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

93–390 PDF 2015

S. HRG. 113–578 

HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND AND THE 

NEED TO INVEST IN THE NATION’S PORTS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JANUARY 31, 2013 

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

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gpo.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon 

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

ROGER WICKER, Mississippi 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

BETTINA POIRIER, Majority Staff Director 

ZAK BAIG, Republican Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

JANUARY 31, 2013 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

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

Vitter, David, U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana ..................................... 2 

Udall, Hon. Tom, U.S. Senator from the State of Mew Mexico ......................... 4 

Crapo, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator from the State of Idaho ................................... 6 

Merkley, Hon. Jeff., U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon .............................. 7 

Boozman, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Arizona .......................... 8 

Barrasso. Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming ........................ 31 

Sessions, Hon. Jeff., U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama ........................... 33 

Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland .............. 79 

Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode Island ........ 82 

Lautenberg, Hon. Frank, U.S. Senator from the State of New Jersey, prepared statement ................................................................................................... 88 

Wicker, Hon. Roger F., U.S. Senator from the State of Mississippi, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 89 

WITNESSES 

Darcy, Hon. Joe-Ellen, Assistant Secretary of the Army, Civil Works ............... 9 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 12 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Boxer ............................................................................................ 18 

Senator Lautenberg ................................................................................... 19 

Senator Cardin .......................................................................................... 20 

Senator Vitter ............................................................................................ 21 

Senator Wicker .......................................................................................... 23 

Christensen, Michael R., PE, Deputy Executive Director of Development, 

Port of Los Angeles; Chair, California Marine Affairs and Navigation Conference ................................................................................................................... 34 

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

Response to an additional question from Senator Boxer .............................. 40 

Lyons, James K., director and CEO, Alabama State Port Authority .................. 43 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 45 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Boxer ............................................................................................ 52 

Senator Wicker .......................................................................................... 52 

Lorino, Mike, president, Associated Branch Pilots ............................................... 55 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 58 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Boxer ............................................................................................ 66 

Senator Wicker .......................................................................................... 68 

Cairns, Andrew, H., P.E., PMP, board member, American Society of Civil 

Engineers’ Coasts, Oceans, Ports and Rivers Institute; Port & MarineNortheast Lead, AECOM ..................................................................................... 70 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 72 

Response to an additional question from Senator Boxer .............................. 77 

(1) 

HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND AND 

THE NEED TO INVEST IN THE NATION’S 

PORTS 

THURSDAY JANUARY 31, 2013 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m. in room 

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

Present: Senators Boxer, Vitter, Cardin, Whitehouse, Udall, 

Merkley, Barrasso, Sessions, Crapo and Boozman. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. The meeting will come to order. I first want to 

welcome the Committee’s new Ranking Member, Senator David 

Vitter. We are so pleased to be working together now. For many 

years, Senator Vitter has been a leader in calling for investments 

in our Nation’s ports. He is a pragmatist. When it comes to infrastructure, we have a very good partnership. I am excited about the 

opportunity to work with him and other members of this Committee on this and many other water infrastructure issues. 

Today’s hearing will examine the role of the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund in supporting commerce at our Nation’s ports. The 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is the primary source of Federal 

investment to maintain America’s ports. The Trust Fund is financed through a fee on the value of cargo imported through coastal and Great Lakes ports. 

According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, if funding 

continues at current levels, by 2040 the United States will face a 

shortfall of nearly $28 billion to meet the dredging needs of the Nation’s ports. As we will hear from our witnesses today, this funding 

gap can have significant economic consequences. 

Increasing investment in ports and reforming the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund will be critical components of the next Water 

Resources Development Act, known as WRDA. Senator Vitter and 

I have already begun working together on this vital legislation, 

which supports water resources infrastructure nationwide. 

WRDA authorizes the projects and programs of the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers and provides many benefits to the American 

people, including expanding and maintaining navigation routes for 

commerce. 

In the coming weeks, we intend to move forward with the bipartisan Water Resources Development Act. Senator Vitter and I look 

2 

forward to working with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle 

to advance a bill. We are optimistic that we can repeat last year’s 

success on MAP–21. 

I want to thank the staff of Senator Mitch McConnell, who actually proactively came to us and said that they really wanted to help 

us with this bill. I was very pleased about that. 

