[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 147 (Wednesday, September 28, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H6040-H6058]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2016

  The Committee resumed its sitting.


           Amendment No. 7 Offered by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hultgren). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the 
desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. __. RECREATIONAL ACCESS.

       Section 1035 of the Water Resources Reform and Development 
     Act of 2014 (Public Law 113-121; 128 Stat. 1234) is amended--
       (1) by striking subsection (b) and inserting the following:
       ``(b) Recreational Access.--The Secretary shall allow the 
     use of a floating cabin on waters under the jurisdiction of 
     the Secretary in the Cumberland River basin if--
       ``(1) the floating cabin--
       ``(A) is in compliance with, and maintained by the owner to 
     satisfy the requirements of, regulations for recreational 
     vessels, including health and safety standards, issued under 
     chapter 43 of title 46, United States Code, and section 312 
     of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1322); 
     and
       ``(B) is located at a marina leased by the Corps of 
     Engineers; and
       ``(2) the Secretary has authorized the use of recreational 
     vessels on such waters.''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(c) Limitation on Statutory Construction.--
       ``(1) In general.--Nothing in this section may be construed 
     to authorize the Secretary to impose requirements on a 
     floating cabin or on any facility that serves a floating 
     cabin, including marinas or docks located on waters under the 
     jurisdiction of the Secretary in the Cumberland River basin, 
     that are different or more stringent than the requirements 
     imposed on all recreational vessels authorized to use such 
     waters.
       ``(2) Definitions.--In this subsection, the following 
     definitions apply:
       ``(A) Vessel.--The term `vessel' has the meaning given that 
     term in section 3 of title 1, United States Code.
       ``(B) Requirement.--The term `requirement' includes a 
     requirement imposed through the utilization of guidance.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Kentucky.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, this small legislative 
clarification will go a long way to promote tourism and economic 
opportunity on Corps lakes.
  Beautiful Lake Cumberland, in my Congressional District, is the 
largest man-made lake east of the Mississippi. Located within a day's 
drive of 87 million Americans and with over 1,200 miles of pristine 
coastline, it is the ideal location for families to enjoy a week or a 
weekend on a houseboat.
  Indeed, Lake Cumberland was once the houseboat capital of America, 
but that all abruptly changed when a major Corps rehabilitation project 
on the dam coincided with a downturn of the U.S. economy in 2007. The 
Corps had to lower the lake by some 43 feet to repair damage to Wolf 
Creek Dam, and the houseboat business was all but decimated.
  It took 7 years to complete this project and restore lake levels, but 
I am proud to say, Mr. Chairman, that Lake Cumberland is now open for 
business. Unfortunately, the Corps has not been as eager as others to 
bring back the vibrant houseboat industry that once flourished in this 
region, or to support the emerging floating cabin industry that 
promises to make lake life accessible to more and more vacationers and 
families.
  With Chairman Shuster's support, we added bipartisan language to the 
last WRDA bill to ensure that floating cabins, once garnering safety 
approval by the U.S. Coast Guard, would be permitted on Corps lakes. 
However, the Corps has since found new and creative ways to continue 
banning floating cabins from their lakes, particularly through the 
promulgation of overly burdensome guidance with requirements far more 
stringent than those health and safety standards expected by the Coast 
Guard.
  The Coast Guard has successfully safeguarded our maritime system 
since its creation in 1790, and it is, therefore, the Coast Guard that 
should be the lead Federal agency in regulating the vessels that 
navigate our Federal waterways. Today's amendment simply reinforces 
congressional intent to ensure that there is one standard for these 
floating cabins, and that standard would be set by the U.S. Coast 
Guard. Safety should always remain our highest priority, and I am 
confident these cabins will create exciting new opportunities at Lake 
Cumberland and other Corps lakes.
  I urge support of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Yoder). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Rogers).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 8 Offered by Mr. Rouzer

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 8 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. __. NO WAKE ZONES FOR VESSELS.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall work with State and 
     local officials to establish a no wake zone for vessels in a 
     covered navigation channel if--
       (1) State or local law enforcement officers have documented 
     that there exist safety hazards that are a direct result of 
     excessive wakes in the channel;
       (2) a State law has been enacted to establish a no wake 
     zone for the channel or waters adjacent to the channel; and
       (3) the no wake zone complies with any recommendation made 
     by the Commandant of the Coast Guard to ensure the safety of 
     vessels operating in the zone and the safety of the 
     passengers and crew aboard such vessels.
       (b) Exception.--A no wake zone established pursuant to this 
     section shall not apply to the operation of a towing vessel, 
     as defined in section 2101 of title 46, United States Code.
       (c) Covered Navigation Channel.--In this section, the term 
     ``covered navigation channel'' means a navigation channel 
     that--
       (1) is federally marked or maintained;
       (2) is part of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway; and
       (3) is adjacent to a marina.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Chairman, I have come here to the floor this 
afternoon because there is a specific and, I would argue, unique public 
safety concern that I have in my district right along the Intracoastal 
Waterway. Specifically, it is right there at Southport Marina.
  Let me give you a visual description of what is taking place there. 
When you are traveling up the Intracoastal Waterway, particularly from 
the south, you can't see the Southport Marina at all. There is not a 
no-wake zone there. Because you can't see the Southport Marina, these 
boats, particularly the recreational users, fly right on through there.
  This is a high traffic area, particularly during the spring and 
summer months when you have a lot of recreational boaters on the water. 
This is a growing area. In fact, this has been a public safety concern 
for some time; so much of a public safety concern, that the State of 
North Carolina passed a law requiring that this area adjacent to the 
Southport Marina be a no-wake zone. The problem is the Army Corps of 
Engineers and the Coast Guard won't recognize it.
  So let me give you this mental picture again. You have got the 
Intracoastal Waterway, you have a marina that most boaters, 
particularly those speeding up from the south, can't see on the left-
hand side. They are flying through there. You have all kinds of boats 
coming in and out, recreational boats coming in and out of the marina. 
This is a major accident waiting to happen.
  The local sheriff's office is quite concerned about this. The local 
government and county commissioners, town, and all of the local 
citizens are quite concerned about this. Again, I want to

[[Page H6041]]

stress that there has been so much concern about this that the State of 
North Carolina passed a law requiring this area to be a no-wake zone.
  So this is not an amendment in any way, shape, or form to require or 
attempt to persuade the Corps of Engineers or Coast Guard to get in the 
business of no-wake zones. However, it is designed to encourage the 
Corps and the Coast Guard to work with the locals and the State to 
address this significant public safety issue.
  The amendment is narrowly crafted so as to avoid creating any other 
speed bump, for example, up and down the Intracoastal Waterway. And 
there is an exception made for tugboat operators, because I certainly 
recognize that they have to maintain a certain speed in order to get 
the cargo through the waterway.
  I encourage my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I would ask the author--I am a bit 
puzzled, and we have been unable to get an answer expeditiously from 
the Coast Guard--you are saying the Coast Guard will not recognize the 
no-wake zone, but the enforcement would fall to the local harbor patrol 
or the local authorities. So there is a no-wake zone that the local 
officials can fine or penalize people who violate it, can they not?
  Mr. ROUZER. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I yield to the gentleman from North Carolina.
  Mr. ROUZER. Here is the situation. There is not a no-wake zone there 
because the Army Corps and the Coast Guard do not recognize it. The 
State passed a law requiring that there be a no-wake zone, but there is 
not one because Federal law, obviously, supersedes State law.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I think we have got an 
issue here that doesn't require legislation. I am not going to object 
to this going forward, but I think we can get the attention of the 
Coast Guard and figure out what is going on here because I am not 
aware--and I live on a boat in D.C. and I have spent a lot of time on 
the water and I have been on the Intracoastal Waterway. I am not aware 
that the Coast Guard has any authority over locally declared no-wake 
zones to preempt them, and I am puzzled as to why they would do that in 
this particular case.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Chairman, I think the problem specifically is that it 
is Federal water. I would add, again to paint a mental picture here, 
you have State and local officials that want to have a no-wake zone; 
and the only reason why there is not a no-wake zone there is because 
the Army Corps of Engineers and the Coast Guard do not recognize it. 
Again, I would suspect that is specifically because it is Federal 
water.
  This amendment is narrowly tailored to address this specific public 
safety issue. Again, I would encourage my colleagues to support the 
amendment.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ROUZER. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I am puzzled because, again, I have been 
on segments of the Intracoastal Waterway, which I guess he is saying 
are all declared to be Federal waters where there are no-wake zones. So 
I don't know what the issue is. I would be happy to work with the 
gentleman on this, and I am not going to object to the amendment at 
this point.
  Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I appreciate the 
comments of the ranking member. And to be quite candid, I don't 
understand why they won't follow it either, which is why I am here.
  I greatly appreciate the ranking member and his support, and I look 
forward to working to get this resolved.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1615


                  Amendment No. 9 Offered by Ms. Meng

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 9 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Ms. MENG. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. ___. ICE JAM PREVENTION AND MITIGATION.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary may carry out projects under 
     section 205 of the Flood Control Act of 1948 (33 U.S.C. 
     701s), including planning, design, construction, and 
     monitoring of structural and nonstructural technologies and 
     measures for preventing and mitigating flood damages 
     associated with ice jams.
       (b) Inclusion.--The projects described in subsection (a) 
     may include the development and demonstration of cost-
     effective technologies and designs developed in consultation 
     with--
       (1) the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory of 
     the Corps of Engineers;
       (2) universities;
       (3) Federal, State, and local agencies; and
       (4) private organizations.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentlewoman 
from New York (Ms. Meng) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York.
  Ms. MENG. Mr. Chairman, first, I thank my partner in offering this 
amendment, Representative Elise Stefanik. Our bipartisan amendment is 
simple. It is identical to language in the Senate-passed WRDA that 
allows the Army Corps of Engineers to pursue projects and technologies 
that prevent and mitigate flood damage that is associated with ice 
jams.
  Every year, flooding that results from the piling up of frozen ice in 
rivers across the United States costs our economy millions of dollars. 
When free-floating ice catches on obstructions, such as bridge pilings, 
rocks, or logs, flooding can result upstream from the blockage and, 
again, downstream when the ice finally releases.
  During my time in the New York State Assembly, I can remember hearing 
horrible stories from my colleagues in upstate New York and wondering 
what more could be done to prepare for these events. I know that my 
friend Representative Stefanik's district has been directly impacted by 
such floods in the recent past, and I am glad that we could come 
together today to offer this amendment.
  Currently, research is ongoing regarding the best practices in 
planning, design, and construction of Army Corps projects that would 
help alleviate future ice jam flooding. I support those efforts and 
look forward to new technologies and designs that are being developed 
by local universities, State and local agencies, and even private 
industry. Together, I know that we can do more to combat the hardships 
that are created in American communities every year by ice jam 
flooding, and I appreciate the time today to highlight this terrible 
problem.
  I urge the Army Corps to continue its efforts at the Cold Regions 
Research and Engineering Laboratory in Hanover, New Hampshire, and I 
urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition, although I am not in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I congratulate the gentlewoman on being sensitive to the needs of her 
district, which has a very real problem, and this is fully within the 
authority of the Corps. I wish they had more money with which to do 
more projects around the country. I tried that yesterday, and it didn't 
work, but I will certainly be happy to support this.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MENG. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for his support.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Meng).
  The amendment was agreed to.

[[Page H6042]]

  



                 Amendment No. 10 Offered by Ms. Moore

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 10 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. ___. TRIBAL CONSULTATION.

       (a) Review.--Not later than 60 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall begin a review of 
     the policies, regulations, and guidance related to conducting 
     meaningful consultation with Indian tribes regarding Corps of 
     Engineers flood control, environmental restoration, and other 
     projects or requiring the Corps of Engineers to approve a 
     permit that may have an impact on tribal cultural or natural 
     resources.
       (b) Contents.--The review required under subsection (a) 
     shall examine and assess the following:
       (1) How tribal consultation rules apply to the permitting 
     process, especially for projects not on tribal lands but 
     which may still be continguous to such lands or affect tribal 
     cultural and natural resources.
       (2) How the Corps of Engineers defines meaningful 
     consultation.
       (3) Whether the current process adequately considers tribal 
     interests including environmental, social, health and well-
     being of tribal members.
       (4) How the Corps of Engineers informs tribes that it will 
     not consider concerns or alternatives raised during the 
     consultation process.
       (5) How the Corps of Engineers determines a project's 
     impact on tribal communities including the Corps ability to 
     protect cultural and natural resources such as water.
       (6) The specific situations by which tribes have access to 
     high level Corps of Engineers officials such as the Assistant 
     Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) and the Chief of 
     Engineers to dispute or otherwise direct concerns about 
     pending Corps of Engineers projects or permits, including 
     examples of instances in which the Corps of Engineers 
     provided such access as part of its consultation with a tribe 
     regarding a particular project.
       (7) The role of headquarters in overseeing tribal 
     consultation being done at the District and Division levels.
       (8) The effectiveness of the dispute resolution process 
     that has been developed to elevate tribal concerns to higher 
     levels of Corps of Engineers oversight and review.
       (9) Whether the Corps should undertake a rulemaking process 
     related to its tribal consultation policies and procedures.
       (c) Consultation.--In completing the review required under 
     subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide for public and 
     private meetings with Indian tribes and other stakeholders.
       (d) Report.--Not later than 1 year after beginning the 
     review under subsection (a), the Secretary shall submit to 
     Congress, and publish in the Federal Register, a report on--
       (1) the results of the review;
       (2) any proposed changes to the tribal consultation 
     policies determined necessary as a result of the review; and
       (3) if the Secretary determines that no changes to the 
     tribal consultation policies are necessary, the justification 
     for such determination.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentlewoman 
from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Wisconsin.
  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I will be brief.
  We are all aware of the latest controversy surrounding the failure of 
the Federal Government to consult with Native American tribes. Wisely, 
the Obama administration has postponed work on the Dakota Access 
pipeline while it meets to hear tribes' concerns about the inadequacy 
of the consulting process in that case and, more broadly, across the 
Federal Government. In the bill before us, Mr. Chairman, we are 
authorizing billions of dollars in Army Corps of Engineers projects and 
providing direction for work it is doing in almost every community 
throughout our great country.
  There is no question that the Corps' responsibility to undertake this 
work and the indigenous people's desire and ability to protect their 
cultural and natural resources will continue to clash, and we know that 
tribes continue to be frustrated by how Federal agencies, including the 
Army Corps, do their so-called consulting with them. I share this 
frustration.
  I would love to go much further with this amendment, but my 
amendment, Mr. Chairman, simply requires the Army Corps to work with 
tribes to review its current consultation policies. Let me just read a 
little bit, Mr. Chairman, because it sounds good on paper.
  ``All federally recognized Tribes are sovereign governments and will 
be treated with respect. . . . The trust responsibility will be honored 
and fulfilled. . . . The Federal Government has a unique legal and 
political relationship with Tribal governments that recognizes self-
government and self-determination,'' et cetera.
  I include in the Record this policy.

