U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

88–903 PDF 2015

S. HRG. 110–1258 

THE MIDWEST FLOODS: WHAT HAPPENED AND 

WHAT MIGHT BE IMPROVED FOR MANAGING 

RISK AND RESPONSES IN THE FUTURE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

JULY 23, 2008 

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

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress.senate 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri 

BETTINA POIRIER, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

ANDREW WHEELER, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

JULY 17, 2008 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Boxer, Hon. Barbara, U.S. Senator from the State of California ........................ 1 

Bond, Hon. Christopher S., U.S. Senator from the State of Missouri ................. 2 

Grassley, Hon. Charles, U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa ............................. 4 

Mccaskill, Hon. Claire, U.S. Senator from the State of Missouri ........................ 8 

Durbin, Hon. Richard J., U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois ........................ 10 

Klobuchar, Hon. Amy, U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota ...................... 14 

Inhofe, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma .................... 57 

WITNESSES 

Woodley, Hon. John Paul, Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works 

Accompanied by: Major General Don T. Riley, Deputy Commanding General, Civil and Emergency Operations ............................................................... 16 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 18 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Inhofe ........................................................................................... 30 

Senator Barrasso ....................................................................................... 32 

Walsh, Brigadier General Michael J., Commanding General, U.S. Army Engineer Division, Mississippi Valley ........................................................................ 34 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 37 

Response to an additional question from Senator Inhofe ............................. 43 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Barrosso ........................... 43 

(1) 

THE MIDWEST FLOODS: WHAT HAPPENED 

AND WHAT MIGHT BE IMPROVED FOR MANAGING RISK AND RESPONSES IN THE FUTURE 

WEDNESDAY JULY 23, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, 

Washington, DC. 

The full committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:30 a.m. in room 

406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer (chairman of the full committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Boxer, Bond, Carper, Klobuchar. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. Good morning. I was sorry to hear that Senator 

Harkin is ill this morning. We are very happy to see Senator 

Grassley here, and I understand Senator McCaskill is trying to 

change her schedule and join us. 

Today the Committee meets to examine the Midwest floods of 

2008 and consider ways of improving flood protection and flood response. I think all of America was shocked to see what happened, 

Senator Grassley. We want to help, this Committee wants to help. 

We are joined today not only by right now, Senator Grassley, and 

we hope other Senators, but by the Assistant Secretary of the Army 

for Civil Works, John Paul Woodley, and Brigadier General Michael J. Walsh, Commanding General U.S. Army Engineer Division 

Mississippi Valley. But before we hear from the Corps, we are so 

happy to have before us Senator Grassley. I want to welcome you. 

Your constituents have suffered through a terrible season of devastating flooding and the Committee looks forward to hearing your 

testimony. This summer’s flooding in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Missouri, those floods resulted in unusual 

heavy precipitation which inundated the Midwestern region of the 

U.S. throughout the early part of 2008. It appears to be continuing 

into the summer. 

According to data from the Department of Commerce, over 1,100 

daily precipitation records were broken across the Midwest, mostly 

in Iowa, Illinois, Wisconsin and Missouri. Further complicating 

matters is that prior to June’s extreme rains, much of the upper 

Mississippi Basin had already experienced very wet conditions 

from the spring and the winter. Indeed, precipitation across the 

upper Mississippi from December 2007 through December 2008 

2 

was the second wettest since 1895. Naturally, this already oversaturated region could not stand much more, and the impacts were 

devastating. 

I would like to take a few moments to share a few images of this 

catastrophic event. Here is a levee breaching in Missouri. Then a 

levee breaching, damaging homes. This is an aerial view of what 

happens when a levee breaches. And then, homes destroyed. This 

chart dramatically shows just how terrible flooding can be with 

homes and other structures uprooted and slammed into a bridge. 

But there can be some statistics that are just as dramatic as pictures. At least two dozen people died, and 148 people sustained injuries due to the floods. Forty-one levees overtopped in Iowa, Indiana, Illinois and Missouri. Tens of thousands of people had to leave 

their homes to escape the flooding. Many economists predict that 

the floods are to blame for at least $8 billion in losses to crop production. 

Economic damages will likely be higher after losses to livestock, 

farm machinery, buildings and infrastructure are accounted for. 

This last point is something all Americans will feel. I will let Senator Grassley tell the rest of the story. 

But I believe these tragic floods have served as a wake-up call. 

Our Nation’s water infrastructure needs to be carefully reviewed 

and carefully shored up. Having led a congressional delegation to 

New Orleans last year, I saw for myself what happens when we neglect our Nation’s flood control infrastructure. Like Hurricane 

Katrina, there is a lesson to be learned from the Midwest floods, 

that we must shore up our Nation’s water and flood control infrastructure before catastrophe strikes, not after. 

And even though most of the levees that failed in this year’s 

flooding were non-Federal, we can do so much more to help communities protect themselves. Indeed, in the 2007 WRDA, we enacted 

a significant program to inventory and assess many of our Nation’s 

levees. However, that was only the first step. I look forward to 

working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle to improve and 

expand that program to inventory and assess every levee in this 

Country as the Senate-passed WRDA bill included. I will be asking 

the Corps about that project. 

I am confident that this tragedy will help recommit our Country 

and this Congress to shoring up our Nation’s water infrastructure. 

Last year, I was proud to join with Senator Inhofe and all members 

of this Committee to lead the floor fight to overturn the President’s 

veto of WRDA 2007, and we did it, by a vote of 79 to 14. I am very 

grateful for that. But like that vote, I want us to come together 

again. We have to tackle this problem, and it shouldn’t have anything to do with party affiliation. 

So I look forward to hearing from Senator Grassley and any 

other Senator who manages to get here this morning. And of 

course, I look forward to hearing from Secretary Woodley and Brigadier General Walsh. With that, I will call on Senator Bond. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI 

Senator BOND. Madam Chair, I thank you very much for holding 

the hearing. My home State of Missouri, along with Senator GrassVerDate Aug 31 2005 12:28 May 01, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\88903.TXT VERN
3 

ley’s State of Iowa, has endured flooding on the Mississippi River, 

we also on the Missouri River and the tributaries, as well as suffering from tornadoes this spring. 

I very much appreciate your leadership in helping us get WRDA 

passed. I was proud to be able to join you in the veto override, because assuring appropriate water infrastructure is a vitally important responsibility that we have in Washington and this Congress 

bears through our Committee, environment and public works. After 

the 1993 floods, the first of three 500-year floods we have experienced in 15 years, I fought hard against the OMB and the Administration then, which did not want to rebuild the levees. With the 

help of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, we were able to 

begin to restore the levees that had been destroyed in Missouri in 

that catastrophic flood. 

I went to the White House and the President’s assistant, my good 

friend Leon Paneta, welcomed me by calling me Mr. Levee. I said, 

now, Leon, that may be an insult to you, but I wear that as a 

badge of pride back in the heartland. 

It has been a very trying year for all of us in the flood area. But 

one thing has rung clear: the mitigation of these disasters has been 

a coordinated effort among the Federal, State and local governments and volunteers. I am very proud of the work that Midwesterners did. I saw the work, particularly in Missouri, where I 

have made visits, as a testament to showing how bad disasters can 

be prevented from becoming worse disasters, when competent State 

and local leaders take proactive steps to mitigate circumstances on 

the ground. 

During Missouri’s recent floods, I met with volunteers from the 

Salvation Army, the Red Cross, Missouri’s Civil Air Patrol, local 

law enforcement, the National Guard, local surrounding communities, and of course, representatives from the Corps of Engineers. 

It was really inspiring to see these people come together to protect 

lives and livelihoods. 

Now, our National Guard acted valiantly. Their work gave businesses and families the critical time needed to move important assets out of harm’s way where levees were in danger of failing. People from all walks of life and from across Missouri and the heartland have pitched in. It is truly an all hands on deck effort, and 

I am tremendously proud. 

Madam Chair, you might be interested to know that they had so 

many volunteers coming in, they moved out 330,000 sand bags and 

they had more volunteers coming. They used all the sand bags that 

were available. We had thousands of volunteers ready to come in. 

It turned out that the levees had been weakened and the levees 

gave way, not because in most instances, not because of lack of 

sand bags, but because of animals drilling holes in the levee, and 

the fact that it stayed up so long. But Missouri and the Midwestern 

States have pulled together, done an outstanding job of preventing 

damage. And I was pleased to work with Senator Grassley and 

other Senators from the Midwest, Senator Harkin, Senator 

McCaskill, to fund vital programs to get our communities up and 

running again. We included more than $600 million to appropriate 

it to the Corps of Engineers for repair of navigation and flood control structures damaged in the flood event. 

4 

What is important to focus on now is the speedy repair of damaged structures. It is my hope that the money in the supplemental 

appropriations will enable the Corps to expedite repair to levees, 

so when the next storm comes, our farms and communities will be 

protected. We are not holding our breath and counting on waiting 

another 499 years for the next 500-year flood. Five hundred year 

floods tend to come a little more frequently than that. 

I thank you very much for holding this hearing and I look forward to working with you on this. 

Senator BOXER. Yes, we will. 

Senator GRASSLEY. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES GRASSLEY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IOWA 

Senator GRASSLEY. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

What you laid out about the situation takes a lot of my statement. I want to thank you very much for highlighting. . . 

[remarks off microphone]. 

As Senator Harkin, if he were here, and because he is ill, he 

can’t be here, demonstrates the bipartisanship we have approached 

this, I like to say that in regard to this flooding, to paraphrase Senator Vandenberg in the 1940’s and 1950’s, he said, when it comes 

to foreign policy, partisanship ends at the shoreline. When it comes 

to flooding, partisanship in Iowa ends at the water’s edge. 

I thank the Committee for holding the hearing and allowing me 

to share with you this morning. As you know, the Midwest and especially Iowa was hit extremely hard by tornadoes, storms and 

flooding this spring. In Iowa, it started out by a deadly tornado ripping through my home town and the surrounding areas, causing 

significant damage and death. 

A little more than a week later, record floods brought havoc in 

central and eastern parts of our State, as it has in about six or 

seven other States of the Midwest, maybe to a lesser extent, but 

still damage. 

We also had another tornado sweep through the western part of 

our State that killed four Boy Scouts in early June. Many people 

saw pictures on television or in their newspapers of the damage 

throughout the Midwest and our State. However, those pictures 

hardly do justice to the historic devastation. This severe weather 

system caused a 500-year flood event and the rivers overtook communities. 

As Senator Harkin and I toured Iowa, this became very apparent, especially when we flew over the affected areas. You could 

hardly see a dry piece of land between any of the cities. Our rich 

Iowa crop land looked like lakes; homes, public buildings and businesses being inundated wither water. You could only see the tops 

of many buildings. It was devastating and there is hurt everywhere. 

As the water recedes, people are attempting to start rebuilding 

their lives. However, this is frustrating and a discouraging process. 

Not only have folks lost their belongings, family photos, heirlooms, 

they are faced with many tough decisions about where they should 

live and how to protect themselves from having to go through this 

experience again. 