As we will hear from our witnesses today, adequate investment 

can boost the economy and create jobs. U.S. ports and waterways, 

many of which are maintained by the Corps, move 2.3 billion tons 

of goods in Fiscal Year 2011. In my home State of California, our 

ports are some of the busiest in the entire world. 

Continued maintenance of port facilities is critical for the commerce and jobs that rely on these hubs, and that is why we must 

increase investment from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Currently, the Trust Fund collects more revenues than are annually spent for maintaining our ports. In fact, the Fiscal Year 2013 

budget, the Obama administration estimated that the Trust Fund 

would receive $1.8 billion, but the Corps budget request was only 

$848 million. This leaves a growing surplus at a time when many 

of the Nation’s ports are not maintained to their authorized depths 

and widths. 

This is something that has gone on with every administration. 

They do not spend the funds in the Trust Fund the way they are 

meant to be spent. Significant challenges remain in working to ensure the revenues collected in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund 

are fully expended, including identification of necessary offsets, and 

I look forward to collaborating with all of my colleagues as we look 

for creative solutions to this challenging issue. 

In addition, we must also look at ways to ensure that ports 

which collect the most Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund revenues 

receive an equitable share of Federal investment. Currently, some 

of these ports receive only a fraction of the funds that they pay into 

the Trust Fund. That is unfair. I propose a provision for the next 

WRDA that would increase equity for ports nationwide. The provision would allow certain ports to use harbor maintenance funds for 

limited additional uses after other traditional operation and maintenance needs are met. This would be an important step forward 

in ensuring our Nation’s most essential ports receive an equitable 

share of harbor maintenance revenues and it just gives a little 

flexibility to the program. 

I am so grateful to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for 

their interest in this issue and I look forward to hearing from them 

today. 

I want to say, Senator Vitter, as my Ranking Member, you have 

been a driving force behind this hearing and this issue, and it is 

with that that I call on you for the first time as ranking. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID VITTER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am very excited to 

be here. I am very excited to be Ranking Member, and I am very 

excited about our partnership on infrastructure issues. 

The first thing out of the gate with regard to that is, first of all, 

this hearing, which is so important. I requested that we focus on 

3 

this issue because it is so vital, including in the context of a new 

WRDA, and I appreciate your organizing this hearing; and then in 

terms of legislative work, a new proactive, reform-minded, bipartisan WRDA bill, which we are already well into working on, and 

I am very excited about the prospects for that, again, as you said, 

following the model of good solid bipartisan work on MAP–21. So 

that is our goal and that is why we are here today. 

I certainly want to underscore your comments about how our Nation’s ports and waterways are grossly underfunded for routine operation and maintenance, and one big reason is the misallocation 

of Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund revenues. It is a pretty simple 

story. Revenue into the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund has increased steadily over the past decade, minus a one-time decrease 

in Fiscal Year 2009. The Fund currently collects about $1.8 billion 

a year in revenue. However, even though all of that money clearly, 

under law, is supposed to be used only for designated purposes 

with regard to harbor maintenance, even though that is clearly 

true, the Administration only spends roughly half that amount for 

harbor maintenance. 

What does that mean? Well, some people say that means we 

have an unspent balance of $8 billion. It really doesn’t mean that; 

it is really worse than that, because that money isn’t sitting anywhere. There is no pile of cash; that money is gone. What it really 

means is that the other money is stolen and spent on other completely unrelated purposes, directly contrary to the statute setting 

up the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and the revenue to go into 

it. 

Meanwhile, what is going on with our infrastructure? You know, 

if all of our needs were being met, if we were fully dredging our 

crucial waterways and harbors, that might be understandable. But, 

of course, that is not the case. According to a recent analysis from 

the Corps itself, fully authorized channel dimensions are available 

less than an average of 35 percent of the time at the 59 highest 

use, harbors and waterways, and those are the harbors and waterways that basically get the best treatment. So there that fully authorized dimension and depth is available only 35 percent of the 

time. 

Of course, I care about that because the national economy, but 

also because Louisiana has five of the top 15 busiest ports in the 

Nation, with four of those located on the lower Mississippi River; 

and the lower Mississippi River, which is at vital as anything to 

our commerce, our waterborne commerce, is traditionally underfunded in terms of this as well. 

