and 
expectations for other non-Federal sponsors.
    Utilizing a P3 is easier if done early in the process. This 
means being able to identify a viable financial model early 
enough in the process to provide private sector bidders with 
confidence. The same holds true for environmental permitting 
and being able to show a low amount of risk to the bidders.
    It is also important to know that the process of getting to 
a final project partnership agreement took hundreds of hours of 
meetings between our team and the private sector financers to 
create a viable financial plan, numerous environmental permits, 
and corresponding mitigation plans. This required a true 
restructuring of the Corps' role in planning and delivery of 
flood risk management projects.
    Ultimately, this was a learning process for us and the 
Corps, and proper education of the P3 delivery model is 
necessary to ensure future projects continue being a success.
    Thank you again, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Capito, 
and members of the Committee for this opportunity. I look 
forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Paulsen follows:]  
    
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator Carper. And we look forward to your answers. Thanks 
for that testimony and for joining us today.
    Next, Tony Pratt, who is well known to a lot of us in 
Delaware.
    It is very nice to see you again, Tony. Thank you for a lot 
of great work you have done over the years and for coming. You 
are not a stranger here, so welcome back.
    Tony is today the Executive Director of the Bay Beach 
Association, and he is here, again, from the First State. Tony 
also serves as the Executive Director of the American Shore and 
Beach Preservation Association and has a long history of 
service in the First State, including as part of the leadership 
of the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and 
Environmental Control.
    Tony, you are now recognized for your statement. Welcome. 
Please proceed.

                   STATEMENT OF TONY PRATT, 
           EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BAY BEACH ASSOCIATION

    Mr. Pratt. Chairman Carper and Ranking Member Capito, nice 
to see you today. Members of the Committee, good to see you. It 
is nice to be here again.
    I have been before you a few times in the past, and I have 
always enjoyed it. You have always inspired me to speak from my 
brain and not from my nose. I am going to do my best today not 
to read everything here and emulate your style, sir.
    I want to congratulate this Committee for its return to 
biennial WRDAs. It is very important to the Nation that that 
occur. We track that between 2000 and 2014, there were exactly 
two WRDAs, and by returning to the work of the Nation in these 
WRDAs, it is very important, and we very much appreciate it. I 
think the Nation appreciates it.
    I want to talk a little bit about a subject, Senator 
Carper, that you have brought up and Senator Capito too, that 
the Nation suffers pretty dramatically from natural hazards 
every week, it seems like. There has not been a week in the 
last year that we have not seen a hazard of one sort or 
another, a natural hazard, that has not made the national news. 
It is snowpack in the winter; it is snow melt in the spring; it 
is drought; it is heat; it is forest fires. It is any number of 
occasions. We had last week, and it has been referenced earlier 
today, the event in Vermont and New York last week. A thousand 
year event, it was calculated to be. The Nation has a 
tremendous threat from natural hazards.
    My role here today is to talk about one I have spent most 
of my career, 40+ years, working on flood risk management along 
the coast. Senator Carper has been a champion as our treasurer, 
as our long member of the House of Representatives. We always 
thought he was a very important person in that position. Two 
Senators, one Representative, it was a very interesting 
situation. He had such power in the State of Delaware.
    He became our Governor and became our Senator and is now 
our senior Senator. Served us for many years, and Senator 
Carper has observed for many, many years the importance of 
protecting the coast.
    The example I wanted to use today in my testimony is the 
Bay Beach Association's work that has been ongoing, which is 
protecting dozens and dozens and dozens of miles of Delaware 
Bay, because through the 2022 WRDA authorizations, this has 
gone forward.
    I use an example of how we should regard the importance of 
coastal dunes and beaches. The National Wildlife Refuge, Prime 
Hook Refuge had a breach in the dunes that occurred many years 
ago. It was not attended to immediately. It elevated the tide 
back in the wetlands area, resulting in not only massive 
destruction of the wetlands themselves, but also very critical 
loss of forest habitat along the edge of the marsh.
    Almost even more concerning is how far inland the saltwater 
went, contaminating farm fields, farm fields that are important 
for production of food crop as well as important chicken food 
that is a major industry of the State of Delaware. The poultry 
industry is a big driver, and we had salt inundation in the 
fields, agricultural fields that really impeded the ability of 
a farmer to produce product for many, many years after that.
    We have before us an opportunity in the 2024 WRDA to 
further the work of the Corps of Engineers. I think that has 
been observed. This is going to be catching up, I think, on 
many of the authorizations that have gone out before, the 
change in policies, new authorizations, but policy changes.
    I would like to leave you all with a couple of thoughts, 
two recommendations for enhancing the Nation's defense against 
coastal storms and sea level rise.
    Through previous WRDA bills, Congress provided a 
sophisticated toolbox of authorities to help USACE meet our 
most pressing coastal challenges. However, there is a lag in 
implementation guidance and authorized studies, often never 
receiving funding. Please do all you can to remedy the 
challenges of implementation so all of your good work can 
actually benefit those of us who work with USACE Districts on 
frontline problems.
    Help break the cycle of paying for the cost of hazards 
after the fact and avoid the damages by investing before the 
event. This could be helped by conducting comprehensive risk 
assessments of natural disasters that factor in the 
aftereffects of disaster recovery. Natural disasters, whether 
they be floods, storms, fires, tornadoes, earthquakes, extreme 
heat, or drought are life threatening and life altering events. 
The post-event cost of human suffering is very real, but is 
absent from the Federal Government's view on recovery and 
rebuilding costs.
    I want to close my testimony by thanking this Committee for 
its steadfast commitment to our Nation's coastlines, all other 
flooding and water resources problems, and related threats to 
homeland security through biennial passage of WRDA. The 
examples I have shared today may be just for one State. 
However, you could find similar examples across the country. 
Thank you for taking these challenges head on.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Pratt follows:]  
    
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
    
    Senator Carper. Thank you.
    Senator Cardin usually sits right here on my left. He is 
also stuck with me on the Finance Committee; there, he sits on 
my right hand. He is one of two Senators from Maryland.
    As Tony knows, Delaware and Maryland are part of the 
DelMarVa Peninsula. The ``Va'' is Virginia, and a lot of the 
issues that Tony has spoken to with respect to beach erosion 
and replenishment, the loss of valuable agriculture land, 
especially, is not only of concern to us, but also to our 
neighbors.
    I would be remiss if I didn't note that one of the people 
who preceded Ben in the U.S. Senate is a woman whose birthday 
is today, Barbara Mikulski. I don't know if Barb is out there 
listening, tuned in or anything, but she is alive and kicking, 
and there was a nice reception room in the Capitol that was 
named after her in her honor last year. She and I were on good 
terms. Sometimes we weren't, but usually we were. When we were 
on good terms, she would describe us as DelMarVa buddies. When 
we weren't on such good terms, she had other words she might 
use.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Carper. Chris, I don't know how you follow this, 
but let me just say last, but not least, Chris Blanchard, the 
Treasurer of the Waterways Council and Executive Director of 
Cooper Consolidated, a firm that handles cargo and provides 
services on the inland waterways systems.
    Mr. Blanchard is directly familiar with the importance of 
the extensive system, including the upper Ohio River.
    Mr. Blanchard, welcome, and please proceed with your 
statement. Thank you.

                 STATEMENT OF CHRIS BLANCHARD, 
            EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COOPER CONSOLIDATED

    Mr. Blanchard. Chairman Carper, Ranking Member Capito, and 
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
speak today on the benefits of the Nation's inland waterways 
transportation system and the importance of Water Resources 
Development Acts.
    I will focus on the improvements for inland waterways made 
through various WRDAs and why these changes help create and 
sustain jobs, increase efficiency and safety, reduce emissions, 
and make our inland waterway systems more resilient for 
decades.