5 

A key component, then, in decisions for individuals and communities on how to rebuild is what type and level of flood protection 

that will be in place. The Army Corps of Engineers has been 

partnering with the State of Iowa in emergency and recovery efforts. I appreciate the assistance that they have provided to 

Iowans. They have been assessing the damage and the need for 

Federal levees affected by this disaster, and are scheduling their 

emergency repairs. It is my hope that my colleagues in Congress 

will help to provide the moneys needed for the Corps to carry out 

their emergency repair and to do it immediately. 

Brigadier General Walsh is here. I would like to share a story 

which emphasizes the need for this emergency assistance. Senator 

Harkin and I were viewing the damage in Louisa County, and particularly the city of Oakville that was inundated. This area experienced having approximately 4,000 feet of their levee washed away. 

Another opening had to be cut downstream to give the water somewhere to go. 

So as you can imagine, the whole town had to be evacuated. It 

was completely underwater, people in distress. Senator Harkin and 

I called General Walsh and personally asked that the Corps immediately begin assessing and putting into motion the emergency repair of the levee, and they acted accordingly, and we thank them 

very much for that. So we will continue to work with the Rock Island District of the Corps in these efforts. 

Furthermore, after the great flood of 1993, which now may be a 

lesser great flood of 1993 than what we had in 2008, it was decided 

in 1993 that a comprehensive plan to integrate existing and needed 

projects into a coordinated system for flood damage reduction and 

flood plain management on the upper Mississippi and Illinois Rivers was warranted. Congress authorized this plan in Section 459 

of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999. Earlier this year, 

the Army Corps completed the study. It shows that systemic flood 

protection is achievable. It now awaits congressional approval. 

I look forward to working with this Committee in the near future 

in evaluating and implementing such a plan. Adequate appropriations for this effort will also be needed so work can begin to reduce 

the risk of a repeat flood like this year. 

Thank you for letting me testify today about Iowa’s floods. I 

would like to reiterate the need for additional Federal assistance 

to help the Midwest in recovery efforts. As we toured Iowa communities during the last month, and I did it as recently as Monday, 

once again our constituents often ask us ‘‘not to forget’’ about them. 

So I bring that message to my colleagues. Iowans have great 

pride, great resilience. They aren’t complainers, but they are hurt. 

I see I in their eyes every day as they sort through the rubble. We 

only ask that Congress give Iowans and those in the Midwest the 

same consideration that they gave victims of other major disasters. 

I hope we acted, when I was chairman of a committee, responsibly after the New York disaster, after the Katrina disaster, and 

I would like to have the same response from Congress with this 

disaster, because I think it is just as bad, and encourage you to 

work quickly to get that help. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Grassley follows:] 

6 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES GRASSLEY, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

I thank the Committee for holding this hearing and for allowing me to share with 

you this morning. As you know, the Midwest and especially Iowa was hit extremely 

hard by tornadoes, storms, and flooding this spring. In Iowa it started by a deadly 

tornado ripping through my hometown and the surrounding area causing significant 

damage. Little more than a week later, record floods wrecked havoc in the central 

and eastern parts of our state. We also had another tornado sweep through the 

Western part of the state, causing four Boy Scouts to lose their lives. 

Many people saw pictures on television or in their newspapers of the damage 

throughout the Midwest and in Iowa. However, those pictures hardly do justice to 

this historic devastation. This severe weather system caused a 500-year flood event 

and the rivers overtook our communities. 

As Senator Harkin and I toured Iowa this became very apparent, especially when 

we flew over the effected areas. You could hardly see a dry piece of a land between 

any of the cities. Our rich Iowa cropland looked like lakes. Homes, public buildings, 

and businesses were inundated with water. You could only see the tops of many 

buildings. It was devastating and there is hurt everywhere. 

As the water recedes, people are attempting to start rebuilding their lives. However, this is a frustrating and discouraging process. Not only have these folks lost 

their belongings, family photos, and heirlooms they are faced with many tough decisions about where they should live and how to protect themselves from having to 

go through this experience again. A key component in the decision for individuals 

and communities on how to rebuild is what type and level of flood protection will 

be in place. 

The Army Corps of Engineers has been partnering with the State of Iowa in emergency and recovery efforts. I appreciate the assistance they have provided to Iowans. 

They have been assessing the damage and needs on the Federal levees affected by 

this disaster and are scheduling their emergency repairs. It is my hope that my colleagues in Congress will help to provide the moneys needed for the Corps to carry 

out these emergency repairs immediately. 

Since Brigadier General Walsh is testifying at this hearing, I would like to share 

a story which emphasizes the need for this emergency assistance. Senator Harkin 

and I were viewing the damage in Louisa County and the city of Oakville. This area 

experienced having approximately 4,000 feet of their levee wash away. Another 

opening had to be cut on a levee down stream to give the water somewhere to go. 

As you can imagine, the whole town had to be evacuated. It was completely underwater and folks are distressed. Senator Harkin and I called the General and personally asked that the Corps immediately begin assessing and putting into motion the 

emergency repair of this levee. We continue to work with the Rock Island District 

of the Corps on these efforts. 

Furthermore, after the Great Flood of 1993, it was decided that a comprehensive 

plan to integrate existing and needed projects into a coordinated system for flood 

damage reduction and floodplain management for the Upper Mississippi and Illinois 

Rivers was warranted. Congress authorized this plan in Section 459 of the Water 

Resources Development Bill of 1999. Earlier this year the Army Corps of Engineers 

completed the study. It shows that systemic flood protection is achievable. It now 

awaits congressional approval. 

I look forward to working with this Committee in the near future in evaluating 

and implementing such a plan. Adequate appropriations for this effort will also be 

needed so work can begin to reduce the risk of a repeat of floods like this year. 

Thank you again for letting me testify today about the Iowa floods. I would like 

to reiterate the need for additional Federal assistance to help the Midwest in our 

recovery efforts. 

As we’ve toured Iowa communities during the last month, our constituents often 

ask us to ‘‘not forget’’ about them. So, I bring that message to my colleagues. Iowans 

have great pride and resiliency. They aren’t complainers, but they are hurt. I see 

it in their eyes every day as they sort through the rubble. We only ask that Congress give Iowans and those in the Midwest the same consideration that they gave 

the victims of other major disasters. Nothing more, nothing less. 

Senator BOXER. Senator Grassley, I am so pleased you are here. 

At this point, I want to put into the record, without objection, 

Senator Harkin’s testimony. It really does match yours. He is a little more specific. I hope that his staff will share it with you, because I think he outlines some very good ideas. 

7 

I won’t take time, because I know all of our colleagues are under 

time stress. I do want to say one thing here. He says in his presentation, ‘‘To give you some idea of the magnitude of the flooding, 

consider that since the 1850’s, the highest flood level in Cedar Rapids had been 20 feet. The levees in Cedar Rapids are at 22 feet. 

Last month, the water level rose to more than 31 feet, well above 

the estimate 500-year flood level.’’ 

[The prepared statement of Senator Harkin follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS HARKIN, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

Chairman Boxer and members of the Committee, I appreciate this opportunity to 

report to the Committee on the recent flooding in Iowa, and to share my views on 

the lessons we can draw from this disaster as we plan for similar events in the future. 

First, I want to publicly salute the professionals in the Corps of Engineers, who 

worked day and night both before and during the flooding to minimize damage. In 

addition, local governments and many thousands of volunteers worked around the 

clock to fight the flood waters, and they did a magnificent job. 

However, the storms and subsequent flooding were simply overwhelming. In Iowa, 

we had more rain in the first 6 months of this year than in any other 6-month period on record. The already-saturated soil, combined with downpours day after day, 

resulted in what has been characterized as worse than 500-year flood events on the 

Cedar River, which inundated Cedar Rapids, and on the Iowa River, which flooded 

Iowa City and a number of other communities. 

To give you some idea of the magnitude of the flooding, consider that, since the 

1850’s, the highest flood level in Cedar Rapids had been 20 feet. The levees in Cedar 

Rapids are at 22 feet. Last month, the water level rose to more than 31 feet, well 

above the estimated 500-year flood level. 

In addition to the flooding, Iowa has been hit be a number of devastating tornadoes. Senator Chuck Grassley’s hometown, New Hartford, was hit by an F5 tornado, 

killing two people. Just weeks later, the same town was engulfed by flood waters 

when a local levee failed to protect the community. Thousands lost their homes and 

businesses. 

The obvious lesson we have learned is that we need to substantially increase the 

resources devoted to preventing flood damage. The current level of funding is clearly 

inadequate. 

I am proud to have been the chief sponsor of the 1993 Hazard Mitigation and Relocation Assistance Act, which substantially increased the FEMA mitigation program. And, now, funding has been further increased for states with an approved 

mitigation plan. Mitigation is absolutely crucial and we need to substantially increase our efforts. 

Where we have low-lying areas that are repeatedly flooded, an excellent alternative to building levees is to convert that land to parks and recreation uses. 

The Federal Government should increase assistance to cities like Davenport, 

Iowa, that are taking this approach. However, this approach will not work in most 

cases, due to topography or existing structures. I would also add that flood plain 

easements can be a very useful tool in rural areas as an alternative to levees. 

We need a formal assessment of what worked and what did not work during the 

recent flooding. But there are some things that are already clear. 

One obvious problem is that we have a hodgepodge of levees in Iowa and elsewhere across the Nation. Some levees are under the Corps authority, built to their 

specifications. Some are owned by cities. Others are owned by drainage districts or 

are effectively privately maintained. 

The ideal would be for the Corps to have responsibility for a national network of 

levees. However, I believe that, at a minimum, we should start with a regular program of Corps inspections of all significant levees, as Chairman Boxer proposed in 

the EPW-proposed version of the Corps reauthorization. 

Regrettably, that proposed program was sharply narrowed to the creation of an 

inventory of levees in the final version of the Corps reauthorization. That is important, but it is only an initial step. We should go further by requiring rigorous inspections that identify needed maintenance and improvements. 

The Corps budgets have been excessively tight for many years. In most cases, 

projects have been delayed at the design phase or construction phase for long periods because of lack of funding. Projects take far too many years to complete, and 

8 

many do not get started at all. We need a substantial increase for the Corps and 

in many other areas of infrastructure improvement. 

We need to improve our ability to predict very high flood levels. In Cedar Rapids, 

I am told, the modeling was not sophisticated enough to predict the kind of flooding 

we had in June, which was so far beyond normal boundaries. If local officials and 

citizens had been given warning of the potential for such a flood, they could have 

taken precautions accordingly, and damage could have been reduced. 

Where we have reservoirs, I believe we need to consider operating with lower 

water levels in order to maximize flood protection. If we move major structures that 

might be damaged by significant water releases, this would allow for faster releases 

prior to water exceeding the spillway level. 

When we begin a flood-control project, we need to improve the coordination between the Corps of Engineers and the USDA’s watershed structure program, which 

constructs small flood-control structures in rural areas. These small structures can 

have a significant, positive impact, often at a reasonable cost. We need more conservation practices that slow the movement of water. 