I want to thank all of our panelists and witnesses today, including my invitee, Mike Lorino, President of the Associated Branch Pilots. He will testify before this Committee about the negative effects of these draft restrictions which followed directly from this 

under-dredging and under-funding, restrictions which restrict commerce, restrictions which increase cost on commerce. For instance, 

every time a vessel’s draft is decreased by one foot on the lower 

Mississippi because of under-maintained waterways, this costs 

shippers about $1 million against the value of their cargo. So that 

is a tax on shippers; that is a tax on commerce, and it slows down 

4 

the economy and holds us back from job creation and economic 

growth. 

So this is a problem we absolutely have to fix, and it is a problem 

both Senator Boxer and I are very, very focused on in the WRDA 

that we are working on. 

One final thought. A lot of folks correctly say that we need even 

more resources to fully account for, maintain, dredge, operate all 

of this waterborne commerce and infrastructure. I agree, and I 

want to be a leader in that effort and fully supportive of that effort. 

But, of course, industry, the folks we would ask to pay those extra 

resources, are not going to consider doing that if half of it is stolen 

for unrelated purposes; and that is what is going on now. 

So we need to fix that problem if we expect any more resources 

to be put into the bucket. That is a simple and obvious request 

from the folks who are paying the bill, so their commerce and their 

freight can be transported in these harbors and along these waterways. 

Thanks to all of our witnesses, and I look forward to a great discussion. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Senator. 

At this point I would ask unanimous consent to place into the 

record a statement by Senator Gillibrand, who is over at the Armed 

Services Committee. Without objection, I will do that. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Gillibrand was not received 

at time of print.] 

Senator BOXER. Also place into the record a statement from Senator Levin, who has written the Harbor Maintenance Act, a bill to 

require funds deposited into the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund 

be fully expended for operation and maintenance at our Nation’s 

ports. Without objection, we will do that. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Levin was not received at 

time of print.] 

Senator BOXER. I am pleased to call on Senator Udall. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

Good morning and welcome, Madam Secretary. I want to express 

my appreciation to you for being here and to Senators Boxer and 

Vitter for holding this hearing on WRDA. Assistant Secretary 

Darcy, I am sorry I won’t be able to stay for the entire hearing, but 

I wanted to take this opportunity to highlight three issues that are 

of importance to New Mexico. Now, these aren’t harbor issues, as 

you can imagine, but they are the closest thing New Mexico has to 

harbors, as we had a million-year-old ancient sea which covered 

much of New Mexico, but that is obviously gone. 

I think we will see you again soon when we convene another 

hearing on general WRDA issues, so I hope to discuss these issues 

further at that time. 

The issues I wanted to raise are the potential for flooding in our 

major city, Albuquerque, NM; my continued support for the Rio 

Grande Environmental Management Program; and, three, my concern over the current status of the project in the Rio Grande 

Floodway, the San Acacia to Bosque Del Apache. The city of AlbuVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:19 Mar 09, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\93390.TXT VERN
5 

querque is our major metropolitan hub in New Mexico. I am particularly concerned about the effects flash flooding can have on our 

levee system that protects the city. 

The levees clearly need upgrading, and I am hoping that I can 

work with you through the EPW Committee and through my additional role on Appropriations Committee to address this issue this 

year. 

Next, I want to reiterate my strong support for the Rio Grande 

Environmental Management Program. I appreciate Chairman 

Boxer including this provision in the current WRDA draft again, 

but I am disappointed that it has not been funded. I would like to 

urge the Corps to include this program in future budgets to help 

with planning and conservation projects that will help balance the 

complex tradeoffs between flood control, agriculture, and habitat. 

The Rio Grande Basin is experiencing a severe drought that is 

harming farmers and endangered species, so this program is sorely 

needed. 

Additionally, I hope the Corps can work with the Bureau of Reclamation and the International Boundary and Water Commission 

about ways to better manage the Rio Grande infrastructure in 

times of drought. We can’t make it rain or snow, but we should 

take every measure available to ensure that our available water 

stretches as far as possible. 

Finally, I understand that there is a disagreement between the 

Corps and the Fish and Wildlife Service about how much mitigation is needed for the San Acacia levee project. I want to take this 

opportunity to urge both organizations to do their best together toward a resolution on this so that the funding we have in place for 

it is not diverted elsewhere. 