    My name is Chris Blanchard, and I serve as the Executive 
Director of Cooper Consolidated, an asset based provider of 
midstream stevedoring, barge, marine, and logistics services. 
With operations from the mouth of the Mississippi River to 
Baton Rouge, we provide cargo handling and movements throughout 
the entire U.S. inland waterway system. I am also treasurer of 
the Waterways Council, the national public policy organization 
that advocates for a modern and well maintained inland 
waterways transportation system.
    The building block commodities that transit the inland 
waterways include energy products, fertilizer, grain to feed 
the U.S. and the world, sand and salt for icy roads, aggregate 
materials for constructions, booster rockets for NASA, wind 
turbine blades, military equipment, and much more.
    Collectively, locks provide cost advantages that 
incentivize more than 500 million tons of cargo across the 
entire system of 176 lock sites, extending through 28 States. 
Nearly 11,000 miles comprise the fuel tax portion of the system 
on which commercial operators pay diesel fuel tax that is 
deposited into the dedicated Inland Waterways Trust Fund. This 
tax pays for 35 percent of the cost of new construction and 
major rehabilitation of the infrastructure on the fuel taxed 
waterways.
    In 2014, users of this system successfully advocated in 
support of raising that tax by 45 percent to its current level 
of 29 cents per gallon, which is the highest Federal fuel tax 
currently being paid by a surface transportation mode and the 
only source of revenue for the Inland Waterways Trust Fund.
    While America's inland waterway system is the best in the 
world, it is not without challenges. Our international 
competitors have significant efforts underway to enhance their 
systems and improve their position in a challenging global 
marketplace. Today, more than 80 percent of our waterway system 
operated by the Corps is over 50 years old. Some segments are 
utilizing outdated locks that are unable to accommodate today's 
standard 1,200 foot long, 15 barge tows, engaging in 
inefficient and potentially dangerous procedure of uncoupling 
the tow into two sections, requiring it to pass through the 
lock in two trips instead of one.
    As traffic on the system increases, our locks and dams 
require more attention and recapitalization to improve 
efficiency. Fortunately, this Committee prioritizes consistent 
funding for the inland waterways, facilitating the Nation's 
economic well being. These investments keep our waterways 
reliably available to all users, and as we increase our 
efficiency, the national benefit of the inland waterways will 
continue to grow.
    I want to thank this Committee for continuing to prioritize 
the biennial enactment of WRDAs. As a native Louisianian and 
avid sportsman, I assure you that your work has not gone 
unnoticed. The bipartisanship shown through WRDA bills proves 
that Congress has a significant interest in modernizing our 
Nation's civil infrastructure and maintaining America's 
advantage in global markets.
    I especially thank you for your diligence and attention to 
modernizing the cost share formula for inland waterways 
construction projects. As a result, skilled building trades 
that construct locks and dams, operators who transit the 
rivers, shippers of many commodities, and the American economy 
is stronger for it.
    While navigation often dominates the spotlight, it is 
essential to note that our industry is not the only beneficiary 
of lock and dam infrastructure. Inland waterways infrastructure 
strengthens surrounding communities through six critical 
benefits: Navigation, hydropower, flood control, recreation, 
water supply, and irrigation. We all benefit from the Inland 
Waterways Trust Fund construction projects and will continue to 
do so through the helpful policy changes made during the WRDA 
process.
    That concludes my testimony. Thank you for allowing me to 
be here today. I am happy to answer any questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Blanchard follows:] 
    
    
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
         
    Senator Carper. Mr. Blanchard, thank you for joining us, 
and thanks very much for your testimony.
    We are going to turn to some questions. I am going to lead 
it off and then yield to Senator Capito.
    First of all, our thanks to each of you.
    Dina, if you are still out there somewhere, I hope you are, 
we appreciate your joining us remotely. Your testimony is very 
much valued, and we are grateful to receive it.
    Each of you understands the critical work of the Army Corps 
of Engineers to all of our States throughout the country, from 
providing for navigable waterways, to protecting our 
communities, to addressing flood risks, and restoring our 
degraded ecosystems. We appreciate your insights, you as non-
Federal stakeholders. That is very valuable.
    My first question is a question for each of you. I am going 
to ask each of you to take a shot at it, if you would. What has 
been your experience in working with the Army Corps in general? 
How have they supported you and your efforts and your water 
infrastructure needs, and maybe an area or two where they might 
do a little better?
    Mr. Paulsen, do you want to lead off? Again, experience 
working with the Corps, how they have been supportive, and 
maybe what could they do a little better?
    Mr. Paulsen. Absolutely, Mr. Chairman.
    Overall, our partnership with the Corps is very strong. 
With the public-private partnership approach, it did require 
the Corps to change the way that they approach projects. It 
required them to provide flexibility, both in permitting and 
contracting actions. Ultimately, the relationship was one of 
risk management relationship. The Corps continued to take on 
the components of our project that were the most risky and 
maintain the Federal integrity.
    The non-Federal sponsor chose to take things that were 
marketable for private developers and the private industry and 
move toward that direction. It is really split delivery type of 
a concept. In order to do that, you need to have a very strong 
partnership, so there isn't a day that goes by where we don't 
coordinate with our colleagues at the St. Paul District to 
continue to further move this project along.
    I would like to say that this absolutely is one of the very 
rare projects that the Corps has that is under budget and on 
schedule, and the result of that is the measures that are put 
into place and the pressures provided by the public-private 
partnership.
    To answer your question, Chairman, our partnership is very 
good, and there are certainly some lessons to learn along the 
way. We had rocky times, but we always found ways to work 
through those. We did spend a lot of time with Corps policy 
folks here in Washington as we developed the concept of the 
public-private partnership, as well as the P3 Office at the 
Corps of Engineers, headed by Aaron Schneider.
    Senator Carper. Good, thank you for that.
    Tony, same question. Maybe share a little bit, if you will, 
some of your experiences in working with the Corps, not all of 
them, but maybe one or two, and maybe highlight an area where 
they have been very supportive and maybe an area where they 
could do maybe a little better. Thank you.
    Mr. Pratt. I am very happy to answer the question.
    I have had many years of experience, and I have had very, 
very positive one to one relationships with Corps individuals, 
both in the Philadelphia District, North Atlantic Division, and 
also at headquarters. I think the individual interactions have 
been top notch, and I have great respect for those individuals.
    If I were to make one comment about ways in which the Corps 
could probably provide better services, it is looking at some 
of the bureaucratic processes that are imposed upon them. I 
think the biggest issue that comes up in my mind is the stove 
piping of some of the missions, that there are theoretical 
talks of looking at navigation needs and looking at operations 
management, sediment supplies and how they could benefit flood 
risk management, and natural resources.
    There still seems to be a lot of stove piping as where the 
budgets lie and where they could do better in providing an 
overall service, but individually, great. I think there are 
some business lines that need to be looked at in a more modern 
way.
    Senator Carper. Thank you.
    Mr. Blanchard, please, same questions.
    Mr. Blanchard. Our organizations also enjoy a positive 
relationship with the Corps and a partnership. A great example 
of when our industry and the Corps worked together was last 
year. We experienced a significant drought on the inland 
waterway system, which impacted the ability to move cargo 
efficiently. And the Corps, along with the Coast Guard and 
industry, coordinated the timely deployment of dredges to 
address low spots in the river that would enable us to continue 
to move cargo as efficiently as possible. It wasn't an ideal 
situation, but they were a great partner in working with us to 
ensure that cargo kept moving and that we did not get to an all 
stop position.