Today, levees across the United States are mostly 100-year-event levees. Given 

the realities of climate change and the greater frequency of severe weather, we need 

to revisit the assumptions behind this practice. 

I would also like to note that a significant part of the damage in Iowa was not 

caused directly by the flooding rivers or tornadoes. It was caused in places where 

storm-water pipes and sewer pipes are combined. As the system was overwhelmed, 

the waste water was pushed directly into people’s homes. We need to provide more 

support to cities as they work to modify these systems—to protect both property and 

the environment. 

I am hopeful that the National Flood Risk Management Committee, which brings 

together Federal agencies as well as State and local interests, can make excellent 

recommendations. But the bottom line is the bottom line: We simply need more 

funding for flood mitigation. 

I thank the Committee. 

Senator BOXER. So something is happening out there. We can 

argue about why, and I don’t want to get into it, because frankly, 

it is painful. We are not going to argue why. But we are going to 

do something about it together. I think we can. And that is the objective of this Committee under my chairmanship. 

So now I am going to, because Senator Klobuchar is such a good 

soldier, she said, please, let’s hear from our two colleagues. So, 

Senator Durbin, you are recognized, followed by Senator McCaskill. 

We really welcome you. We know your schedules are tight. 

Senator GRASSLEY. Can I go? 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BOXER. You may leave, sir, the teacher gives you permission. We look forward to working with you and Senator Harkin as 

well as all the Midwestern Senators. 

Senator DURBIN. I would like to defer to Senator McCaskill, 

please. 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CLAIRE McCASKILL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI 

Senator MCCASKILL. I would like to thank my colleague, Senator 

Durbin. We share a river and we are neighbors, and it was very 

nice of him to give me just a minute. I need to go introduce a great 

Missourian who is going to be confirmed as an ambassador, hopefully, today. 

And I just want to say that my senior Senator from Missouri and 

I agree completely about this incident and the struggles Missouri 

has had over the last year. He and I have been together looking 

at damage from Mother Nature in southwest Missouri. He and I 

9 

both obviously visited the flooded areas over the last few months. 

And he and I stand in lockstep to try to get this thing done. 

Missourians have had nine Federal disasters since June of last 

year. It has been a rough year. It is when it is rough that I stand 

in awe of the work ethic and the values of Missourians. My beloved 

State has the best that there is when it comes to communities that 

join together and do what is necessary to help one another. This 

flood was a great example of communities coming together and 

helping one another. 

We need to get these levees repaired. We are grateful that none 

of the Federal levees were breached in this incident. But I echo 

Senator Bond’s comment that haste is important here in terms of 

getting the work done and the repairs done that are necessary. Obviously, we want to stand in vigilance to make sure the bureaucratic nightmares that sometimes go with assistance from the Federal Government are kept at a minimum. I know Senator Bond and 

I agree on that. 

I will place my statement in the record. I am very grateful to the 

very senior Senator from Illinois for giving me a couple of minutes 

so that I could weigh in on this very important issue to the State 

I love and to the people in that State that I love even more. Thank 

you, Madam Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Senator McCaskill follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. CLAIRE MCCASKILL, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI

Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe, I want to thank you for holding 

this hearing. As you are well aware, the entire Midwest Region has been devastated 

by recent flooding events. Missouri alone has had 22 counties, in addition to the city 

of St. Louis, declared disaster areas and an excess of 300,000 acres of farm land 

were flooded, many of which remain under water and unable to be planted. So having this platform to express the needs of many Missourians will help send the signal 

that Washington is listening. 

This past year, Missouri have faced significant hardship. Except for 3 days in 

March, Missouri has been under a State of emergency since December 2007 and has 

had nine Federal disasters since June 2007. In fact, in March of this year, Missouri 

received another significant flooding event where 72 of our counties and the independent city of St. Louis received disaster declarations. Just this one event took several lives and caused millions of dollars of damage across the state. And then we 

were hit again by last month’s epic flooding. 

Madam Chairman, I had the opportunity to view some of the affected communities both by land and by air. I was escorted by Col. Lewis Setliff of the St. Louis 

District of the Army Corps of Engineers who helped guide me through the damage 

areas and provide me details off their extensive flood fighting efforts. Remarkably, 

Missourians at the State and local levels came together to prevent a significant 

amount of damage yet, the devastation was still overwhelming. It was like flying 

over an ocean right there in Missouri and while it was enough to take your breath 

away what was more astonishing was the resilience and determination of the people 

I met. Missourians have an unbelievable ability to overcome when faced with tremendous challenges, just as we did after 1993, but they won’t be able to do it without the assistance of the Federal Government. 

Thankfully, during all of the severe weather Missouri has had this past year, 

none of our Federal levees were breached. This is a good sign that the repairs made 

along the Mississippi after 1993 were a wise investment. However, there is still 

work to be done. We did have several non-Federal levees breach and many others, 

including some Federal levees that are in need of repair. It’s imperative that the 

Corps act swiftly to make the necessary repairs so that these communities are protected from any future weather events. 

Finally, Madam Chairman, I would just like to close by stating that while this 

recent event has caused significant damage to thousands of Midwest communities, 

10 

I am confident that our local, State and Federal entities will do what is necessary 

ensure they are renewed and revitalized. 

This concludes my testimony. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Senator. We do look forward 

to working with everyone on this. 

Senator Durbin, welcome. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you very much, Senator Boxer. I also 

want to thank Senator Bond and Senator Klobuchar for being part 

of this hearing. It is certainly timely. 

I can remember the flood of 1993. I was a Congressman and had 

a big chunk of our State that was under water. We had problems 

on the Mississippi River, problems on the Illinois River. I spent day 

after day, weekend after weekend, out sandbagging and working 

with local people. They gave us some consolation as we toiled away 

to try to save towns and homes and farms. They said, thank goodness this is a 500-year event. You have seen it for the last time 

in your lifetime and you can tell your grandkids about it. 

Well, 15 years later, we had a replay of this 500-year event, 

which I think should give us some pause here. It isn’t just the nature and scope of this disaster. It was bad in my State, much worse 

in Iowa, I am sure bad in parts of Missouri and other places, Wisconsin. But the fact is, it isn’t just the change in weather, which 

I think is part of it, but it is also the change in the way we live, 

the way we build, and the way we develop. I think it has had an 

impact in terms of runoff in the water reaching levels unheard of 

before. That I think has challenged all of us to look honestly at 

some of the larger policy and program decisions made at every 

level, Federal, State and local, and to ask are there things, 

thoughtful things that we can do that acknowledge what is happening here and try to avoid it coming again. 

I just have to tell you that the unusual thing about this set of 

disasters was I can always pinpoint the western part of my State 

along the Mississippi River as the most vulnerable part, and then 

usually the Illinois River, which feeds into it, a little bit south of 

where I live. This time we got hit not only in that area, but also 

in the southeastern part of the State, where the Wabash River and 

the Embra River breached the levees and the town of 

Lawrenceville and surrounding towns faced a lot more devastation 

than ever. 

And then north in our State, just west of Chicago, in the Rockford-Machesney Park area, we had additional problems of flooding. 

Some of those poor people were in for the third flood of the year 

when I went to visit them in their homes. They had pulled out of 

their homes and then came another flood and then it receded, they 

started reconstruction, remodeling their homes, putting in new 

drywall, and then came the third flood of the year. So something 

is happening here that I have never seen before in the time that 

I have lived in this State and paid closer attention to it. I hope that 

we will take a look at that, too. 

As Senator McCaskill said, I have to agree with her, when Mother Nature brings out here worst, people bring out their best all 

11 

across America. I am so proud in Illinois of so many people who 

stepped forward, local elected officials, many of whom don’t get 

paid anything, who worked night and day to try to save their communities. People who were working for levee districts, like the Sny, 

which is a 53-mile long private levee maintained by farmers just 

north of St. Louis, Senator Bond. These men and women were 

working night and day to save this levee, which they maintain with 

their own tax dollars. They are pretty good at it, incidentally. 

And we had volunteers, National Guard showed up as usual, a 

great number of State employees. People pitched in. Barack Obama 

and I were out there filling sandbags in Quincy, Illinois, trying to 

help local volunteers. Businesses that saw the potential damage, 

closing down their business and costing jobs, their workers left the 

offices, left their computers and were out filling sandbags. They 

pitched in because they knew they had to, and they did it over and 

over again. Those who were too young or too old and couldn’t pitch 

in were making sandwiches and bringing out cold water to the volunteers. It was a terrific feeling, even though we were facing all 

this adversity, that so many people came together. 

Let me tell you a quick story, I mentioned Machesney Park to 

you. It is a story about a woman named Stacy. The Red Cross was 

able to move her disabled mother to a hotel, but Stacy, her husband and four kids stayed in a car at a campsite because their 

home was flooded and they couldn’t afford a hotel. She wasn’t 

alone. Over 500 homes that had been affected in Machesney Park, 

a small community in Winnebago County, without a public works 

department and without any trucks or other equipment to help 

them with cleanup efforts. You think about what their family has 

been through, and I met with a lot of them. They had a smile on 

their face, but they were going through some tough times, and a 

lot of people faced even worse. 

A couple of things that I thought we might think about in the 

future is first, rail operations. On rivers, it turns out to be a big 

deal. That railroad bridge can turn out to be critically important. 

There was a problem in 1993 with these bridges. There was a problem again in 2008. Many times, we don’t have good communications between the emergency disaster agencies and the railroads. 

In this one situation, this railroad bridge was a swing bridge. And 

they were fearful that if they swung it open, it would destabilize 

the bridge and the waters would overcome it and knock it down. 

If they closed it, they were afraid that if the water got up to the 

bridge, it would start accumulating debris, holding back the river, 

putting more pressure on the levees behind it and they would fail, 

devastating tens of thousands of acres. 

It was a terrible moral dilemma. Thank goodness, the waters 

started to recede and the bridge did not cause that ultimate problem. But I will just tell you that there were anxious days there 

when the local people didn’t know where to turn and there wasn’t 

good communication with the railroads. We can do a lot better. 

I also want to tell you that even though the stories are behind 

us, the water is not. There are many areas still flooded, like Henderson County in my State. We have to worry about de-watering 

these counties. Your Committee has such an important job. I know 

that you have had fires in your home State, Senator Boxer, you 

12 

have talked to me about them. I know how devastating they are 

to the people that you represent. Senator Bond’s State of Missouri, 

Senator Klobuchar’s State of Minnesota, we have all faced these 

disasters. 

I have felt, in the time that I have served in Congress, this is 

when we are called on as an American family. One of the members 

of our family is having a problem. It may not be in my back yard, 

but it is part of my family concern. This Committee, as much if not 

more than any other Committee in the Senate, is going to be asked 

to step forward. I hope that we will have an appropriations bill before we leave this year that includes a substantial commitment to 

disaster assistance, to give peace of mind to people in Missouri and 

Wisconsin and Iowa and Illinois, Minnesota and all throughout the 

Midwest, who want to know that at the end of the day, we are 

going to be there. We promised them they would, and we have to 

keep our word. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. I ask that my statement be made part 

of the record. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Durbin follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

Before I begin, I want to thank Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe for 

holding today’s hearing and giving me an opportunity to talk about our experience 

in Illinois. 

