[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 114 (Monday, July 27, 2009)]
[House]
[Page H8853]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           OZARK-JETA PROJECT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Boozman) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I join those Members of Congress who are 
concerned about the rapid growth of deficit spending by the Federal 
Government, lots of spending with little job growth. For that reason I 
rise today to express my concern that the administration budget 
attempts to cancel a project that will literally cost the taxpayers 
more to cancel than it will to complete.
  On July 7 the New York Times reported on the Ozark Powerhouse 
Rehabilitation project. According to the Times: ``Shutting down the 
Ozark-Jeta project won't save taxpayers a dime since the government 
would pay a $12 million cancellation fee and reimburse utility 
ratepayers for their $20 million share. Bottom line: Federal Taxpayers 
would spend $32 million to kill the project, $4 million more than it 
would cost to complete it.''
  I think it is important for the record to contain some background 
information on the Ozark Powerhouse Rehabilitation project. So let's 
take a moment to do that.
  The Corps of Engineers is in the middle of a major rehabilitation of 
the Ozark-Jeta Taylor Powerhouse on the Arkansas River. Construction is 
under way. This project involves turbine redesign and replacement that 
will improve and allow the continued operation of this 100-megawatt 
hydropower facility. The electricity produced at the Ozark Powerhouse 
is sold to customers in Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, 
Oklahoma, and Texas. As the Times article noted, electricity customers 
have already invested $20 million through their utilities in this 
project. Neither the President's fiscal year 2010 budget request nor 
the initial announcements of stimulus money for the Corps contain any 
funding for this project.
  My hope is that the administration will now work with the Congress to 
do the right thing and ensure that funding is provided to complete this 
project. If the project is not funded in 2010, work would be closed out 
on the project as fiscal year 2009 funds are exhausted.
  If that happens, what will we have? We will have one turbine unit 
disassembled and inoperative. We will have another inoperative unit due 
to a cracked shaft. We will have three units that are available only on 
a day-to-day basis due to frequent outages caused by problems with old 
turbine runners. We will have five new units that have already been 
purchased and may be left sitting uninstalled and onsite with no place 
to store them. Most regrettably, the taxpayers will have an additional 
$32 million bill on top of the money they have already spent on an 
incomplete project.
  If this project is cut, how can we say we want to reduce our 
dependence on fossil fuels and cut emissions? If this project is cut, 
how can we say we want to encourage renewable energy? If this project 
is cut, how can we say we will avoid wasting the taxpayers' money?
  In fact, because the electricity produced by this Federal project 
will be sold, once the rehabilitation is complete, every taxpayer's 
invested dollar will be returned to the Treasury plus interest. At this 
point how could we even consider not completing the work?
  I encourage the President to make an honest effort to reduce Federal 
spending, and we can start by completing this project rather than 
canceling it. During the Presidential campaign, then-Senator Obama 
talked about the importance of using a scalpel, not a hatchet, when 
cutting spending. A quick look at the facts shows that this project was 
thoughtlessly cut, the kind of cut that is made with a hatchet.
  We have all seen crazy decisions made by both Republicans and 
Democrats in the White House; so I'm not trying to be partisan 
expressing my concern about the way this project is being handled. 
Instead, I believe this cut illustrates that the government too often 
makes poor decisions and mishandles taxpayers' dollars. It just doesn't 
make any sense to cancel a project in the middle of construction when 
it will cost more to cancel the project than it would to finish it.
  Again, my hope is that the administration now will work with Congress 
to do the right thing and ensure that funding is provided to complete 
this project.

                          ____________________