[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 16]
[House]
[Pages 22401-22411]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1495, WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the rule, I call up the 
conference report on the bill (H.R. 1495) to provide for the 
conservation and development of water and related resources, to 
authorize the Secretary of the Army to construct various projects for 
improvements to rivers and harbors of the United States, and for other 
purposes.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 597, the 
conference report is considered read.
  (For conference report and statement, see proceedings of the House of 
July 31, 2007, at page 21755.)
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) 
and the gentleman Florida (Mr. Mica) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.


                             General Leave

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous material on the conference report on H.R. 1495.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Minnesota?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  At the very outset, I want to, on this historic day and historic 
occasion, express my great appreciation to the gentleman from Florida, 
the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Mica, for the time that 
he has devoted and the close cooperation that we've enjoyed in crafting 
this legislation.
  We reached an agreement at the very outset of this session that we 
would take up the work of the last 6, really 7 years on three previous 
Congresses on the Water Resources Development Act and limit action in 
this Congress to only those measures that were in the previous three 
Congresses and not take up new measures, not take up new initiatives by 
Members, not even adjusting the cost of previously approved projects on 
which cost escalation may have occurred, and limit the scope of the 
legislation to the work of three previous Congresses, and also to 
comply with the rules of the House in getting sign-offs from Members on 
both sides as the ethics rules require.
  We crafted our sign-off sheet in advance of that done by any other 
committee in the House, got it approved by the Ethics Committee and by 
the Parliamentarian. We went through all these sign-off sheets, did 
everything according to the book, and in roughly 6 weeks from the 
beginning of the session, we were ready to go to the floor in March 
with the House version of the Water Resources Development Act.
  Regrettably, it took quite some time thereafter for the other body, 
because of the difference in procedures and rules in their body from 
those in ours, for them to get to this point, but they eventually moved 
through committee and through the other body their version of WRDA.
  We've concluded a conference, and I have to say, in 6 years, this is 
a very extraordinary, historic accomplishment, and I'm very grateful 
for the cooperation we've had and the participation every step of the 
way on the Republican side on this committee in the historic tradition 
of our committee, a very bipartisan approach.
  I express great appreciation to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie 
Bernice Johnson), Chair of the Subcommittee on Water Resources. She 
devoted an enormous amount of her time in working through all of the 
900-plus projects that come to the floor in this conference report, the 
600-plus projects that were in the original House bill; and to the 
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), who equally devoted an enormous 
amount of his time to the subject matter before us.
  It's that kind of time and effort and consideration that brought us 
to the point where we have a bill that I expect will pass with an 
overwhelming vote.
  I will make a further observation, and that is, for me, as I said at 
the opening meeting of our committee on January 17, a very historic and 
nostalgic moment. I started in this body 44 years ago as clerk of the 
Subcommittee on Rivers and Harbors, and now I'm chairman of the full 
committee. That's not happened before in the House nor the other body, 
and I feel very privileged, very honored, very deeply moved to be here 
at this moment to see passage of this impressive legislation that will 
make significant changes in Corps policy and programs, review of Corps 
projects that will deal with the restoration of the wetlands in the 
gulf from Texas through Louisiana and Mississippi; restoration of the 
Everglades, one of the Nation's greatest water resource treasures; will 
deal with locks and dams on the Mississippi River to expedite passage 
of our agricultural commodities and international trade in which grain 
moves on as little as an eighth of a cent a bushel.
  It now takes 820 hours round trip for a barge tow to move from 
Clinton, Iowa, to New Orleans, the world's most important grain export 
facility. We can take 60-plus hours of time off that transit and make 
our agriculture commodities more competitive in the international 
marketplace.
  We can restore the efficiency of commerce on the Great Lakes by 
accelerating the dredging of the Great

[[Page 22402]]

Lakes during this period of drought where we have harbor depths that 
are down 58 inches in Cleveland, 18 inches in St. Mary's Canal, 54 
inches in Ashtebula Harbor, preventing the movement of iron ore to the 
steel mills, coal to the power plants at competitive prices. We're 
having to make two, three, four more voyages per vessel in the Great 
Lakes because the Corps has not been doing the dredging it needs to do. 
It will do that under the provisions of this legislation.
  We address the issues of invasive species in the Great Lakes, and the 
east and the west coast and the gulf coast parts are now being invaded 
by species brought in from waters foreign to our lands. Mr. Ehlers, for 
whom I have a great admiration and respect, has been such a strong 
advocate.
  There's much, much more in this legislation. We need not be 
exhaustive in discussing it. I just say I'm very grateful to all our 
colleagues on the committee for this very special moment, and 
especially to the committee staff on both sides who have worked so 
diligently. And in particular, I want to express my great admiration 
for Ryan Seiger, for he has steered the ship of state for us on this 
matter; John Anderson on the minority side who was has been diligent 
and forthright and helpful with his years of experience.


                         great lakes navigation

  The conference report includes language to address the backlog of 
maintenance dredging needs in the Great Lakes and connecting channels, 
and ensure the long-term viability of the lakes for the movement of 
goods and services.
  The Great Lakes region is home to 25 of the Nation's top 100 ports, 
when measured on the basis of tons of cargo, as well as many smaller 
and rural ports. Unfortunately, over the past few years, declining 
water levels in the lakes and a lack of adequate maintenance dredging 
has hindered the overall efficiency of the Great Lakes system, and has 
made the movement of goods through the Great Lakes more difficult, with 
ports throughout the lakes being between 18 and 84 inches below their 
authorized depths.
  These shallow depths have caused three out of every four vessels 
loaded in the Great Lakes over the last 5 years to have been forced to 
``light load'' to safely travel through the reduced depths of the Great 
Lakes and navigation channels. ``Light loading'' forces shippers to 
take on less cargo, and reduces the overall efficiencies and cost-
savings related to the movement of goods by ship--increasing the 
overall cost of goods.
  Section 5014(a) provides authority for the Corps of Engineers, 
``Corps'', using available appropriations, to address these emergency 
dredging needs. The Corps should immediately begin work on addressing 
this dredging backlog, and restore the authorized depths for the Great 
Lakes and connecting channels to sustain commercial navigation 
throughout the lakes.


                  Second Lock at Sault Ste. Marie, Mi

  The conference report also ensures that the Corps will finally build 
the second lock at Sault Ste. Marie, MI. The Soo locks are situated on 
the St. Marys River at Sault Ste. Marie, MI. The St. Marys River, a 
water bridge connecting Lake Superior with Lake Huron, is a critical 
link in the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway system.
  Over 80 million tons of commercial commodities pass through the Soo 
lock annually. The primary commodity group is iron ore and taconite, 
comprising more than 50 percent of the total annual tonnage. The Corps 
estimates that the water route provided by the Soo locks reduces 
transportation costs by an average of more than $4.90 per ton based on 
fourth quarter 1998 cost levels. Based on 1998 tonnage, this represents 
an annual transportation cost savings to the Nation of approximately 
$420 million. Of the four U.S. locks, only the Poe lock is capable of 
handling vessels with beams in excess of 76 feet. Any disruption of 
service at the Poe lock would result in delays to the system's largest 
vessels and could cause serious disruption to the industries and 
companies that rely on the Poe-restricted vessels for shipment of raw 
materials, especially iron ore and coal.
  In 1985, the Corps studied the construction of a replacement lock at 
the sites of the Davis and Sabin locks, and recommended a replacement 
lock at 1,200 feet by 110 feet. The project was authorized in the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1986, and reauthorized in the Water 
Resources Development Act of 1990.
  The Water Resources Development Act of 2007 authorizes the 
construction of the second lock funded at Federal expense. The revised 
cost of the project, in accordance with the limited reevaluation report 
dated February 2004, is $341,714,000. Section 3091 provides the Corps 
sufficient authority to carry out this project at the authorized 
dimensions. The Corps should budget for this project in the 
administration's fiscal year 2009 budget request, and immediately 
proceed to construction of this project, without regard to 
administrative policy.


                          St. Lawrence Seaway

  Currently, two independent studies are close to completion on the 
infrastructure needs of the Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Seaway system, 
specifically the engineering, economic, and environmental implications 
of those needs as they pertain to the marine transportation 
infrastructure on which commercial navigation depends. Both of these 
studies have identified huge capital needs for restoration, operation, 
and maintenance of the seaway. According to the seaway, approximately 
$135 million in unmet operations, maintenance, repair, and 
rehabilitation of the existing Eisenhower and Snell lock related 
facilities and related navigational infrastructure is necessary to 
ensure the continued, long-term viability of the system. Over the past 
50 years, since completion of the seaway, there is about $83 million in 
deferred maintenance costs that have left large portions of the 
infrastructure in poor condition and in immediate need of repair, 
replacement, or upgrading.
  The conference report authorizes the Corps to assist the Saint 
Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation by carrying out projects to 
address the capital infrastructure and dredging maintenance needs of 
the seaway, either through appropriations of the Seaway Development 
Corporation or through the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. Funding for 
projects under this section should not come from the budget of the 
Corps.