As we’ve just heard from Senator Harkin and Senator Grassley, Iowa and the rest 

of the Midwest is still reeling from weeks of flooding and tornadoes. 

DAMAGE ESTIMATES

We know from the Great Flood that devastated the Midwest in 1993—and, more 

recently, from Hurricane Katrina and the California wildfires—that the losses from 

a natural disaster can be catastrophic and more than any one community or State 

can bear. 

In Illinois, we still don’t know the full extent of our losses. Damage assessments 

are ongoing. Some places, like Henderson County, are still underwater. 

Although we were not as hard hit as our neighbors in Iowa, very early, very preliminary estimates put the costs of recovery and rebuilding for Illinois in the millions—maybe billions—of dollars. 

The flooding started in early June even before the banks of the Mississippi began 

to overflow, along the Wabash and Embarras rivers in southeast Illinois. In 

Lawrenceville, over 10,000 people were without running water for more than a 

week. 

Then, alone the Mississippi, record and near-record water levels caused levees to 

break, flooding hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland and forcing people from 

their homes in towns like Keithsburg and Gulfport. 

Nearly two thousand homes have been impacted by the waters—everything from 

a flooded basement to complete destruction. 

Farmers in my State face at least $1.3 billion in crop damage and the loss of hundreds of thousands of acres of corn and soybean. 

Floodwaters have also caused damage to roads in the tens of millions of dollars. 

Then there are the losses you can’t count in dollars. There are people like Stacy 

whose home in Machesney Park was flooded. The Red Cross was able to move her 

disabled mother to a hotel but Stacy, her husband, and her four kids stayed in a 

car at a campsite because they couldn’t afford a hotel. 

Stacy isn’t alone. Over 500 homes have been affected in Machesney Park, a small 

community in Winnebago County without a public works department and without 

trucks or any other equipment to help with the clean-up efforts. 

My heart goes out to everyone affected by the floods, especially those have 

watched their homes and livelihoods disappear under muddy waters. 

13 

COMMENDING ILLINOISANS

The damage is bad, but it could have been a lot worse had it not been for the 

hard work and determination of everyone who helped us prepare for the floods. 

They showed up day after day—Illinois residents, volunteers, emergency workers, 

members of the National Guard. 

In cities and towns all along the Mississippi, they worked around the clock to fill 

sandbags and fortify levees. Even after the flooding started, they didn’t stop working. It’s because of their perseverance that more levees—like Sny Island’s—didn’t 

overtop. 

It’s not easy to stand your ground in the face of a force as mighty as the Mississippi, but these folks did just that. Their resolve and determination showed an 

amazing spirit at work. 

It’s a spirit Senator Obama and I had a chance to see for ourselves when we 

helped sandbag in Quincy. I saw it again and again as I visited communities hit 

by the floods—from Grafton, south of Quincy on the Mississippi, to Lerna and 

Lawrenceville on the other side of the state, to Machesney Park up north by Rockford. 

No doubt it’s a spirit at work today as these river communities bounce back from 

the flooding. 

As one City Council member said about her hometown of Grafton: ‘‘Grafton people 

are resilient people. They’re river people.’’ 

I also want to commend the Illinois departments and agencies who worked 24/ 

7 to ensure that communities had the resources to fight the floodwaters. They’re 

still working today to make sure these communities are equipped with the resources 

to recover. 

I want to thank FEMA, the Army Corps of Engineers, and the other Federal agencies whose help has been essential to helping Illinois fight the floodwaters. 

When Mother Nature brings her worst, we bring our best. Thanks to this team 

effort, even though the flooding may have been historic in some places along the 

river in Illinois, it looks like the damage will not be. 

LOOKING FORWARD

This is the second time in 15 years that the Midwest has been devastated by historic flooding. 

The Great Flood of 1993 was one of the costliest natural disasters to hit the 

United States. Back then I was a Congressman in central Illinois, with a big swath 

of the Mississippi River in my district, and I saw the devastation first hand. 

More than 50 people died and thousands more were evacuated from their homes 

as hundreds of levees along the Mississippi failed. The economic damage exceeded 

$15 billion. 

Experts told us this was a 500-year flood event. But then we found ourselves, 15 

years later, facing a similar disaster. 

It’s clear that these 200-and 500-year flood events are happening more frequently 

than every 200 or 500 years. It’s also clear that we need to do a better job preparing 

for them. 

Often, weather-related disasters strike with no warning. But floods are different. 

We can see them coming. We can use the lessons of the past to better prepare for 

the future. 

With that in mind, I want to offer a couple of observations from our experience 

in Illinois. 

The first is the lack of clear direction on rail bridge operations during a natural 

disaster. It was a problem in 1993 and a problem in 2008. Both times the railroad 

companies refused to listen to the local community’s concerns and to lift a bridge 

out of the way of oncoming floodwaters. In 1993, their refusal caused the water 

pressure to build and a levee to overtop. This time around, we were fortunate that 

the water levels were not high enough to cause a repeat of that situation. 

During a flood event or other natural disaster, who has the navigation rights over 

an inland waterway? The answer is unclear. A second concern is dewatering. 

The flooding has receded in many parts of Illinois. But there are still some 

places—like parts of Henderson County—that are underwater. FEMA, the Corps, 

the Illinois Emergency Management Agency, and locals have been working together 

to drain the standing floodwaters. But it’s been weeks since the rain stopped falling. 

There has to be a better way to coordinate among the Federal, State and local 

partners to more quickly help communities hardest hit by the floods get back on 

their feet. 

14 

CONCLUSION

I want to thank Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe again for this 

chance to speak about my state’s experience. An important part of the rebuilding 

and recovery effort is looking back to see what lessons can be brought to bear now 

and in the future. These lessons help us better prepare for and mitigate the damage 

from future flood events. 

As we move forward to work on the second supplemental, I hope we keep in mind 

that disasters don’t end with the news coverage. There are still communities across 

the Midwest trying to clean up and get on with their lives. We, the Congress, have 

to make sure we give them all the tools they need to do that. The communities and 

the people affected should not face this disaster alone. America, and this Senate, 

will stand with them. 

Senator BOXER. Absolutely. And I just want to thank you. 

Yes, Senator. 

Senator BOND. I just wanted to make two comments to my colleague and neighbor from across the river. No. 1, my father used 

to be a member of the Sny Drainage District, had a small farm at 

Pleasant Hill. So I know those people. They work well. 

No. 2, we had the same problem that apparently Machesney 

Park had with the town of Plattsburg in 1993. Plattsburg was 

flooded out in early June, they were halfway rebuilt, they flooded 

out again. I believe that in that instance, the people of Plattsburg 

agreed to a buy-out. With the help of the Corps and the State agencies we moved them out of that flood plain. It sounds like perhaps 

more buy-outs will lessen the risk to people in Machesney Park. I 

am a supporter of that where the local officials and citizens agree. 

Senator DURBIN. I might add, Senator Bond, that in the city of 

Valmeyer, across the river from Missouri, Congressman Costello 

and I worked, and they literally moved the town, picked it up and 

moved it to high ground. One farmer stuck around, and he had 

some tough times ahead of him because he did. But by and large, 

those who moved felt that they made the right decision. 

And you also know, and I am sure the people from the Corps of 

Engineers can back me up, the world of levees changes south of St. 

Louis. North of St. Louis it is kind of a private endeavor and a 

local endeavor. South of St. Louis, there is much more Federal participation. I think that reflects the history of the Congress and the 

number of southern Senators and Congressmen who took care of 

their own long before you and I arrived here. 

Senator BOND. Fortunately, we can still earmark. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BOXER. Fortunately, we are still here, for the moment. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Senator Durbin, you are free to go. I don’t 

want to rush you, but I know you don’t want to miss anything. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. I wanted to express my sympathy to the 

States that were hurt even more than Minnesota, and that is particularly to Senator Grassley and Senator Harkin, to Senator Durbin and Obama in Illinois, and to Senator McCaskill and Senator 

Bond in Missouri and several other States that were victims of 

these floods. 

In Minnesota, I was listening with great interest to your story, 

Senator Durbin, about the one farmer that stayed behind. Because 

15 

I went and toured Austin, Minnesota, about a week after the floods 

hit. The mayor and sheriff took me around, and the exact same 

thing happened. They showed me how they had moved through a 

long-term 10-year flood mitigation project, they had moved about 

50 homes. They weren’t expensive homes, so it was fairly easy to 

do. They had turned this whole area and the river into a park. It 

is a beautiful park, with bike paths, things like that. There was 

one guy that wouldn’t take the buy-out, wouldn’t move. They 

showed me his house; it was completely wrecked Because he 

wouldn’t take it. 

So they were able to really tell which businesses and houses 

needed to move and were able to avert severe damage. It wasn’t 

just the individual home buyers, which was interesting to me, they 

saved the taxpayers tons of money. Because in the other floods, in 

Austin, Minnesota, by the way, the home of Hormel Foods, the 

home of Spam, in other floods in the past, the sewer system had 

backed up. So it had cost taxpayers a lot of money. This time, that 

didn’t happen at all. We saw great flood mitigation projects in Winona and in Rochester, Minnesota, so they also withstood some of 

the damage. 

That is not to say that we didn’t experience enormous damage 

in this flood. Several of our counties were declared disaster areas. 

We had the crop damage, especially with corn, and some of the 

farmers tried to replant with soybeans at the end. But that was difficult. Then finally, we lost the life of a man who was simply driving down a country road to help out his daughter and get a sump 

pump, middle of the night, storm is raging. He is driving down the 

road, and suddenly the pavement just went out from under him. 

I went to the spot, and it was like from here to that wall where 

the road had just broken down into the culvert behind. His car 

went down, another car landed on his car. And that driver, because 

his car was there first, actually survived, the one on the top. 

But it just again brought home to me, Madam Chair, the importance of this infrastructure funding, the importance of thinking 

ahead with these floods, and using this as an opportunity for public 

works projects at a time when our economy is suffering, that we 

really have to focus on infrastructure. 

I see our friends who are going to testify, I remember seeing you 

in New Orleans as we talked about the levee issues, that we should 

see this as a way of saving lives. But we should also see this as 

an economic development opportunity for our Country. Thank you 

very much. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator. 

I know both Senators have to leave. We thank you so much. 

Now it is my pleasure to ask Hon. John Paul Woodley, the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works, and Brigadier General 

Michael Walsh, Commanding General, U.S. Army Engineer Division, Mississippi Valley, to come forward. 

Mr. Woodley, we will give you 7 minutes instead of five, so that 

you don’t have to rush through your statement. Then if you need 

more time, we are happy to give it to you. 

16 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN PAUL WOODLEY, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY, CIVIL WORKS ACCOMPANIED BY: 

MAJOR GENERAL DON T. RILEY, DEPUTY COMMANDING 

GENERAL, CIVIL AND EMERGENCY OPERATIONS 

Mr Woodley. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Distinguished members of the Committee, we very much appreciate the opportunity to testify before the Committee and report to 

you on the June 2008 Midwest floods. 