There are obviously other projects in New Mexico that are of 

great importance to me, but, since time is limited, I wanted to take 

a minute to highlight those three. Again, I thank you, Madam Secretary. I look forward to working with you on these issues, and appreciate very much Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Vitter 

for this first hearing on WRDA. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Without objection, I will place into the record Senator Inhofe’s 

statement for this hearing. He is also over at the Armed Services. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Inhofe follows:] 

Thank you, Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Vitter, for holding this hearing and allowing committee members to receive testimony on the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. I also would like to thank Assistant Secretary Darcy for testifying before us this morning, as well as the four gentlemen who will be joining us 

during the second panel—this committee greatly appreciates you and relies on your 

expertise, so thank you very much for being here. 

I would like to also take a moment to thank the chairman, Senator Boxer, and 

our new ranking member, Senator Vitter, for all the work they and their staffs have 

done thus far on the next Water Resources Development Act. I look forward to 

working with both of you as we build upon our past successes and continue to work 

toward preserving and enhancing the infrastructure of this great Nation. 

Certainly the most immediate challenge this committee faces is the authorization 

of water resources development legislation. As I’ve said time and time again, we as 

a Congress must pass authorization bills on a regular schedule so as to preserve 

the proper authorization-then-appropriations process. It has been 6 years now since 

we passed the last Water Resources Development Act, despite the best efforts of this 

committee—and that, in my judgment, is too long. 

6 

Our harbors and inland waterways are vital to the economic health of our country. In my home State of Oklahoma, over 90 percent of the grain that is shipped 

on barges eventually finds its way to New Orleans to be exported. If the harbor in 

New Orleans is not properly maintained, shipping from Oklahoma will suffer. And 

vice versa—for harbors to gain the economic benefit of shipping from places like 

Oklahoma, our inland waterways must also be properly maintained. As everyone 

here knows, only about half of the annual revenue in the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund is spent as intended—on critical maintenance dredging. But because of the 

current structure of budgetary allocations, we simply cannot afford to allow funding 

for our inland waterways and ports to be redirected—it, too, needs a source of stable 

revenue. The only reasonable solution is increased funding for the system as a 

whole. 

The Inland Waterways Trust Fund helps fund the 18 locks and dams on the 

McClellan-Kerr Arkansas River Navigation System, but it is woefully underfunded. 

In 2012, over 2.7 million tons of cargo shipped from the Port of Catoosa, with over 

12 million tons being shipped on MKARNS, but the system could function much 

more efficiently and productively if it was deepened from its current 9-foot depth 

to the authorized 12 feet, and if hours of service on the locks are not further reduced. This must be a priority. 

I have said my entire career that I take fiscal responsibility very seriously. However, I believe the Federal Government has a responsibility to invest in national defense and infrastructure. In 2011 the President cut the Corps of Engineers’ budget 

by $600 million and by $300 million again in 2012. Our nation’s system of inland 

waterways, highways, and coastal ports are our pathway to trade and economic 

prosperity, and we cannot continue this downward trajectory. Again, I thank the 

witnesses and look forward to their testimony. 

Senator BOXER. So now it is my pleasure to turn to Senator 

Crapo. 

Senator Crapo. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE CRAPO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO 

Senator CRAPO. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman and 

Ranking Member Vitter. A lot of us appreciate your holding this 

important hearing to focus on the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Of interest, Idaho does actually have a seaport, contrary to New 

Mexico. Idaho actually is home to the furthest inland seaport on 

the West Coast. This port, the Port of Lewiston, is located at the 

confluence of the Snake and Clearwater Rivers in the city of Lewiston. For farmers and other businesses in the west, the Port of 

Lewiston provides a critical link through the Snake and Columbia 

Rivers to the Port of Portland and ultimately to the Pacific Ocean. 

However, the Port of Lewiston, like other ports, faces considerable challenges with meeting shipping needs. Despite a large surplus in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, which has already 

been discussed, harbors across the United States are presently 

under-maintained. Again, the statistics that have already been presented show that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimates that 

the full channel dimensions of the Nation’s busiest 59 ports are 

available less than 35 percent of the time. 