                          Programmatic Changes

  The conference agreement includes important programmatic changes that 
address concerns with the existing Corps' study, design, review, and 
mitigation processes.
     Independent peer review
  The Independent Peer Review requirements provide that project studies 
shall be subject to peer review by an independent panel of experts. The 
conference agreement is a combination of independent peer review 
proposals passed by the United States Senate and the House of 
Representatives. The conference agreement improves upon both the House 
and Senate proposals to create a strong, workable, and independent 
process for review of project studies carried out by the Corps. For 
example, the conference agreement authorizes the independent peer 
review to run concurrent with the project study period, and requires 
that the peer review panel remain beyond the release of the independent 
peer review report to allow the expertise gained during the review 
period to be utilized by the Corps up to the release of the draft 
report of the Chief of Engineers, ``Chief.''
  There are two categories for independent peer review--project studies 
for which independent peer review is mandatory, and project studies for 
which such review is discretionary. The criteria for mandatory review 
of project studies includes an estimated total project cost of more 
than $45 million, project studies for which the Governor of an affected 
State requests an independent peer review, and project studies that the 
Chief determines are controversial.
  The conference report also provides for discretionary independent 
peer review of project studies for which the head of a Federal or State 
agency charged with reviewing the project study determines that the 
proposed project is likely to have a significant adverse impact on 
environmental, cultural, or other natural resources under the 
jurisdiction of the agency after implementation of the proposed 
mitigation plans.
  The conference agreement also includes a. narrow provision for the 
Chief to exclude a very limited number of project studies from 
independent peer review. The expectation is that project studies that 
could be excluded from independent peer review are so limited in scope 
or impact, that they would not significantly benefit from an 
independent peer review. Project studies subject to independent peer 
review based on the request of the Governor of an affected State may 
not be excluded from review under any condition.
  The conference agreement directs the Chief to contract with an 
external entity, such as the National Academy of Sciences or a similar 
independent scientific and technical advisory organization to establish 
the panel of independent experts. The bill ensures that independent 
experts with potential conflicts of interest in a project are excluded 
from serving on the peer review panel.

[[Page 22403]]

  The conference report requires independent peer review to occur 
during the period beginning on the date of the signing of the 
feasibility cost-sharing agreement, and will be conducted concurrent 
with the development of the project study. Having the independent peer 
review carried out concurrently with the development of the project 
study will allow the independent peer review panel to receive relevant 
information from the Corps, on a timely basis, and allow the 
independent peer review panel to provide ongoing input into the 
development of the project study. The conference expects that this 
process will provide the independent peer review panel with sufficient 
information to conduct its review, as well as allow the peer review 
panel to recommend mid-course corrections to the ongoing project study, 
and avoid the potential for significant issues or delay to arise at the 
end of the project study period. As noted in the statement of managers, 
the managers recognize that the recommendations of the independent peer 
review panel are advisory; however, the managers expect the Corps to 
give full consideration to the findings of the independent peer review 
panel.
  The independent peer review panel should conclude its peer review, 
and submit a report to the Chief, not more than 60 days after the close 
of the public comment period for the draft project study. The Chief may 
extend the period for the peer review panel to conclude its peer review 
if the Chief determines that additional time is necessary. The 
conference has included language to terminate the peer review panel on 
the date of the initiation of the State and agency review, which is 
conterminous with the release of the draft Report of the Chief of 
Engineers for the project, and which is after the issuance of the peer 
review report. Recognizing that the Corps intends to allow a member or 
members of the peer review panel to participate on the Civil Works 
Review Board, which requires District Commanders to present their final 
reports and recommendations for review, the bill requires the 
independent peer review to remain impaneled beyond the issuance of the 
peer review report and allows a member of the panel to participate on 
the Civil Works Review Board, and to be available as experts, if 
needed, for additional consultation on the project study.
  The conference agreement applies the review process to project 
studies initiated in the two years prior to enactment and for any study 
initiated in the seven years following enactment. The two-year look 
back applies to projects where the array of alternatives has not been 
identified. In including this language, it was our intent that ``array 
of alternatives'' be interpreted as when the alternatives are 
identified for public comment in a draft feasibility report. This 
should be quite late in the study process, resulting in the maximum 
number of ongoing studies being subject to the independent review 
process.
  In the prospective application of the independent review process, all 
established independent review panels will not end after seven years. 
If a project study is initiated any time during the next seven years, 
the entire study process is subject to independent review, no matter 
how long it takes to complete the study.
     Mitigation for fish and wildlife and wetlands losses
  Typically, Corps' projects impact more wetlands than any other agency 
or entity in the country. Various organizations, including the U.S. 
Government Accountability Office, have raised concerns with the 
mitigation conducted by the Corps related to their projects. This 
legislation ensures that potential impacts from Corps' projects are 
provided timely and adequate mitigation. In addition to mitigating the 
impacts to fish and wildlife habitat, the conference agreement 
amendment to section 906( d) of the Water Resources Development Act of 
1986 intends for the Corps to mitigate for any potential loss of flood 
damage reduction capabilities for activities impacted waters, including 
wetlands.
  The conference agreement specifically amends section 906(d) of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 to specify the elements that 
must be identified in a mitigation plan required under that section. 
Mitigation requirements now require mitigating losses to fish and 
wildlife, and mitigation must now include losses to flood damage 
reduction capabilities of the project area. The specific mitigation 
plan must provide a description of the physical action to be 
undertaken. The plan also must include a description of the lands or 
interests in lands to be acquired for mitigation, and the basis for a 
determination that such lands are available. The conference agreement 
requires the mitigation plan to identify the quantity and type of lands 
needed, and include a determination that lands of such quantity and 
type are available for acquisition. The plan also must include the 
type, amount, and characteristics of the habitat to be restored. The 
plan must include success criteria based on replacement of lost 
functions and values of the habitat, including hydrologic and 
vegetative characteristics. Finally, if monitoring is necessary to 
determine success of the mitigation, the plan must include a monitoring 
plan and to the extent practicable, identification of the entities 
responsible for monitoring. As monitoring is part of operation and 
maintenance of a project, in most cases the entity responsible for any 
monitoring will be the non-Federal sponsor. Such person must be 
identified no later than entering into partnership agreement entered 
into with the non-Federal interest.
  The conference agreement supports more specificity in Corps reporting 
documents concerning expected mitigation efforts. This section also 
directs the Secretary to submit to Congress a report on the status of 
mitigation concurrent with the submission of reports on the status of 
project construction, as part of the President's budget submission.
  The conference agreement also directs the Secretary, when carrying 
out water resources projects, to first consider the use of a mitigation 
bank if the bank has sufficient and appropriate (including ecologically 
appropriate) credit to offset the impact, and the mitigation bank meets 
certain criteria. To the maximum extent practicable, the service area 
of the mitigation bank shall be in the same watershed as the project 
activity for which mitigation is required. The intent term 
``watershed'' is to be the immediate, localized watershed in which the 
impact occurs and not the much larger watershed or watersheds that 
might be included in the service area of a mitigation bank. This is 
especially critical to address potential impacts in higher order 
streams, including headwater streams, where the mitigation activities 
should be proximate to the impacted areas.
     Principles and guidelines
  The conference agreement also directs the Secretary of the Army to 
undertake a review and revise the principles and guidelines used by the 
Corps for formulation, evaluation, and implementation of water 
resources projects.
  The current principles and guidelines focuses predominantly on the 
national economic development (``NED'') benefits of Corps projects, 
requiring a project to achieve a positive economic benefit cost ratio 
before projects are recommended. In many cases, however, the Corps has 
struggled with utilizing a traditional NED analysis in the evaluation 
of projects within environmental restoration mission of the Corps. The 
NED analysis works well on traditional Corps projects such as 
navigation and flood damage reduction, but is not always appropriate in 
the development of benefit cost analyses for environmental restoration 
products. The Corps demonstrated its awareness of this issue through 
the issuance of regulatory guidance materials that encourage, to the 
maximum extent practicable, the inclusion of the national ecosystem 
restoration (``NER'') benefits for ecosystem restoration projects.
  The conference agreement directs the Corps to revise its existing 
principles and guidelines to incorporate the unique needs for 
evaluating environmental restoration projects into its current master 
planning guidance. This is intended to enable the Corps to build better 
projects. As is evident in this legislation, many of the recent Reports 
of the Chief of Engineers recommend multipurpose projects that 
appropriately address multiple concerns in a single project. A revised 
principles and guidelines should enable the Corps to better weigh the 
values of the different components of a multipurpose project.