Accompanying me today is Major General Don Riley, who is Deputy Commanding General for Civil and Emergency Operations, and 

Brigadier General Michael Walsh, Commanding General of the 

Mississippi Valley Division. General Walsh will report to you on 

the specifics of the recent flood, and I am going to discuss the current program activities of the Corps addressing the bigger issue of 

flood risk management. 

I have a complete statement that I would ask for permission to 

put into the record. 

Senator BOXER. Absolutely, it will be in the record. 

Mr Woodley. Responsibility for flood risk management in the 

United States is shared among multiple Federal, State and local 

government agencies, with a complex set of programs and authorities. The Corps of Engineers and FEMA have programs to assist 

States and communities in reducing flood damages. However, the 

authority to determine how land is used in flood plains and to enforce flood-wise requirements is entirely the responsibility of State 

and local governments. 

Many reports have offered lessons from prior floods and recommendations for the future. Common themes have included a call 

for improved interagency coordination and emphasis on public safety and the need for improved flood risk communication. Many have 

also called for greater use of flood plain management measures by 

local and State government, including wise land use planning, 

flood-proof building code requirements, easements and relocation of 

flood-prone structures in conjunction with traditional engineered 

flood water management structures. 

The Midwest floods of June 2008 have again highlighted the importance of evaluating and communicating the risks to the public 

and decisionmakers associated with levee systems. There are many 

questions that need to be answered. How many miles of levees 

exist? What is the condition of these levees? Which entity is responsible for them? What areas are the highest risk? How should 

Federal, State and local resources be prioritized to reduce these 

risks? And what can be done together in the interim to reduce risk? 

In 2006, the Corps of Engineers began a major effort to work on answering these questions. Using $30 million of the Fiscal Year 

2006 supplemental appropriation from Congress, the Corps created 

its Levee Safety Program to assess the integrity and viability of 

levees and recommend actions to ensure that levee systems do not 

present unacceptable risk to the public, property and environment. 

Over the last 2 years, the Corps has made great strides toward 

a National levee inventory for levees that are active in the Corps’ 

levee program and a methodology for technical risk assessments of 

existing levees. Although great advances have been made in collecting and assessing information about levee systems, much reVerDate Aug 31 2005 12:28 May 01, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\88903.TXT VERN
17 

mains to be done and detailed information is still needed about 

many Federal levees, most non-Federal Government levees and all 

private levees. 

Also in 2006, the Corps established the National Flood Risk 

Management Program to take the first step of bringing together 

Federal agencies, State and local governments and private sector 

entities with a stake in flood risk management. The objective is a 

unified national flood risk management strategy that eliminates 

conflicts between programs and takes advantage of all opportunities for collaboration. 

On November 8, 2007, as the Chairman has previously indicated, 

the Water Resource Development Act of 2007 became law. Title IX 

of this statute, cited as the National Levee Safety Act of 2007, calls 

for recommendations for a national levee safety program in addition to the inventory and inspection of levees. The Act complements 

many of the ongoing activities of the Corps’ Levee Safety Program. 

The Administration was able to include funding in its Fiscal Year 

2009 budget to begin the work outlined in Section 2032 of WRDA 

2007 that would assess the vulnerability of the United States to 

flooding. The study will assess the extent to which existing programs operate, individually and together, and develop recommendations for improving the effectiveness, efficiency and accountability of these programs. 

In summary, Madam Chair, the responsibility for flood risk management in the United States is shared between multiple Federal, 

State and local government agencies who all must work together 

to effectively address these complex issues. While great strides 

have been made in the last 2 years with the leadership of this 

Committee, we remain to implement many of the things that have 

been put in place, and there is much work that needs to be done. 

I am delighted to appear before you and answer any further questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Woodley follows:] 

18 


88903.008
19 


88903.009
20 


88903.010
21 


88903.011
22 


88903.012
23 


88903.013
24 


88903.014
25 


88903.015
26 


88903.016
27 


88903.017
28 


88903.018
29 


88903.019
30 


88903.020
31 


88903.021
32 


88903.022
33 


88903.023
34 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much, Mr. Woodley. 

Brigadier General Walsh, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF BRIGADIER GENERAL MICHAEL J. WALSH, 

COMMANDING GENERAL, U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DIVISION, 

MISSISSIPPI VALLEY 

General WALSH. Madam Chair and members of the Committee, 

I am honored to appear before you today and report on the response of the Corps of Engineers Mississippi Valley Division during 

the Midwest flood event on the Mississippi in June 2008. 

My testimony addresses both the response of the extensive flooding in the Midwest area as well as how we continue to support and 

provide assistance to the people of this region in the recovery efforts from this significant event. The Corps’ first concern is always 

to ensure the safety of U.S. citizens. We cannot stress enough that 

each and every citizen should maintain situational awareness of 

current and future flood events, stay in touch with the latest updates and warnings, particularly with the changing weather and 

river conditions as monitored and forecast by the National Weather 

Service; have evacuation plans prepared and implemented and stay 

away from flooded areas and moving waters unless involved with 

the flood fight effort. 

In March of this year, the focus of the Corps’ flood response efforts was centered on the lower Mississippi River from Arkansas to 

Tennessee down to the Gulf of Mexico. In June, our focus shifted 

to the middle and upper reaches of the Mississippi and its tributaries, where extensive flooding, in some locations record-setting 

flooding, occurred. Many Mississippi River tributaries, including in 

the Cedar, Des Moines and Iowa Rivers, reached record and nearrecord stages. The climate conditions early this spring led to continuous weather systems moving through the middle section of our 

Country. These systems resulted in rainfall amounts twice the normal level for that time of year. 

This record rainfall led to rivers and streams not only being filled 

to capacity, but in numerous locations causing over-bank flooding. 

The magnitude of the Midwest flood event of 2008 adversely impacted and continues to impact areas along the Mississippi River 

and its tributaries from Wisconsin and Minnesota to Arkansas and 

Tennessee. The Cedar River set new record stages, reaching 6 feet 

above the 1999 record stage at Cedar Falls, Iowa, and reaching 11 

feet above previous records at Cedar Rapids, Iowa. The Iowa River 

in Iowa City, Iowa, crested at three feet above the 1993 record 

stage, flooding facilities in the University of Iowa campus as well 

as other areas in the city. 

Record stages were set in over 47 gauge stations on more than 

12 tributary rivers and creeks. The Mississippi River set new 

record stages at Keithsburg and Gladstone, Illinois, and Burlington, Iowa and approached record stages in many areas. Within 

the Mississippi Valley Division, specifically in the Rock Island and 

St. Louis Districts, a total of 19 non-Federal levee projects and 6 

Federal levee projects, all under the Public Law 84–99 program, 

were over-topped along the Mississippi River and in the Iowa and 

Turkey River basins. However, of the 200 levee projects in the 84– 

99 program in those two districts, 175 did not over-top. 

35 

The locks at the locks and dams from 12 to 25 on the Mississippi 

and the Calcasieu River were taken out of operation, as flood waters over-topped the facilities, closing navigation to a major reach 

of the upper Mississippi River. In response to these historic flood 

events in the Midwest, reservoirs were operated in accordance with 

their established water control manuals. 

In addition, the Corps responded through emergency support to 

State and local governments as well as through mission assignments from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA. 

Emergency operations centers responded to a variety of flood-fighting activities on a continuous basis from our district offices in St. 

Paul, Rock Island, St. Louis and Memphis Districts. 

The Corps also provided assistance to State and local governments through our own authorities, as well as through the mission 

assignments from FEMA. These missions included emergency response, technical assistance for all phases of debris management, 

inspection of water and water treatment systems. We assisted in 

the assessment of temporary housing needs and conducted assessments for the provision of temporary emergency power through the 

deployment of our 249th Engineer Battalion and provided support 

for the power needs of critical facilities, including the University of 

Iowa hospital. 

Approximately 1.7 million liters of drinking water were provided 

to the State of Iowa, as well as critical public facility assistance 

and engineering design for repair and restoration of public schools. 

At the peak, there were 239 personnel engaged in providing floodfighting assistance. Approximately 13 million sand bags, 100 

pumps, 3,000 rolls of polyethylene sheeting were provided to support the local and State efforts. 

I visited many of these impacted areas on several occasions, and 

I have had the opportunity to talk to a lot of people and see the 

efforts put forth to control the situation. I also had visited the Sny 

Island Levee District in Illinois and watched at least 10 bulldozers 

continuing to push sand back up onto the levee to bolster the fight, 

to meet the predicted event. This example shows how the citizens 

of the regions responded heroically to the difficult challenges in 

these past few months. 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will coordinate an interagency 

levee task force, comprised of Federal, State and local agencies 

whose purpose is to conduct a regionally coordinated assessment of 

flood risk management systems in the areas affected by the 2008 

flood. The task force will offer an opportunity for all participating 

agencies to address a rapid and effective response to damaged flood 

systems that will minimize future risk to life and property while 

ensuring an effective inter-agency approach to flood damage mitigation, including opportunities for non-structural alternatives in a 

collaborative manner. 

Activities are currently underway to assess damages to flood 

damage reduction projects that are actively enrolled in the Corps’ 

rehabilitation and inspection program, leading to the subsequent 

repair of those projects. As accurate rainfall and river forecasts are 

vital to the protection of human life, property and business operations as the 2008 floods, reemphasized, we will also put together 

a rainfall and river forecasting summit with Federal agencies, 

36 

State and local government entities and commercial interests and 

the public. This is planned for the October timeframe to determine 

what went right, what went wrong and what can be improved in 

the river forecasting process. The recent Supplemental Appropriations Act provided $600 million for the Corps to address multiple recent natural disasters, including the flooding in the Midwest. The Corps will continue to 

work with our partners in the Federal, State and local agencies to 

repair flood risk management infrastructure as well as explore 

other means for reducing the risks of future flooding. 

Again, thank you for allowing me to testify here today, Madam 

Chair. This concludes my testimony. 

[The prepared statement of General Walsh follows:] 

37 


88903.024
38 


88903.025
39 


88903.026
40 


88903.027
41 


88903.028
42 


88903.029
43 


88903.030
44 


88903.031
45 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Woodley, as you noted in your testimony, most of the levees 

that were over-topped were non-Federal levees, levees built and 

maintained by individual farmers and property owners, or local or 

State governments. The National Levee Safety Act included in 

WRDA 2007, which you alluded to, would inventory, inspect and 

assess levees that fall within the Federal levee program. That 

would cover a significant amount of the Nation’s levees. 

However, the program could be expanded to include every levee 

in the Country, including levees that failed in the Midwest flooding. My question is, would the Corps support that, and what kinds 

of resources do you believe we would need to make available to 

make that program work? Whoever would like to address that. 

Mr Woodley. Senator, I believe we would support a comprehensive levee assessment, something along the lines of the dam safety 

programs that we have underway in cooperation with State authorities. I think that the investment required would be very substantial, both Federal and State, although I think that it would not 

be very large compared to the losses that are suffered. 