    With that said, certainly, a lot of the capital projects 
for inland waterways that the Corps works on have oftentimes 
been over budget and have taken longer than anticipated, so I 
think there is definitely room for improvement there. We have 
plenty of opportunities there for improvement, but I think 
someone else would be most qualified to give specifics. We can 
certainly follow up with your staff on specific ways to improve 
that.
    Senator Carper. Good. OK, thank you.
    Before I turn it over to Senator Capito, let me turn to Ms. 
Aryan-Zahlan for your responses to the same questions, please. 
Thank you.
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. Yes, thank you, Senator. Our relationship 
with the local Corps office is strong and cooperative, and we 
are confident it will continue to be so.
    We do have a request, and we believe the intent of the 
committee of WRDA is to direct the Corps to allocate the 12 
percent for the HMTF revenue to donor and energy ports was 
clear. And we are hoping to work with the Appropriations 
Committee and the Corps to implement this provision. We would 
like to be able to utilize those funds and allocations to 
advance our critical berth maintenance projects and other in 
water improvements.
    Senator Carper. All right, thanks for that.
    Senator Capito, please.
    Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Recently, the Army Corps leadership said that your project, 
Mr. Paulsen, would have taken 10 additional years to build if 
it had used the Army Corps' traditional approach rather than 
the P3 approach. So I want to dig a little bit deeper on this, 
because this could impact what is going to happen in 2024.
    You also mentioned it came in under budget, and that is 
interesting in times of supply chain challenges that a lot of 
projects are seeing. If you could help me, I know you have the 
Federal partner, you probably have State and local. Who are 
your other partners that are non-Federal?
    Mr. Paulsen. Thank you, Senator Capito.
    Our private developer, through the P3 public-private 
partnership model, is called Red River Valley Alliance. It is a 
group, a joint venture, of three world class contractors that 
came together. We did select them through a competitive 
process, and they were the best suited to meet our needs.
    They also bring their own financing to the table, and that 
financing provides them the incentive to meet schedule, because 
they have to pay back their lenders, and we do not pay them 
until they complete whole components of the project. Components 
could be a bridge; it could be a drain inlet; it could be 
something along those lines.
    We get the benefit of getting that piece of infrastructure 
fully complete before we ever pay them a dime. That provides 
them incentive, of course, to stay on schedule, because they 
need to meet those milestones in order to repay their lenders.
    That impetus and that incentive then also applies pressure 
on the Corps, because this is a comprehensive project. We can't 
operate unless the Corps is completed with their components and 
the public-private partnership is completed with their 
components. It is really a joint venture between this private 
developer. Our role is really to oversee the private developer 
to ensure quality and that they are doing everything 
appropriately, and then coordinating issues with the Corps.
    That doesn't happen during traditional delivery projects. 
When you do a design bid build, there are a lot of 
inefficiencies, components are broken apart. There is a lack of 
innovation from the contractor, who is also the designer, on 
our public-private partnership.
    So through those enhanced efficiencies and the pressures of 
the private financing, it has really helped to keep our project 
on schedule. And that is of utmost importance for us, of 
course, when we are under the threat of annual flooding. Any 
one given year could have dire consequences. So schedule is of 
utmost importance for us, and this model certainly has proven 
that it can deliver massive mega-projects on schedule.
    Senator Capito. Right. So you mentioned, as on the to do 
list of 2024 for the Corps, or I don't know that it would need 
to be legislatively so much as their best practices, because 
trying to figure all of this out, that is why I wanted to know, 
who is this partner, and how did you work that out? So, are 
there other P3 projects with the Corps active right now that 
you are aware of? I am certain they are calling you and trying 
to figure out how you did this.
    Mr. Paulsen. Absolutely. It is my understanding that there 
are a few additional projects that have been authorized and 
could use P3. There are no other projects that are under 
construction, however, so we were the first project to go 
through project development procurement with a private 
contractor.
    Senator Capito. How long did that take?
    Mr. Paulsen. The procurement process lasted about 4 years. 
However, we were hampered by some permit issues along the way, 
and we did have to suspend the procurement for about a year.
    Senator Capito. I am going to assume that is Federal 
permitting?
    Mr. Paulsen. Some of it was Corps. Some of it was State 
permitting.
    Senator Capito. State, OK. Well, that is a repeating theme 
in this Committee.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Capito. Let me ask you this, everybody. I wanted to 
ask everybody the same question with the remaining 40 seconds, 
so I will just start with you, Mr. Pratt. Are there additional 
authorities that you think the Corps would need to carry out 
projects as of what you have? It is a little bit of what the 
Chairman just asked, but I guess I am asking for more 
specifics, here.
    Mr. Pratt. I don't know that it is the authorities, per se, 
but to be more of the will of Congress for the Corps to look at 
ways to optimize the work that they do. I don't know if that is 
specifically within an authority or not, but it, to me, I have 
referred to it just a moment ago as sort of the stove piping of 
the missions of the Corps sometimes don't mix as well as they 
should.
    I think the ASA's office right now is trying to strive to 
correct that, and the PRNG that is coming out will also look at 
the benefits, counting the benefits in a better way, that we 
might be able to count how the benefits from a navigation 
project can supplement flood risk management or an 
environmental enhancement project, because of sediment supply.
    Senator Capito. Right. Well, the Corps is an Army, and 
stove piping is sort of a problem over there, DOD, in certain 
times and certain places. I think that is excellent.
    One of the other issues that we have run into again, onto 
the permitting and certainly, Mr. Blanchard, you may know this, 
I know we have a project going on on the Ohio River right now. 
It is not just the Corps; it is Fish and Wildlife; it is State 
DEPs, and the better coordination of those, we have tried to 
formulate through the highway program, One Federal Decision, 
where there is a lead agency.
    Obviously, in the Corps projects, the Corps is going to be 
the lead agency, but I mean, are you finding this an issue as 
well, the moving from agency to agency while the Corps is 
spearheading this, or is this not an issue?
    Mr. Blanchard. Yes, ma'am. We find the same, that there are 
continued challenges when there are so many agencies involved 
in the permitting process in general. There is a good reason 
for a lot of that, but there certainly is an area of 
improvement where there could be more coordination so that you 
could move the timelines up, because as the timelines continue 
to get added, the projects only get more expensive, and 
certainly, we have seen that here most recently in the economic 
environment that we have experienced lately.
    Senator Capito. I would say, just, finally, a big takeaway 
here is that the P3 projects come in on time or even earlier 
and under budget. I think that is a welcome relief when you are 
trying to stretch Federal dollars.
    Thank you all very much.
    Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Senator Capito, thank you very much.
    Senator Cramer, thanks again for joining us and for being a 
valued member of this Committee. Please proceed.
    Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to all 
of you. This has been fascinating. I had stove piping running 
through my head ever since you brought it up, because I think 
it illustrates a lot of the challenges.
    Mr. Paulsen, in talking about inflexibilities and the 
challenges, and stove piping just within the Corps, you have a 
really big stovepipe situation where you do have, some of the 
value of the P3 is that some things are not so Corps or other 
things have to be, particularly the river itself and how that 
outlet gets built.
    Describe a little, give us an example, I think you 
mentioned this to me earlier, an example of where the Corps' 
inflexibility, perhaps especially timing, didn't synch up with 
the other part of the project, and what the consequence of that 
is. I think, ultimately, this could be an area where maybe 
legislatively or policywise, we could help. You gave me a $3 
million example, I think, earlier in our meeting.
    Mr. Paulsen. Absolutely, Senator Cramer.
    So, during procurement, it is imperative that you define 
the project with performance based specifications such that the 
private industry can bid the project appropriately and they can 
price the risk, if you fail to provide criteria for portions of 
the project, which, in this case that you mentioned, occurred.