We too, in Idaho, are very interested and concerned with the 

management of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. We have 

seen, just as an example from Idaho, that the draft restrictions in 

2011 and 2012, due to the Corps’ inability to maintain the deep 

draft portion of the Columbia River, have been significant impacts 

on our economy. For every inch of draft that is lost due to the 

silted-in channel, vessels are unable to load 358,000 pounds of 

wheat. This is just one example of how important it is that we 

properly utilize the funds in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

7 

Second, Idaho is also very interested in the Inland Waterways 

Trust Fund concerns. There are eight locks between the Pacific 

Ocean and the Port of Lewiston, and we need to have the adequate 

support for the maintenance of these locks and the facilities to 

allow for the traffic to reach the port and to return back to the Pacific Ocean. 

So we are interested, Madam Chairman and Ranking Member 

Vitter, not only in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, but also 

in reforming and making more effective the Inland Waterways 

Trust Fund that would enable us to have truly effective access to 

and support of this critical waterway for our economy in the Northwest. 

Each day the condition of our water infrastructure results in significant losses and damages from broken water and sewer mains, 

sewage overflows and other symptoms of water infrastructure that 

is reaching the end of its useful life; and with these challenges and 

the others I have already mentioned in mind, as this Committee 

is well aware, a national investment in water infrastructure 

projects would create jobs, repair crumbling infrastructure, and 

provide significant protection for public health and the environment. A strong focus on improving the financing structure of our 

Nation’s water infrastructure is greatly needed. 

Again, thank you again for holding this hearing, Senator Boxer 

and Senator Vitter, and I look forward to the testimony we have 

in today’s witnesses. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Senator. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MERKLEY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Senator MERKLEY. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank 

you, Madam Secretary, for coming. I think you are hearing the general story of the significant challenges in maintaining levees and 

jetties and harbor dredging and locks, and how frustrating it is 

that we have funds tat are raised specifically for maintenance, and 

in this case harbor maintenance, and they are not being spent in 

that fashion. 

Now, Oregon is a coastal State, so I go to town after town after 

town where industry depends upon the success of those harbors 

and the maintenance of the jetties; and not only is it important to 

commerce moving back and forth, it is important to our fishing vessels, it is important to our recreational coastal industry, and it imposes not just an issue of commerce, but an issue of safety, because 

when the dredging is not maintained and the jetties are not maintained, you can have very dangerous entries from the ocean. 

So how can I possibly justify that we have funds that have been 

raised for a specific purpose, commerce is at stake, safety is at 

stake, and we are not spending it in this fashion? I can’t justify it. 

I want to see this policy changed. I so much applaud the Chair and 

Ranking Member for bringing this bill forward and I, like my colleague from New Mexico, apologize because I have a conflict to attend to, but I certainly look forward to your comments. I will be 

following up and hope that we can get to the point that we are 

spending these funds in the appropriate place. Thank you. 

8 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Senator Boozman, welcome. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member Vitter, for having this very important hearing today. I am glad 

that we are moving forward toward what I believe will be a strong, 

bipartisan Water Resources Development Act early in the 113th 

Congress, and I think that you are probably excited about that, 

also, and there will be tremendous input from you. 

I am also glad that the improvements to the harbor maintenance 

may be part of this process. Every American benefits from the harbor maintenance. Well-maintained water infrastructure harbors 

and inland waterways are critical to our farmers, job creators, exporters, manufacturers, and consumers. 

One of our witnesses highlights the tremendous advantage American farmers enjoy over foreign competitors when the Mississippi 

River’s fully authorized dimensions. Water infrastructure does not 

get the attention of our other transportation modes, but is an 

indispensible part of our transportation system. 

I believe in the principle that the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund should be fully used, but I also agree with our witnesses who 

emphasize that the Trust Fund should be used to boost funding for 

the Corps of Engineers. I am concerned that our budget process, 

specifically limited allocations for energy and water, could result in 

cuts to other Corps priorities if we don’t do this properly. 

In short, as one witness’s prepared remarks State, this should be 

additive. Another witness’s prepared remarks State that the appropriations should not be taken from other Corps of Engineers programs due to the potential increased funding from the Harbor 

Maintenance Trust Fund. 

Another concern I have is how we move forward on equitable return of HMT dollars. Arkansas is an inland State, but we have significant water infrastructure. Our State, as many other States like 

it, receives just a tiny portion of the Trust Fund dollars, but these 

funds are critical. 

While I understand the importance of equitable return, we need 

to ensure that Arkansas’s infrastructure and similar States, that 

that infrastructure is maintained. Expanding the potential uses of 

Trust Fund dollars may be a balanced approach, but we must avoid 

an inflexible framework, such as a rigid formula, which would 

abandon infrastructure States like Arkansas. 