Senator BOXER. Do you agree with that, Brigadier General? 

General WALSH. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator BOXER. And do you as well? 

General RILEY. Yes, ma’am, of course. And the bill authorizes 

$20 million per year to do that inventory. If I may just point—— 

Senator BOXER. But that is not an inventory for everything. It is 

just the inventory for—— 

General RILEY. It does authorize an inventory of more than just 

the Corps projects. 

Senator BOXER. Of every levee in the Country? 

General RILEY. Yes, ma’am. The bill authorizes us to—— 

Senator BOXER. OK, hold on 1 second. 

I was told not every levee is covered. But the point is, so you do 

feel there is enough funding now to do every levee? Because my understanding is you were just doing those levees that fall within the 

Federal levee program. Am I incorrect in that? 

General RILEY. Ma’am, the funding available now is only for 

what is in the Federal program. If I may refer to the chart just—— 

Senator BOXER. Before you get off that, I want to be specific. So 

the funding that you have available to you right now is just for the 

Federal levees. Did you say it is $20 million? 

General RILEY. We received, in the 2006 supplemental, $30 million, which began our levee inventory. 

Senator BOXER. Good. 

General RILEY. And in the latest supplemental this year, we 

have allocated $10 million of that supplemental to continue the inventory of the levees in the Federal program. 

Senator BOXER. OK, so my question is, how much more would be 

needed to get everything assessed, all the levees assessed? 

General RILEY. I don’t have that figure on all of them, but we 

will get that to you. 

Senator BOXER. Mr. Woodley, I would so appreciate it if you 

could get it. Because you have a lot of friends here who want to 

see us be more proactive. So if you could get that number to me, 

that would be very helpful. 

46 

Senator BOXER. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator BOXER. Did you want to add something? I cut you off, 

Mr. Riley, so go ahead. 

General RILEY. If I could refer to the chart, which shows the 

total number of levees. Across the bottom of this chart are four 

general categories. The first category are those that are built and 

maintained by the Corps of Engineers. There are about 2,100 miles 

of those, the majority of which are in the lower Mississippi Valley. 

The second category are those levees that are built by the Corps 

and then we turn them over to sponsors to locally operate and 

maintain. The third category—— 

Senator BOXER. And how many of those? 

General RILEY. That is almost 10,000 miles, 9,650 miles. 

The third category are those that are locally built, but we have 

enrolled them in our rehabilitation and inspection program under 

Public Law 84–99. And those three categories—— 

Senator BOXER. And how many of those? 

General RILEY. Those are 2,250 miles. So about 14,000 miles in 

the Federal program, some built by us, some not built by us. 

Now, the other—— 

Senator BOXER. And excuse me for interrupting, because you are 

educating me. We are talking about here the Midwest or the whole 

Country? 

General RILEY. This is the entire Country. 

Senator BOXER. The entire Country. 

General RILEY. About 14,000 miles of Federal and non-Federal 

programs. 

Senator BOXER. That is very helpful. I am going to read it back 

to you. Twenty-one hundred miles are Corps-maintained, 10,000 

miles were approximately turned over to locals, the Corps built it, 

and then 2,250 locally built? 

General RILEY. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator BOXER. That is very helpful. 

General RILEY. And then the last category, the fourth category, 

is an unknown number of locally built and maintained. 

Senator BOXER. I see. What was the 2,250? I thought that was 

locally built. 

General RILEY. That was locally built and we have enrolled them 

into our Federal program. 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

General RILEY. The others are locally built, nobody in the Country has a handle on those. But your last bill, the WRDA 2007, authorizes us to inventory all those levees in the Nation. So we are 

now authorized to do that. 

Senator BOXER. OK. So just so I understand, what you are doing 

now is you are inventorying all the locally built that have not been 

turned over? 

General RILEY. Ma’am, if I could flip to the next chart. 

Senator BOXER. Yes, please. 

General RILEY. Then I will show you where we stand on our inventory. Of those 14,000 miles of levees in the Federal program, by 

the end of this year we will have completed a detailed inventory 

of 9,800 miles of those. So the 14,000 miles we have in the Federal 

program, we have identified those, they are in the data base. We 

47 

have completed a detailed inventory of about 9,800, that will be 

complete by the end of this year. Those again are the Federal levees. 

So we will have to then continue on with the remaining funding 

to complete detailed inventory of those Federal levees. The detail 

I speak about, these show the features of the levees that are in the 

data base, but there are about 200 data fields that go in that fill 

in all the data. So it is a detailed survey. 

So once we complete the 14,000 miles in the Federal program, 

then we will proceed with all of those other locally built and maintained that really nobody knows how many are out there, because 

there are many, many private levees. 

Senator BOXER. I think it is an excellent move. I wanted to ask, 

as you build the data base, are you also including in that the, if 

the levees are strong, if they are weak, if they are problematic, or 

is that another step? 

General RILEY. That is another step. That will fill in all the detailed data of the physical characteristics of the levees. Then we 

will conduct, in our inspection program, under Public Law 84–99, 

and as we are funded, we will conduct a portfolio risk assessment. 

So we have routine annual inspections, we have inspections every 

5 years that are periodic. Then the highest risk levees, we will conduct an even more detailed study where we will look at even subsurface conditions to determine the characteristics and the capability of those levees to withstand any size flood. 

Senator BOXER. Major General, can you tell us a timeframe here 

that you are working off of? Because here is the thing. What I really want to do is start, obviously, as we get the information, have 

a list, what are the most endangered levees, where do we have to 

work, where does it not pay to fix the levee, maybe it pays to move 

folks, maybe it pays to turn it into a flood plain, all these other 

things. Because we really, in this Committee, we want to do kind 

of an emergency levee bill to just give you a little more juice as we 

move forward to get more funding. We know that the appropriators 

can do it. But if we have an overall bill that identifies the priority. 

So where are you on the timeframe here? 

General RILEY. Yes, ma’am, on this, of course, the 9,800 miles, 

by the end of this year, and the rest of the 14,000 miles we will 

complete in the next 2 years after that. That is in the Federal program. Then we will also, in 2 years, begin risk assessments on 

those levees to determine which ones are the greater risk. 

Now, at the end of this year, we will have this website with all 

this data on it. It will be accessible to the public. All the data won’t 

be accessible, because we will have to restrict some of it. But it will 

be accessible of course to the Corps, FEMA, and then other Federal, State and local agencies that work in that program. We will 

begin next year to make those priority choices of which ones are 

at the highest risk. 

Senator BOXER. Let me ask you this, and anyone can answer it. 

Could we speed up that program if we gave you, if we made it a 

Manhattan Project, if we just said, look, at the rate these storms 

are coming, we need to move quicker? So is there a way, if we were 

to, I am not asking your opinion whether we should or shouldn’t, 

because that is our decision. But if you were able to, say, get douVerDate Aug 31 2005 12:28 May 01, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\88903.TXT VERN
48 

ble the funding, could you double the time in which this could be 

done? 

General RILEY. Ma’am, I think the best way to approach that is 

through your WRDA bill you authorized a national levee safety 

committee. Our Director of Civil Works is here. He is the chair of 

that committee. Mr. Woodley has directed that committee now be 

stood up. Your bill requires within 180 days that they come back 

to you and Mr. Woodley and then the Congress with a national 

strategy. So that has to be done in less than 6 months from now. 

I think that committee, which include representatives from all 

over the Nation, external to the Corps, chaired by our director, will 

provide you a good analysis of that. 

Senator BOXER. Of where we go from there. So Mr. Woodley, if 

in 6 months you are ready, you would be able to tell me at that 

time whether or not additional funding would be able to move this 

process along, is that right? 

Mr Woodley. Yes. 

Senator BOXER. OK. Well, I look forward to that. 

Mr. Woodley, Carl Strock, former Chief of Engineers of the Army 

Corps, has testified about the value of wetlands in helping to prevent and mitigate funding. Chief Van Antwerp similarly testified 

to their benefits. In the upper Mississippi River basin, there has 

been considerable wetland loss in many of the affected States. Iowa 

has lost 89 percent, Illinois 85, Missouri 87 percent. Do you believe 

this loss of wetlands may have helped contribute to these regular 

devastating floods in the region? And are there any policies you 

could support that could help turn that wetlands loss around? 

Mr Woodley. Senator, I am quite confident that loss of wetlands 

nationwide has altered hydrologies in ways that make the severity 

of floods greater than they otherwise might have been. Now, when 

a flood is 11 feet above the historic figure, it is hard to say that 

there would not have been a flood in that location regardless. But 

this is one of the prime reasons for our national policy of restoration of the Nation’s wetlands. Of course, our regulatory program 

seeks to protect existing wetlands, and we have also embarked on 

a policy or a planning process in the Upper Mississippi to engage 

in a number of aspects of ecosystem restoration on the Upper Mississippi and its tributaries that I believe, in, the planning process 

and we should be able, or I hope to be able to make a recommendation to Congress very soon. 

Senator BOXER. Good. 

Mr Woodley. The other thing that I would mention in this context is the very strong provisions in the Farm Bill that are available for farmers to devote parts of their appropriate land, on a voluntary basis, for wetlands restoration and preservation. 

Senator BOXER. I fought for that one. 

Mr Woodley. It is a very important policy. 

Senator BOXER. It is. From my own experience, when I first got 

involved with the Army Corps, it was so many years ago. In those 

years, it was before I even got to the Congress, it was in local government in the 1970’s. The Corps thought, concrete channel, concrete channel, that was basically the mind set, how do you get that 

water fast, we move it out. Then through the years, I have watched 

with just great relief as the Corps has embraced these other kinds 

49 

of strategies to allow the water to spread out and go slower and 

so forth. Certainly, in my experience in California, those wetlands 

are just a tremendous addition to any flood control that we are 

going to do. 

So I look forward to that. I think, again, a lot of the times, you 

are put in a difficult position. What we need from you is just not, 

you should do this, but if you were to be able to restore wetlands, 

it would mean X, it would mean Y. These are the things we need 

from you, and then we have to make a policy choice. 

Mr. Woodley, are you aware of the findings in a recent report released by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program, in cooperation 

with NOAA, titled Weather and Climate Extremes in a Changing 

Climate? This study shows that the last few decades have brought 

more heavy summer rainfall, especially to the central United 

States. This trend toward heavier precipitation is caused by global 

warming primarily, because warmer air can hold more moisture. 

This report projects that the trend toward heavy precipitation 

will continue. For example, those big storms in the Midwest that 

historically would be seen once every 20 years could happen once 

every 5 years by the end of the 21st century. How is the Army 

Corps taking into account this latest science indicating a trend toward heavier rainfall events in the future and the implications for 

flood management? 

Mr Woodley. Senator, we are examining climate change aspects 

within our organization through our Institute of Water Resources, 

which is our policy institute that is engaged in that sort of thing 

and that follows that very closely. In fact, it is something that they 

are very proud of, that organization that deals with that on an 

international scale actually won a Nobel Prize last year. One of the 

members of the organization is a staffer at our Institute of Water 

Resources. I was there last week, and they have put his Nobel 

Prize on the wall there. They are very, very proud of it. 