                                           Department of the Army,


                                 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,

                                 Washington, DC, November 1, 2012.
     Memorandum for Commanders, Directors and Chiefs of Separate 
         Offices, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
     Subject: Tribal Consultation Policy
       1. This memorandum affirms and formalizes current tribal 
     consultation procedures for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
     (USACE).
       2. The interaction between the federal government and 
     federally recognized Indian Tribes (including Alaska Natives) 
     has its origins in the U.S. Constitution and has been upheld 
     and defined through Treaties, U.S. Supreme Court cases, 
     various statutes and regulations, presidential documents and 
     policies, including the Department of Defense American Indian 
     and Alaska Native Policy, and the USACE Tribal Policy 
     Principles, recently reissued on 10 May 2010.
       3. The Policy provides an outline of our responsibilities 
     to federally recognized Tribes as well as a framework for 
     consulting with them. It is purposefully general in nature 
     because each of the 565 federally recognized American Indian 
     and Alaska Native Tribes are distinct and separate 
     governments, requiring a consultation process that may be 
     completely unique to them.
       4. USACE recognizes the sovereign status of Tribal 
     governments and our obligation for pre-decisional government-
     to-government consultation. USACE also recognizes the unique 
     role Tribes play as partners in water resources projects and 
     seeks to develop relationships with all Tribes who may need 
     our assistance in their capacity building and self-
     determination.
       5. USACE has an excellent tribal program coordinated by a 
     tribal liaison at Headquarters and a point of contact or 
     liaison in each District and Division office. These experts 
     are ready to support you and answer any questions you have 
     regarding tribal policies.
       6. An accountable process to interact with Tribes is 
     mandated in Executive Order 13175, Consultation and 
     Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, 06 Nov 2000, and 
     Presidential Memorandum, Tribal Consultation, 05 Nov 2009. 
     Please ensure that your staff is aware of and abides by our 
     Consultation Policy to ensure effective and mutually 
     beneficial relationships with tribal partners.
                                                Thomas P. Bostick,
                         Lieutenant General, U.S. Army Commanding.


                      U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

                       Tribal Consultation Policy

       1. References.
       a. U.S. Constitution, Articles I, Section 8; Article VI.
       b. National Historic Preservation Act.
       c. American Indian Religious Freedom Act.
       d. Archaeological Resources Protection Act.
       e. Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.
       f. Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
       g. Executive Order 13007, Indian Sacred Sites, 24 May 1996.
       h. Department of Defense American Indian and Alaska Native 
     Policy, 20 Oct 1998.
       i. Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination 
     with Indian Tribal Governments, 06 Nov 2000.
       j. Engineer Regulation 1105-2-100, Planners Guidance 
     Notebook, 22 Apr 2000.
       k. Department of Defense Instruction Number 4710.02: DoD 
     Interactions with Federally Recognized Tribes, 14 Sep 2006.
       l. Army Regulation 200-1, Environmental Protection and 
     Enhancement, 13 Dec 2007.
       m. Engineer Regulation 1130-2-540, Project Operations--
     Environmental Stewardship Operations and Maintenance 
     Guidelines and Procedures, 11 Aug 2008.
       n. Presidential Memorandum, Tribal Consultation, 5 Nov 
     2009.
       o. USACE Tribal Policy Principles, 18 Feb 1998 and 10 May 
     2010.
       p. Announcement of Presidential support for the United 
     Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 
     Public Papers of the President, December 16, 2010.
       2. Purpose. On November 5, 2009, President Barack Obama 
     issued a Memorandum to the heads of all federal agencies 
     entitled Tribal Consultation (74 Fed Reg 57881) reaffirming 
     Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with 
     Indian Tribal Governments (65 Fed Reg 67249) signed by 
     President William J. Clinton on November 6, 2000. E.O. 13175 
     requires all federal agencies to formulate ``an accountable 
     process to ensure meaningful and timely input by tribal 
     officials in the development of regulatory policies that have 
     tribal implications.'' This document affirms the U.S. Army 
     Corps of Engineers' (USACE) commitment to engage in 
     consultation with federally recognized Tribes.
       3. Background. There are responsibilities to Tribes 
     resulting from the Federal Trust Doctrine, as well as from 
     Treaties, statutes, regulations, Executive Orders and 
     agreements between the United States government and tribal 
     governments. Department of

[[Page H6043]]

     Defense American Indian and Alaska Native Policy, Department 
     of Defense Instruction number 4710.02: DoD Interactions with 
     Federally Recognized Tribes, and US Army Corps of Engineers 
     Tribal Policy Principles (Attachment 1) provide guidance.
       For the purposes of this policy, the following definitions 
     are applied:
       a. Tribe: Indian Tribes as defined in E.O. 13175, ``an 
     Indian or Alaska Native tribe, band, nation, pueblo, village, 
     or community that the Secretary of the Interior acknowledges 
     to exist as an Indian tribe pursuant to the Federally 
     Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 USC 479a.''
       b. Consultation: Open, timely, meaningful, collaborative 
     and effective deliberative communication process that 
     emphasizes trust, respect and shared responsibility. To the 
     extent practicable and permitted by law, consultation works 
     toward mutual consensus and begins at the earliest planning 
     stages, before decisions are made and actions are taken; an 
     active and respectful dialogue concerning actions taken by 
     the USACE that may significantly affect tribal resources, 
     tribal rights (including treaty rights) or Indian lands.
       4. Applicability. This regulation applies to all HQUSACE 
     elements, Major Subordinate Commands, District Commands, the 
     Institute for Water Resources, the Humphreys Engineering 
     Center Support Activity, and the Engineer Research and 
     Development Center.
       5. General Policy. The Tribal Policy Principles.
       a. All federally recognized Tribes are sovereign 
     governments and will be treated with respect.
       (1) Sovereignty is the foundation of tribal governments.
       (2) Tribes are responsible for their own governance and 
     management.
       b. The Trust responsibility will be honored and fulfilled.
       (1) The federal government has a unique legal and political 
     relationship with Tribal governments that recognizes self-
     government and self-determination.
       (2) USACE is committed to supporting projects and programs 
     beneficial to Tribes through partnership with them.
       (3) USACE will ensure that it addresses Tribal concerns 
     regarding protected tribal resources, tribal rights 
     (including treaty rights) and Indian lands.
       (4) USACE will protect and allow access to protected tribal 
     resources under USACE jurisdiction to the extent practicable, 
     and will work to develop and implement access policies as 
     needed.
       (5) USACE will share information that is not otherwise 
     controlled or classified information.
       c. USACE will maintain a government-to-government 
     relationship with Tribes.
       (1) Tribes have a unique and distinctive political and 
     legal relationship with the United
       States.
       (2) A Tribe may have access to the Chief of Engineers, the 
     Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), and other high 
     level individuals if the need arises.
       (3) While most interaction will be staff to staff, decision 
     making will be leader to leader (the head of the Tribe and 
     the district commander), with the assistance of the local 
     subject matter expert (typically, the Tribal Liaison).
       d. Consultation will be an integral, invaluable process of 
     USACE planning and implementation.
       (1) When appropriate, potentially affected Tribes, as 
     determined by the Corps, including Tribes whose aboriginal 
     territories extend to the lands where an activity would 
     occur, will be contacted by letter, telephone or e-mail 
     sufficiently early to allow a timely review of the proposed 
     action. If contacted Tribes notify USACE that other Tribes 
     are potentially affected, USACE has the responsibility to 
     notify those Tribes as well.
       (2) Any activity that has the potential to significantly 
     affect protected tribal resources, tribal rights (including 
     treaty rights) and Indian lands-individual projects, 
     programs, permit applications, real estate actions, 
     promulgation of regulations and policies--regardless of land 
     status, will be reviewed at the district level by an 
     individual who effectively interacts with Tribes, usually the 
     Tribal Liaison.
       (3) Consultation will be conducted at the district or 
     division level under the guidance of an individual who 
     effectively interacts with Tribes, usually the Tribal 
     Liaison, unless there is a request for HQUSACE (and/or OASA 
     (CW) in the case of Civil Works) input, or if HQUSACE 
     determines input is necessary.
       (4) Commands will ensure that all Tribes with an interest 
     in a particular activity that has the potential to 
     significantly affect protected tribal resources, tribal 
     rights (including treaty rights) and Indian lands are 
     contacted and their comments taken into consideration.
       (5) Consultation procedures for individual projects or 
     programs may be developed at the local level to meet the 
     needs of particular Tribe(s).
       (6) In recognition of the varied organizations and customs 
     of different Tribes, written protocols for consultation 
     procedures may be considered and implemented at the local 
     level with a specific Tribe.
       (7) A dispute resolution process will be developed during 
     the consultation process, including a provision to elevate 
     the consultation to higher USACE and/or Tribal levels.
       (8) Requests for consultation by a Tribe to USACE will be 
     honored.
       e. USACE will support Tribal self-determination, self 
     reliance and capacity building by:
       (1) Partnering with Tribes on studies, projects, programs 
     and permitting procedures will be supported and promoted to 
     the extent permitted by law and policy.
       (2) To the extent permitted by law and policy, provide 
     information on opportunities to compete for requests for 
     proposals or other potential contracts with USACE.
       (3) Sharing appropriate information on USACE programs, 
     policies and procedures, and public documents.
       (4) Utilizing Tribal knowledge for planning purposes and to 
     inform operational activities.
       (5) Supporting Tribal efforts to lease and operate water 
     resource projects and lands, where appropriate.
       (6) Identifying and implementing, within existing 
     authority, other capacity-building opportunities as they 
     occur.
       f. Protection of natural and cultural resources.
       (1) USACE recognizes the importance of strict compliance 
     with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 
     Act (NAGPRA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) 
     and other statutes concerning cultural and natural resources.
       (2) USACE acknowledges that compliance with the above 
     statutes may not comprise the full range of consultation, nor 
     of cultural property and resource protection.
       (3) To the extent allowed by law, USACE will protect the 
     location of historic properties, properties of religious and 
     cultural significance, and archaeological resources, in 
     consultation with and when requested by the affected 
     Tribe(s).
       6. Responsibilities of Commanders and other USACE officials 
     interacting with federally recognized Tribes.
       a. Build relationships with Tribes soon after each change 
     of command by face-to-face interaction at the local 
     headquarters or at tribal offices when at all possible.
       b. Identify and remove procedural impediments to working 
     with Tribes whenever possible.
       c. Share appropriate Corps procedures, regulations and 
     organizational information with Tribes.
       d. Maintain open lines of communication through 
     consultation with Tribes during the decision making process 
     for those matters that have the potential to significantly 
     affect protected tribal resources, tribal rights (including 
     treaty rights) and Indian lands.
       e. Provide Tribes with points of contact on project-related 
     issues, and issues in general.
       f. Encourage partnerships on projects with Tribes wherever 
     possible.
       g. Encourage collaborative partnerships by other federal 
     and state agencies with Tribes to further their goals and 
     projects.
       7. Education. To develop a proactive well-informed 
     workforce, in-house training, workshops, and an annual 
     meeting of USACE tribal liaisons have been developed and 
     should be attended by Corps employees who interact with 
     Tribes-liaisons, project managers, program managers, real 
     estate professionals, regulators, leaders, contracting 
     specialists, etc.
       8. Accountability. To assess the effectiveness of USACE 
     Tribal consultation, professionals who interact with Tribes 
     will keep records of consultation meetings and other tribal 
     interactions. These records will be accessible and can be 
     made available for purposes of reporting to OMB through DoD 
     as per the reporting requirement in the Presidential 
     Proclamation of 5 Nov 2009. The report will be synthesized at 
     HQUSACE and transmitted to DoD (OSD) on a yearly basis. A 
     copy of this report will be distributed to federally 
     recognized Tribes upon request.
       9. Implementation. USACE will incorporate the six Tribal 
     policy principles, including pre-decisional consultation, 
     into its planning, management, budgetary, operational, and 
     legislative initiatives, management accountability system and 
     ongoing policy and regulation development processes.
       10. General Provision: This policy does not establish new 
     requirements, but reaffirms procedures and policies already 
     in place, clarifies responsibilities and establishes clear 
     measures of implementation success.

  Ms. MOORE. Let me be clear. We may need a formal rulemaking process, 
but this amendment today doesn't block any pending project or permit 
process. I do think it is appropriate, when questions are raised about 
inadequate consultation, that we do something here. It is my hope that 
this report will guide Congress within a year, when we consider the 
next WRDA bill, so that the chairman, the ranking member, and the 
underlying bill, itself, will make clear that their support for taking 
up WRDA bills on a regular 2-year cycle will include tribal 
consultation. Again, these consultations look good on paper, but my 
amendment wants to formalize the consultation process and get a report.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition, although I am not in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.