Again, thank you all very much for having the hearing. I appreciate your leadership. I also appreciate the witnesses being here 

and looking forward to their testimony; look forward to the conversation. 

This Committee, again, has a history of being very friendly to the 

Secretary, and trying to be supportive, and the rest of the witnesses. Regardless of what happens today, remember it could be 

worse; you could be Senator Hagel over there right now in the 

midst of his hearing. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. That was an unexpected truth. 

[Laughter.] 

9 

Senator BOXER. An unexpected truth. 

We want to welcome you, Jo-Ellen Darcy, Assistant Secretary of 

the Army for Civil Works. I just want to thank you. This is a very 

contentious issue. This is not a new issue. We have had people sitting right there on the same issue, where members here were 

upset, but this is a circumstance that I think needs to be faced. 

People are paying into a fund and guess what? They are not getting what they are supposed to get from it. It is not right. It would 

be as if we paid into the Highway Trust Fund and the money was 

used for something completely different. It is not right. 

So I know you are in kind of the hot seat on it. We want to welcome you. We thank you for your service and what you are doing 

to help us every day in our States. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JO-ELLEN DARCY, ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF THE ARMY, CIVIL WORKS 

Ms. DARCY. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman Boxer, Ranking 

Member Vitter, and distinguished members of this Committee. I 

want to thank you for the opportunity to testify on the Harbor 

Maintenance Trust Fund and the importance of investment in the 

Nation’s ports. 

The Army Corps of Engineers provides support for safe, reliable, 

highly cost-effective and environmentally sustainable waterborne 

transportation systems, investing over $1.7 billion annually, more 

than one-third of the total budget of the Civil Works program, to 

study, construct, replace, rehabilitate, operate, and maintain commercial navigation infrastructure across this Country. 

The Nation’s ports handle over 2 billion tons of commerce annually, including over 70 percent of the imported oil and more than 

48 percent of goods purchased by American consumers. 

The Administration understands that our ports are an important 

part of the Nation’s infrastructure and has formed an Interagency 

Task Force on Ports to develop a strategy for investment in our 

ports and related infrastructure. Maintaining these ports and making targeted investments in their improvement can lower shipping 

costs for U.S. exports and imports. 

The work of the task force will reflect a strategic, multi-modal 

view of the Nation’s investment priorities for the infrastructure 

that supports the movement of freight through our ports, including 

the protections for life, safety, and property during transport, as 

well as protections for affected communities and for sustaining our 

ecosystem. 

The Harbor Maintenance Tax and the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund were established by the Water Resources Development Act of 

1986. The harbor maintenance tax is an ad valorem fee on the 

value of commercial cargo loaded or unloaded on vessels using federally maintained harbors. An amount equivalent to the revenue 

collected is deposited in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and 

is then available to finance certain costs, subject to the congressional appropriations process. 

For the Civil Works Program, the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund is authorized to be used to finance up to 100 percent of the 

Corps’ eligible operation and maintenance expenditures for commercial navigation at all Federal coastal and inland harbors within 

10 

the United States. Expenditures from the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund are also authorized to be used to recover the Federal 

share of construction costs for dredged material placement facilities, including beneficial uses associated with the operation and 

maintenance of Federal commercial navigation projects. The Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is also authorized to be used to finance operation and maintenance costs of the U.S. portion of the 

St. Lawrence Seaway. 

Harbor Maintenance Tax receipts in Fiscal Year 2012 were $1.54 

billion, and the interest earned was $47.3 million. The balance in 

the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund at the end of Fiscal Year 2012 

was $6.95 billion. 

An increasing portion of Civil Works funding in recent years has 

been devoted to harbor maintenance. The President’s 2013 budget 

request for the Corps included $848 million for the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund to support the maintenance of coastal harbors 

and their channels and related works, the most ever requested by 

any president. This is a significant increase over the level in the 

Fiscal Year 2012 budget, which was $758 million; this all at a time 

when many programs governmentwide are being reduced in order 

to put the Nation on a sustainable fiscal path. 