                           Earmark Disclosure

  In the preparation of the table of Congressional earmarks that 
accompanies the Statement of Managers for the conference report, a 
limited number of earmark disclosures were inadvertently deleted from 
the table. The following Members of Congress have provided the 
Committee with earmark disclosure forms for the following projects:
  Representative Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (SD) for section 5158(253) 
Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation (Dewey and Zeibach Counties) and 
Perkins and Meade Counties, South Dakota.
  Representative Patrick Murphy (PA-08) for section 5003(a)(12) Ingham 
Spring Dam, Solebury Township, Pennsylvania.
  Representative Solomon Ortiz (TX-27) for section 3150 Lower Rio 
Grande Basin, Texas.
  Representative Charles W. Dent (PA-15) for section 5003(a)(14) 
Stillwater Dam, Monroe County, Pennsylvania.
  Representative Barbara Lee (CA-09) for section 3182(b) Oakland Inner 
Harbor Tidal Canal, California.
  Representative Frank Pallone, Jr. (NJ-06) for section 1001(34) South 
River, Raritan River Basin, New Jersey.
  Representative Rush D. Holt (NJ-12) for section 1001(34) South River, 
Raritan River Basin, New Jersey.

[[Page 22404]]

  The following Member of Congress was inadvertently listed in the 
earmark disclosure report for the Statement on Managers for the 
conference report:
  Representative Robert Andrews (NJ-01) for section 1001(34) South 
River, Raritan River Basin, New Jersey.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance my time.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Well, first of all, I can't begin this debate on this water resources 
legislation without congratulating Mr. Oberstar. As you heard Mr. 
Oberstar say that some 44 years ago he was a staffer for Chairman 
Blatnik, I think his name was, at that time and tonight he chairs the 
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, and I'm pleased to be the 
Republican ranking member to have worked with him to bring forth a bill 
that is very important, not only to Mr. Oberstar, and his efforts and 
others in trying to bring a bill forward.
  You know, we have not passed a water resources infrastructure bill 
since the year 2000. Normally, we pass it every 2 years in a cycle 
legislation that sets forth the projects and the policy and the 
priorities for building the Nation's infrastructure, and we haven't 
done that.
  Now, one of the problems that we've had is that we've had a bad name 
given to earmarks, and this bill contains some 950 projects, almost all 
of them earmarks. There are a very significant number of earmarks in 
this bill.
  From the time I assumed responsibility for the T&I Committee on the 
Republican side and in my discussions with Mr. Oberstar, I said we've 
got to make certain this process is open, this process is transparent 
and that we restore faith in this process. The choice is that we could 
pass a bill tonight for $20 billion and authorizing projects and not 
name those projects but let some bureaucrats down the street that are 
unelected make the decisions, but that's not way this process works.
  The people sent us here, they send us here to renew the contract 
every 2 years to decide what the priorities are for our districts, and 
that's what this legislation is about.
  There are 950 projects in this legislation, again a very high number, 
and the bill is a very high number, probably $20 billion when you total 
up all those projects in authorization. Now, all of them won't get 
funded, but we have a responsibility to set the priorities, and the 
people are setting the priorities through their elected representative, 
not some appointed bureaucrat.
  I tried to make this a transparent process from the beginning. These 
are all of the Republican Water Resource Development Act of 2007 
requests. These have been on file. These have been open to the public. 
The press has been in. They have been carefully vetted. Mr. Oberstar 
and I attempted to vet every single project on the House side, and the 
staff and others have been working to make certain that we vetted the 
Senate and all the projects in this bill. And I think we've done about 
as good a job and opened the process up to sunshine, to again a fair 
and open honest process and hopefully restored some of the faith in 
this process.
  Now, I did receive today a communication notifying me that the White 
House will probably veto this legislation. That's unfortunate, and I've 
talked to the White House. We've tried to keep the dollars number down, 
but I tell the White House and anyone else, and I will support Mr. 
Oberstar and others if we have to override that veto. We need to do 
that. Our job is to make certain that we build the infrastructure of 
this country and we do it in a responsible manner.
  We haven't had a bill since 2000. All you have to do is do the math. 
The math is simple. The bills in the past have been about $6 billion, 
6X3 is 18, and you add a few billion dollars more for inflation, and 
this is the number we're at and the number of projects we're at. I've 
told this to the President's advisers, and I regret that we're in this 
situation, but we'll have to do what we have to do. The President's 
going to have to do what he has to do.
  But let me tell you now, and Katrina should be a lesson to us all, 
you either pay now or you will pay later.

                              {time}  2100

  These are projects that will determine whether dams break, whether 
levees are secure, whether water resources for this Nation are 
available, whether we do important environmental restoration that's 
been left behind.
  Again, I repeat that this is authorization, not funding. But we have 
a responsibility to pick and set those priorities as the people's 
elected representatives.
  Let me tell you also again critical needs in this bill. I have had 
Members literally come to me with tears in their eyes and say that, in 
fact, a project is so important that people's homes, lives and 
properties may be destroyed if we don't move forward with authorizing 
their projects.
  In my own State of Florida, I am pleased tonight, and there are 
ironies tonight, I remember working with Senator Dole when we tried to 
do the Everglades restoration. That was talked about for years, even 
when I was in the legislature back in Florida in the 1970s.
  Tonight, in this bill is the authorization for the first construction 
money to restore Florida's Everglades, a national environmental 
treasure that, unfortunately, man and sometimes the Corps of Engineers 
in some unwise policies have nearly ruined. But we have a chance now to 
restore that through this legislation.
  In 2000, we authorized study money. This is the actual work money, 
the first work money for that. In my own community, and I close on 
this, I have A1A, scenic and national highway designation A1A, through 
Flagler County, which is literally falling into the ocean. The beach 
has eroded. We have no more beach there. We need to restore that. Those 
are the kinds of projects that are in this bill, even for me as a 
ranking member.
  I strongly support this measure. I think it's responsible. I don't 
want to get into a contest with the White House, but, again, I thank 
the staff; Mr. Baker, I will yield to in a few minutes; Ms. Johnson; 
Mr. Duncan, the former chairman of the water resources; and all others 
who have worked on this.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to express my 
appreciation to the gentleman from Florida for his splendid 
cooperation, his heartfelt earnestness on getting this legislation 
through and understanding the great significance it represents for all 
of us.
  I want to emphasize once again, we exercise great discipline in this 
body in shaping the legislation, keeping the costs within containment, 
within the previous 6, almost 7 years of projects that had already been 
vetted through the House, passed by this body and yet, unfortunately, 
didn't make it through the Senate.
  I read with heavy heart the administration statement of veto. I think 
that it's a misunderstanding on their part. We will do our part, we 
will do our role, and the other body will do its part. Then we will see 
whether, in fact, a veto comes forward. If it does, we will deal with 
it just straightforwardly, without rancor, without discussion. These 
are the right investments for America.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Eddie Bernice Johnson), the distinguished Chair of the Subcommittee on 
Water Resources and Environment and thank her once again for the 
splendid work.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in 
strong support of the conference report for H.R. 1495, the Water 
Resources Development Act of 2007.
  I congratulate Chairman Oberstar, Ranking Member Mica and the ranking 
member of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, Mr. 
Baker, for your work on reaching this agreement in the vital 
infrastructure investment bill for the Nation's water resources needs.
  I especially express my appreciation to the staff, to Congressman 
Young, Congressman Duncan, and Congressman Costello and other 
distinguished members of this committee, because