[[Page H6044]]

  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I congratulate my good friend, the gentlewoman from Wisconsin, for 
bringing forward this important amendment.
  I think the key thing is what she said at the end, which is that the 
process may look good on paper but that that is not good enough when we 
are dealing with sovereign nations.
  I have restored a tribe in my district and have worked a lot on 
tribal issues in my 28 years on the Natural Resources Committee. I have 
put an amendment into the FAST Act to allow tribal governance to take 
control of their Federal transportation funds so that the State isn't 
nicking money off the top and so that they actually can exert their 
sovereignty, and we have done that in some other areas for the tribes. 
This is, really, a critical amendment.
  There is a real issue here. The tribes say, in the case of this 
pipeline, that they were not adequately consulted with. The Corps says, 
well, the box is checked. Thanks to the President, we are going to have 
a review of what really happened here. Obviously, this is not the only 
instance, and we need a broader review. We need to be sure that the 
Corps is fully cognizant of and recognizes the sovereignty of tribal 
nations so that they have in place a real and full consultation process 
for anything that may affect any tribe or reservation in the United 
States.
  I think this is a great amendment and very timely, and I urge my 
colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. MOORE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the ranking member, and I thank the 
committee for being sensitive to the needs of native peoples to be 
included and involved in things that concern their sovereignty and 
self-governance.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from Wisconsin (Ms. Moore).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 11 Offered by Mr. Peters

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 11 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. ___. STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING.

       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall design and develop a 
     structural health monitoring program to assess and improve 
     the condition of infrastructure constructed and maintained by 
     the Corps of Engineers, including research, design, and 
     development of systems and frameworks for--
       (1) response to flood and earthquake events;
       (2) pre-disaster mitigation measures;
       (3) lengthening the useful life of the infrastructure; and
       (4) identifying risks due to sea level rise.
       (b) Consultation and Consideration.--In developing the 
     program under subsection (a), the Secretary shall--
       (1) consult with academic and other experts; and
       (2) consider models for maintenance and repair information, 
     the development of degradation models for real-time 
     measurements and environmental inputs, and research on 
     qualitative inspection data as surrogate sensors.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from California (Mr. Peters) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would enable the Army Corps of 
Engineers to use the best technology available to ensure our 
infrastructure is structurally sound and avoid the loss of property, 
money, and lives. Specifically, it directs the Secretary of the Army to 
use structural health monitoring to evaluate its construction projects 
and current infrastructure to mitigate damage from floods, earthquakes, 
sea level rise, and other disasters both before and after a major 
event.
  The increased frequency and magnitude of the extreme weather events 
have high recovery costs for the Federal Government. In 2012, 
Superstorm Sandy caused an estimated $50 billion in damages and forced 
more than 775,000 people to flee their homes. The Federal Government 
provided $136 billion in assistance, amounting to $1,160 per taxpayer. 
These costs can be prevented. Research has shown that every $1 spent on 
preparedness saves $4 in disaster recovery costs. How we prepare before 
disaster strikes determines how much we spend and, more importantly, 
how many lives we save.
  Successful planning and preparation require consultation with experts 
and access to the best available data with structural health monitoring 
sensors that can detect in near realtime the existence, location, and 
severity of the damage to infrastructure. Data from these sensors can 
provide essential information on the condition of infrastructure, 
ranging from bridges to skyscrapers, following a natural disaster like 
an earthquake; but effective management of these structures is not one 
size fits all. Access to realtime-specific data through structural 
health monitoring technology will enable the Army Corps to prioritize 
buildings and structures that need immediate maintenance. By working 
proactively rather than reactively, we can avoid further damage and 
higher costs.
  Data show we will only be more likely to see more extreme weather, 
sea level rise, and floods that can significantly damage our buildings 
and bridges in the future. Those disasters are not only costly but 
dangerous. We need to provide the groups responsible for maintaining 
our Nation's infrastructure the tools they need to do so.
  I thank the chairman, the ranking member, and the committee for 
considering this amendment. I ask my colleagues to support this smart, 
commonsense amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition, although I am not in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I congratulate the gentleman from California on a very thoughtful 
amendment. Actually, I am having a personal experience with this right 
now. Since we have discovered we have a major fault off of southern 
Oregon, the Corps has decided that they need to come back in and bore 
and reevaluate the dams on my Willamette River system. This should be, 
I would think, a pretty routine thing for the Corps.
  I asked: Why do you have to do that?
  They said: Back when we built those dams, we didn't know about it, 
and we aren't really quite sure of their seismic stability.
  I think there are probably many, many, many other Corps projects in 
California, Oregon, and elsewhere that need that kind of scrutiny; so 
what the gentleman is doing is shining a light on a problem. As I 
mentioned earlier, the Corps has a $2.5 billion backlog on O&M. This 
will come out of the O&M budget. I am happy to send this mandate to the 
Corps.
  In revisiting my objections to the bill yesterday, which is going to 
cause me to vote against the bill, underspending the tax which is 
levied on all imported goods--paid for by all Americans who buy 
imported goods--and diverting that money to other programs when the 
Corps has critical needs like this is stupid. I really regret, again, 
that my harbor maintenance trust fund amendment was pulled out of the 
bill, but this just underlines the need for the Corps to have more 
resources.
  I urge a positive vote on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Peters).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 12 Offered by Mr. Quigley

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 12 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. __. EXPEDITED COMPLETION OF AUTHORIZED PROJECT FOR FLOOD 
                   CONTROL.

       The Secretary shall expedite the completion of the project 
     for flood control,

[[Page H6045]]

     Chicagoland Underflow Plan, Illinois, phase 2, as authorized 
     by section 3(a)(5) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
     1988 (Public Law 100-676; 102 Stat. 4013) and modified by 
     section 319 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1996 
     (Public Law 104-303; 110 Stat. 3715) and section 501 of the 
     Water Resources Development Act of 1999 (Public Law 106-53; 
     113 Stat. 334).

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Illinois (Mr. Quigley) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chairman, residents and businesses in the 
Chicagoland area are vulnerable to significant urban flooding that has 
the potential to cost millions of dollars and to endanger the lives and 
livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of people.
  To address this problem, Congress authorized the Chicagoland 
Underflow Plan as a flood risk management project in the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1988. A key component of the plan is the 
construction of the McCook Reservoir, which is a major flood damage 
reduction reservoir. This benefits the city of Chicago and 36 suburbs 
by aiding flood mitigation. It also helps to protect thousands of 
structures and millions of people.
  According to the Army Corps' 2015 fact sheet to Congress, the 
reservoir is already 65 percent complete and would offer significant 
benefits to Chicago residents and businessowners. It is also among the 
Army Corps' most economical projects, boasting a 3 to 1 benefit-to-cost 
ratio. The second phase of the construction in McCook has a 9 to 1 
benefit-to-cost ratio.
  Since its authorization in the late 1980s, the congressional intent 
of this project has been clear: it is for flood risk management, and it 
is constructed to help alleviate flooding problems in the metropolitan 
area of Chicago.

                              {time}  1630

  However, the Army Corps omitted funding for the critical second stage 
of this project in their FY17 budget due to the mistaken belief that 
stage two is related to water pollution control which is not handled by 
the Corps. It is, in fact, for flood control and is fully authorized 
and documented in the Corps' system as such. That is why my amendment 
would ensure that the Army Corps continues to do McCook as flood damage 
reduction system, consistent with legislative intent, and expedites the 
completion of this vital public work.
  After many years of strong support for one of the Corps' most 
competitive flood protection projects, now is not the time to abandon 
funding for McCook. The livelihood of too many families and businesses 
are at stake.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am 
not in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I want to congratulation the gentleman for shining a spotlight on 
this. This is something that is critical to his district and region, 
and it was authorized in WRDA in 1988. It is past time that this 
received positive consideration and moved forward, and I think his 
amendment will help in that effort with that. I urge Members to support 
the amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairman Shuster for his 
support. I want to thank the ranking member for his comments. And I 
want to thank all who have worked on this project for so long. We are 
getting close.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Quigley).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                  Amendment No. 13 Offered by Mr. Vela

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 13 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. VELA. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. __. CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS.

       (a) Release.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall execute and file 
     in the appropriate office a deed of release, amended deed, or 
     other appropriate instrument effectuating the release of the 
     interests of the United States in certain tracts of land 
     located in Cameron County, Texas, as described in subsection 
     (e).
       (b) Additional Terms and Conditions.--The Secretary may 
     require that any release under this section be subject to 
     such additional terms and conditions as the Secretary 
     considers appropriate and necessary to protect the interests 
     of the United States.
       (c) Costs of Conveyance.--The Brownsville Navigation 
     District shall be responsible for all reasonable and 
     necessary costs, including real estate transaction and 
     environmental documentation costs, associated with the 
     releases.
       (d) Description.--The Secretary shall release all or 
     portions of the interests in the following tracts as 
     determined by a survey to be paid for by the Brownsville 
     Navigation District, that is satisfactory to the Secretary:
       (1) Tract No. 1: Being approximately 1,277.80 acres as 
     conveyed by the Brownsville Navigation District of Cameron 
     County, Texas, to the United States by instrument dated 
     September 22, 1932, and recorded at volume 238, pages 578 
     through 580, in the Deed Records of Cameron County, Texas, to 
     be released and abandoned in its entirety, save and except 
     the approximately 347.40 acres.
       (2) Tract No. 2: Being approximately 842.28 acres as 
     condemned by the United States by the Final Report of 
     Commissioners dated May 6, 1938, and recorded at volume 281, 
     pages 486 through 488, in the Deed Records of Cameron County, 
     Texas, to be released and abandoned in its entirety, save and 
     except approximately 158.14 acres comprised of an 
     approximately 500 ft. wide strip centered on the centerline 
     of the Brownsville Ship Channel.
       (3) Tract No. 3: Being approximately 362.00 acres as 
     conveyed by the Manufacturing and Distributing University to 
     the United States by instrument dated March 3, 1936, and 
     recorded at volume ``R'', page 123, in the Miscellaneous Deed 
     Records of Cameron County, Texas, to be released and 
     abandoned in its entirety.
       (4) Tract No. 5: Being approximately 10.91 acres as 
     conveyed by the Brownsville Navigation District of Cameron 
     County, Texas, by instrument dated March 6, 1939, and 
     recorded at volume 293, pages 113 through 115, in the Deed 
     Records of Cameron County, Texas (said 10.91 acres are 
     identified in said instrument as the ``Third Tract''), to be 
     partially released as to the land portion of the tract.
       (5) Tract No. 9: Being approximately 552.82 acres as 
     condemned by the United States by the Final Report of 
     Commissioners dated May 6, 1938, and recorded at volume 281, 
     pages 483 through 486, in the Deed Records of Cameron County, 
     Texas, to be released and abandoned in its entirety, save and 
     except approximately 88.04 acres comprised of an 
     approximately 450 ft. wide strip along the new centerline of 
     the Brownsville Ship Channel.
       (6) Tract No. 10: Being approximately 325.02 acres as 
     condemned by the United States by the Final Report of 
     Commissioners dated May 7, 1935, and recorded at volume 281, 
     pages 476 through 483, in the Deed Records of Cameron County, 
     Texas, to be released and abandoned in its entirety, save and 
     except approximately 61.58 acres comprised of an 
     approximately 500 ft. wide strip centered on the new 
     centerline of the Brownsville Ship Channel.
       (7) Tract No. 11: Being approximately 8.85 acres as 
     conveyed by the Brownsville Navigation District of Cameron 
     County, Texas, to the United States by instrument dated 
     January 23, 1939, and recorded at volume 293, pages 115 
     through 118, in the Deed Records of Cameron County, Texas 
     (said 8.85 acres are identified in said instrument as the 
     ``First Tract''), to be released and abandoned in its 
     entirety, save and except a narrow area along the channel.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Texas (Mr. Vela) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. VELA. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of my amendment, 
which is cosponsored by Representative Farenthold and provides for the 
release of Army Corps easements on certain tracts of land that are 
located at the Port of Brownsville in Cameron County, Texas. This 
amendment was written in conjunction with the Army Corps of Engineers, 
and they have signed off on this language. The purpose of this release 
of land is to allow for economic growth at the Port of Brownsville. 
These tracts of land are the property of the port and have been under 
easement to the Army Corps for decades.
  These easements were originally granted to the Army Corps in the 
1930s, 1940s, and 1950s, but have never been used. Returning control of 
the property to the Port of Brownsville will not

[[Page H6046]]

hinder Army Corps projects at the port.
  Under my amendment, parts of seven tracts would be released subject 
to the conditions that the Secretary considers appropriate and 
necessary to protect the interests of the United States.
  The Port of Brownsville is responsible for all reasonable and 
necessary costs, including real estate transaction and environmental 
documentation costs, making the amendment budget-neutral.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition, although I am not in 
opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, again, I want to congratulate the 
gentleman on his amendment. I can confirm that the Corps of Engineers 
has said they have no objection to this. I guess just somehow, they 
couldn't get through the bureaucracy to release the land until the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Vela) brought this amendment to the floor. So 
the gentleman is doing a public service for his constituents and I 
believe the Nation, holding onto property unnecessarily. I recommend 
our colleagues support this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. VELA. Mr. Chair, I thank the chairman, ranking member, 
Representative Farenthold, the Army Corps, and the committee staff for 
their work on this amendment. I urge my colleagues to support the 
amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Vela).
  The amendment was agreed to.


          Amendment No. 14 Offered by Mr. Huizenga of Michigan

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 14 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chair, I rise to offer an amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. __. GREAT LAKES NAVIGATION SYSTEM.