Our investments in coastal port maintenance are directed primarily at providing operational capabilities and efficiencies. To 

make the best use of these funds, the Corps evaluates and establishes priorities using objective criteria. These criteria include 

transportation cost savings, risk reduction, and improved reliability, all relative to the cost. Consequently, maintenance work 

generally is focused more on the most heavily used commercial 

channels, those with 10 million tons of cargo a year or more, which 

together carry about 90 percent of the total commercial cargo by 

tonnage traveling through our coastal ports. 

The amount proposed in the Fiscal Year 2013 budget is an appropriate level, considering the other responsibilities of the Corps for 

inland navigation, flood risk management, aquatic ecosystem restoration, hydropower, and other Civil Works Program areas. The 

Corps is working to develop better analytical tools to help determine whether additional spending in this area is warranted based 

on the economic and safety return. 

Dredging costs continue to rise due to increases in the cost of 

fuel, steel, labor, and changes in methods of disposal of dredge material. We recognize that this presents challenges in maintaining 

commercial navigation projects. The pending improvements to the 

Panama Canal will increase the draft of vessels transiting the 

Canal to 50 feet. 

On our Atlantic Coast we now have two 50-foot deep ports capable of receiving these ships, Norfolk and Baltimore. The Corps expects to complete the dredging work for deepening the Port of New 

York-New Jersey to 50 feet in fiscal year 2015. The Corps is also 

working with the Port of Miami, which is financing a project, to 

deepen the Federal channel to 50 feet. 

On the West Coast, the Ports of L.A., Long Beach, Oakland, Seattle, and Tacoma all have channel depths of 50 feet or greater. 

11 

In addition to the ongoing work, the Corps is also working with 

seven ports on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts to evaluate proposals 

to deepen or widen those channels. 

Madam Chairman and members of the Committee, I look forward to answering any questions you have, and also to work with 

you on this difficult issue as you prepare for the WRDA bill. Thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Darcy follows:] 

12 


93390.001
13 


93390.002
14 


93390.003
15 


93390.004
16 


93390.005
17 


93390.006
18 


93390.007
19 


93390.008
20 


93390.009
21 


93390.010
22 


93390.011
23 


93390.012
24 


93390.013
25 


93390.014
26 


93390.015
27 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much for that. You know, you 

stay away from the bigger notion, bigger issue here, which is is it 

right to collect fees and then not spend them on this purpose that 

they are supposed to be used for, and I don’t blame you for staying 

away from that because, in essence, you don’t really have control 

over that; the Administration does and prior administrations did, 

and we do, and we intend to fix it to the greatest extent that we 

can. 

Now, the Corps has estimated that the Nation’s 59 busiest ports 

have access to their full channel dimensions only 35 percent of the 

time. These ports are critical for commerce and international trade. 

Restrictions on commerce as a result of inadequate port maintenance can have significant consequences. In fact, a recent report by 

the American Society of Civil Engineers, which we will hear about 

on our second panel, indicates that failure to adequately maintain 

our ports could result in a variety of economic impacts. 

Do you agree that failure to invest in port maintenance could 

have economic consequences that we must seek to avoid? 

Ms. DARCY. Senator, I do believe it could have consequences; 

however, I do see that we are investing in our ports. As I noted, 

the President has asked for more money for the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund than ever before. He has also established the 

Interagency Task Force working with the Department of Management and Budget, as well as Transportation, to look at evaluating 

what resources are needed for transportation, and we are hoping 

that, in looking at transportation in the future, in addition to the 

three Rs, which are always rail, road, and runways, it can now be 

the four Rs and we can include rivers in that. 

I think we need to look at the infrastructure all together, we 

need to expand the way we have traditionally looked at it as just 

mostly asphalt and make sure that we include the river systems 

that need to be reliable for our economy. 

Senator BOXER. Well, I do appreciate the President moving in the 

right direction, but I still note he is still not spending all that came 

into the Fund, and I still note that 59 busiest ports have access to 

their full channel dimensions only 35 percent of the time, and I 

just think that is as clear as anything; it just shows that we are 

not doing enough. But yes, the President is definitely moving in the 

right direction, but he still isn’t using all the funds that come into 

the Trust Fund. 

When Congress created the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, it 

sought to recoup the cost necessary to operate and maintain U.S. 

ports and waterways, but, as we have said, much less is spent on 

operations and maintenance than is collected, and, as you point 

out, it is in the billions. 

Do you believe it is important to increase the amount expended 

from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund so that we can better 

maintain the Nation’s ports? 