[[Page 22405]]

we have all worked together in a bipartisan manner.
  All of us assembled here this evening understand the magnitude of 
this moment. The clock is working against the infrastructure of our 
country. The 7 years we have waited to enact a water resources 
development bill have led to significant increases in cost to 
adequately address the Nation's deteriorating water resources and flood 
control infrastructure.
  As such, I am delighted that we as conferees have come to an 
agreement on the issues independent of review, environmental issues, 
environmental infrastructure and individual projects that have, up 
until now, prevented us from crafting a final conference report.
  We do right and good by this country when we invest in its 
infrastructure. I agree with the chairman that enactment of a water 
resources bill this year is critical to economic prosperity, job 
creation, protection of the environment and public safety.
  Since Congress last passed a Water Resources Development Act, we have 
seen Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita devastate the gulf coast and 
my home State of Texas, flooding cities, damaging economies and 
businesses and threatening public health.
  No water resources bill has been enacted since the year 2000, the 
entire term of this current administration. While I am fully aware of 
the veto threat that this administration has issued on the conference 
report, I want to remind my colleagues that since the start of the Iraq 
conflict in 2003, nearly $42 billion has been appropriated at the 
request of the administration for Iraqi reconstruction, one-third of 
which, or $14 billion, is going towards Iraqi economic infrastructure.
  I would daresay that if this level of attention is adequate for Iraqi 
water and road infrastructure, my State, as well as my constituents, 
who are constantly beleaguered by outdated flood protection, are as 
equally deserving of the attention afforded by H.R. 1495. I deeply 
regret that the administration has decided to turn its back on a bill 
that would put Americans to work with good-paying jobs, protect lives 
and property and bolster our Nation's infrastructure.
  A recent report by the Texas Section of Civil Engineers assessed my 
State's infrastructure and rendered a dismal cumulative grade of below 
average. The assessment of the State's flood control fared even worse, 
with the State receiving a failing grade of D minus.
  Over the past decade, Texas has experienced 15 federally declared 
disasters, most involving flooding. Moreover, Texas leads the Nation in 
terms of dollars paid for flood claims, second only to the State of 
Louisiana.
  The population of Texas is expected to double in the next 30 to 40 
years. Development in and near flood plains can be expected to 
increase, as developers continue to build near the State's rivers, 
lakes and coastlines.
  In my district, the Dallas Floodway accepts 1,600 square miles of 
Trinity River watershed runoff and safely moves the floodwaters through 
the City of Dallas by virtue of levees that form both sides of the 
2,000-foot-wide Floodway. The Floodway levees protect the downtown 
vicinity from a potential flood damage loss to properties and 
infrastructure at a price of $8 billion or more. This is a major 
economic area.
  The 23 miles of levees for the Dallas Floodway were originally 
constructed by local interests in 1932 and reconstructed by the Corps 
in 1960. But, since 1960, the upstream watershed has experienced 
exploding population growth, and that was not expected, which has 
significantly increased runoff, overwhelmed our antiquated drainage 
pumps, and greatly reduced the flood protection afforded by the Dallas 
Floodway levees.
  My district's flood control needs are great; and, like the other 
communities across this Nation, they are anxiously anticipating the 
resumption of a predictable, consistent, and 2-year water plan.
  I am glad our work here today brings us one step closer to this 
reality. The product before us authorizes a number of studies and 
projects, particularly for the restoration of coastal Louisiana, the 
restoration of Florida Everglades and the restoration of the upper 
Mississippi River and the Illinois Waterway System.
  Again, we do right by this country when we invest in its 
infrastructure. Communities across the country have been waiting 7 long 
years to begin their noteworthy flood control and water infrastructure 
projects. I am pleased that we have been able to put our heads together 
and once and for all advance this vitally important and long-overdue 
legislation for the American people.
  I want to extend my thanks again to the bipartisan committee 
leadership of both Chambers and, most especially, the efforts of our 
dedicated staff persons who have spent countless hours in crafting the 
conference report.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this conference 
report to H.R. 1495. The time to act is now.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to introduce the 
gentleman from Louisiana.
  Sometimes in this business you have the opportunity to decide who is 
going to work with you on different projects. I had that opportunity in 
January, and I chose Richard Baker.
  If you don't know Richard Baker, let me tell you, the good Lord sent 
Richard Baker to us at the right time, because there is probably nobody 
in the Congress that could have been a better steward or done a better 
job in handling the Water Resources Committee responsibilities.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana 
(Mr. Baker), just an absolutely outstanding representative, who has 
done a good job on this great bill that is so important to Louisiana.
  Mr. BAKER. Mr. Ranking Member, I am humbled by your comments. I thank 
you for that courtesy, and I am deeply appreciative.
  I have enjoyed very much the opportunity not only to work with you in 
this capacity but to work with our chairman, who has deep roots and 
ties to New Orleans, and the gracious gentlelady from Texas, the 
chairman of our subcommittee.
  Mr. Speaker, it has been a terrific team from which there has been a 
terrific product developed that all Members who have spoken this 
evening have made clear as to the scope of the projects, the need for 
the projects, the clarity of the process, which our ranking member 
insisted on and opening up to public scrutiny the projects which 
ultimately are contained in this report.
  I wish to make just one observation as a representative of Louisiana 
and make clear that the Governor, the congressional delegation and, 
most importantly, the people of Louisiana recognize what this 
legislation means to us tonight. It is not merely the elimination of an 
inconvenience or the restoration of some public service that we would 
like to have. This bill goes to the point of restoring our culture and 
our ability to live as people along the coast of the great State of 
Louisiana. For that, all of us are deeply grateful to the Members who 
have made this possible and to this Congress.
  There is one notable development I would like to memorialize in the 
discussion of the conference report tonight, and that is a problem 
which had been long-standing for many years with the representatives of 
the great State of Mississippi, particularly that of Senator Lott, to 
whom I would like to express deep appreciation.
  The gentleman has had for many years concerns about the salinity 
levels of the water off the gulf coast affecting the productivity of 
his own fisheries. Likewise, we in Louisiana had concerns about some of 
the proposed remedies which, in our view, would have had an adverse 
water quality effect on our own fisheries.
  In the course of the debate with the conferees, I was assigned the 
duty to work with the Senator and come to some resolution thereon, 
which will enable both States to seek the benefit they are entitled to.
  I am pleased that with the coastal area impact program, we have 
identified a source of funding, we have agreed to the terms of 
construction for the Violet Canal project, and I tonight

[[Page 22406]]

want to say tonight, on behalf of the congressional delegation and for 
those who follow us here, that it is our intent to honor and abide by 
the terms and agreement that Senator Lott negotiated with us and in 
good faith ultimately seek closure of this most difficult project, 
which I understand has led to difficulty and the consideration of prior 
WRDA legislative efforts. It is important, I believe, for us to 
recognize the contributions made by that delegation and their 
willingness to assist us in Louisiana in coming to final agreement.
  With that, I am just pleased to be a small part this process and to 
have enabled the ability to participate in a small way getting a vital 
piece of legislation virtually for every congressional district in this 
country.