       Section 210(d)(1)(B) of the Water Resources Development Act 
     of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2238(d)(1)(B)) is amended in the matter 
     preceding clause (i) by striking ``For each of fiscal years 
     2015 through 2024'' and inserting ``For each fiscal year''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chair, I am offering this amendment 
because Great Lakes ports and harbors are facing a crisis. I want to 
thank the chairman of the committee for his willingness to work on this 
situation, not just in this bill but in previous bills as well.
  The Great Lakes navigation system is a critical international 
waterway that extends from the western end of Lake Superior to the Gulf 
of St. Lawrence Seaway on the Atlantic Ocean, a distance of over 2,400 
miles. The U.S. portion of the system includes 140 harbors and over 600 
miles of maintained navigation channels. This system can handle 200 
million tons of cargo that generate and sustain around 130,000 good-
paying jobs and an $18 billion support to our economy in the eight 
Great Lakes States and around the country.
  However, 16 million cubic yards of sediment clogged these ports and 
waterways in the Great Lakes. It is estimated that it would cost nearly 
$200 million to make them fully functional.
  In addition, the critical Soo Locks, joining Lake Superior and Lake 
Huron, require $115 million to complete maintenance rehabilitation 
while Great Lakes breakwaters and jetties need $250 million for 
repairs. We must act before the crisis in the Great Lakes grows even 
worse.
  Just 2 years ago, the House overwhelmingly passed the Water Resources 
Reform and Development Act 412-4, and it was later signed into law. 
WRRDA 2014 included a provision that temporarily set aside 10 percent 
of Army Corps priority funding for the Great Lakes navigation system.
  Consistent with the spirit of WRRDA 2014, my amendment provides the 
140 federally maintained commercial and recreational Great Lakes ports 
and harbors with access to dependable funding by ensuring that the set-
aside does not expire. These Federal harbor channels, like Pentwater, 
White Lake, Ludington, Muskegon, Holland, and Grand Haven in my 
district, are the lifeblood of these communities.
  The Federal Government must meet its obligation to communities across 
the Great Lakes region. These ports and harbors are engines of economic 
growth that create jobs for American workers, farmers, and 
manufacturers.
  As the chairman knows, it would be my preference to ensure that ports 
and harbors across our Nation are properly maintained by using the 
harbor maintenance trust fund for its intended purpose: harbor 
maintenance.
  By working together since 2011, we have made significant progress. In 
fiscal year 2011, only 47 percent of the harbor maintenance tax that 
was paid into the HMTF was used to dredge and maintain our harbors 
because this trust fund was raided, frankly, to pay for unrelated 
projects.
  Because of the progress we have made, the harbor maintenance trust 
fund will retain 76 percent of the revenues that are intended for water 
infrastructure improvements and harbor dredging under this year's 
Appropriations Committee-passed funding bill. This is a huge win for 
coastal communities in all of these different States and, frankly, for 
our entire Nation.
  I look forward to building on the success in the future and would 
like to thank the chairman for working with us.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am 
definitively not in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Oregon is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chair, I want to congratulate the gentleman on this, 
creating a permanent set-aside for this critical harbor maintenance in 
the Great Lakes.
  I have a similar amendment targeted toward small ports in the base 
bill. But, as the gentleman mentioned, what this points to is the fact 
that the Corps is stretched too thin. They have a $2.5 million backlog 
on operations and maintenance, yet there is $9.8 billion in the 
nonexistent harbor maintenance trust fund. That is, there is $9.8 
billion in taxes that has been paid by shippers and passed on to 
consumers that hasn't been spent on harbor maintenance.
  Were we to create a harbor maintenance trust fund next year and, say, 
it was to be fully obligated, we would have an additional $500 million 
in current revenues to invest in operations and maintenance, let alone 
the $9.8 billion that harbor maintenance and construction is owed from 
past collections.
  So I think this is an excellent amendment. I recommend it to my 
colleagues. The Great Lakes need this sort of attention, but we have 
got to get to the underlying problem which is insufficient funds.
  I thank the gentleman for his support also on that issue.
  I urge a positive vote, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chair, may I inquire of the balance of 
my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan has 2-minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Michigan, and I 
rise to support his amendment which establishes a permanent use of 
priority funds for the Great Lakes navigation system.
  Mr. Chairman, the 2014 WRRDA bill included a temporary provision to 
set aside these funds for the Great Lakes to address the maintenance 
backlog. The Huizenga amendment continues this effort and ensures the 
140 federally maintained ports and harbors on the Great Lakes, 
including the Port of Monroe in my district, have dependable funding as 
they continue to move over 200 million tons of cargo each year, and, I 
would add, Mr. Chairman, without producing any potholes, needing no 
guardrails or bridges.
  They sustain good jobs and drive economic growth in Michigan and 
across

[[Page H6047]]

the country. I urge support of this amendment and the adoption of the 
amendment.
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the work that both 
the chairman and the ranking member put into this particular issue that 
is so important to those of us that border the Great Lakes. I urge my 
colleagues to pass this amendment.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Huizenga).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Joyce

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 15 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. JOYCE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. ___. GREAT LAKES RESTORATION INITIATIVE.

       Section 118(c)(7) of the Federal Water Pollution Control 
     Act (33 U.S.C. 1268(c)(7)) is amended--
       (1) by striking subparagraphs (B) and (C) and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(B) Focus areas.--In carrying out the Initiative, the 
     Administrator shall prioritize programs and projects, to be 
     carried out in coordination with non-Federal partners, that 
     address the priority areas described in the Initiative Action 
     Plan, including--
       ``(i) the remediation of toxic substances and areas of 
     concern;
       ``(ii) the prevention and control of invasive species and 
     the impacts of invasive species;
       ``(iii) the protection and restoration of nearshore health 
     and the prevention and mitigation of nonpoint source 
     pollution;
       ``(iv) habitat and wildlife protection and restoration, 
     including wetlands restoration and preservation; and
       ``(v) accountability, monitoring, evaluation, 
     communication, and partnership activities.
       ``(C) Projects.--
       ``(i) In general.--In carrying out the Initiative, the 
     Administrator shall collaborate with other Federal partners, 
     including the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force established 
     by Executive Order No. 13340 (69 Fed. Reg. 29043), to select 
     the best combination of programs and projects for Great Lakes 
     protection and restoration using appropriate principles and 
     criteria, including whether a program or project provides--

       ``(I) the ability to achieve strategic and measurable 
     environmental outcomes that implement the Initiative Action 
     Plan and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement;
       ``(II) the feasibility of--

       ``(aa) prompt implementation;
       ``(bb) timely achievement of results; and
       ``(cc) resource leveraging; and

       ``(III) the opportunity to improve interagency, 
     intergovernmental, and inter-organizational coordination and 
     collaboration to reduce duplication and streamline efforts.

       ``(ii) Outreach.--In selecting the best combination of 
     programs and projects for Great Lakes protection and 
     restoration under clause (i), the Administrator shall consult 
     with the Great Lakes States and Indian tribes and solicit 
     input from other non-Federal stakeholders.
       ``(iii) Harmful algal bloom coordinator.--The Administrator 
     shall designate a point person from an appropriate Federal 
     partner to coordinate, with Federal partners and Great Lakes 
     States, Indian tribes, and other non-Federal stakeholders, 
     projects and activities under the Initiative involving 
     harmful algal blooms in the Great Lakes.'';
       (2) in subparagraph (D)--
       (A) by striking clause (i) and inserting the following:
       ``(i) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (J)(ii), funds 
     made available to carry out the Initiative shall be used to 
     strategically implement--

       ``(I) Federal projects;
       ``(II) projects carried out in coordination with States, 
     Indian tribes, municipalities, institutions of higher 
     education, and other organizations; and
       ``(III) operations and activities of the Program Office, 
     including remediation of sediment contamination in areas of 
     concern.'';

       (B) in clause (ii)(I), by striking ``(G)(i)'' and inserting 
     ``(J)(i)''; and
       (C) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
       ``(iii) Agreements with non-federal entities.--

       ``(I) In general.--The Administrator, or the head of any 
     other Federal department or agency receiving funds under 
     clause (ii)(I), may make a grant to, or otherwise enter into 
     an agreement with, a qualified non-Federal entity, as 
     determined by the Administrator or the applicable head of the 
     other Federal department or agency receiving funds, for 
     planning, research, monitoring, outreach, or implementation 
     of a project selected under subparagraph (C), to support the 
     Initiative Action Plan or the Great Lakes Water Quality 
     Agreement.
       ``(II) Qualified non-federal entity.--For purposes of this 
     clause, a qualified non-Federal entity may include a 
     governmental entity, nonprofit organization, institution, or 
     individual.''; and

       (3) by striking subparagraphs (E) through (G) and inserting 
     the following:
       ``(E) Scope.--
       ``(i) In general.--Projects may be carried out under the 
     Initiative on multiple levels, including--

       ``(I) locally;
       ``(II) Great Lakes-wide; or
       ``(III) Great Lakes basin-wide.

       ``(ii) Limitation.--No funds made available to carry out 
     the Initiative may be used for any water infrastructure 
     activity (other than a green infrastructure project that 
     improves habitat and other ecosystem functions in the Great 
     Lakes) for which financial assistance is received--

       ``(I) from a State water pollution control revolving fund 
     established under title VI;
       ``(II) from a State drinking water revolving loan fund 
     established under section 1452 of the Safe Drinking Water Act 
     (42 U.S.C. 300j-12); or
       ``(III) pursuant to the Water Infrastructure Finance and 
     Innovation Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 3901 et seq.).

       ``(F) Activities by other federal agencies.--Each relevant 
     Federal department or agency shall, to the maximum extent 
     practicable--
       ``(i) maintain the base level of funding for the Great 
     Lakes activities of that department or agency without regard 
     to funding under the Initiative; and
       ``(ii) identify new activities and projects to support the 
     environmental goals of the Initiative.
       ``(G) Revision of initiative action plan.--
       ``(i) In general.--Not less often than once every 5 years, 
     the Administrator, in conjunction with the Great Lakes 
     Interagency Task Force, shall review, and revise as 
     appropriate, the Initiative Action Plan to guide the 
     activities of the Initiative in addressing the restoration 
     and protection of the Great Lakes system.
       ``(ii) Outreach.--In reviewing and revising the Initiative 
     Action Plan under clause (i), the Administrator shall consult 
     with the Great Lakes States and Indian tribes and solicit 
     input from other non-Federal stakeholders.
       ``(H) Monitoring and reporting.--The Administrator shall--
       ``(i) establish and maintain a process for monitoring and 
     periodically reporting to the public on the progress made in 
     implementing the Initiative Action Plan;
       ``(ii) make information about each project carried out 
     under the Initiative Action Plan available on a public 
     website; and
       ``(iii) provide to the House Committee on Transportation 
     and Infrastructure and the Senate Committee on Environment 
     and Public Works a yearly detailed description of the 
     progress of the Initiative and amounts transferred to 
     participating Federal departments and agencies under 
     subparagraph (D)(ii).
       ``(I) Initiative action plan defined.--In this paragraph, 
     the term `Initiative Action Plan' means the comprehensive, 
     multi-year action plan for the restoration of the Great 
     Lakes, first developed pursuant to the Joint Explanatory 
     Statement of the Conference Report accompanying the 
     Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 
     Appropriations Act, 2010 (Public Law 111-88).
       ``(J) Funding.--
       ``(i) In general.--There is authorized to be appropriated 
     to carry out this paragraph $300,000,000 for each of fiscal 
     years 2017 through 2021.
       ``(ii) Limitation.--Nothing in this paragraph creates, 
     expands, or amends the authority of the Administrator to 
     implement programs or projects under--

       ``(I) this section;
       ``(II) the Initiative Action Plan; or
       ``(III) the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Joyce) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio.
  Mr. JOYCE. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of my amendment. I 
would like to start today by thanking Chairman Shuster, subcommittee 
Chairman Gibbs, and the rest of the members of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee for the committee's thorough review of the 
Great Lakes Restoration Initiative; here and after, GLRI. The GLRI 
ensures we work together as a country to protect and preserve one of 
our most important national treasures and economic assets, the Great 
Lakes.
  According to recent estimates, if the Great Lakes region were a 
country its GDP would be the third largest in the world. The Great 
Lakes currently generate 1.5 million jobs and $60 billion in wages 
annually and provides the foundation for a $30 billion tourism economy. 
Whether it is manufacturing, mining, engineering, agriculture, or 
fishing, the Great Lakes support a wide variety of jobs and industries, 
but the Lakes' importance doesn't stop there.
  The Great Lakes does not just provide jobs; it provides a resource. 
You see, the Great Lakes holds 6 quadrillion gallons of fresh water. 
They contain 95 percent of the surface freshwater in the United States 
and more