    So, we have two aqueduct structures where we are actually 
taking a river over the top of the diversion channel. Those 
aqueduct structures have to maintain biological conductivity in 
the river, and of course, appropriate velocities for fish 
passage. Prior to the procurement of the private developer, we 
were not able to get criteria from the Corps. It was very 
difficult. Nobody had built one of these structures before, and 
so folks just didn't have a user manual to say, this is what 
the velocities need to be.
    It wasn't until after procurement that the Corps provided 
us with guidance on velocities for the aqueduct structures. 
What that resulted in was a $3.5 million compensation payment 
to our developer because they had to go back and retool their 
designs and compensate for the criteria that we gave them.
    That change was born by the non-Federal sponsor. That was 
not Federal dollars. So, from our standpoint, the more 
comprehensive you can be up front during the bidding process, 
it allows the private developers to appropriately price that 
risk.
    Senator Cramer. One of the things I would say in defense of 
the bureaucracy, and I don't say that very much, is that 
sometimes the bureaucracy worries about how we will respond to 
a mistake. In other words, we oftentimes punish the bureaucracy 
if we see something, and I think our attitude toward innovation 
itself is a little bit of the problem.
    I would say this, and Shelley said it so well, when you 
combine a natural resource bureaucracy and a military 
bureaucracy, you have a really big bureaucracy, and you have a 
lot of complications. One of the challenges with the Corps, in 
my view, is that they are sort of an agency without an agency.
    On a different Corps project that I worked hard on with 
General Semonite and trying to identify what the problem was in 
the bidding process for major infrastructure, I insisted on 
seeing the various proposals and then the responses, the bids. 
So we would do that in secret. I had to have lawyers all around 
me. It was crazy.
    One of the things I noticed, and I asked a Corps engineer 
flat out, it seems to me you are anti-innovation, that when a 
contractor responds to an RFP and provides a different way to 
do something, you reject it just because it is a different way, 
and he looked right at me and said, we believe innovation is 
risk.
    So, it gets ``risked'' right out of the, it is something 
that could be done twice as fast at half the price. They won't 
do it because they still have to use those other machines that 
do it slower.
    All of that said, I think some of this is, we as 
policymakers need to encourage it. I don't know how we do it 
from a policy standpoint, but we have to find a way forward. 
Well, we ought to find a way, because we need to do more things 
with the same amount of money or less to build on those 
incentives in the public sector that aren't natural. They are 
natural in the private sector, and P3s are a way to do that. 
But having said that, any thoughts you might have on how we 
could encourage or inspire the Corps, incentivize them the 
right way would be great.
    Mr. Paulsen. Absolutely, Senator Cramer. Our project is all 
about innovation. I mentioned previously that we use 
performance based specifications. That allows the private 
industry to come up with the best way to build our project, the 
most efficient way to build our project. Now, that obviously 
challenged the Corps to start building a project of our 
magnitude without having final specifications and drawings. It 
really kind of caused some concern.
    We did see flexibility from the Corps in allowing us to 
move forward with them as an observer on our portion of the 
project, which is P3. And we have seen an immense amount of 
innovation come from the private contractor, which reduces 
costs, reduces schedule, and provides the level of quality that 
we are looking for. It really is the best of all worlds.
    So if we want innovation, we have to have performance based 
specifications, not prescriptive specifications, which the 
Corps is generally accustomed to.
    Senator Cramer. It is a clash of cultures.
    Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Not at all.
    Senator Ricketts, thanks for coming back. You are up.
    Senator Ricketts. Great, thank you very much, Chairman 
Carper and Ranking Member Capito, and to our witnesses for 
being here today.
    As I have discussed in this Committee before, in the State 
of Nebraska, we have had some challenges with the Army Corps of 
Engineers. And one of the challenges with regard to permitting, 
we had one of our natural resource districts looking to raise 
some levees. They weren't trying to build new levees; they were 
trying to raise levees.
    The Army Corps took 6 years to get them their permit on 
this. And because the Army Corps took 6 years, we had a--if 
they had just given us the permit, say, in 4 years, we would 
have been able to raise the levees.
    In 2019, though, we had a flood that was a 500 year flood 
and damaged Offutt Air Force Base and caused nearly a billion 
dollars in damage. Six years is way too long to get a permit 
done. Like I said, even the horrible service of 4 years would 
have allowed us to raise those levees and mitigate that damage. 
So getting permits done in a timely manner is an important 
thing.
    I will also note that with some new leadership at the Army 
Corps of Engineers, we have a much better relationship in the 
State of Nebraska. I appreciate that relationship being better, 
because I think it is to the benefit of everybody. One of the 
things the Army Corps of Engineers is doing is they have their 
permit finder data base they are developing. My team has been 
going through that, and it seems like, in some cases, it is 
already outdated and is lacking important updates. Of course, 
if we are going to have tools to be able to track all these 
projects, these tools must be updated so that we can do that.
    I was going to ask all the witnesses what your experience 
is with regard to the permit finder data base, and do you find 
that it is something that has been updated, that is useful, and 
what sort of things need to be improved on, if any, from the 
Army Corps? Mr. Paulsen, we will start with you.
    Mr. Paulsen. Thank you, Senator. I do not have experience 
using that data base, but I can tell you, one thing that was 
very advantageous for our project was the Corps allowing us to 
pursue some permits and do some of the NEPA requirements.
    Our project wasn't always a P3. We had initially decided to 
do a traditional Corps project. It wasn't until this Committee 
allowed the Corps to use the P3 and authorized them in the 2014 
WRDA that we changed, and we started to look in that direction. 
When we did that, we started to look for flexibility with the 
permitting through the Corps and through the State agencies.
    Another tactic that we used is having the Corps allow us to 
coordinate with the State agencies versus the Corps 
coordinating with the State agencies. There tended to be some 
level of, I don't want to say mistrust, but inefficiency 
between the Corps working with the State agencies versus the 
non-Federal sponsor, who is on the ground. They know the area 
better. We are the ones that are going to be taking care of the 
environment as it relates to our project long term.
    So that has been very beneficial, both from the State 
permitting in Minnesota and North Dakota, and has really 
expedited it and removed the risk of permit schedule impacts 
that you see so often on other projects.
    Senator Ricketts. Great, thank you.
    Mr. Pratt, what about you and your experience in the Army 
Corps' permitting data base?
    Mr. Pratt. I have not used the data base. I can't speak to 
it directly. I will say that I retired 5 years ago from the 
State of Delaware as the administrator's role in waterway 
management. We had a number of projects that came before the 
Corps for permitting and felt the exact same pain. I can't say 
that we ever had a project that took 6 years in permitting. But 
certainly, 2 to 3 were sometimes the case.
    It is a nut that needs to be cracked. We have seen a lot of 
discussion about it for decades, and no one seems to know 
exactly how to remedy it. Sometimes, it is lack of personnel. 
It could be the tax on the road. It could be consulting other 
agencies. It could be unanswered data that goes into the 
application itself that the Corps sits on and says they need 
more information. We welcome those conversations going forward, 
but I have not seen the data base and can't comment on it.
    Senator Ricketts. OK.
    Mr. Blanchard.
    Mr. Blanchard. Thank you for the question, Senator 
Ricketts. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with the particular 
data base you mentioned.
    Senator Ricketts. Do you have any other experience or 
suggestions on how we can improve the permitting process in 
general with the Army Corps?
    Mr. Blanchard. Sure. I think one of the tangible things 
that our group has seen that was effective at one point was 
allowing the Corps to have continuing contracting authority. 
That is something, I believe, that was removed from their 
toolbox at some point in the past. That is one tangible 
suggestion that has been brought up.
    There are other folks with our group that would be more 
familiar with some of those daily interactions on the 
permitting side. My knowledge base is generally more business 
operational.
    Senator Ricketts. OK, great. Thank you, Mr. Blanchard.