                              {time}  2115

  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to yield 2 minutes to 
the distinguished Chair of the Railroad Subcommittee, Ms. Brown from 
Florida.
  Ms. CORRINE BROWN of Florida. I want to thank Chairman Oberstar and 
Chairwoman Johnson as well as Mr. Mica and Mr. Baker for their hard 
work in completing this long-awaited bill. With the new leadership in 
the House and on the committee, this legislation will soon be on the 
way to the President's desk for his signature.
  These water projects and these projects are extremely important to my 
home State of Florida and for the Nation as a whole and have been held 
hostage for far too long. Like all transportation projects, these 
included in this bill will put people back to work, improve our 
communities, and create economic activity. This legislation also 
ensures that workers are paid a fair rate for their hard work. It is 
these workers' taxes that pay for these projects, and they deserve fair 
wages that allow them to adequately provide for their families.
  By delaying the passage of this much-needed legislation any further, 
we are doing a disservice to the people we represent. I encourage my 
colleagues to support this conference report so we can move forward 
with these critical projects this bill contains and so that we can 
begin to work on the next WRDA reauthorization so we don't have to wait 
another 6 years to fund these critical water infrastructure projects.
  Again, I want to thank Chairman Oberstar, especially Chairwoman 
Johnson for making this conference a reality. I want to thank Mr. Mica 
and Mr. Baker again. And I am just very excited that after 6 years we 
are going to have a bill. And, as Mr. Oberstar always says, that our 
committee, Transportation is the committee that actually put America to 
work. And so not only do we put them to work, but we are protecting the 
infrastructure.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 4 minutes to one of the 
very distinguished members of the Missouri delegation, Mr. Hulshof.
  Mr. HULSHOF. I thank the gentleman for yielding. To the chairman of 
the full committee, I would say as difficult and partisan as this day 
has begun, I think we are going to end on a very bipartisan high note, 
and certainly thank the gentleman, the gentlelady from Texas, certainly 
Mr. Mica and the gentleman from Louisiana who just spoke. 
Congratulations to all in finally passing this WRDA bill.
  I would like to spend just a moment to talk about the legislation, 
the modernization of the 5 locks on the Mississippi River and the 2 on 
the Illinois River; the gentleman from Minnesota mentioned that earlier 
as far as the modernization of locks and dams. And I want to do this in 
a little different way.
  Last week, we considered and passed the farm bill. Perhaps I took a 
little bit of heat for actually supporting that bill. In part, I 
supported it because it provides an important safety net for our 
farmers. And, interestingly, the bill we are considering tonight will 
go a long way to ensuring that farmers don't need to rely upon 
subsidies to survive.
  How is that, you ask? Well, the ability to transport crops to export 
markets via the Mississippi River provides our Midwestern farmers a 
better price for crops than if that river was not available. Witness 
Hurricane Katrina as an unfortunate real world example of that specific 
example. A recent study conducted on behalf of a river stakeholder 
calculated that, if we fail to increase the size of our locks and if we 
were to allow river congestion to increase, farmers would lose $562 
million a year. That income would need to be replaced by subsidy 
payments on the farms or the farms would fail. As such, the $1 billion 
in taxpayer dollars that this bill includes to modernize our locks is a 
hedge against the multiple billions of dollars of future farm subsidies 
and allows our farmers to continue to farm for the markets and not for 
a government check.
  This bill, as has been noticed, is long overdue. The modernization of 
our outdated locks is also long overdue. These locks are standing out 
of habit. They were built in the 1930s to accommodate steamboats. Since 
1975, the Corps has spent $900 million under fix-it-as-it-fails 
scenarios, hoping to push major problems a little way down the river. 
But despite the Corps' best efforts, and I would have to say an amazing 
job of maintenance on a shoestring budget, the River continues to lose 
about 10 percent of its capacity every year due to unplanned 
maintenance closures.
  Now, as a last point, a gentle point, I would say to my friend from 
Oregon, who spoke earlier on the rule, he and I have discussed on 
several occasions the modernization of locks and dams on the Upper 
Mississippi, and I want to be kind to him as I say he is not as ardent 
of a supporter of those modernization efforts as I, and he spoke of the 
independent review process. I concur with him, but I would remind the 
gentleman that the independent review that examined the locks and dams 
modernization woefully underestimated the demand variable for corn and 
ethanol.
  This year alone in my district, tens of millions of additional 
bushels of corn will be harvested this fall and will need a viable 
navigable waterway. The study by the National Academy of Sciences did 
not adequately anticipate this increased demand. So while independent 
review, I agree, is important, it is not infallible. But I thank the 
diligent work of the committee to include this modernization. I urge 
every Member to support the conference report.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 2 additional 
minutes, and ask if the gentleman would yield?
  Mr. HULSHOF. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I compliment the gentleman on his statement and his 
recognition of underscoring the importance of the Mississippi River-
Illinois-Ohio River system as the water highway for our midcontinent 
grain producers.
  If you look at a map of the north and south hemisphere, the furthest 
point of Brazil sticks out of the South Atlantic Ocean, and that is 
Recife. From that port are exported soybeans. That is 2,500 miles 
further out in the Atlantic than New Orleans. They market to the same 
destinations that we do for soybeans, we in the great Midwest, to east 
and west Africa, and to the Pacific rim. They have a 5-day or 6-day 
sail advantage.
  If we don't do the modernization on the locks, we continue to lose 
market share in the world marketplace. As I said earlier, grain moves 
on as little as an eighth of a cent a bushel.
  So we have to do this, and it is going to be done. It has waited far 
too long.
  Mr. HULSHOF. I appreciate my friend from Minnesota.
  I would tell the gentleman that I grew up in the shadows of the 
levees of the Mississippi River, and I am the son of a Missouri farm 
family. We are about 8 miles from the Mississippi River as the crow 
flies, and the ability to have that navigable waterway means the 
difference between being in the black or being in the red for our 
family farm. So that lesson has imprinted itself upon me. And I am 
pleased to support the gentleman in this conference report, and I thank 
the gentleman for the additional courtesies.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield to an outstanding member 
of

[[Page 22407]]

the T&I Committee on the Republican side of the aisle, the gentleman 
from Beaumont, Texas (Mr. Poe) for 3\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. POE. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to congratulate 
the chairman, Mr. Oberstar, and Ranking Member Mica for their work on 
getting this long-delayed bill to the House floor, and I certainly 
support it. Both the ranking member and the chairman have said, as long 
as I have been on this committee, that this is the most cooperative 
committee even though it is the largest committee in Congress. And it 
is true. It is a bipartisan committee that gets things done. We 
disagree, but we do it in a civil manner.
  I am also impressed with Mr. Oberstar's knowledge of transportation 
history. He knows more about transportation that has occurred in the 
United States probably than all of us put together.
  I do want to thank the committee for including in this WRDA bill the 
expedited completion of the study for the Sabine-Neches Waterway 
Project. I have been frustrated for the lack of progress by the Army 
Corps of Engineers to finalize this completion study.
  The study report was started by the Corps in the year 2000, with a 
completion date of 2004. It was supposed to cost $6 million. And now it 
is 2007, and this project study is still not completed, and estimates 
on final cost of the project have now risen to $13 million. I 
appreciate the chairman's support for this study to be completed as 
soon as possible.
  The Sabine-Neches Waterway is the riverway that separates Texas from 
Louisiana and flows into the Gulf of Mexico. Sabine-Neches is vital to 
not only southeast Texas, but it is essential for the national security 
needs of our Nation. It is the home of America's largest commercial 
military port and the Port of Beaumont, and it is second largest in the 
world. It is crucial for shipping military cargo to our troops in Iraq 
and Afghanistan and is America's largest importer of crude oil by 
tonnage. Approximately 20 to 30 percent of the Nation's jet fuel is 
produced by refineries on this waterway, including 80 percent of the 
jet fuel used by our military. This riverway supplies petrochemical and 
energy needs for southeast Texas and the rest of the Nation.
  Section 508 requires the Army Corps of Engineers to expedite 
completion of this study whether or not to expand, widen, and deepen 
the riverway for the Sabine-Neches Waterway, and the joint statement 
further directs that this would be done as soon as possible. I hope 
this study is finished this year so that it will be included in next 
year's full WRDA bill and we can start moving dirt to widen, deepen, 
and make this riverway important not only for southeast Texas but for 
national security reasons as well. It is important for our economy, it 
is important for our recovering economy after Rita in southeast Texas, 
and I look forward to working on the next WRDA bill after this one is 
passed to have it completed.
  Once again, I want to thank the ranking member and the chairman for 
their full support.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mahoney). And I thank the gentleman from 
Texas for his kind remarks.
  Mr. MAHONEY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
  I want to begin by thanking Chairman Oberstar, Congresswoman Johnson, 
and my colleague, Ranking Member Mica and their staffs on behalf of 
Palm Beach, Martin, and St. Lucie County for all the efforts that they 
have done to ensure that one of our Nation's greatest treasures is 
preserved for future generations, the Everglades.
  Seven years ago, Congress authorized the largest environmental 
restoration plan in the Nation's history, the Comprehensive Everglades 
Restoration Plan. Despite its broad bipartisan support for the plan in 
2000, Congress has not honored its commitment to the Everglades. As a 
result, this plan once envisioned as an equal partnership between State 
and Federal Government has become the sole responsibility of Florida, 
whose citizens have invested over $2 billion. Today, Congress has an 
historic opportunity to renew its promise to be an equal partner in 
Everglades restoration by passing the WRDA conference report for the 
first time in 7 years.
  The conference report would authorize funding for numerous projects 
that are a part of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan, most 
notably the Indian River Lagoon and Picayune Strand. The Indian River 
Lagoon project located in my district is not only critical to the 
success of the Everglades, but it is critical to the economic well-
being to the Treasure Coast of Florida.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge Congress to pass this long overdue legislation 
and renew Congress' commitment to restoring one of our Nation's 
greatest treasures, the Everglades. And, once passed, I urge my 
colleagues to join me in telling the President, after 7 years of 
neglect, it is time to do the people's business and sign this bill into 
law.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison), whose district I mentioned 
earlier on the transportation bill had a terrible tragedy this 
afternoon.
  Mr. ELLISON. Mr. Speaker, of course I rise in very strong support of 
the bill tonight, and it is a very tragic irony that it is over a body 
of water that a tragedy occurred in Minneapolis today.
  I rise tonight with every Member of that Minneapolis delegation. We 
stand united in our heartfelt concerns over the news of the collapse of 
the 35W Bridge spanning the Mississippi River in my hometown of 
Minneapolis, which occurred early this evening. I spoke with Mayor 
Rybak regarding this tragic situation, and I pledge to work with him in 
every possible way to recover from this disaster.
  As of now, we simply do not know the magnitude of the tragedy. Early 
reports are that eight cars and one truck are in the river. About 50 
school children very narrowly avoided falling into the river. I do not 
know the depth of the injured. As of now, we know there are three 
confirmed dead. We pray for the deceased, for those still in peril, and 
for the families who have not yet heard the news from their loved ones.