[[Page H6048]]

than 20 percent of the world's surface freshwater. It provides drinking 
water to 46 million people.
  The text of this amendment is the same as the text of the Great Lakes 
Restoration Initiative Act of 2016, which just passed this House 
unanimously on April 26, 2016.
  I offer my amendment today in hopes that it will finally pass in the 
Senate, which overwhelmingly passed a similar provision in their WRDA 
bill. The difference between the House and Senate versions are small 
but they are important. This amendment includes important changes to 
current law that reflect feedback from the Government Accountability 
Office and key stakeholders.
  My amendment enhances the non-Federal stakeholder outreach the EPA is 
required to conduct to ensure regular consultation with States and 
tribes and better communication with NGOs.
  This amendment also includes a coordinator to address harmful algal 
blooms in Lake Erie which reduces duplication and increases 
transparency. It requires more robust, adaptive management by the EPA 
and the Great Lakes Interagency Task Force to update the GLRI action 
plan every 5 years.
  None of these changes were included in the Senate bill. Adding them 
to the House WRDA bill will make sure these thoughtful provisions, 
which enhance transparency, accountability, and local planning, are 
maintained as we fight to get this bill passed.
  I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, but I do 
not oppose the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, this is a good amendment that I support. 
It authorizes, as my colleague explained, the Great Lakes Restoration 
Initiative. Mr. Joyce has championed this bill and worked very hard, as 
has Ms. Kaptur, on this important issue.
  In fact, the GLRI bill passed through the Committee on Transportation 
and Infrastructure and passed the House by a voice vote, so I firmly 
stand behind Mr. Joyce's amendment. I support it and would urge all my 
colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. JOYCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as she may consume to the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Ms. Kaptur), who has also been very active in 
this campaign.
  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Chairman, I thank Congressman Joyce for yielding, and 
I urge strong support of his amendment. I thank him for his vigilant 
and necessary championing of our Great Lakes, the largest body of 
freshwater on the face of the Earth. I want to thank Chairman Shuster, 
Ranking Member DeFazio, and Subcommittee Chairman Gibbs for helping us 
to elevate to national importance and to large numbers of our citizenry 
the sheer magnitude of what these freshwater seas actually represent 
for our country and the world.
  The Great Lakes Restoration Initiative has been very effective in 
beginning to address the severe and unique concerns confronting our 
Great Lakes. During the first 5 years of GLRI, Federal agencies and 
their partners removed 42 beneficial-use-impairment listings in 17 
areas of concern, quadrupling the number of beneficial use impairments 
removed in the preceding 22 years. For example, this year the 
Environmental Protection Agency made an important designation at the 
Black River area of concern near Lorain, Ohio. It is the largest EPA 
GLRI investment, and it will bring that area of concern to completion, 
an area so critically damaged by decades of industrial waste that 
drains directly into Lake Erie, our life source.
  Programs like the GLRI, which have proven effective, deserve our 
praise and support. As such, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of 
Mr. Joyce's amendment to protect one of our greatest national and 
global treasures, the Great Lakes, which represent and contain 20 
percent of the world's freshwater. Just to put it on the record, God 
isn't making any more freshwater. This equals 20% of all that exists. 
We have to take care of it and shepherd it into the future.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Pennsylvania has 4\1/2\ minutes 
remaining. The gentleman from Ohio has 45 seconds remaining.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg).
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Mr. Joyce for his 
leadership on this amendment and his bipartisan efforts to ensure 
resources to protect and restore the Great Lakes ecosystem. In April, 
the House joined together to unanimously pass Mr. Joyce's amendment to 
formally authorize the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative program, the 
same goal as his amendment today.
  The Great Lakes are a vast, strategic resource, and a source of pride 
for the State of Michigan and all surrounding States, and our country, 
as well, as a whole, with this massive, very special resource. I 
encourage my colleagues to vote in support of this amendment and help 
protect and preserve the Great Lakes for the benefit of our environment 
and the economy for generations to come.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I will say my piece if I could. It is with 
a heavy heart that I come to the House floor today. My mother passed 
away early this morning, Pat Shuster--Patricia Shuster. I want to thank 
all my colleagues for their condolences and kind words.
  Some may wonder why am I here today. Well, it is what my mother would 
have wanted. In fact, she would have insisted that I do my job and 
finish my work. So I know my mother is smiling down on me today.
  Mom, my work is almost done. I love you and will miss you forever.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. JOYCE. Mr. Chairman, when it comes to the Great Lakes, I know I 
can sound like a broken record. In fact, some have recently called me 
here the Great Lakes guy. I am proud of that, and I am proud to support 
this amendment, proud to stand up for one of our country's greatest 
natural resources and economic powerhouses. I hope you all join me in 
support to protect and preserve our national treasure, the Great Lakes.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Joyce).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio will be 
postponed.


              Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Bridenstine

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 72, strike lines 19 through 21.
       At the end of title II, add the following:

     SEC. 2__. TULSA AND WEST TULSA, ARKANSAS RIVER, OKLAHOMA.

       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall conduct a study to 
     determine the feasibility of modifying the projects for flood 
     risk management, Tulsa and West Tulsa, Oklahoma, authorized 
     by section 3 of the Act of August 18, 1941 (55 Stat. 645; 
     chapter 377).
       (2) Requirements.--
       (A) In general.--In carrying out the study under paragraph 
     (1), the Secretary shall address project deficiencies, 
     uncertainties, and significant data gaps, including material, 
     construction, and subsurface, which render the project at 
     risk of overtopping, breaching, or system failure.
       (B) Addressing deficiencies.--In addressing deficiencies 
     under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall incorporate 
     current design standards and efficiency improvements, 
     including the replacement of mechanical and electrical 
     components at pumping stations, if the incorporation does not 
     significantly change the scope, function, or purpose of the 
     project.
       (3) Prioritization to address significant risks.--In any 
     case in which a levee or levee

[[Page H6049]]

     system (as defined in section 9002 of the Water Resources 
     Reform and Development Act of 2007 (33 U.S.C. 3301)) is 
     classified as a Class I or II under the levee safety action 
     classification tool developed by the Corps of Engineers, the 
     Secretary shall expedite the project for budget 
     consideration.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Oklahoma (Mr. Bridenstine) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Oklahoma.
  Mr. BRIDENSTINE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  While the current version of the bill includes language for a 
feasibility study on the Tulsa-West Tulsa levees, this amendment simply 
strengthens the language by aligning the House version of the bill with 
the already Senate-passed bill. It requires the Army Corps of Engineers 
to prioritize funding for construction if the study finds the levees 
are at a high risk for failure. In order to get priority, the Corps 
feasibility study must conclude that the Tulsa levees are category 1 or 
2, the highest safety risk.
  The current infrastructure that encompasses the 20 miles of levees in 
the Tulsa system was constructed over 70 years ago, rendering the 
levees woefully outdated. In fact, the Corps has assessed that the 
levees are among the most high-risk levees in the country. These levees 
protect billions of dollars' worth of infrastructure, including homes 
and businesses and even energy production facilities. The potential 
loss of life and destruction of property in the event of a breach would 
be absolutely devastating to my district.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment simply aligns the House bill with the 
Senate bill and helps protect life and property. I urge a ``yes'' vote 
on this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Bridenstine).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                Amendment No. 17 Offered by Mr. Courtney

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title III, add the following:

     SEC. ___. STONINGTON HARBOR, CONNECTICUT.

       The portion of the project for navigation, Stonington 
     Harbor, Connecticut, authorized by the Act of May 23, 1828 (4 
     Stat. 288; chapter 73) that consists of the inner stone 
     breakwater that begins at coordinates N. 682,146.42, E. 
     1231,378.69, running north 83.587 degrees west 166.79' to a 
     point N. 682,165.05, E. 1,231,212.94, running north 69.209 
     degrees west 380.89' to a point N. 682,300.25, E. 
     1,230,856.86, is no longer authorized as a Federal project 
     beginning on the date of enactment of this Act.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) and a Member opposed each will control 
5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
  Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This is a simple amendment that adds to the list of projects 
deauthorized through WRDA a stone breakwater in Stonington Harbor in 
Stonington, Connecticut.
  If the amendment passes, it will return the breakwater to the town of 
Stonington. I can report confidently that all the stakeholders in that 
region, the town of Stonington, and the State of Connecticut strongly 
support this amendment.
  It is a breakwater that was built in 1827, operated for a number of 
years; but in the mid-20th century, the Army Corps abandoned the wharf, 
and it has really deteriorated since as a result of storms, Hurricanes 
Donna and Gloria and Superstorm Sandy. The town created an Old 
Stonington Harbor Wharf/Breakwater Task Force, which, again, has put 
together a reconstruction plan. It has received funding from the State 
of Connecticut. All of this is on standby, subject to deauthorization, 
which the Army Corps tells us is necessary for legal title to switch.
  Again, it is a simple amendment. I want to, again, salute the hard 
work of the task force, which was headed by Peter Tacy; the First 
Selectman of Stonington, Rob Simmons, who was my predecessor in the 
Second Congressional District seat; and also to State senator Andy 
Maynard, who worked hard on this project and is retiring from the 
Connecticut General Assembly.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, but I do not 
oppose the bill.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
is recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I support Mr. Courtney's amendment and 
urge adoption of it.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise for the purpose of engaging Chairman 
Shuster in a colloquy with respect to the Kildee-Moolenaar amendment 
that the House will consider shortly. First, I thank him for his 
efforts, and for the efforts of Ranking Member DeFazio, as well as 
Speaker Ryan, Leader Pelosi, and Mr. Hoyer, who late in the evening 
yesterday worked to reach an agreement on this amendment.
  The amendment authorizes $170 million for the Corps of Engineers to 
replace public and private infrastructure in communities such as my 
hometown of Flint that have received an emergency declaration due to 
lead contamination in their drinking water. My constituents have been 
waiting for the help they need for more than a year since they were 
told their drinking water was poisoned. This is a very important step 
toward getting them the help they deserve and putting this aid on the 
President's desk.
  As the chairman knows, the Senate has passed $220 million to assist 
communities like Flint with lead issues in an overwhelmingly bipartisan 
vote of 95-3. That package includes funding for water infrastructure 
replacement and for programs to help address the impacts of lead 
exposure on children and pregnant women nationwide. It also creates a 
Federal advisory committee to study the effects of lead exposure on 
communities, and it suggests ways to reduce it.
  To my friend, Mr. Shuster, do I have your commitment to bridge the 
gap between my amendment and the Senate package so that the final bill 
we send to the President provides the much-needed relief to my 
constituents and the families of Flint?
  Mr. SHUSTER. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. KILDEE. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. SHUSTER. I thank the gentleman and recognize that this is an 
important issue to him and his constituents back home in Michigan. In 
2016, no one, no one should be afraid to drink the water that comes out 
of their tap. That is something I think we all can agree on. It is in 
that spirit that I have committed to working together as we bridge the 
differences between the two Chambers that these bills will ensure a 
mutually agreeable solution. I am committed to getting this vital 
infrastructure bill to the President's desk. I look forward to working 
with the gentleman and those on the other side of the aisle to move 
this forward.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman. I look forward to 
working with the chairman on this and working to successfully get this 
bill out of the House today so that we can work on it with the Senate.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, again, I want to thank the ranking 
member's support for my amendment and also the chairman of the 
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure for his support. I want 
to express my deepest condolences for his loss.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney).
  The amendment was agreed to.

[[Page H6050]]

  



                Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Newhouse

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. __. KENNEWICK MAN.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Claimant tribes.--The term ``claimant tribes'' means 
     the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, the 
     Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, the Nez 
     Perce Tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla 
     Reservation, and the Wanapum Band of Priest Rapids.
       (2) Department.--The term ``Department'' means the 
     Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic 
     Preservation.
       (3) Human remains.--The term ``human remains'' means the 
     human remains that--
       (A) are known as Kennewick Man or the Ancient One, which 
     includes the projectile point lodged in the right ilium bone, 
     as well as any residue from previous sampling and studies; 
     and
       (B) are part of archaeological collection number 45BN495.
       (b) Transfer.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     Federal law, including the Native American Graves Protection 
     and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.), or law of the 
     State of Washington, not later than 90 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary, acting through the 
     Chief of Engineers, shall transfer the human remains to the 
     Department, on the condition that the Department, acting 
     through the State Historic Preservation Officer, disposes of 
     the remains and repatriates the remains to claimant tribes.
       (c) Terms and Conditions.--The transfer shall be subject to 
     the following terms and conditions:
       (1) The release of the human remains to the claimant tribes 
     is contingent upon the claimant tribes entering into 
     agreement with the Department.
       (2) The claimant tribes are in agreement as to the final 
     burial place of the human remains.
       (3) The claimant tribes are in agreement that the human 
     remains will be buried in the State of Washington.
       (4) The claimant tribes are in agreement that the 
     Department will take custody of the human remains upon the 
     transfer by the Secretary.
       (d) Cost.--The Corps of Engineers shall be responsible for 
     any costs associated with the transfer.
       (e) Limitations.--
       (1) In general.--The transfer shall be limited solely to 
     the human remains portion of the archaeological collection.
       (2) Secretary.--The Secretary shall have no further 
     responsibility for the human remains transferred pursuant to 
     subsection (b) after the date of the transfer.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Washington (Mr. Newhouse) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Washington.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to offer this bipartisan 
amendment that is based on the text of H.R. 4131, the Bring the Ancient 
One Home Act of 2015, which was bipartisan legislation introduced by 
the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Heck), my friend and colleague. I 
was very proud to cosponsor this bill, and I am honored to lead this 
amendment with my Pacific Northwest colleagues: Representatives Heck, 
Kilmer, and Walden. I appreciate their commitment to this important 
issue.
  Mr. Chairman, 20 years ago the skeletal remains of a human being 
determined to be roughly 9,000 years old were found on Federal land 
near the Columbia River in my central Washington district. These 
remains are often referred to as the Kennewick Man, but the tribes 
prefer the more respectful name of The Ancient One, which is how I will 
refer to him.
  Because The Ancient One was found on lands managed by the Army Corps 
of Engineers, the nearly fully intact skeleton was turned over to the 
Corps.