So we are keeping very close tabs on the science of climate 

change, and I believe I am going to be seeing a draft white paper 

on the engineering aspects of climate change. It is mainly something that would affect us within our own program in the projections that we make and the risk assessments that we make. We 

are transitioning to consider these aspects as aspects of risk and 

we are recognizing the practical impossibility of absolute protection. I visited Cedar Rapids and the people there are, I would encourage anyone who wanted to see the human spirit at its most 

noble to visit Cedar Rapids and see the way that people are coping 

with it. 

But the thing that I saw, in the work that I do, I would say engineering is probably not going to prevent or protect against a flood 

that is 11 feet above any experience we have had before. But we 

need to express the risks to people, what are your risks. And the 

other thing about a levee is that levees are just human structures, 

they will be over-topped, they will fail, they will develop weaknesses, animals will burrow into them, every kind of thing can happen to a levee. It is a very fragile structure, and it holds back an 

enormous force of nature. 

At any rate, that is a long way of saying that we are very much 

following the matters that you describe and continuing to use them 

50 

in a very dynamic way to inform the recommendations that we 

make to Congress. 

Senator BOXER. Mr. Woodley, I found that testimony to be extremely straightforward, and I appreciate it. I am going to say it 

back to you and see if I heard you right. 

When I asked you, and I think this would be interesting for Senator Carper, whether or not the Corps was taking into account 

global warming in its projections of what they have to do and what 

people have to expect, Mr. Woodley basically said, we can’t promise 

absolute protection, because of the way these storms are coming. 

And I think that is an important point for all of us to hear. Because unless we build, I don’t know what, fortresses around our cities, this is a problem. And this isn’t your job, it is ours. We need 

to get a handle on this global warming and we need to do something so that 25 years from now, with other people sitting here, of 

course, Tom will still be here, 25, 30, 40 years from now, and who 

knows, Mr. Woodley, you have proven yourself to be, you have been 

around a while. So you might be here. 

And when somebody says, oh, my God, what can you do? And we 

are not going to be able to give them a good answer unless we 

today, and it isn’t you, it is us, and it is a future President, takes 

strong action to make sure that the temperatures don’t go up 3, 4, 

5, 6 degrees average temperatures. Because you are already saying 

it is getting problematic. I appreciate that. Because I will tell you, 

when I was a kid growing up, we thought, no problem, we can master this. And you know what? So far, we have. But if we can’t get 

a handle on global warming and reverse what could happen in the 

worst of circumstances, I don’t know that levees are going to matter that much. 

But I do have a question for General Walsh. Of the Federal levees that were over-topped, how many of these levees remain structurally sound, and how many will need substantial structural work 

to once again operate at a functioning level? I was really glad that 

they held pretty well. But how many were over-topped? Do we 

know? 

General WALSH. 

[Off microphone.] There were six Federal levees that were overtopped. 

Senator BOXER. Could you make sure you turn on your microphone? 

General WALSH. Madam Chair, there were six Federal levees 

that were over-topped in the area. Two of them were rated at a 100 

year level of protection, three were at 50 years. We really need to 

wait until the flood waters go down some more and damage survey 

repair teams will go out. Then we will write up project information 

reports, and then fund them and go into the repair process. 

Senator BOXER. Good. So this is interesting. You said two were 

100 year? 

General WALSH. Two were rated at a 100 year level of protection. 

Senator BOXER. And those were breached? 

General WALSH. And three were 50 year. 

Senator BOXER. Wow. And 100 year is the biggest that we aim 

for, right? The biggest flood that we try to protect from? 

51 

General WALSH. That is where we start, FEMA works their insurance piece. But there are 500 year levees and even higher. 

Senator BOXER. There are 500 year, OK. 

General WALSH. Yes, ma’am, and if I may? 

Senator BOXER. Please. 

General WALSH. For any of those, any system that we take a look 

at, we make an assessment based on the risk and will design a 

levee based on the reduction of risk in that area. It may be at any 

level of protection. And 100 year only refers to FEMA’s protection 

for the National Flood Insurance Program. 

Senator BOXER. Do you work with private insurers ever just to 

find out what they are doing in some of these flood-prone areas? 

Mr. Woodley, do you ever talk to them about it? Because we have 

heard stories that private insurers are not coming in to some of 

these areas. 

Mr Woodley. Senator, I am not aware of any direct interaction 

we have with them on particular cases. I believe that we have been 

consulting with the trade groups and representatives of the industry as a whole in understanding and getting a better understanding on our own part of risk management and the tools that 

they use in their business for risk management and how to express 

it. Because that is a tremendous challenge for us right now. 

Senator BOXER. I have one last question, then I am going to turn 

the gavel over to Senator Carper to run the rest of the hearing as 

he sees fit. This is to Mr. Woodley. 

In 1993, devastating floods hit much of the same region that was 

hit this year. Following the Midwest flood of 1993, President Clinton chartered the U.S. Interagency Task Force on Flood Plain Management, headed by General George Galloway of the Corps. He 

wrote the Galloway Report. The report argued that the responsibility for flood plain management needed to be more clearly defined 

among Federal, State, tribal and local governments. The report 

also acknowledged the critical ecological services, such as nutrient 

and water uptake provided by wetlands and upland forests. It 

noted that loss of wetlands significantly increased runoff, contributing to an area’s susceptibility to flooding. 

Are you familiar with this report, and can you tell us the status 

of those recommendations, how many were implemented and how 

many still remain to be implemented? 

Mr Woodley. I certainly am, and I am very familiar with General 

Galloway as well, who is, I think, one of the Nation’s premier experts on flood risk policy. We consult with him all the time. I believe the answer is that many of the recommendations have been 

partially implemented, a few have been fully implemented. I think 

to the extent they have been implemented the effects of this year’s 

flooding have been ameliorated. There are some aspects of the report that we are still working our way toward as a Nation. And 

some of them have not been fully taken to heart. 

But I believe that the recommendations of that report remain 

valid and that we can see, to the extent that they have been implemented, that the effects of the subsequent flooding have been ameliorated. 

Senator BOXER. Here is the thing. I haven’t read it. But would 

you commit to me that the Corps would take a review of the 1993 

52 

task force report to either reaffirm its recommendations or put forward new ideas? I think a lot of times, we have a crisis and we 

write a report. And this one, here it is. This is the summary. And 

I am sure there are some things in there that you would want to 

do and some things you wouldn’t. 

Would you commit to me that you would do a thorough review 

of this report and get it to me as to which recommendations you 

think still have merit, which ones have been done? I mean, this is 

1993. So if you would make that commitment? 

Mr Woodley. Senator, I will do something better than that. I will 

task the Levee Safety Committee that the Congress created in the 

last WRDA bill to make that their first order of business. 

Senator BOXER. That would be wonderful. I think that is great. 

Because it may be that there are six or eight or ten or five things 

in there that we just didn’t do. And there is nothing about blame. 

It is the nature of humanity, we have so many things on our plate. 

But I think if you could do that, I am just thrilled with that answer, and I really look forward to going over that with you. When 

you get that done, please come see me and we will take a look at 

it. It may make the job of your task force a little easier, because 

maybe half the things that we need to do are already detailed in 

that report. That would be good. And we can move faster. 

So with that, let me just say to all of you, I thank you very much 

for being here today. We are on the same team on this. The main 

thing I need from you is your honest appraisals. I think I have gotten that today. That is all I can ask you for. Then the rest is up 

to us. So if you just give us your opinion and then we will make 

the policy decisions, that is all I ask. I do hope and pray that we 

don’t have to have a lot of these hearings after the fact. 

But I am a realist, like you are, Mr. Woodley, and we are in this 

difficult moment, for whatever reason. The main thing we need to 

do is prevent as much as we can, much of this from happening. 

Then when something does happen, respond quickly and do the 

mitigation after the fact. And whatever that mitigation is, we have 

to be honest. And you were very honest today and I really appreciate that. 

So I will turn the gavel over to my dear friend, such a great 

member of this Committee, Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. [Presiding] Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for your leadership and thank you for turning that gavel over to me. We will be 

finished here in about 3 hours. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CARPER. It may feel like 3 hours, but it won’t be long at 

all. 

First of all, it is good to see you all. Thank you for coming and 

thank you for your stewardship and for your leadership on issues 

that are important to us, whether they are happening on the west 

coast, in California, where I used to live, before I moved to Delaware on the east coast, to find my fame and fortune. Well, actually, 

my fame, not my fortune. 

Every now and then, I run into people who say, well, I live in 

an area where it is described as a 100 year flood zone or maybe 

a 500 year flood zone. And people say, well, particularly in one 

53 

place in northern Delaware where we had literally twice in about 

a 5-year period of time 100 year floods, and so probably after the 

first time it happened, people said, well, we are good for another 

100 years. It turned out we weren’t. But sometimes the term 100 

year flood or 500 year flood is misleading. I have seen it with my 

own eyes and heard with my own ears how misleading that can be. 

But telling people that they have a 1 percent chance, that would 

be like a 100 year flood situation, or a 0.2 percent chance of flooding, which would relate to a 500 year flood, telling them that those 

are their chances of being flooded in a year can also be misleading. 

Let me just ask how you think we can maybe better communicate 

to Americans living in high risk areas the flood risks that they do 

face? 

Mr Woodley. Senator, you have put your finger right on the biggest communication issue and difficulty we have in this whole 

arena. And we are, as we speak, creating a new vocabulary for 

communication of risk. And it is—— 

Senator CARPER. Can you tell us a little bit about it? 

Mr Woodley. Actually, I think General Riley probably could describe it in more understandable terms than I can. It is not ready 

to be released, and it is something that we are wrestling with within the Federal family and also with the State agencies. There are 

two major groups that embody the State actors on this, NAFSMA, 

which is the National Association of Flood and Storm Management 

Agencies, and the Association of State Flood Plain Managers. They 

are actively working with us on this. And NOAA needs to be involved in it. But I am going to ask General Riley to describe the 

way we are going to be trying to communicate these risks in the 

future. 

Senator CARPER. Good, thanks, if you would do that, General 

Riley, that would be great. 

General RILEY. Yes, sir. Then we might even hear more specifics 

by General Walsh on how well New Orleans has accepted it. But 

probably our first example was in New Orleans. Also, we had some 

dams at risk at Wolf Creek and Center Hill, California, as well. 

Those were in Tennessee, and then in California. We have used the 

same sort of methodology. We found that in New Orleans in particular it took a great deal of modeling and sophistication, but we 

articulated the risks through inundation maps. You are able to now 

go onto Google, type in your address, go right to your home, and 

it says, if you live there, you have a risk every year of being flooded 

to this depth, two, three, four feet, or no feet if you are on a little 

bit higher ground. 

We have found that to be the most effective way to convince people. That is the risk every year from all storms, including rainfall, 

not just hurricanes. 

So we tried to get away from the terminology of percent, although it is difficult to get away from that, so we still use that. But 

we say, you can expect this depth every year from any type of 

storm to a certain percent, whether it be the 1 percent chance 

every year. Then we compared that 1 percent chance to some other 

event in their life that they can compare that to. 