                              {time}  2130

  Our delegation stands united in marshaling the resources for our 
Minneapolis emergency forces in need of search and rescue efforts.
  I want to express my profound thanks for the dedicated work of the 
responders who are on the scene risking their own lives to save others.
  We are grateful for those who we know have survived this tragedy, 
including, miraculously, the school bus containing perhaps as many as 
50 youngsters.
  Again, I am very saddened by the depth of this tragedy, stand 
together with all eight members of the Minnesota delegation, and I 
intend to return home tomorrow morning to Minneapolis on the earliest 
possible flight to do everything I can to help the citizens of my city 
recover from this horrible tragedy.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ramstad).
  Mr. RAMSTAD. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding, the dean 
of our delegation, Mr. Oberstar; and I strongly support this Water 
Resources Development Act and thank, again, Chairman Oberstar for 
yielding.
  I rise with tremendous sadness and grief about an awful tragedy that 
took place this evening in Minnesota. Full details on the tragedy are 
still sketchy, but we know that, as of 6:10 p.m. Minnesota time, during 
the midst of evening rush hour, a bridge on Interstate Highway 35W in 
downtown Minneapolis, very close to the Metrodome, collapsed, causing 
at least 40 cars to fall into the Mississippi River.
  As my colleague, Keith Ellison, mentioned, at least three people are 
confirmed dead. A number of others have been hospitalized at the nearby 
Hennepin County Medical Center, and now we get word at five other 
hospitals as well. Rescue operations are still under way at this late 
hour, as fires continue to burn and people remain unaccounted for.

[[Page 22408]]

  The Minnesota Congressional Delegation, thanks to our dean, Mr. 
Oberstar, has already met and pledged our total support to obtain 
whatever Federal assistance is needed.
  In addition, on behalf of Governor Pawlenty, with whom I've been in 
constant contact, I want to offer the gratitude of all Minnesotans to 
Speaker Pelosi, who has already pledged her full support for any 
Federal assistance our State needs to address this bridge disaster.
  I also want to pay special thanks to the first responders who are on 
the scene at the moment and rescue operations and other services. Every 
single Fire Department in the seven county metro area is there on the 
scene, as well as all the Police Departments, emergency medical 
personnel. And, again, we all thank those brave first responders.
  Our thoughts and prayers, Mr. Speaker, finally, are with the families 
of all those affected by this horrible disaster. We will continue to 
monitor the situation very closely, of course; and we ask all Americans 
to pray for the victims, the survivors and their families.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
gentlewoman from Minnesota (Ms. McCollum).
  Ms. McCOLLUM of Minnesota. The words of my colleagues from Minnesota 
reflect how we all feel at this time; and those of you in the Chamber, 
I know, are sharing our grief on this very, very sad day.
  We need to stand united to make sure that infrastructure all around 
this country is properly maintained and cared for. We don't know the 
cause of the accident as of yet, but I know that we will do a thorough 
investigation and do whatever we can to prevent tragedies like this 
from happening in the future.
  And to my congressional colleague from the other twin city, 
Minneapolis, please know that the City of St. Paul stands in 
solidarity. This is a time for grief for both cities, and we'll do 
whatever we can to be supportive.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).
  Mr. McNERNEY. Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge the tragedy that 
occurred today in Minnesota and assure our colleagues from Minnesota 
and the families of Minnesota victims that we stand in solidarity with 
them.
  Thank you, Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member Mica for all your 
hard work to finalize what would be the first WRDA bill to become law 
since the year 2000. I would also like to thank the staff for their 
diligence in finalizing the details of this important legislation.
  Simply put, enactment of this bill is long overdue, not just because 
we have billions of dollars of water infrastructure projects that 
desperately need to be completed but because this bill means more jobs 
throughout the country and each project we undertake provides a net 
benefit to the economy in terms of improved commerce, new jobs and a 
cleaner environment.
  In particular, this bill is vitally important to my State, and the 
chairman and members of the California delegation know all too well 
that much of Northern California that I represent is held together by a 
fragile web of 100-year-old levees with varying degrees of stability. 
As a source of drinking water for 25 million Californians, the mix of 
natural and manmade channels in the San Joaquin Delta need constant 
oversight and perpetual maintenance to remain functional.
  Of particular importance is a flood protection project near the city 
of Morgan Hill in my district that improves the Llagas Creek, a 
waterway that runs several miles through Morgan Hill south to Gilroy. 
I'm very pleased that we are correcting a jurisdictional issue in this 
legislation that stopped the Corps from completing work on Llagas Creek 
for years. Specifically, we are now directing the Corps to complete the 
Llagas Creek.
  Mr. Speaker, as a conference member on this legislation, I want the 
Record to indicate that the Llagas Creek project is meant to be 
completed under the national directive language we included in the bill 
and under the cost-sharing ratio we have explicitly included in H.R. 
1495.
  I'm hopeful the Corps will expeditiously complete the project so the 
residents of Morgan Hill can rest easy in the knowledge that we're 
protecting them from periodic flood damage.
  Again, I want to compliment the chairman for his hard work.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire as to the time remaining on both 
sides?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Florida has 12 minutes 
remaining; the gentleman from Minnesota, 2.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time; and 
I'll be pleased, if the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) needs 
additional time, to yield to him in light of the tragedy that has 
struck his State.
  Mr. Speaker, again, my heartfelt sympathies are expressed to any of 
the Members from Minnesota as they deal with this very difficult 
tragedy and also to the families who've lost loved ones in the collapse 
of the span of Interstate 35 West, which I understand connects 
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
  The information I have is that some of the sections were under 
construction, and the span was closed last night for construction and 
reopened this morning and scheduled to be closed again tonight. But, 
unfortunately, we have seen from news accounts a very significant 
disaster and loss of life in the failure of that infrastructure.
  I, too, would pledge my support in working with Chairman Oberstar, 
with the Minnesota delegation and working with this administration and 
the Congress to bring whatever resources to reopen that span and try to 
repair that infrastructure.
  While we can replace the infrastructure, we can't replace the lives; 
and, again, our sympathy goes to those who mourn their loved ones 
tonight.
  As we conclude debate on this water resources infrastructure bill, 
once again we're reminded of the importance of infrastructure, whether 
it's bridges, dams, the highways that are along our beaches, the 
natural reserves we have in this country that depend on Congress to 
protect them and protect that water resource infrastructure.
  I yielded earlier to our ranking member and thank him again, Mr. 
Baker; and I said the Good Lord sent us Mr. Baker to lead the 
Republican side of the Water Resources Committee. And again, we have 
the example of the failure of water resource infrastructure, the levees 
and some of the infrastructure in New Orleans and Louisiana. No one is 
more knowledgeable, has a better firsthand experience than Mr. Baker. 
And this bill also contains a considerable amount of authorization for 
projects in Louisiana and New Orleans.
  Finally, I want to thank, again, Ms. Johnson. Next week, I'll get to 
travel to her district. Under her leadership they bring together all 
the transportation leaders in the State of Texas for probably one of 
the country's largest, it's grown to the country's largest 
infrastructure conferences, and they've asked me to come down and speak 
and be with them as they plan Texas' policy and transportation projects 
for the future. I look forward to that opportunity of being with her, 
and I thank her again for her distinguished leadership and working in a 
bipartisan fashion to craft this long-overdue legislation.
  So again, I thank all of those. I have John Anderson, Mr. Speaker, 
with me, who represents all of the staff on the Republican side; and I 
thank the staff on the majority side for their hard work in trying to 
make this bill a reality.
  And, again, I thought of one of the most important projects, as the 
gentleman from Florida, other gentleman from Florida pointed out 
tonight, that restoration, the first work on the Everglades being in 
this bill, important not only to Florida and our districts in Florida 
but also to the Nation because of the environmental treasure that we're 
trying to preserve. We do make positive steps towards its restoration 
and preservation for future generations.