                              {time}  1700

  The tribes involved--the Yakama Nation, the Confederated Tribes of 
the Colville Reservation, the Nez Perce Tribe, the Confederated Tribes 
of the Umatilla and the Wanapum Band of Priest Rapids--have, for two 
decades, worked to repatriate the Ancient One and return him for proper 
burial that would follow practices used by these Columbia Basin tribes 
for thousands of years; or, as they say, for time immemorial. The 
tribes believe that the spirit of the Ancient One cannot rest until he 
is reburied, and I think it is important that we respect that belief.
  The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, or 
NAGPRA, was enacted into law in 1990 to address the treatment of Native 
American cultural items, including human remains, with the goal of 
returning these items to tribes. In other words, NAGPRA was enacted to 
facilitate the return of skeletal remains such as the Ancient One.
  In January of 2000, both the Corps of Engineers and the Interior 
Department determined the Ancient One was indeed of Indian descent and 
should be returned for proper burial. In June of 2015, University of 
Copenhagen geneticists released findings that clearly tied the DNA of 
the Ancient One to modern Native Americans, and a subsequent study by 
the University of Chicago reached similar conclusions.
  Mr. Chairman, my amendment would simply return the Ancient One back 
to the Columbia Basin tribes, who are in total agreement that he should 
be reburied. I urge my colleagues to support the enactment of this 
commonsense amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, 
although I am not opposed.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HECK of Washington. Mr. Chairman, initially, I would like to 
invoke an expression from Indian Country in the Northwest. I raise my 
hands in respect first to the chair of the standing committee, Mr. 
Shuster, who has my deepest condolences, and to my friends, Mr. 
Newhouse, Mr. Walden, and my roommate, Mr. Kilmer.
  The story of the Ancient One, or Kennewick Man, as he is known, is 
very familiar to those of us who live in the Northwest. As the 
gentleman from Washington indicated, two college students stumbled upon 
a skull of the Ancient One on the waters of the Columbia River 20 years 
ago. That accident unearthed one of the most important archeological 
discoveries in North American history. Think about it: a skeleton 
virtually fully intact that is 9,000 years old. Since that time, as has 
been indicated, the five tribes of the region have struggled for two 
decades for their right to properly honor, as is their cultural way, 
and rebury their ancestor.
  But there is another story here that I think is important to tell. 
For generations, American archeologists and collectors raced across the 
West to collect native artifacts that they shipped back to museums or, 
more sadly, sold for a profit. Those museums were filled for years with 
Indian remains from graves, burial platforms, and battlefields that 
were desecrated, desecrated simply because the nonnative people did not 
understand the heritage and culture of native people. This era of 
looting and desecration is, in fact, a stain on our Nation's history.
  Thankfully, that wasn't the case with the remains of the Ancient One. 
This is, in part, because in 1990, in its wisdom, this institution 
passed a law to protect Indian remains and cultural items from 
desecration.
  In the last 26 years since its enactment, that law has allowed the 
Federal Government to return thousands of remains and artifacts to 
native tribes, and that is exactly what this amendment will do. It 
would enforce our existing laws and return the Ancient One to the five 
tribes in the Columbia River Basin, which they have fought for for two 
decades. They fought against a group of scientists that seek to study 
these remains in order to learn more about how humans first populated 
North America.
  I don't mean to impugn the motives of these scientists. We all want 
to support greater scientific discovery; but, frankly, these efforts to 
prevent the reburial of the Ancient One ignore these tribes' sovereign 
rights, traditions, and, in fact, their most sacred beliefs.
  Throughout American history, the Federal Government and the American 
people have not always--if we are honest with one another--upheld our 
vital responsibility to respect the treaty rights of the peoples who 
have been here since time immemorial. It is something we continue to 
struggle with--I get that--but we can't let it happen here again.

[[Page H6051]]

  As my friend from Washington said, the science is settled. The 
Ancient One is in fact an ancestor of the native peoples of the 
Columbia River Basin, and he belongs with them. We need to do 
everything in our power to ensure he is returned as quickly as 
possibly. That is why I was honored to introduce the Bring the Ancient 
One Home Act, along with my colleagues here. That is why I am so proud 
to work closely with Mr. Newhouse, Mr. Walden, and Mr. Kilmer on this 
amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, it has been 20 years, and that is 20 years too long. It 
is vital that we act now to properly honor the Ancient One. For that 
reason, I urge adoption of this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Kilmer).
  Mr. KILMER. Mr. Chairman, I thank my good friends, Representative 
Newhouse and Representative Heck, for taking the lead on this effort.
  I rise today in support of this amendment because the Ancient One has 
been separated from his family for far too long. It is time he return 
home.
  For 20 years, as you heard my colleague point out, the Ancient One 
has been stuck in limbo while the scientists and lawyers have debated 
what the Native American community knew to be true: that he is their 
ancestor. Now that three independent DNA analyses have confirmed his 
ancestry to the native people of the Columbia Plateau, the U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers must expedite his repatriation so that his 
descendants may honor his life.
  This legislation will help speed up the process and ensure that the 
Ancient One's descendants have the opportunity to lay his remains to 
rest in their ancestral burial grounds. Only then will the Ancient 
One's story finally be complete and will his spirit be able to rest. 
That is why I support the amendment, and I urge my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Mr. NEWHOUSE. Mr. Chairman, I would urge all of my colleagues to 
accept this amendment. It is very important to the native people of 
central Washington.
  I, again, want to extend my thanks to Representative Heck, 
Representative Walden, and Representative Kilmer. I would like to 
extend a word of condolence to Chairman Shuster. We are all part of an 
extended family, and I want to make sure that he understands that we 
share with him his loss.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Washington (Mr. Newhouse).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Kildee

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19 
printed in House Report 114-794.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title I, add the following:

     SEC. 1__. ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE.

       Section 219 of the Water Resources Development Act of 1992 
     (Public Law 102-580; 106 Stat. 4835) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following:
       ``(g) Additional Assistance.--Notwithstanding any 
     limitation on project purposes identified in subsections (c) 
     or (f), or limitation on authorization, the Secretary may 
     provide additional assistance under subsection (a), and 
     assistance for construction, to any community identified in 
     subsection (c) or (f), in any State for which the President 
     has declared an emergency under the Robert T. Stafford 
     Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 
     et seq.), as a result of the presence of chemical, physical, 
     or biological constituents, including lead or other 
     contaminants in the eligible system, for the repair or 
     replacement of public and private infrastructure.
       ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purposes 
     under paragraph (g), there is authorized to be appropriated 
     $170,000,000 to remain available until expended.''

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 897, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is something, obviously, I 
have been working on for some time. It would bring urgently needed aid 
to my hometown of Flint, Michigan.
  For over a year, the Flint water crisis has been public, and we have 
not yet been able to act here in Congress. It has been even longer 
since the residents of Flint have been drinking or using water that is 
basically poisoned with lead--2 full years.
  To be clear, what happened in Flint was a failure of government at 
every level of government. Through this amendment, Congress can take 
its rightful place in fulfilling its obligation and its responsibility 
to help my hometown recover.
  The amendment would authorize $170 million to restore the safety of 
water infrastructure in communities like my hometown of Flint that have 
lead in their water. More importantly, it would create a concrete 
commitment from both bodies of Congress to get aid for my hometown to 
the President's desk.
  The Senate passed similar legislation by a vote of 95-3. This 
amendment would ensure that the House also supports communities like 
Flint that are suffering with this terrible problem.
  We have just waited an awful long time for this. We have worked very 
hard to get this amendment in a bipartisan fashion to the floor. I want 
to thank all my friends, but particularly Mr. Moolenaar, who cosponsors 
this amendment with me.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOOLENAAR. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition, though I am not opposed to it.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman 
from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. MOOLENAAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.
  First, I also want to congratulate and express my appreciation to my 
colleague, friend, and neighbor from Flint, Mr. Kildee, for his work on 
this and for his advocacy of his hometown.
  I wanted to say, Mr. Chairman, the crisis in Flint was caused by 
failures of government at all levels. The Federal Government played a 
significant role in causing this crisis, and Congress has held multiple 
hearings to investigate. Members on both sides of the aisle have found 
fault with the Federal Government's actions in Flint.
  Today, the House has the opportunity to acknowledge those failures 
and do right by the people of Flint. While the Federal Government 
failed, the pipes in Flint were damaged beyond repair and residents 
were poisoned with lead. That is why fixing the water infrastructure in 
Flint is a proper role for the Federal Government and a step forward 
for the city and its residents.
  I urge my colleagues to support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, may I ask how much time I have remaining.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) has 3\1/2\ 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOOLENAAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Upton).
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Chairman, listen, we all know what happened in Flint 
was a tragic failure at every level, and folks there are rightly tired 
of the finger pointing. They want answers.
  Is it asking too much for the EPA to tell folks when lead levels are 
too high? I say no. This is why this very body passed the Kildee-Upton 
bill earlier this year, 416-2, that would force the EPA to alert 
families when lead levels are too high.
  Is it asking too much for us to tackle this problem in a fiscally 
responsible manner? I say no. That is why we have a responsible 
solution right in front of us. This provision will be fully paid for 
when conferenced with the Senate.
  Is it asking too much for our kids to have access to safe drinking 
water? I say no. I was just in Flint with my friend, Mr. Kildee. We 
ought to be focused on working together to get the job done.
  Folks in Flint have been asking these questions for more than 2 years 
now. And you know what? They deserve answers, action, and results. It 
is time to stand up and deliver.

[[Page H6052]]

  

  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MOOLENAAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Michigan (Mrs. Miller).
  Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, I am so thankful that Congress is stepping up finally 
to do the right thing by providing assistance to the people of Flint.
  Flint has suffered a manmade disaster because of the failure of 
government at every level of government: the local level, the county 
level, the State level, and, certainly, the Federal level. Certainly, 
the State of Michigan has acknowledged their responsibility and has 
been taking some corrective action, but this disaster is beyond the 
ability of the city, county, and State to deal with. It requires the 
Federal Government to accept culpability as well and to buck up, and it 
is entirely appropriate and necessary that we do so.
  Helping the people of Flint, Mr. Chairman, especially the children--
these are American children, these are American babies, not from some 
other foreign country where we give plenty of foreign aid--speaks to 
who we are as a people.

                              {time}  1715

  And we are Americans, compassionate, never turning our back on our 
own when they need help; and certainly our fellow American citizens of 
Flint need our country's--this country's--help right now.
  So I will be very proud to vote ``yes,'' and I urge all of my 
colleagues to do the same.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Huizenga), my friend and member of the Financial Services 
Committee.
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, this is going to be from the heart. My family is 
originally from Flint, on my mom's side. I have had very many fond 
memories growing up as a child going and visiting aunts and uncles and 
cousins. I have recently visited those who have been affected, and it 
is tragic.
  Mr. Chairman, the simple fact is that if these were folks that had 
been affected by the breach of a dam or by a nuclear plant meltdown, we 
would not be turning our backs on them; we would be taking care of 
them. We should be doing the exact same thing with the folks in Flint.
  These folks have experienced failure of government at all levels for 
decades: local, State, and the Federal Government. That has been well 
acknowledged. But what we have not talked about is how we are going to 
then care for those citizens.
  Let's fix the management issues, but, more importantly, let's care 
for our fellow citizens and make sure that those children, especially, 
are going to have the same opportunity as every other child in Michigan 
and the United States.
  Mr. MOOLENAAR. Mr. Chairman, just in closing, I want to compliment 
everyone who has been involved in this bipartisan solution. It is an 
example of Congress working together to solve a problem.
  This is something that those of us--and many of us have traveled to 
Flint--have listened to the stories of the families of children who 
have been poisoned. It is a tragedy on the national level. Presidential 
candidates have been there.
  This is something concrete that Congress can do to move the ball 
forward and help Flint with its healing and making a huge difference in 
the lives of residents in Michigan.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  I just want to say how much I appreciate the efforts on behalf of my 
home community by my colleagues on both sides of the aisle. As you have 
heard, Congressman Moolenaar, my neighbor, has been there right along.
  Congresswoman Miller stepped up immediately after this crisis became 
known and articulated a need for Federal intervention very early in the 
process. Mr. Huizenga obviously has been there, with roots in Flint, 
and has come to my community.
  There is not much more I can say about what Mr. Upton has been 
willing to do, working with me initially on legislation to reform the 
EPA's obligations regarding notification and now, of course, working 
with us to get this amendment before the House of Representatives.
  It broke my heart when this whole episode began, to see my own 
hometown, the place that has given me virtually everything that I have, 
go through the worst crisis that it could ever even imagine, a crisis 
that was a threat to its very existence. So I am grateful for the help 
of Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Pallone), the ranking member of the Committee on Energy and Commerce.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for 
yielding, and I am happy to support this amendment.
  The people of Flint have gone over 2 years without clean drinking 
water in their homes. They are still being exposed, still being harmed. 
I think it is a disgrace that we are still fighting about providing 
them with essential Federal aid.
  I want to commend my colleague Mr. Kildee and Democratic leaders in 
the House and the Senate who kept attention on the plight of this 
community and worked tirelessly for the opportunity to offer this 
amendment.
  I hope to see this amendment pass shortly, but our work will not be 
done. We will have to work to go to conference with the House and the 
Senate WRDA bills and ensure that the people of Flint receive the funds 
that they need.
  Safe drinking water is essential to every person in this country, and 
provisions to ensure safe drinking water should not be a partisan 
issue. So I urge my colleagues to join me in voting ``yes'' on this 
amendment.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, again, I thank my colleagues. I hope and 
pray that I have strong bipartisan support for this effort. It has 
surely been demonstrated by my friends who have spoken.
  This is one of those issues that should and ought to transcend some 
of the divisions that often occupy this House. It is a matter simply of 
doing what is right for the people of my hometown and the people of 
this country, and it means a lot to me that so many have stood with me 
in this time. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chair, I rise today in support of H.R. 5303, the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2016.
  Across the country, my colleagues and I hear from communities and 
businesses about the need to invest in infrastructure. The federal 
investment in infrastructure has fallen to a paltry level, and our 
communities are feeling the consequences of this every day. Not only 
does investing in infrastructure put people to work, it also allows for 
the efficient movement of people and goods, an essential aspect of 
commerce, economic growth, and public safety. The lack of robust 
investment threatens our global competitiveness and the safety and 
quality of life of our constituents.
  The original Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) bill included 
language that would set a schedule to direct all of the Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF) revenues to be used for the maintenance 
of U.S. harbors instead of the current process of transferring a 
portion to the Treasury to cover unrelated debts. Our nation's harbors, 
ports, and waterways have a backlog of important projects that are key 
to our country's competitiveness. By moving HMTF funding off-budget, it 
would have provided much-needed funding for these projects. As the 
Senate and House negotiate the final legislation, I support directing 
all Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund revenues to be used for harbor 
maintenance.
  I applaud Ranking Member DeFazio for securing a set-aside of at least 
10 percent of the revenues from the HMTF to be used for small ports. 
This provision will benefit many communities in Oregon that rely on 
small ports to get goods to market, which will help local economies 
thrive. These small ports can't compete for Harbor Maintenance funding 
alongside the large, deep-draft ports, so a set-aside is vital to their 
survival.
  Additionally the Willamette Falls at the end of the Oregon Trail and 
the Willamette Locks were an important element of American settlement 
of the West. Repair and reopening of the Willamette Falls Locks is an 
essential part of the future economic and cultural heritage of the 
area. A final disposition study of the Locks