    Senator Carper. Thanks for those questions.
    We are going to be joined, I think, by at least one more 
member. Senator Kelly is trying to join us.
    Senator Capito is also a senior member of the 
Appropriations Committee, and they are doing some good work 
right now, so I am going to yield to her for anything else she 
wants to say before she puts on her Appropriations hat.
    Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I want to thank the witnesses, and I want to reemphasize 
not just to those in the room today that this is a process we 
are beginning very early so that we can be successful again.
    As Senator Cramer said, it is something that I think we are 
all dedicated to, to completing this in the 2 year time period. 
So I would make sure that our fellow Senators are listening to 
their Corps projects and to their WRDA projects and 
improvements that can be made so that we can incorporate these 
into what I think will be an aspirational, good 2024.
    The other thing is, we are really good here at patting 
ourselves on the back. But I will say with some of the 
improvements that we have made over the last 2 to 4 years, we 
are seeing things changing and projects getting done and 
getting to completion. These are not inexpensive projects, as 
you know. They are very, very expensive, but they are life 
changing, so thank you all very much.
    Senator Carper. Senator Capito, good luck. Thanks again for 
being a big part of today's hearing.
    I am going to go ahead and ask maybe another question or 
two. I expect Senator Kelly will show up very shortly. If he 
does, I will yield to him.
    In my question here in the second round, we will go to Tony 
Pratt. It deals with the shore protection. I am concerned that 
climate change, which has been talked about here today, and 
frankly, talked about everywhere I go, is driving sea level 
rise and driving land subsidence, it is driving flooding in our 
State and in a bunch of other States up and down the coast of 
our country.
    During the time that we are in this hearing today, we will 
be here probably for close to 100 minutes, in the State of 
Louisiana, they will lose a piece of land to the sea every 100 
minutes the size of a football field. It wouldn't take too much 
of that for us to lose all of Delaware. The size of a football 
field in Louisiana, so that certainly has our attention. I know 
it does for a lot of other coastal States.
    We have been joined by Senator Kelly, who is trying to be 
in three places at once today.
    I am glad you could be here with us today. If you are 
ready, I will yield to you for any questions you have. You are 
welcome. Thanks for coming.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for 
holding this hearing. It is so important to get this WRDA 
process complete.
    I am the Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure 
Subcommittee, which has jurisdiction over the Army Corps, so 
let me just say that I look forward to working closely with you 
and Senator Capito and Senator Cramer to make sure that we 
continue the tradition of the past decade of passing a WRDA 
bill every other year.
    For me, I am hopeful that this bill can take some positive 
steps in the right direction to ensuring that the Army Corps of 
Engineers has the tools it needs to do a number of things, 
including responding to drought conditions in the western 
United States, including through updating the flood control 
curves to account for drought conditions. We talked about that 
at a previous hearing.
    But also to effectively collaborate with Tribal communities 
to address important water challenges that they are facing and 
provide some better technical assistance and planning support 
to small and rural communities. I know we have a lot of hard 
work ahead of us, but I know we can get this done.
    With that, I just want to start off with a question for Mr. 
Pratt. While Delaware coastal projects and Arizona drought 
response projects are not the same thing, I do want to ask 
about your perspective on partnering with the Corps on projects 
which are not within the agency's typical flood control 
mission.
    Mr. Pratt, can you speak a little bit more about how the 
benefit to cost ratio that the Corps uses to decide which 
projects to fund has a bias for certain types of infrastructure 
as compared to some others?
    Mr. Pratt. How much time do we have today, sir?
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Kelly. On this, a minute.
    Mr. Pratt. OK. I will make it very brief. That is a very 
interesting question. If you look at the Corps of Engineers 
historically, they were developed, obviously, as military 
engineers, and they became, obviously, in this country, a civil 
works mission that is centered around water, water being either 
supply or oversupply in the form of flooding.
    When they get to your State's interest, that really begins 
to tilt the mission a little bit to something else. Delaware 
has the extreme opposite problem you have, which is we are very 
wet, and we are getting wetter all the time. You are dry and 
getting dryer all the time. The Corps would have to sort of, 
and I have been advocating today earlier in some of my 
responses, that the Corps needs to be evolved and look at 
things in a new light.
    The principal regulations and guidelines that are in the 
works and coming out at some point, they have been long delayed 
in getting to the Corps as a guidance document. When that comes 
out, looking at the benefits that accrue from the work that 
they do, they are primarily and fundamentally an engineering 
outfit. They then attend to their engineering with economics 
and other expertise.
    But I think that when we have water supply questions and 
issues, engineering does play a role in that, and the PRNG and 
the emphasis on benefits that would accrue from their work 
could possibly be an avenue for an expansion.
    Senator Kelly. Do you think it is biased toward certain 
types of infrastructure?
    Mr. Pratt. I think it is biased toward their historic 
mission, very decidedly so. I think their historic mission has 
been, in the Civil Works branch, either water supply directly 
through dams and levees, not levees, but navigation, water 
supply, and then flood control. I think they are very much 
biased in their historical approach to things, yes.
    Senator Kelly. Well, thank you.
    In my remaining minute, I have a question for Ms. Aryan-
Zahlan, who I think is testifying remotely.
    Senator Carper. You can take more than a minute.
    Senator Kelly. First of all, thank you for attending. I am 
the first U.S. Senator, Member of Congress, that ever went to 
the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. I feel that I bring sort of a 
unique perspective to the importance of our domestic maritime 
economy.
    I believe that Ms. Aryan-Zahlan discussed in her testimony 
the value of reforms to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, 
which is managed by the Army Corps to help American ports 
invest in our infrastructure. And this infrastructure is 
important because it helps us stay competitive with our foreign 
adversaries in this space.
    So could you speak a little bit to the national and 
economic security benefits which come from having a well funded 
modern port infrastructure, and are there steps we could be 
taking in the next WRDA bill to further enhance those benefits?
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. Thank you, Senator, for your question.
    As you mentioned, the supply chain is very important. Our 
improvements and the harbor maintenance tax that we provide to 
the Nation is crucial for us to utilize with the Army Corps in 
order for us to do improvements to our ports and berths and in 
water structures. Our country's ports are vital to the economy, 
the national economy, and historically, our six donor ports 
have funded port infrastructures across the Nation through this 
tax. Donor ports account for 50 percent of all harbor 
maintenance tax revenue, yet they receive less than 2 percent 
in revenue and return.
    We are pleased to work with Congress to ensure that the 
donor ports receive more than their equitable share. We would 
like the framework to direct the Army Corps to allocate the 8 
percent annual HMTF appropriations to donor ports and the 4 
percent to our energy port transfer. We are embracing the 
definition of the expanded use to include additional in water 
maintenance projects and seismic upgrades.
    Senator Kelly. Well, thank you. This is an issue that is 
not just a domestic trade, domestic infrastructure issue. It is 
also connected to our national security. It is one I have 
spoken about in one of my other committees on the Armed 
Services, about having a maritime industry that works for our 
country and our national defense.
    With that, Mr. Chairman, I thank you again for holding this 
hearing. And I look forward to working with you to get this 
bill across the finish line.
    Senator Carper. You bet.
    Take just a minute. Some of the other members might have 
been talking about the kind of weather that they are 
experiencing in their States. You and I talked a little bit 
about what we all are witnessing in Arizona. It is certainly 
challenging.
    Senator Kelly. Yes, it is pretty hot.
    Senator Carper. Give us a minute or 2, if you would.
    Senator Kelly. Yes. Well, it is always hot in the summer. 
Let me start there. We are used to dealing with the heat.