Senator CARPER. Such as what? 

54 

General RILEY. Well, such as the risk of crossing the street or the 

risk of flying, is probably an easier one, because they have those 

statistics available. So the comparative risk methodology is quite a 

body of knowledge. We are not all experts on it, but as Senator 

Boxer asked earlier about the insurance, we have partnered with 

the auto insurance agencies to help us be able to articulate risk, 

because they do that very, very well, and for a living. 

Senator CARPER. Good, thanks. You guys are ahead of the curve 

on that one. 

I have one more issue I want to touch on. I serve on a couple 

other committees, some of which are meeting right now. One of 

those committees is the Banking Committee. Before I was Governor, I served on the House Banking Committee. About 20 years 

ago, we worked on an effort to overhaul our Nation’s flood insurance, which needed to be overhauled then, and frankly, still needs 

it today. One of the things that I found is that a lot of people want 

levees built to protect them and their family, their homes, their 

businesses, to protect them from floods and to protect them from 

having to buy flood insurance. Let me just ask, how is the latter 

issue handled by the Corps? How is that issue handled by the 

Corps? 

Mr Woodley. Senator, we work very closely with FEMA on defining and setting the parameters necessary for them to operate their 

program. But their program actually does not directly influence our 

decisionmaking on formulating projects. That is, our methodology 

in formulating new projects is determined by the value of the property that is expected to be protected and the amount of value then 

of benefit to the Nation from protecting it depends on the risk that 

it is under or the amount to which we are reducing its risk of being 

destroyed, then compare that against the cost of creating the engineering structure and, or the cost of the whole project with the 

non-structural and structural elements. Then you do the cost benefit analysis, and if you get a benefit from that, then we could recommend that a project be built. 

And that may have the additional benefit of freeing the residents 

of the area from the necessity of purchasing flood insurance. If it 

does, I think that is a separate benefit, not a direct benefit from 

the project. That is not why we build the project, that is a benefit. 

It may be why the people who live there want the project to be 

built even more than their concern about inundation. But within 

our program, it is not used as a factor. 

Senator CARPER. Does anyone want to add to that? General 

Riley? 

General RILEY. Yes, sir, thank you, if I might. FEMA and the 

Corps work closely together; we have worked with many communities together. If I could just refer to this chart on my right as to 

how one State, has taken the work that FEMA and we have done 

with all of the State and flood plain managers around the Nation. 

In this case, it is California, and I asked permission to use their 

chart. This was our sort of depiction, our concept of buying down 

risk, all the different methods you can use to lower the risk of living in a flood plain, where you begin with an initial risk and you 

take steps. It is a shared responsibility, so everybody participates. 

It would be building codes, zoning, outreach, evacuation planning, 

55 

insurance, and levees. Then you still end up with some residual 

risk. That is what has been missing in the past, when people 

thought if they had a levee, they were protected. 

What California did, they took this, they came back to us, here 

is what we are doing to buy down risk. And they put several hundreds of millions of dollars behind this effort in the State of California, especially, and this is in the central valley in this particular 

case, where they start with the most critical levee repairs, they go 

through some Federal projects, but then they get into State 

projects as well. They go down through building codes, insurance 

restrictions of building in the flood plain. After 2015, if they are not 

making adequate progress in protection, then they won’t allow development. After 2025, there will be no development in a 200-year 

flood plain. 

So they have taken all those steps. This is about a 35 page briefing. I picked one slide out of it. But they go into great detail how 

they show that everybody, from State, local and private, insurance, 

bankers, developers, investors, all participate in lowering the flood 

risk. At the end of it, there is still a residual risk and that gets 

back to the education question you asked earlier. 

Senator CARPER. Good, thank you. What is the old saying, a picture is worth a thousand words. That is a pretty good picture. 

Thanks for sharing that with us. 

Just a followup to my earlier question on flood insurance. What 

should the Corps’ role be in ensuring that the flood insurance program is solvent and that people living in high risk areas have flood 

insurance? The answer may be, well, we have no responsibility, but 

there may be some responsibility. We found on the heels of Katrina 

that a 20 year old flood insurance or 35 year old flood insurance 

program was all of a sudden underwater to the tune of about $20 

billion. The flood insurance program statutorily may draw on the 

Treasury, they have a line of credit to the Treasury. Over the 

years, it has been sort of off and on in terms of being solvent. But 

after Katrina, it was $20 billion underwater. But what role, if any, 

do you think is appropriate for the Corps with respect to trying to 

make sure that the program is solvent going forward? 

Mr Woodley. Senator, I don’t think we participate in the management of the program to the extent of assuring its solvency. But I 

think that the way we manage, or the way we formulate projects, 

has changed in that we now are looking, when we formulate a 

project, we are looking at more non-structural measures. Those can 

include the buy-out of flood-prone areas and returning those areas 

to a natural flood plain State. We have done that in many, many 

cases as part of a mixture of different measures, whereas at some 

point in the past, we might have advocated a purely engineering 

solution of protecting all areas, to the maximum extent possible. 

Now, we will ask the question, is it really better that some part 

of this community be relocated and the place that they had previously settled be returned to a flood plain State. If you look at 

places like Grand Forks in North Dakota, where we have actually 

implemented that, and some projects in California and others in 

parts of the Midwest. Obviously, once that happens, all those formerly at-risk structures are no longer in the flood insurance program and the additional structures that would be in the flood proVerDate Aug 31 2005 12:28 May 01, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\88903.TXT VERN
56 

gram would, we hope, have a lower level of risk, increasing that 

solvency of the program to that degree. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. There is a community in northern 

Delaware which I mentioned earlier that went through, over a span 

of about a half dozen years, two 100 year floods. The decision was 

finally made that, maybe we don’t want to look for that third time 

for lightning to strike. The community people were assisted and 

helped to relocate from there. The area has been pretty much returned to its natural State. 

OK. In closing, anything that either of the three of you would 

like to say, reiterate, say again, repeat, emphasize? Or just or not. 

General Walsh, you are welcome to chime in here as well, if there 

is anything you want to add. 

General RILEY. Sir, if I may, to add to the last question, I cochair an intergovernmental committee with the director of FEMA’s 

flood mitigation program. We meet quarterly, and we meet with all 

of the representatives of the flood and storm managers around the 

Nation, the State and local storm managers. So we work that together to get consistency of FEMA and Corps policy and the application of those. 

Senator CARPER. Good. 

General RILEY. We get the State and local feedback at the same 

time. 

Second, on the flood insurance program, a major purpose of that 

is flood risk education. So we work closely with FEMA to educate 

people on their actual flood risk, and then of course, FEMA deals 

with the insurance component of that. 

Senator CARPER. Good, thank you. Thanks for that clarification. 

Secretary Woodley. 

Mr Woodley. Senator, the only thing that I wanted to make sure 

we had indicated on the record in this hearing is that we had discussed in the supplemental appropriation, there was some approximately $600 million in emergency funding for the Corps, of which 

about half was directed to the Midwest. I would like to have it in 

the record very clearly that is a preliminary amount intended as 

a, well, certainly more than a placeholder, but at the time that the 

supplemental was prepared, we had by no means, and we even now 

today have not conducted the kinds of assessments and engineering 

work and cost estimates necessary to determine the final amount. 

So I think it is clearly indicated in our submissions, but I wanted 

to make it clear on the record of this hearing, that the amounts in 

the supplemental are very likely to be increased later as a result 

of the detailed assessments of our facilities, and of the damaged 

levees that are currently underway in the Mississippi Valley Division. 

Senator CARPER. All right, thank you. General Walsh, do you 

want to add a closing word before I give the benediction? 

[Laughter.] 

General WALSH. Yes, thank you, Senator. I just wanted to mention that when I visited Quincy, Illinois and Hannibal, Missouri, 

Cedar Rapids, Waterloo, Iowa, Des Moines, Iowa—— 

Senator CARPER. When were you at those places? 

General WALSH. During the flood fights. I was very proud of our 

American people in working the flood fights. Certainly in Quincy, 

57 

when the mayor asked for some volunteers to fill sand bags, 5,000 

folks showed up working day and night filling sand bags. Thirteen 

million sandbags is what we distributed and filled, not just at 

Quincy but at other places as well. 

At Hannibal, again, volunteers just working day and night, putting together reception centers and just watching small government 

and the prideful American people to go after these floods, it was 

very moving to me. 

I talked to Governor Culver and the Governor of Illinois and Missouri and told them I was very proud of their people and how they 

were responding to these floods. Just let us figure out how to do 

it, and we will ask you when we need help. I think we have been 

able to respond to that so far. 

Senator CARPER. That is inspiring to hear that account. Thank 

you. 

Let me just close by saying, on behalf of not just the people who 

live in the communities that you have just mentioned, but from 

west coast to east coast, and particularly the folks in Delaware, 

DelMarVa Peninsula, whom I am privileged to represent, we have 

a wonderful history of working with the folks who run your operation in the greater Delaware area, which includes a suburb of Wilmington, Philadelphia. That is a little humor there. But you had 

some just terrific leadership, on the military side and on the civilian side. We very much treasure, I think that is probably not too 

strong a word, treasure the relationship we have and the terrific 

cooperation that we get and support that we receive from the Army 

Corps. So thank you very, very much. 

With that having been said, I am going to reach over here and 

grab Chairman Boxer’s gavel and we will conclude this hearing. 

Thank you so much. 

[Whereupon, at 11:07 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Thank you, Chairman Boxer. I’d like to welcome our colleagues who are here 

today to give us their observations on the impacts of the flooding and what their 

communities might now need. Also welcome to Secretary Woodley and General 

Walsh, who will provide us with specific details on the emergency preparedness and 

response activities of the Corps of Engineers and whether their efforts were at all 

hampered by existing authorities, as well as the impacts of the flooding across all 

Corps mission areas. 

The Corps of Engineers can play a critical role during excessive rain events. Last 

year, my home State of Oklahoma experienced record-breaking floods, but the Corps 

was right there to help lessen the impacts. The Tulsa District did an excellent job 

of, in particular, managing water levels at the reservoirs in order to prevent hundreds of millions of dollars in additional damages. Unfortunately, these floods 

caused a fair amount of damage at our recreation areas, leading to reduced services 

this year. Heavy rains again this year in the region have had impacts for the navigation industry as well. 

The flooded region today’s hearing is focused on is facing a similarly broad range 

of water resources issues. It is not simply a question of whether the levees performed as intended and if so, whether we need more or larger levees or if not, why 

not. The questions we need to discuss involve how to balance all the needs and benefits of the Mississippi River and its tributaries. 

These waterways are used for navigation, recreation, hydropower, fish and wildlife habitat and other water resources needs. Sometimes these uses seem to be in 

conflict with one another. It is our job as policymakers to provide the technical experts at the Corps of Engineers with enough guidance and the proper tools to promote the national interest in the use of the waterways. Today we get a chance to 

58 

hear a status update on this particular flooding incident, as well as any recommendations for future improvements. 

Æ