[[Page H6053]]

is underway by the Army Corps of Engineers. It is important that this 
study fully consider all economic, recreational, historic, and cultural 
significance of the locks at the national, state, or local level.
  The Columbia River is a powerful economic force in Oregon. It helps 
carry goods to market and provides food to tribal populations and 
others. We must reduce pollution and contamination of this critical 
resource. I joined my colleagues Reps. Blumenauer and DeFazio in 
introducing H.R. 2469, the Columbia River Basin Restoration Act of 
2015, which includes grants for projects that help preserve and protect 
the waterway. As the Senate and House negotiate the final legislation, 
I support the inclusion of the Columbia River Restoration Act in the 
final bill.
  I share the frustration of so many families in Oregon and across the 
nation whose children have been exposed to lead in their school 
drinking water and their neighborhoods. Families shouldn't have to 
worry about whether the drinking water in their homes or schools poses 
serious risks to their children's health. The Flint, Michigan crisis 
continues, and children and families desperately need aid to restore 
quality drinking water. I supported Rep. Kildee's amendment to bring 
aid needed to communities suffering from water contamination 
emergencies.
  Invasive mussels have destroyed infrastructure in Western States and 
are costly to eradicate once they've multiplied. Accordingly, 
prevention is important. Watercraft inspection stations help protect 
the Columbia River basin from being permeated by zebra and quagga 
mussels. I am pleased that Rep. Herrera Beutler's amendment was adopted 
to allow funds to be used for watercraft inspection stations in 
Northwestern states.
  I am supporting this bill today and will continue working with my 
colleagues to dedicate HMTF revenue for its intended purpose.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I rise in strong support of the Kildee 
Amendment to H.R. 5303, the ``Water Resources Development Act,'' which 
authorizes variety of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers water resources 
development projects, feasibility studies, and relationships with 
nonfederal project sponsors.
  Specifically, I would like to congratulate my colleague 
Representative Dan Kildee who represents Michigan's 5th District on his 
amendment, which bring much needed relief to the people of Flint 
Michigan who have gone without safe potable water for over 2 years.
  The Kildee Amendment provides $170,000,000 in funding to repair and 
replace the damaged water pipes that are the source of the toxic lead 
and chemical laced water flowing to Flint, Michigan homes.
  For the past two years, Flint, Michigan has lived in a state of fear 
of the water flowing from the faucets in their homes.
  It is beyond shocking and unacceptable that tens of thousands of 
citizens have been exposed to toxic levels of lead in their drinking 
water.
  The trust and ability to protect our citizens' basic right to clean 
water has been shaken nationally by the severity and length of time 
this disaster has been allowed to fester without Congressional action.
  Each of us in this body has a duty to ensure justice and protection 
of our citizens.
  This was not a disaster in hiding, it was in plain sight for 2 years, 
but Congress refused to act until forced to do so by a deadline that 
they could not control.
  We must not let the plight of Flint and the provision of relief let 
us forget that we must:
  address the harms caused;
  get an accounting of what happened;
  understand how the water was poisoned;
  make the lives of people damaged by this tragedy whole;
  find justice for those lives that may have been lost; and
  determine and provide for the long-term health needs of those 
impacted.
  Flint, Michigan like so many communities across the nation really 
felt the brunt of the financial crisis created by the abuse of new home 
lending practices and deceptive investment schemes that hid the 
weaknesses in the economy until the great recession spread across the 
nation beginning in late 2008.
  The financial damage done to communities like Flint in the form of 
steep declines in property values, which caused significant declines in 
property tax income.
  This was not just Flint's problem, but a national reality--for 
financially strapped cities, towns, school boards, and municipal 
governments.
  This shared economic crisis resulted in new leadership being sent to 
Congress and to governors' mansions across the nation.
  Michigan was one state that turned to new leadership to solve 
problems and restore fiscal health to the state and local economies.
  Governor Rick Snyder of Michigan was sworn into office in 2011 to 
solve problems and restore fiscal health to his state.
  On December 1, 2010, Michael Brown took office as Flint's state-
appointed emergency manager.
  One of the first acts of the newly elected leaders in the state of 
Michigan was to drastically change the powers that could be exercised 
under the state's emergency manager law to include special provisions 
regarding the declaration of a local government financial emergency.
  Over the 22 years the original emergency management law had been in 
place only 7 jurisdictions had been under emergency management, but 
following the 2011 changes to that law 10 jurisdictions were placed 
under emergency management.
  On Election Day in 2011 the state declared that an emergency 
financial manager should assume control over the city of Flint.
  The conditions in Flint are a cautionary tale on what happens when 
money has more value than people in the minds of those charged under 
public oath to serve, defend and protect Constitutional Rights.
  On April 25, 2014, the city of Flint switches water supply from Lake 
Huron, which cost the city about $1 million each month to the Flint 
River to save money.
  The Flint River had long been known by residents to be contaminated 
by industrial pollution.
  The water out of the Flint River was not safe, but it could have been 
treated to prevent the erosion of lead pipes that contaminated the 
water, the introduction bacteria and other toxins into the homes, 
schools, workplaces, and churches of the community, but that would have 
cost money.
  Shortly after the switch citizens began to complain about the color, 
taste, order, and reported rashes.
  In August and September 2014, city officials issued boil water 
directives to citizens after a coliform bacterium was found in the 
water.
  Some people may be more vulnerable to contaminants in drinking water 
than the general population.
  Immuno-comprised persons such as persons with cancer undergoing 
chemotherapy, persons who have undergone organ transplants, people with 
HIV/AIDS or other immune system disorders, some elderly, and infants 
can be particularly at risk from infections if exposed to water born 
bacteria.
  Several deaths are under investigation because they may be linked to 
the polluted water sent to Flint residents' homes.
  In October 2014 the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality 
blames cold weather, aging pipes, and a population decline for the poor 
water quality.
  In January 2015, the Detroit water systems offers to reconnect Flint, 
and would waive the $4 million connection fee, but 3 weeks later the 
state appointed emergency manager declined the offer.
  In February 2015, a memo from Governor Snyder's office plays down the 
problem and states that the water is not an imminent ``threat to public 
health.''
  In February 2015--the same month the governor's office declared that 
the water was safe tests revealed that it contained 104 parts per 
billion of lead in drinking water drawn from taps in the home of Lee 
Anne Walters one of today's witnesses.
  The Environmental Protection Agency requires action when levels reach 
15 parts per billion of lead contamination, but scientist state there 
is no safe level of lead contamination.
  On February 27, Miguel Del Toral an EPA expert reported that the 
state was testing water in a manner that would profoundly underestimate 
lead levels.
  On March 12, 2015, Veolia a consultant group hired by Flint reports 
that the city's water meets state and federal standards, but fails to 
report on lead levels.
  Elevated levels of lead can cause serious health problems, especially 
for pregnant women and young children.
  Infants and young children are typically more vulnerable to lead in 
drinking water than the general population.
  While the state declared the water safe to drink and the EPA received 
assurances that testing was being performed and the results showed no 
worries, behind the scenes something very different was happening in 
state offices located in Flint Michigan.
  On January 9, 2015, e-mails among Flint government employees at the 
Department of Technology, Management and Budget, Michigan Department of 
Environmental Quality, and the Office of Drinking Water and Municipal 
Assistance.
  The emails revealed that employees at government departments in the 
city of Flint were concerned about Flint's water quality and in 
response the state paid for water coolers to be placed in government 
offices located in the city of flint on each occupied floor, and 
positioned near the water fountain, so state workers could choose which 
water to drink.
  The core concern of the emails was the levels of a group of chemical 
compounds called ``TTHM'' or ``total tri-halomethanes, that were 
identified in the Flint drinking water.
  TTHM are produced when organic matter in natural water reacts 
chemically with chlorine disinfectants.

[[Page H6054]]

  Chlorine disinfectants are added to drinking water to destroy the 
microbial pathogens that could make consumers sick or even kill them.
  Disinfection byproducts TTHM can be minimized in drinking water by 
reducing organic matter in water before chlorination--in other words 
through treating the water.
  While the people of Flint Michigan continue to complain about the 
taste and smell of the water--which ranged from a dull grey grime to 
rust color in appearance government officials provided themselves with 
access to bottled water at the taxpayers' expense.
  The amount of chlorination added to the water in excess of what 
should have been created another problem--people were now consuming and 
bathing in water contaminated with TTHM.
  The amount of chlorination added to the water in excess of what 
should have been created another problem--people were now.
  Flint Mayor Karen Weaver announced that her goal would be to replace 
13,000 lead pipes at a cost of $2-3,000 for each pipe for a total of 
about $42 million.
  No one knows the reality of undertaking a massive effort such as what 
will be needed, so the cost could easily be much higher than estimates.
  Flint cannot be another Katrina where the poor, people of color and 
marginalized are shutout of jobs as well as the political and decision 
making processes regarding their homes, neighborhoods or city.
  Replacing the lead pipes of Flint must include the cost of repairing 
homes that will be damaged to access the pipes; repaving driveways, or 
re-sodding lawns that are dug up to get to pipes, and restoring 
sidewalks that are damaged to access pipe.
  The repair and restitution of potable water to residents of Flint 
will not be the end of the story.
  We must recognize and acknowledge that there will be long term health 
consequences for every person exposed to the toxic water for 2 years.
  There are health impacts for children, their parents, and 
grandparents that cannot and should not be ignored.
  Our next step must be a public fund to compensate those who have long 
term health impacts or diminished ability to be productive over the 
full course of their work careers.
  We will continue to work to help the people of Flint, Michigan in 
order to restore them to health and eliminate their fear.
  In closing, let me again express my appreciation and thanks to 
Congressman Kildee for his steadfastness in advocating his amendment 
and to Energy and Commerce Chair Upton, Congressman Conyers, and 
Congresswoman Brenda Lawrence for their tireless efforts to ameliorate 
the suffering of the people of Flint Michigan.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Mr. MASSIE. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan 
will be postponed.


                    Announcement by the Acting Chair

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings 
will now resume on those amendments printed in House Report 114-794 on 
which further proceedings were postponed, in the following order:
  Amendment No. 15 by Mr. Joyce of Ohio.
  Amendment No. 19 by Mr. Kildee of Michigan.
  The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any 
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.


                 Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Joyce

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Joyce) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the 
ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 407, 
noes 18, not voting 6, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 569]

                               AYES--407

     Abraham
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Allen
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boustany
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DeSaulnier
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gowdy
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Holding
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Kuster
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latta
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Mullin
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perry
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Price, Tom
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Russell
     Ryan (OH)
     Salmon
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                                NOES--18

     Amash
     Brat
     Brooks (AL)
     Collins (GA)
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Franks (AZ)
     Gosar
     Hice, Jody B.
     Jones
     Lummis
     Massie
     McClintock
     Mulvaney
     Palmer
     Sanford
     Weber (TX)
     Woodall

                             NOT VOTING--6

     Denham
     Kirkpatrick
     Poe (TX)
     Ribble
     Rush
     Sanchez, Loretta

[[Page H6055]]


  


                              {time}  1744

  Messrs. BROOKS of Alabama and Mr. WEBER of Texas changed their vote 
from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.


                 Amendment No. 19 Offered by Mr. Kildee

  The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Kildee) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which 
the ayes prevailed by voice vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 284, 
noes 141, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 5, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 570]

                               AYES--284

     Abraham
     Adams
     Aderholt
     Aguilar
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Barletta
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boustany
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Cole
     Comstock
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Gibson
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (LA)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Guinta
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Hastings
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Herrera Beutler
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hurd (TX)
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jolly
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Kuster
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Love
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marino
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McNerney
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Polis
     Pompeo
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Reed
     Reichert
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stivers
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Womack
     Yarmuth
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zinke

                               NOES--141

     Allen
     Babin
     Barr
     Barton
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (AL)
     Buck
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Conaway
     Crenshaw
     Davidson
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Flores
     Forbes
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guthrie
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hensarling
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt (VA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Latta
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Marchant
     Massie
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Renacci
     Rice (SC)
     Roe (TN)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (TX)
     Stewart
     Stutzman
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Walker
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Zeldin

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1

     Amash
       
       

                             NOT VOTING--5

     Kirkpatrick
     Poe (TX)
     Ribble
     Rush
     Sanchez, Loretta
       

                              {time}  1755

  Mr. ROTHFUS changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mr. JOYCE changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Emmer of Minnesota). The question is on the 
amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The Acting CHAIR. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Yoder) having assumed the chair, Mr. Emmer of Minnesota, Acting Chair 
of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
5303) to provide for improvements to the rivers and harbors of the 
United States, to provide for the conservation and development of water 
and related resources, and for other purposes, and, pursuant to House 
Resolution 897, he reported the bill back to the House with an 
amendment adopted in the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment 
reported from the Committee of the Whole?
  If not, the question is on the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute, as amended.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I am opposed to the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. DeFazio moves to recommit the bill H.R. 5303 to the 
     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure with 
     instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith 
     with the following amendment:
       At the end of title IV, add the following:

     SEC. __. NO CORPS FUNDING FOR SOCCER FIELDS, BASEBALL FIELDS, 
                   BASKETBALL COURTS, OR SPLASH PARKS.

       Notwithstanding item 1 of the table in section 401(a)(8), 
     the Secretary may not carry out the project for the Upper 
     Trinity River, Modified Central City, Fort Worth, Texas--
       (1) if the Secretary determines that any portion of the 
     project is for the construction of a soccer field, baseball 
     field, basketball

[[Page H6056]]

     court, or splash park using Federal funds provided through 
     the Corps of Engineers; or
       (2) notwithstanding section 116 of the Energy and Water 
     Development Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108-447; 118 
     Stat. 2944), until the Secretary has determined that the 
     project is economically justified.

  Mr. SHUSTER (during the reading). Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous 
consent that the reading be dispensed with.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Oregon is recognized for 
5 minutes.