    But what we have seen here over the past couple weeks is, I 
think we are now at 20 days if today gets, I haven't checked, 
but if it gets above 110 degrees in Phoenix, I think that will 
be about 20 days in a row, which means where Gabby and I live 
in Tucson, it is probably around 105 or close to 110. If you 
are a senior or folks that are homeless, this is a really, 
really challenging time of year.
    Now, the rest of the year in Arizona and Phoenix and Tucson 
and other places, we have the best weather in the country. I 
think this is manageable at this point. We have got mayors 
across the State that are taking rather proactive steps to 
address this issue of heat islands in cities. There are ways to 
do that, you know, planting more trees, material that you can 
put into pavement to mitigate some of the ability for the 
pavement to absorb and then radiate heat back.
    So, we are making progress on this. It probably would have 
been better if we started 20 years ago. And I think it is going 
to be important for this Committee to recognize that the State 
of Arizona has some climate related challenges. And it is not, 
as we see today, it is not just water. It is heat, but more 
heat results in more evaporation, which then compounds our 
water issues.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for that.
    Senator Kelly. Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Thanks very much. We would like to hear 
from you again, and then I will wrap it up if no one else 
arrives.
    Go ahead, Senator Ricketts.
    Senator Ricketts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would note, 
Senator Kelly, you know, Nebraska is having a great week this 
year. It is 80 degrees; we have rain. You could move to 
Nebraska.
    Senator Kelly. And then you get a blizzard.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Ricketts. Well, OK, yes. We are known to get 
blizzards in February. That is true. Something that they don't 
get in Arizona.
    One of the things that we had been experiencing and are 
still in the process of experiencing for the last couple of 
years is a drought. And that also impacts, in different ways, 
inland transportation and so forth.
    I would like to ask some of the witnesses here just what 
steps can Federal agencies or Congress do to help mitigate some 
of the impacts of droughts and low water events on our inland 
transportation.
    Actually, I think I would like to start, since I ran out of 
time last time, with Ms. Aryan-Zahlan from the Port of Los 
Angeles. Since California has had a drought, did you see any 
impacts on that in the Port of Los Angeles, and do you have any 
suggestions on what we might be able to do to mitigate those?
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. That is a challenge all of us are facing 
across the country. You are absolutely right, Senator. We are 
proactively embracing resiliency with climate change and sea 
level rise. We conducted a sea level rise adaptation study, but 
at the same time, we are also looking for ways that we could 
utilize drought tolerant opportunities for our construction 
methodology and for the port itself.
    We are currently revisiting the study also to ensure that 
our infrastructure remains resilient. But drought is a 
challenge that we are all facing, and we are looking at ways 
that we could incorporate new technology, innovative thinking 
with regard to embracing the new world, as they say, with 
climate change.
    Senator Ricketts. Mr. Paulsen, what about North Dakota? I 
know that, again, you are an agricultural State; transportation 
on waterways is important. What are your thoughts with regard 
to when we have droughts and low water events on what we can do 
to mitigate that, and what are things that Congress might be 
able to do?
    Mr. Paulsen. Thank you, Senator.
    Our project is a flood protection project. However, we are 
in the unique position in North Dakota where we have too much 
water in the spring and not enough water in the summer.
    We are actively working on a project to bring Missouri 
River water to eastern North Dakota. However, that is fraught 
with numerous permit challenges and issues in order to develop 
that as a water source. If you were to go back and look at our 
flood control project, there would potentially have been the 
ability to store some of that flood water with our project for 
the summertime when there may have been a drought.
    I think it is innovative approaches like that. If we are 
going to be doing a mega-project that is related to flood 
protection, can we also address other natural disasters such as 
drought and provide resiliency within our project for those 
sorts of things. It is a unique area, similar to your State of 
course.
    But those are the types of things that I think that need to 
be talked about and looked at. Yes, we currently are trying to 
develop additional water resources within the State. However, 
permit issues are challenging.
    Senator Ricketts. Do you do a lot of transportation of your 
agricultural products by water?
    Mr. Paulsen. North Dakota, not so much. We are the 
beneficiary of transportation on the Mississippi. Goods come up 
to Minneapolis, St. Paul, and obviously are shipped up to the 
Fargo and the Bismarck area in North Dakota. The water 
transportation on the Mississippi is very important for keeping 
cost of goods low and supply chain intact.
    Senator Ricketts. Mr. Pratt.
    Mr. Pratt. Unfortunately, in my experience, I don't have 
any drought experiences whatsoever in Delaware. A drought in 
Delaware is probably 6 weeks without rain, and that is about as 
bad as it gets.
    [Laughter.]
    Senator Ricketts. OK.
    Mr. Blanchard, same question.
    Mr. Blanchard. Thank you, Senator Ricketts.
    Our industry, the inland waterways industry, is severely 
impacted by both low water drought conditions and also, I think 
someone mentioned earlier, the 2019, we had the opposite. We 
had an extreme high water situation. That goes down, and it 
really impacts the competitiveness of U.S. trade, because when 
there is low water, it means less cargo can go onto a barge, 
and so it takes more barges to move the same amount of cargo. 
When that happens, the cost to move those goods goes up, and it 
hurts the competitiveness, whether it is the U.S. farmer or 
imports that are going to steel mills throughout the U.S. It 
really has an impact.
    Thankfully, our industry is extremely resilient, and they 
worked really well in 2022 with the Corps to ensure that as we 
experience that severe drought, that cargo was impacted, the 
shipment of goods was impacted, but it did not come to a halt.
    Senator Ricketts. So, do you have any suggestions, though, 
on what we can do, what the Army Corps can do when we have low 
water events to be able to make sure that we can continue to 
use that transportation infrastructure?
    Mr. Blanchard. Further advancement with the Corps with 
their dredging throughout the river, sort of some pre-
contracted dredging, where they have the ability to have 
dredges when we can see. Traditionally, droughts don't show up 
overnight, and so there is a little bit of having more 
foresight and the ability to anticipate and to pre-contract 
dredging needs so that where there are spot areas where the 
river is low, where they are impassable, the Corps is prepared 
with contractors to address those needs to allow movement of 
cargo to continue.
    Senator Ricketts. Great.
    Thank you very much. I appreciate it, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for those thoughtful questions. 
Thank you for your faithful attendance.
    Senator Ricketts and I are a couple of members of the 
Senate who join together every Thursday right around noon for a 
Bible study. We have two Navy captains here on this Committee, 
Senator Kelly and myself, two retired Navy captains, but we 
have an Admiral who is our chaplain of the U.S. Senate. He is 
good enough to host something for us. It gives us a lot of food 
for thought as we prepare for our other responsibilities here.
    Thanks again for joining us. You are welcome to stay for as 
long as you want. If not, I will see you later today. Thanks.
    I want to come back to my question to Tony Pratt, back to 
shore protection. I will just repeat myself, if you don't mind, 
and I might have another question or two for the panel.
    Tony, again, I am concerned that climate change is driving 
a number of things. One of those is sea level rise. It is 
driving land subsidence, and it is driving flooding in our 
State and other States up and down the East Coast, the Gulf 
Coast, and West Coast, as well. WRDA 2022 included shore 
protection authorities, as you will recall, to support coastal 
resilience, including the authorization of the dredged material 
utilization project, also known as the Bay Beach Restoration 
Project, that you testified about earlier today. Would you 
explain for us today the significance of the shore protection 
authorities to the economy of our State of Delaware, and how 
this project might benefit the First State and its people?
    Mr. Pratt. The movement toward better regional sediment 
management and beneficial use of dredged material is exactly 
the kind of thing we have been talking about. Delaware benefits 
from this already, to a degree, but certainly could benefit 
further from it. The 2022 WRDA authorized Bay Beach protection, 
basically with materials that could come out of the main 
channel, maintaining the main channel of the Delaware River and 
Bay to a 45 foot depth. There was capacity within some of the 
original deposition sites that can also be tapped out so we 
create better capacity later on. That is a regional sediment 
management kind of concept.