[[Page 22409]]

  So it's a good bill. I know the President's probably going to veto 
it. It'll be back here. We're going to, unfortunately, have to override 
that veto to make this a reality.
  But, as I said earlier, the President has to do what he has to do, 
Congress has to do what the Congress has to do, and we will work 
together again to make certain that the infrastructure of this country 
and water resources are preserved for the future.
  For the first time since 2000, the Congress is on the verge of 
passing a major bill authorizing projects, studies, policies, and 
programs related to the Army Corps of Engineers.
  There has been a WRDA introduced in every Congress since 2000, 
however, controversy always seemed to arise that dashed our hopes for a 
new authorization bill. Over the years we have worked to bridge the 
gaps created by those controversies and have arrived at the point where 
we now have a product that the Congress can approve and send to the 
President.
  This bill has been under development for many years. It is the result 
of much debate and much compromise. This is not the bill that any of us 
in the room would have written, if we were writing a bill by ourselves. 
However, it is a bill that all of us can support because it addresses 
important needs of our Nation.
  This is a good bill that represents investments in America. These 
investments will improve trade, protect our homes and businesses from 
flood damages, and enhance our quality of life by restoring aquatic 
ecosystems. This legislation ensures our ports and waterways remain 
viable in the international marketplace by authorizing critical 
navigation deepening projects. Without these projects shippers will go 
to other foreign ports like those in Canada and Central America.
  For some goods, as much as 50% of the ultimate price paid by the 
consumer is attributable to transportation costs. Keeping these costs 
low not only benefits consumers here in the United States, it also 
makes products produced in the United States more competitive on the 
world market. Congestion at an outdated lock on a waterway can result 
in increased costs that rob the farmer of his or her profit. Delay and 
its associated costs also can rob a farmer of his or her market. This 
is not a speculative concern.
  Recently, improved transportation systems in South America have 
allowed farmers there to keep their costs low enough to underbid United 
States grain farmers for customers located in the United States! 
America's farmers, like the rest of the United States economy, depend 
on modern and efficient waterways as an integral part of the intermodal 
transportation system.
  Trade builds wealth. But to realize the economic benefits of trade, 
we must have a modern transportation system. To maintain our place in 
the global economy, the United States must have modern ports and 
waterways that can bring the world's goods to our door and make 
America's products competitive on the world market. Our ports and 
waterways need to be improved to handle the additional traffic and 
larger class of ships that we know are coming. This Conference Report 
addresses these needs in several ways including authorizing 
improvements to waterways in my home State of Florida, as well as in 
Texas, Louisiana, and Virginia. In addition, it authorizes 7 new locks 
and other navigation improvements on the upper Mississippi River.
  The WRDA Conference Report authorizes critical projects to provide 
flood protection to millions of Americans. Flood damage reduction 
projects save Federal dollars by reducing the probability that disaster 
relief will have to be used in the future. This bill includes a 
multitude of projects that protect our cities from floods and coastal 
storms.
  As our Nation has become more environmentally conscious, and sought 
ways to improve aquatic ecosystems, the Corps of Engineers has become a 
leader in planning and carrying our environmental restoration projects. 
This Conference Report is by far the ``greenest'', most 
environmentally-friendly Water Resources Development Act ever. The most 
frequent purpose of new Corps of Engineers project authorizations in 
this bill is environmental restoration.
  This Conference Report contains critical provisions to restore the 
Everglades. Everglades restoration has been talked about for years, but 
with the projects authorized in this bill, actual work and construction 
of projects can begin. Not only is the Everglades vital to the economy, 
environment and people of Florida, it is a national treasure that must 
be cared for and protected for future generations of Americans.
  These projects have been brought forward by the Corps in partnership 
with the State of Florida. The State of Florida has stepped up with 
their share of funds for these projects. Now that we have these first 
authorizations, Congress should be supportive of funding this important 
effort to save a national treasure. These are just the first of what 
will be many projects over the next several decades to clean up, store, 
and redirect water for the Everglades.
  This bill does not provide guaranteed funding--money will have to be 
appropriated to meet these authorization levels, but it represents a 
critical commitment by the Congress to restore an ecological jewel of 
the United States. This legislation will help ensure a revitalized 
Everglades for generations to come.
  Also addressed in this bill are policy issues that improve how the 
Corps of Engineers does projects. We have instituted an Independent 
Peer Review into the Corps' planning process to enhance the agency's 
credibility. We are improving project monitoring to determine if the 
projects are performing as designed.
  I know that some are not happy with the size of this bill; however, 
we must remember that the Conference Report represents the pent-up 
demand of 3 WRDA bills. This legislation is overdue by 5 years. And if 
we wait any longer it will just be a bigger bill, because the Nation's 
needs are not going away by themselves. We must address them like we 
are doing here today.
  I want to thank Don Young, the former chairman of this Committee, who 
worked for many years to resolve the difficult issues surrounding this 
bill; and also Jimmy Duncan who chaired our Water Resources and 
Environment Subcommittee for 6 years and worked closely with the 
Ranking Members Jerry Costello and Peter DeFazio to create many of the 
compromises that made this Conference Report possible.
  I certainly want to thank you, Chairman Oberstar, for your leadership 
over the years both as Ranking Member and now as Chairman of the Full 
Committee. It has been very rewarding to work with you on this bill and 
it shows what we can accomplish when we work together in a bipartisan 
way to address the Nation's needs.
  Under the leadership of Senator Boxer and Senator Inhofe, the Senate 
passed a bill that included many of the same projects addressed in the 
House bill. I think it is appropriate that the package before us today 
represents a compromise of the House and Senate bills into a good 
product that both chambers can proudly support.
  Lastly, I want to thank the staff of the Full Committee, Jim Coon, 
Amy Steinmann, Charlie Ziegler, and Jason Rosa. I also want to thank 
the staff of the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, John 
Anderson, Geoff Bowman, and William Collum for their dedication in 
finishing the Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
  And on Mr. Oberstar's staff, I want to thank David Heymsfeld and Ward 
McCarragher of the Full Committee, and especially the Subcommittee 
staff of Ryan Seiger, Ted Illston, Beth Goldstein, and Mike Brain.
  I urge all Members to support the Conference Report.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield the balance of my time 
to the gentleman from Minnesota.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I thank the gentleman very much for his kind words, for 
his prayers and his thoughts about our fellow Minnesotans and the 
tragedy that's occurred this evening; and I join my prayers with his 
and those of my colleagues who spoke earlier this evening on that 
bridge collapse. We certainly keep the members, the family members and 
the victims in our prayers as we go forth this evening.
  We reach a milestone this evening with this legislation. I said at 
the outset and I say it again, this is a historic moment. We have 
accomplished in 7 months what it has taken 7 years to put together, but 
it is a good bill, and it is evidence that this body can and does work 
together constructively for the common good, for the purpose of 
building a better Nation, for moving people and goods efficiently and 
effectively in the domestic economy.
  Getting us to this point was not easy. The staff had to put in long 
hours, as the gentleman from Florida already expressed.

                              {time}  2145

  I want to specifically mention Ryan Seiger, Beth Goldstein, Ted 
Illston and Mike Brain on the Democratic side; John Anderson, Geoff 
Bowman, William Collum and Tracy Mosebey on the Republican side; Rod 
Hall, Chairwoman Johnson's staff member; Stewart Crigler, staffer for 
Ranking Member Baker.

[[Page 22410]]

  From the Office of Legislative Counsel: David Mendelsohn, Curt 
Haensel, Heather Arpin over in the Senate, and Rosemary Gallagher.
  And from the Senate staff: Ken Kopocis, Jeff Rosato, Tyler Rushford, 
Angie Giancarlo, Jo-Ellen Darcy, Mike Quiello and Let Mon Lee.
  All worked very closely together to craft this legislation, spending 
enormous amounts of time, weekends. While Members were back home in 
their respective districts, staff were here in this oppressive heat of 
Washington, although, I think, comforted by air conditioning at least, 
but putting in extraordinarily long hours to craft this bill, bridge 
the gaps, reach agreements, report back to Members so that we could be 
here this evening.
  It is a significant moment for America, for this Congress to have 
this comprehensive water resources bill together. And, again, I express 
great appreciation to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Mica) for the 
time that he has spent and the cooperation that we have had; the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) for the time that 
she has devoted, for her care, concern, and energy; and the gentleman 
from Louisiana (Mr. Baker), who put his heart and soul into this 
legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to 
submit into the Record a letter from E.G. Pittman, Chairman of the 
Texas Water Development Board, strongly supporting the passage of this 
conference report.
  The State of Texas has recently completed a nationally recognized 
comprehensive water plan. Provisions in H.R. 1495 would greatly assist 
the State in addressing changes in the population, water availability 
and quality, technological improvements, and promotes increased 
collaboration with the Corps of Engineers.