                              {time}  1800

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, as we have heard over 2 days, the Corps' 
budget is tight--a $2.4 billion backlog in operations and maintenance 
and, after today, a $74 billion backlog in authorized projects. Now, 
deep in this bill is a line item that provides an authorization for an 
$810 million lavish waterfront development project in Fort Worth, 
Texas. My amendment simply guarantees fiscal discipline and regular 
order in two parts.
  First, it guarantees that no Corps of Engineers funds will be used to 
build soccer fields, baseball fields, basketball courts, or splash 
parks as part of the project. Second, it requires the Secretary of the 
Army to determine that the project is economically justified. That is 
it. That is all this does.
  The proponents of this will say there are no funds that are going to 
be used for soccer fields, baseball fields, basketball courts, or 
splash parks. However, this has been extracted from the Web site of the 
developer of the project. This is the official Web site. These are all 
included.
  They say: We are going to use local funds.
  There is a little gimmick here. Corps projects that have been 
authorized and have been found to be economically beneficial have to 
have local cost sharing. In this case, big parts of the local cost 
share are these things which are not qualified for a Corps project.
  They say: Those aren't going to be Federal funds.
  This is going to reduce the burden on the local people to match, and 
it is going to increase the burden on the taxpayers. In fact, if this 
does not authorize these things, all the Secretary has to do is to say 
they are not going to be constructed with Federal funds. If Members 
don't want to take my word for it, listen to the Taxpayers for Common 
Sense and National Taxpayers Union.
  ``The legislation authorizes funding for a project in Fort Worth, 
Texas, costing more than $800 million. The Upper Trinity River project 
is portrayed as a flood damage reduction effort, but is really a 
massive economic development initiative that would divert precious 
Corps resources to construct soccer and baseball fields, basketball 
courts, and even a splash park. Money spent on a splash park in Fort 
Worth is money that cannot be spent to further the Corps' core mission 
areas. At the least, we urge you to remove or limit the funds. . . . `' 
If I am wrong and the National Taxpayers Union is wrong, the Secretary 
only has to confirm that.
  Secondly, we are going to require the Secretary to determine the 
project as economically justified. Why would Congress insist on 
economically justifying a $510 million Federal project? A better 
question might be: Why wouldn't you insist on this?
  Every other chief's report in this bill had to go through an economic 
analysis by the Corps of Engineers and be found to be a net benefit to 
the taxpayers of the United States. This project did not. Yes, there 
was a private analysis done that said this is a great project, but 
there was no study done by the chief's office, and it has not been 
economically justified.
  This project started out as an earmark in 2004 at a cost of $220 
million. In this bill, it is a renewed earmark at $810 million, and the 
Federal share has gone from $110 million to $527 million. Anybody out 
there who has a need for a port or a harbor or anything else, think 
about that as you are in a very long line, and $527 million is going to 
get ahead of you with an earmarked project which includes these sorts 
of features.
  I urge Members to observe regular order, not to do an earmark by any 
other name, and require this project to be economically justified and 
not to construct sports facilities.

                                               September 27, 2016.
       Dear Representative: While less expensive and problematic 
     than the Senate version of the Water Resources Development 
     Act (S. 2848), we urge you to oppose H.R. 5303, the ``Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2016.'' Instead of much needed 
     reform, this legislation piles billions of dollars in 
     additional water projects on the U.S. Army Corps of 
     Engineers' plate. The legislation also makes policy changes 
     that will be costly to taxpayers.
       The largest challenge facing the Corps of Engineers water 
     resources program is the lack of a prioritization system for 
     allocating the limited available tax dollars. The legislation 
     directs the executive branch to better explain its budgeting 
     decisions, but this should not serve as an abdication of 
     congressional authority. Congress should develop the criteria 
     and metrics to prioritize Corps projects in the three primary 
     mission areas (navigation, flood/storm damage reduction, and 
     environmental restoration). The executive branch should be 
     required to allocate funds in the budget request in a 
     transparent manner through merit, competitive, or formula 
     systems developed by Congress. Lawmakers could then conduct 
     oversight, hold the administration accountable, and adjust 
     the systems, criteria, and metrics as needed.
       H.R. 5303 fails to include such a prioritization system. It 
     does many other things, however. Between committee 
     consideration and the floor, the bill grew by over $6 
     billion. A provision from the Water Resources Reform and 
     Development Act of 2014 dedicating maintenance dredging funds 
     to emerging ports is made permanent. It doesn't make sense to 
     invest in a port that is continually ``emerging.'' It also 
     extends set-asides for ``donor'' and ``energy'' ports without 
     reforming the massive cross-subsidies in the existing 
     maintenance dredging program. The legislation authorizes 
     funding for a project in Fort Worth, Texas, costing more than 
     $800 million. The Upper Trinity River project is portrayed as 
     a flood damage reduction effort, but is really a massive 
     economic development initiative that would divert precious 
     Corps resources to construct soccer and baseball fields, 
     basketball courts, and even a splash park. Money spent on a 
     splash park in Fort Worth is money that cannot be spent to 
     further the Corps' core mission areas. At the least, we urge 
     you to remove or limit the funds for this project.
       Again, we urge you to oppose H.R. 5303 the ``Water 
     Resources Development Act of 2016.''
           Sincerely,
     Ryan Alexander,
       Taxpayers for Common Sense.
     Pete Sepp,
       National Taxpayers Union.

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to 
recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is correct. We are going to 
stand up and say that the Corps of Engineers and the non-Federal 
sponsor have made it clear that it is not responsible for constructing 
baseball fields, basketball courts, and soccer fields. Not only has the 
Corps said to us that it is not included in this--they have confirmed, 
and they have reconfirmed--but, in fact, an independent board did a 
cost-benefit analysis on this. An independent board did one. This 
motion simply stops the forward motion of this bill.
  When I became chairman, I committed to making sure that, in every 
Congress, we would pass a WRDA bill and get back to regular order like 
we used to do, but there was a 7-year gap; so here, today, we have a 
bill. It is not perfect by any means, but it is a good bill.
  I look around this Chamber, and there are Members here who have 
projects in this that are important to their districts and that are 
important to their States. Most importantly, it is important to the 
Nation that we move this bill forward. If we delay on this bill, we are 
going to delay these jobs. This is a critical bill for us. It does some 
very, very good things. There are good benefits in here.
  First, it reasserts congressional authority by restoring the 2-year 
cycle to WRDA. It restores congressional authority. That means we in 
this House and in the Senate--in Congress--get to tell the 
administration what they are going to do. We are not going to sit here 
and have them direct us and say this is what we will do. We don't know 
who those faceless, nameless bureaucrats are, and I am tired of that. I 
will not let that happen on my watch. There is a return to regular 
order. As I said, there are unelected bureaucrats making those 
decisions for us.

[[Page H6057]]

  Secondly, it is fiscally responsible. We authorize over $9 billion in 
projects, but we de-authorize. We have taken it, and we have balanced 
it out so it is fiscally responsible.
  Finally, it keeps American jobs in America by strengthening our 
competitiveness--not Republican and Democratic jobs, American jobs. In 
each Member's district and in each Member's State, this bill is going 
to help America be competitive so that our goods and products can go 
out of these ports efficiently to world markets and so they can come in 
and get on our store shelves efficiently and save Americans money.
  This is an important economic development bill for this Nation. Let's 
get this bill done. Let's get into conversations with the Senate, and 
let's get this on the President's desk. Let's help strengthen America.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on this.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 9 of rule XX, the Chair 
will reduce to 5 minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote on 
the question of passage.
  This is a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 181, 
noes 243, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 571]

                               AYES--181

     Adams
     Aguilar
     Ashford
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bishop (GA)
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Brady (PA)
     Brooks (AL)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     DeSaulnier
     Deutch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Duckworth
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farr
     Foster
     Frankel (FL)
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Graham
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hastings
     Heck (WA)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Huffman
     Israel
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Jones
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     Kuster
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Lowenthal
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lynch
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Meng
     Moore
     Moulton
     Murphy (FL)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Nolan
     Norcross
     O'Rourke
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree
     Pocan
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Rice (NY)
     Richmond
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell (AL)
     Sherman
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--243

     Abraham
     Aderholt
     Allen
     Amash
     Amodei
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Benishek
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (IN)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Clawson (FL)
     Coffman
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Cook
     Costello (PA)
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis, Rodney
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Donovan
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers (NC)
     Emmer (MN)
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffith
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hanna
     Hardy
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Heck (NV)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Hill
     Holding
     Hudson
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Issa
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Jordan
     Joyce
     Katko
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Labrador
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latta
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     MacArthur
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McHenry
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Neugebauer
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Palmer
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Perry
     Pittenger
     Pitts
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price, Tom
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (SC)
     Rigell
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Royce
     Russell
     Salmon
     Sanford
     Scalise
     Schweikert
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Trott
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Veasey
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Doyle, Michael F.
     Kirkpatrick
     Lowey
     McDermott
     Poe (TX)
     Rush
     Sanchez, Loretta

                              {time}  1812

  So the motion to recommit was rejected.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 399, 
noes 25, not voting 7, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 572]

                               AYES--399

     Abraham
     Adams
     Aguilar
     Allen
     Amodei
     Ashford
     Babin
     Barletta
     Barr
     Barton
     Bass
     Beatty
     Becerra
     Benishek
     Bera
     Beyer
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (MI)
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Blum
     Blumenauer
     Bonamici
     Bost
     Boustany
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brat
     Bridenstine
     Brooks (IN)
     Brown (FL)
     Brownley (CA)
     Buchanan
     Buck
     Bucshon
     Burgess
     Bustos
     Butterfield
     Byrne
     Calvert
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardenas
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Carter (GA)
     Carter (TX)
     Cartwright
     Castor (FL)
     Castro (TX)
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Chu, Judy
     Cicilline
     Clark (MA)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clawson (FL)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Coffman
     Cohen
     Cole
     Collins (GA)
     Collins (NY)
     Comstock
     Conaway
     Connolly
     Conyers
     Cook
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello (PA)
     Courtney
     Cramer
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Curbelo (FL)
     Davidson
     Davis (CA)
     Davis, Danny
     Davis, Rodney
     DeGette
     Delaney
     DeLauro
     DelBene
     Denham
     Dent
     DeSantis
     DeSaulnier
     DesJarlais
     Deutch
     Diaz-Balart
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dold
     Donovan
     Doyle, Michael F.
     Duckworth
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Emmer (MN)
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Esty
     Farenthold
     Farr
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foster
     Foxx
     Frankel (FL)
     Frelinghuysen
     Fudge
     Gabbard
     Gallego
     Garamendi
     Garrett
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Goodlatte
     Gowdy
     Graham
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (LA)
     Graves (MO)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Griffith
     Grijalva
     Grothman
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanna
     Hardy

[[Page H6058]]


     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings
     Heck (NV)
     Heck (WA)
     Hensarling
     Herrera Beutler
     Hice, Jody B.
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Holding
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Hudson
     Huffman
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurd (TX)
     Hurt (VA)
     Israel
     Issa
     Jackson Lee
     Jeffries
     Jenkins (KS)
     Jenkins (WV)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jolly
     Joyce
     Kaptur
     Katko
     Keating
     Kelly (IL)
     Kelly (MS)
     Kelly (PA)
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilmer
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kline
     Knight
     Kuster
     LaHood
     LaMalfa
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latta
     Lawrence
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis
     Lieu, Ted
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Loebsack
     Lofgren
     Long
     Loudermilk
     Love
     Lowenthal
     Lowey
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lujan Grisham (NM)
     Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
     Lummis
     Lynch
     MacArthur
     Maloney, Carolyn
     Maloney, Sean
     Marchant
     Marino
     Massie
     Matsui
     McCarthy
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCollum
     McGovern
     McHenry
     McMorris Rodgers
     McNerney
     McSally
     Meadows
     Meehan
     Meeks
     Meng
     Messer
     Mica
     Miller (MI)
     Moolenaar
     Mooney (WV)
     Moore
     Moulton
     Mullin
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (FL)
     Murphy (PA)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Newhouse
     Noem
     Nolan
     Norcross
     Nugent
     Nunes
     O'Rourke
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Paulsen
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pittenger
     Pocan
     Poliquin
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (NC)
     Price, Tom
     Quigley
     Rangel
     Ratcliffe
     Reed
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rice (NY)
     Rice (SC)
     Richmond
     Rigell
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney (FL)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross
     Rothfus
     Rouzer
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruiz
     Ruppersberger
     Russell
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanford
     Sarbanes
     Scalise
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schweikert
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, Austin
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Sherman
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Sinema
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (MO)
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Speier
     Stefanik
     Stewart
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Swalwell (CA)
     Takano
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Titus
     Tonko
     Torres
     Trott
     Tsongas
     Turner
     Upton
     Valadao
     Van Hollen
     Vargas
     Veasey
     Vela
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Wagner
     Walberg
     Walden
     Walker
     Walorski
     Walters, Mimi
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters, Maxine
     Watson Coleman
     Weber (TX)
     Webster (FL)
     Welch
     Wenstrup
     Westerman
     Westmoreland
     Williams
     Wilson (FL)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yarmuth
     Yoder
     Yoho
     Young (AK)
     Young (IA)
     Young (IN)
     Zeldin
     Zinke

                                NOES--25

     Aderholt
     Amash
     Brooks (AL)
     DeFazio
     Ellmers (NC)
     Franks (AZ)
     Gohmert
     Gosar
     Green, Gene
     Huelskamp
     Jones
     Jordan
     Labrador
     McKinley
     Miller (FL)
     Neugebauer
     Palmer
     Perry
     Pitts
     Polis
     Roby
     Rogers (AL)
     Salmon
     Sensenbrenner
     Sewell (AL)

                             NOT VOTING--7

     Boyle, Brendan F.
     Kirkpatrick
     McDermott
     Pingree
     Poe (TX)
     Rush
     Sanchez, Loretta


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes 
remaining.

                              {time}  1820

  Mr. GOHMERT changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________