    The Corps is the dual authority to maintain navigation 
channels and do something with the material that they dredge 
out. We used to use that horrible word spoils, dredged spoils, 
we now know it is as dredged material, because for the most 
part, it does not contain, in Delaware, contaminants of any 
sort. It is either silt, which would be fine material, good 
materials for wetlands restoration, island creation, where we 
lost islands through erosion over time.
    Looking at the dual responsibilities of the Corps in 
reducing the effects of sea level rise on both natural habitats 
and also man built habitat and infrastructure, the use of 
utilizing any dredged material in a beneficial way should be 
the order of business each day rather than the exceptional 
demonstration type project.
    This does require crossing the missions of the Corps. When 
a navigation manager has a certain amount of money to dredge a 
certain distance of channel, the least cost option for disposal 
of that material has historically been the way to take it on. 
Looking at the fact that it could benefit a flood risk 
management component of the Corps, people that sit in another 
hallway within a Corps district, or it could enhance the 
environment through restoration or enhancement of wetlands that 
are deteriorating, sometimes cross over budget lines and 
mission statements.
    So as we progress, and I think the 2022 WRDA really began 
to fully address this, and I think there is some more work to 
be done, as institutionalizing this as the practice has taken 
on all together.
    There is a lot of need in Delaware. We know that the 
beaches are succumbing to sea level rise, as they have for 
thousands of years. Honestly, the sea level has been rising in 
this country, in this world, for about 15,000, 18,000 years 
since the last ice age. The rate is increasing, which is very 
concerning, and we see the effects of the last 100, 150 years 
of sea level rise, and that maybe be realized in more like 50 
to 75 years. So that is concerning.
    Sediment along beaches and dunes typically move with sea 
level rise, marshes not so quickly. I think there is a lot of 
need for putting material that is dredged into good locations 
that could enhance both flood risk management and natural 
resource priorities.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for those insights.
    Again, with respect to, I think you have touched on this, 
but again, with respect to the dredged material utilization 
project, why is the biennial process of WRDA reauthorization, 
why is that process critical to the project's success?
    Mr. Pratt. It keeps the conversation, if nothing else, it 
keeps the conversation going. We can build on the successes of 
the last one. I think it is an iterative progression forward. 
We can't take giant leaps, but as we, I think as you and 
Congress implement authorities and policies, and then I think 
part of it is to see how the Corps decides to implement those 
responsibilities, and is there a course correction or a course 
enhancement needed as you go forward. So building upon each 
successive WRDA is truly, I think, the best way to go forward.
    Senator Carper. Thank you.
    Chris Blanchard, are you up for another question?
    Mr. Blanchard. Yes, sir.
    Senator Carper. The locks and dams on the Upper Ohio, which 
are part of a larger island waterway system, enable the 
movement, as you have mentioned, hundreds of tons, thousands of 
tons of commodities every year. This system is a critical 
component of the navigable waterways that the Army Corps of 
Engineers maintains. These waterways are the backbone of our 
economy. I have mentioned that before. They are the backbone of 
our economy, moving goods from across our Nation to ports and 
to out of Nation ports and to inland communities and places all 
over the world.
    I understand that much of the inland waterways 
infrastructure is pretty old and comprised of components that 
are hard to maintain or replace. I will ask you to explain for 
us, if you will, how the Corps projects along the Upper Ohio 
River will support reliability and efficiency of the system, 
and what this means for our economy, not just in that part of 
the country, but for the entire country.
    Mr. Blanchard. Thank you. The Upper Ohio project comes down 
to, simply, redundancy. They have three locks, as you 
mentioned, that were originally built between 1919 and 1936. 
They underwent major rehabilitation in 1986 with a design life 
at that time for 25 years. Obviously, we are well past that. 
Every day, those locks have barges that carry cargo.
    One particular project here recently in the last few years, 
there was a shell cracker facility that was an $8 billion 
investment that was built in that area. The vast majority of 
the significant parts to make that facility possible arrived by 
barge that came through the U.S. Gulf, through the Lower 
Mississippi River all the way up through the river systems to 
the Upper Ohio.
    They are a great example of what is going on throughout our 
entire country with the locks and dams. There are critical 
cargos regularly moving through locks and dams that are 
particularly past their design life. As I mentioned in my 
testimony, 80 percent of our locks and dams are past their 
design life.
    Senator Carper. One other question, just geographically, 
paint a picture for us of Upper Ohio. I know when I think of 
Upper Ohio, I spent 4 good years as a Navy ROTC midshipman at 
Ohio State and learned a little bit about Ohio and the Ohio 
River. Just tell us what part of our country, just sketch that 
for us, so we can imagine it.
    Mr. Blanchard. It is the greater Pittsburgh area, and so it 
receives cargo that goes all the way into northern West 
Virginia and then goes north and then westward on the Ohio 
River.
    Senator Carper. Good. Thank you.
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan, are you still there? Good, you are. This 
is overtime for you. You are probably ready to call it a day, 
here, pretty soon. Thanks again for joining us and getting up 
so early today.
    As I mentioned earlier, a sizable amount of United States 
gross domestic product is related to import and export 
activities at our ports across this land. Navigation is one of 
the Corps' primary missions, in addition to flood risk 
management. What is the Corps' role in supporting navigation at 
the Port of Los Angeles? I will repeat that. What is the Corps' 
role in supporting navigation at the Port of Los Angeles? What 
can you share with us about your experience in working with the 
Corps in that regard?
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. Thank you, Senator.
    The Corps' role is to maintain the Federal channel, and the 
Port of Los Angeles itself actually does the maintenance of the 
berths, at the berths. We are a deepwater port, so we don't 
have that much maintenance dredging in comparison to our non-
deepwater ports.
    We do coordinate with the Corps for those berthing 
improvements and maintenance dredging along the berths. The 
port does that work itself, and we do coordinate with the Army 
Corps with the permitting process. We have a regional general 
permit 65 and 29.
    There was a question brought up earlier on how do we 
improve the permitting process with the Corps. We have a very 
good relationship with our permitting process Army Corps 
District Office, and the key to that is actually being 
proactive and discussing the project up front sooner rather 
than later, as they say, to get the permitting process and 
understanding the conditions for that permit and then being in 
compliance with our Regional 65 and 29 permits.
    The Corps plays an important role. We are pleased that we 
have the opportunity to use the expanded use funding for our 
projects above and beyond the maintenance dredging that we were 
able to implement and utilize those funds for our maintenance 
projects for in water work and seismic upgrades and wharf 
maintenance program.
    Senator Carper. Thanks for that response.
    Maybe one last question. This would be for Mr. Paulsen, if 
I could. As you know, the Fargo-Moorhead project takes a unique 
approach to addressing flood control. This project, like other 
Army Corps flood risk management projects across the Nation, is 
designed to protect a couple things: One, the safety of 
communities, and two, the economies of those communities, which 
is something that is growing more challenging in the wake of 
climate change, as we have already alluded.
    In recent years, there have been an increasing number of 
climate change and extreme weather driven flooding events with 
costly damage to life, to property, and to our economy. This 
makes flood control projects like Fargo-Moorhead especially 
important.
    My question today is, and we will close it out with this, 
please describe for us, if you would, from your experience, the 
importance of your partnership with the Corps on flood risk 
management and how are you addressing these extreme weather 
events.
    Mr. Paulsen. Thank you for the question, Chairman. I think 
it is a very good question.
    As we move forward in the future, we are going to see 
larger and larger flood protection projects. With the current 
state of funding for the Corps' Civil Works Program and the 
current backlog continuing to add to itself, it is a very major 
concern for the Nation, how are we going to address climate 
change and provide the flood control resiliency that this 
Nation needs to continue to be successful in the future?