                                Texas Water Development Board,

                                       Austin, TX, August 1, 2007.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. James L. Oberstar,
     Chairman, House Committee on Transportation and 
         Infrastructure, Washington, DC.
     Hon. John A. Boehner,
     House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. John L. Mica,
     Ranking Member, House Committee on Transportation and 
         Infrastructure, Washington, DC.
       Dear House Leaders: The Texas Water Development Board 
     (TWDB) strongly supports the passage of H.R. 1495 by the end 
     of this week. The conference report on the Water Resources 
     Development Act (WRDA) embodies seven years of deliberations 
     on this important and urgent issue. Further delays are 
     incomprehensible after such protracted discussions have 
     finally resulted in a bill that is a crucial step towards 
     addressing the nation's water resources needs, which have 
     accumulated since the last WRDA was enacted.
       The Nation can no longer wait for passage of this important 
     piece of legislation. We are faced with numerous water 
     resources challenges that over time have increased and 
     continue to increase in cost and urgency. We cannot afford to 
     neglect this flood of needs because they will only grow and 
     not dissipate.
       WRDA's time is now. I appreciate your leadership in 
     acknowledging the importance of H.R. 1495, and I look forward 
     to a successful House vote on the bill this week. If you or 
     your staffs would like to further discuss this issue, please 
     do not hesitate to contact me, or Dave Mitamura of my staff.
           Respectfully,
                                                E. G. Rod Pittman,
                                                         Chairman.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the 
Subcommittee on Water Resources and the full Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee for reporting out the Water Resources 
Development Act (WRDA) and getting through conference so we can send a 
bill to the President.
  The previous two Congresses have failed to do so, and because of 
that, much needed flood control projects in Houston, TX, had been put 
on hold. I appreciate the inclusion of our language for the Halls Bayou 
Federal Flood Control Project in Houston, which will allow the Harris 
County Flood Control District, HCFCD, to start work on this project in 
the near future.
  Historic flooding along Halls Bayou has been severe and frequent in 
some neighborhoods. During Tropical Storm Allison in June 2001, Halls 
Bayou was hit very hard, with more than 8,000 homes flooding within the 
watershed. No project can keep all homes from flooding, but a project 
can help reduce the risk of flooding for a significant number of 
families, reducing the need for Federal assistance, property damage, 
and loss of life.
  The purpose of section 5157 of this legislation which pertains to 
Halls Bayou is to allow the HCFCD to conduct the General Reevaluation 
Review, GRR, and any subsequent Federal interest project on Halls 
Bayou. The Corps is limited in its staff, resources, and time with the 
many projects in the Galveston District and the Southwest Division. 
Local project sponsors with the necessary expertise, like Harris 
County, can provide efficiency by becoming more involved.
  Halls Bayou, a major tributary of Greens Bayou, was authorized in 
WRDA 1990 as part of the Buffalo Bayou and Tributaries Project. The 
original Halls Bayou authorization assumed the Greens Bayou project in 
place, which is now finishing a GRR. Results indicate that the work on 
Greens Bayou downstream of Halls Bayou will not have Federal work, 
although it will have significant local projects. Therefore, a GRR is 
now needed for Halls Bayou as well.
  While conducting the GRR to find a possible Federal interest, Harris 
County can begin project implementation in order to reduce future flood 
damage as soon as possible. Adding Halls Bayou to Section 211(f) allows 
Harris County to be reimbursed if the project is later approved by the 
Secretary. I thank the Subcommittee, full Committee, and the Conference 
for their work on this Issue.
  I support this bill and the balance that it strikes between the need 
to improve water resources for human purposes and to preserve our water 
uses for the environment and future generations. The projects in this 
bill are much needed, and I'm pleased the conference committee was able 
to complete its work so we can get a bill to the President.
  Mr. BISHOP of New York. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman 
Oberstar and Ranking Member Mica, as well as Subcommittee Chairwoman 
Johnson and Ranking Member Baker and the committee staffs for their 
hard work and leadership on this important legislation--the first water 
improvement and conservation package in seven years.
  Following several earlier impasses, I want to take this opportunity 
to commend the spirit of bipartisan and bicameral compromise on this 
important measure.
  This bill benefits all Americans and their families who use and enjoy 
our Nation's waterways, public beaches--including over 300 miles of 
coastline along my district--and for U.S. businesses that depend on 
healthy and viable waterways throughout the country.
  My district benefits from the good work that the Army Corps of 
Engineers does for coastal communities by helping small towns deal with 
multiple concerns ranging from erosion to longstanding environmental 
challenges. WRDA will allow the Corps to continue work on several 
projects on eastern Long Island that will protect the TWA Flight 800 
Memorial, restore the quality of the Long Island Sound watershed, 
protect the famous Montauk Lighthouse, and continue environmental 
monitoring of the Atlantic coast of Long Island.
  In addition, H.R. 1495 will go a long way toward supplying the Corps 
with all the resources it needs to protect coastal communities and 
vacationers by modernizing project planning and approval.
  Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman and ranking member again for their 
hard work on this issue, and I look forward to working with my 
colleagues to make sure that we get a WRDA bill to the President as 
soon as we can. We simply cannot afford to let another year go by 
without passing this legislation.
  Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, today we are considering the conference 
report for the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. This has been 7 
years in the making to enact a WRDA bill that addresses the critical 
infrastructure needs of our country.
  I would like to thank Chairman Oberstar, Chairwoman Johnson, Mr. 
Mica, and Mr. Baker for a job well done in bringing this conference 
report to the floor today.
  Without their strong leadership, dedication, and persistence we would 
not have a final conference report on the floor today.
  I am pleased that projects for major flood control, navigation, 
environmental restoration, and other water resource projects, including 
projects in my congressional district, are being authorized.
  I am also pleased we are finally authorizing the Upper Mississippi 
and Illinois Waterway system project. This project is extremely vital 
to the State of Illinois and the Nation because we are going to be able 
to move commerce more efficiently and effectively.
  Modernizing that infrastructure is the right thing to do--it is a 
necessity--and I am glad to see this bill is moving forward on such a

[[Page 22411]]

significant project to our economy and commerce.
  Mr. Speaker, I again salute and thank Chairman Oberstar, Chairwoman 
Johnson, Mr. Mica, and Mr. Baker for their leadership and hard work. I 
strongly support this conference report and urge my colleagues to do 
the same.
  Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Port of New Orleans and the 
economic and business interests throughout the State of Louisiana that 
rely on the maritime trade and commerce through the Port, I am 
especially pleased today to commend the conferees on H.R. 1495, the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2007, WRDA, for their support of the 
navigation project to improve access to the Port's Napoleon Avenue 
Container Terminal. Section 1004(a)(7) of the WRDA conference report 
will allow the Army Corps of Engineers to dredge and maintain a channel 
leading to the Napoleon Avenue Container Terminal berthing area at a 
depth not to exceed the authorized channel depth of the Mississippi 
River Ship Channel. This will ensure that the transportation benefits 
of the authorized channel depth of the Mississippi River Ship Channel 
will continue to be realized by the adjacent Port terminal and the 
larger container and other oceangoing vessels that desire to use that 
facility. This small navigation enhancement project will create 
significant economic and business benefits for the Port, and aid in the 
continuing recovery of the greater New Orleans area. I thank Chairman 
Jim Oberstar and Ranking Member John Mica of the House Transportation 
and Infrastructure Committee for their support of this initiative in 
the vital WRDA legislation.
  Mr. WELLER of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, during the last set of votes I 
unintentionally voted against the conference report on H.R. 1495, the 
Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
  I ask that it be put into the permanent Record that I fully support 
the passage of the conference report and ask that my vote be changed in 
the record from a ``nay'' vote to a ``yea'' vote.
  For the 11th Congressional District that I represent as well as for 
all of Illinois, passage of this legislation is of the utmost 
importance. WRDA contains instructions at my request for the Army Corps 
of Engineers to carry out studies and projects within my district at 
LaSalle and at Ballard's Island in the Illinois River. The conference 
report also contains the critical updating of the lock and dam system 
on the Upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers, vital to Illinois farmers 
and exports.
  In closing, I want to commend Chairman Oberstar and Ranking Member 
Mica for producing a good bipartisan bill again and I am hopeful that 
this year we can finally get this bill to the President for his 
signature.
  Mr. MACK. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about a bill that is 
critical to improving our country's water quality and infrastructure, 
the Water Resources Development Act.
  I am glad we're finally able to pass a WRDA conference report. For 
far too long, Congress has stalled on moving this critical legislation, 
creating a backlog of projects in the country, including many in 
Southwest Florida.
  This legislation is vital to protecting our environment and improving 
water quality in Florida and the rest of the country. The bill will 
help to restore the Everglades and parts of coastal Louisiana affected 
by hurricanes. It will also assist in protecting our beaches and 
coastal areas from floods and storms and is vital in facilitating 
commerce at our Nation's waterways and ports.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill will pay untold dividends in the years to 
come. We all agree that our children and grandchildren deserve to 
inherit a fiscally responsible government, but we also agree that they 
deserve to inherit clean water, clean air and a healthy environment.
  I hope that the President won't act on his veto threat and instead 
will sign WRDA into law. We need this legislation to protect our 
environment for future generations. We can't delay in moving forward on 
these critical infrastructure projects.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the conference report.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the conference report.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________