    I do believe, and our program believes, that this public-
private partnership is one tool in the toolbox that can be used 
for large mega-projects that the Corps will inevitably need to 
be a part of and implement in the future.
    We have been contacted by numerous other non-Federal 
sponsors across the country to try to replicate our financial 
structure and our financial plan, as well as investigate the 
use of a P3 potential with the Corps. Some of these programs 
are huge programs, potentially $50 billion programs for the 
city of New York, for the Boston Harbor, for Galveston, which 
already is authorized, of course.
    When we start talking about $50 billion projects and we 
look at the amount that gets appropriated on an annual basis to 
the Corps, it just doesn't add up. There needs to be other 
funding and financing options available to get these projects 
put into place. We believe our project can be replicated 
throughout the Nation to provide an avenue for private industry 
to get involved and to provide some of their funding and 
financing, as well as enhance the innovation and the cost 
savings that we have seen on our projects.
    Senator Carper. Thank you for that.
    I am going to give our witnesses the opportunity to just 
take maybe a minute to say something that you would like to say 
and haven't been able to say it already, maybe something you 
would just like to reiterate for us.
    We will go out to the West Coast and ask Dina to help us 
close this out.
    Dina, do you want to give us one last minute, that would be 
great.
    Ms. Aryan-Zahlan. Thank you very much, Senator.
    We believe the intent of the Committee in WRDA is to direct 
the Corps to allocate, again, the 12 percent of HMTF revenue to 
donor and energy ports. That was clear, and we hope to work 
with the Appropriations Committee and the Corps to implement 
it. We thank you very much for all of your work in expanding 
the use definition for us to access the Section 2106 and the 
HMTF funding. Thank you very much.
    Senator Carper. Thank you. I think you told us earlier that 
you got up at 5:00 this morning, West Coast time, in order to 
join us, so get some sleep tonight. Thanks again.
    Let's see who else. Chris Blanchard, why don't you give us 
a closing 1 minute? When I was in the House of Representatives, 
they wouldn't, 435 people, you don't have time for everybody to 
talk forever. In the Senate, you can talk for a long time, and 
we do. But in the House, a lot of the time, you are limited to 
a minute. You get to be pretty good in talking in 1 minute 
bites. This is your practice for being House Members someday. 
Go ahead.
    Mr. Blanchard. Thank you, sir.
    I would just like to reiterate the efficiency of moving 
cargo by barge and the importance to the national economy. For 
comparison, I think it is an important fact for folks to 
remember: To move the same cargo by rail versus by barge, it 
emits 43 percent more emissions by rail. And the same amount of 
cargo in truck, to move the same amount of cargo, would be 800 
percent more emissions. As we talk about the climate, and I 
would like to remind the Committee that moving by barge, and 
therefore investment in efficient locks and dams, helps further 
the movement toward less emissions.
    In addition, for the 2024 WRDA bill, the Infrastructure 
Bill funded seven lock and dam projects in the inland waterway 
system to completion. Unfortunately, recently, we have learned 
from the Corps that a lot of those projects, or several of 
them, are going to be significantly over those and will need 
additional money.
    It would be our view and request that WRDA 2024 maintain 
the congressional intent of the Infrastructure Bill and 
federally invest any addition of moneys needed to complete 
those projects that were part of the investment infrastructure 
bill. Thank you.
    Senator Carper. Good. Thank you for that.
    Tony Pratt, last word?
    Mr. Pratt. Yes, thanks for an opportunity for just a 
thought. I will extend a little bit of the thinking we have 
talked about a few minutes ago about beneficial use of dredged 
material.
    One of the underserved areas within the Corps of Engineers 
is small boat channels. We have in Delaware, your home State, 
you know, perhaps, we have, I think, the number is 23 federally 
authorized channels within the State of which three are 
maintained by the Corps through dredging. We have a number of 
them in the inland bays that are not ever dredged by the Corps, 
not maintained by the Corps. I think the metric for that 
determining why they should be dredged is based on commercial 
cargo that goes through channels.
    We see representation from very large urban navigation 
projects, but the small channel service in this country is very 
underserved. If we looked at that from the perspective of 
sediment availability to do environmental enhancement and 
community protection, I think it would change the metric a 
little bit. So I think that is something that this Committee 
could look into a little bit more.
    Senator Carper. OK, thank you for that.
    Mr. Paulsen.
    Mr. Paulsen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    We continue to maintain that P3 authorization for the Corps 
is of utmost importance to keep that authority. I didn't get a 
chance to really expand upon the WIFIA loan that we used, the 
EPA WIFIA loan. The Corps does also have a program that they 
are using similar to the WIFIA program, particularly for dams. 
I would suggest that further expansion of that program to apply 
to flood protection projects would show the benefits of the 
WIFIA component of our financing.
    Bottom line, I don't think our project would be where it is 
today had we not taken advantage of the WIFIA program with the 
EPA. So we are eternally grateful for that and that component 
within our financing plan. So I do think there should be 
continued discussion with how the Corps can utilize that 
financing instrument with non-Federal sponsors to move flood 
protection projects forward much faster.
    Senator Carper. All right, thank you.
    This has been an important hearing. This is really an 
important subject. People of the country, you listen to the 
news these days, you would think we never work together here, 
and we don't like each other, and Democrats and Republicans, we 
just go to our respective corners and just figure out how to 
fight and make the other side look bad.
    That is not the way we work on this Committee. It is not 
the way, frankly, we work in the Senate. We have just a 
wonderful working relationship with Senator Capito and our 
Republican colleagues. We don't agree on everything, but we 
agree on a lot, and I think the people of America, if they 
could see the kind of collegiality and bipartisanship on this 
Committee that they would be actually encouraged. And it is 
important that we work together.
    The greatest challenge that we face on the planet right now 
is our planet is getting hotter and the seas are rising. It is 
a threat to every nation on the planet and the people who live 
in those. That is the bad news.
    The good news is, we can do something about it. Out of this 
Committee, we report out other legislation, not with respect to 
just WRDA, but other legislation, which enables us to address 
those kinds of threats, climate change in very constructive 
ways and create a lot of jobs at the same time, which is for 
me, that is the great combination.
    I think Mr. Blanchard talked about the energy efficiency of 
moving cargo by barge as opposed to by rail, and that is a good 
point, a very good point.
    Another piece of information related to that, is can we 
move, I think I have this right, we can move a ton of freight 
by rail from Washington, DC, to Boston on 1 gallon of diesel 
fuel on a train. Even better and more fuel efficient are 
barges, so that is something for us to keep in mind as we go 
forward.
    I am going to close out. Again, I thank you all for joining 
us. I thank our colleagues, especially our Ranking Member, for 
being here and asking questions. This has been, I think, an 
especially useful, now as we prepare to turn for our work on 
the WRDA 2024 project submission process. We will be asking our 
colleagues from all 50 States, all 100 colleagues, to let us 
know what their projects, their priorities are. Then we will go 
to work and try to meet as many of those as we can.
    Before we adjourn, a little bit of housekeeping. Senators 
will be allowed to submit written questions to our witnesses 
for the record by 4 p.m. on Thursday, August 3rd, which is 2 
weeks from today. We will compile those questions and send them 
to our witnesses, and we are going to ask you to try and 
respond to us, if you will, by Thursday, August the 17th.
    Let me just turn to our staff members on the majority and 
minority side. Anything else? All right.
    As we say in Delaware, it is a wrap. This Committee hearing 
is adjourned. Thank you so much.
    [Whereupon, at 11:23 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
    [Additional material submitted for the record follows:] 
    
    
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
         
                                 [all]