Ms. DARCY. Senator, I believe the amount that is in the President’s request for the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is appropriate at this time, given all of the other fiscal constraints that we 

are faced with within not only the Corps, but across the Country. 

Senator BOXER. Well, I hear you doing what you should do, 

which is defending the President’s budget. I appreciate you are in 

28 

that situation, but, again, this, to me, isn’t about this President. 

This President is doing more than any other president, there is no 

doubt, but we are in a bad situation here because we are the leading economy in the world and yet, still, we have problems at our 

ports. I can tell you, at our ports back home, just out of Los Angeles-Long Beach, about 40 percent of the imports; and you just can’t 

afford to have problems at the ports. 

Let me just go here. You said you would work with us, which I 

really appreciate, even though, perhaps, the Administration doesn’t 

like what we have come out with on this particular issue. Would 

you be available for technical assistance? Because we may need to 

call on you for that. 

Ms. DARCY. Absolutely, Senator. 

Senator BOXER. Good. 

Ms. DARCY. It would be the first time in my career that I had 

not worked on a WRDA bill. 

Senator BOXER. I know. Well, we can’t let that happen. We have 

to use all your experience here. But I think the bottom line is we 

are moving in the right direction, but we are certainly not there 

because we are still not spending the revenues that come in. Nobody has looked at the backlog and how we can possibly offset 

those billions, but Senator Vitter and I, and the rest of our colleagues, are very strong on this, so it is going to be a central piece 

of our WRDA bill. 

Senator Vitter. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, 

Madam Secretary, for your service. This is something you can tell, 

I hope, we are communicating that we care passionately about and 

it is thoroughly bipartisan. 

Madam Secretary, in your testimony you noted the authorized 

uses of this money. It was first set up in WRDA in 1986, Section 

210. It was amended a little bit in WRDA 90, Section 316, and you 

listed the uses. Are there any other authorized uses? 

Ms. DARCY. There is a certain percentage, about $30 million a 

year, maybe a little more, that goes to, the St. Lawrence Seaway, 

and then there is a portion I think it is about $3 million to $5 million annually that goes to the Treasury and the Customs Service 

for the administrative costs of the program. 

Senator VITTER. Right. I was thinking of that too. But given that 

entire list, are there any other authorized uses? 

Ms. DARCY. No, sir. 

Senator VITTER. In fact, isn’t that money spent on plenty of other 

things every year that are not those authorized uses? 

Ms. DARCY. Senator, the receipts go directly into the Harbor 

Maintenance Trust Fund through the Treasury and then the Bureau of Public Debt, which manages 18 different trust funds across 

the Government, then is the dispenser of those funds when our 

agency says we have been appropriated this much money and that 

is what comes out of the Fund. 

Senator VITTER. Doesn’t the other money come out of the Fund 

for other unauthorized uses, unrelated uses? 

Ms. DARCY. The balance of the funds are invested and accumulate interest, and it is up to the Bureau of Public Debt as to how 

those funds then are used. 

29 

Senator VITTER. Well, if there is this balance of $6.95 billion, 

what vault can I go to and look at it? That is what I am asking. 

Because it doesn’t exist. So where can I look at that balance of almost $7 billion? 

Ms. DARCY. Again, those are the Federal investments in securities, for the most part, I understand, and then the interest that accrues on that is what gets you to that balance. 

Senator VITTER. Well, again, this is a big fiction, and I think the 

first important part of this conversation is to get beyond the fiction. 

It is the same fiction as the Social Security Trust Fund, because 

when you go and look at that balance, basically this is what you 

find, IOU $6.95 billion. It is gone, it is spent for unrelated purposes, and that is wrong when it is authorized for specific uses 

under the law. 

Now, you mentioned this administrative task force looking at 

water infrastructure, looking at all of this big picture. Is that task 

force going to come up with a solution that ensures that all of this 

Trust Fund money is spent regularly for its intended uses? 

Ms. DARCY. We will be looking at the uses of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and how that can help to ensure that the future 

of the navigation system is adequate. I can’t tell you, at this point, 

what it is we are going to say or do, but it is something that we 

will definitely be considering. 

Senator VITTER. Well, what you have done previously in that regard is to just want to tremendously expand the uses. Now, there 

may be some room for that, but if you just expand the uses to all 

sorts of other things, you don’t solve this problem, the same thing 

happens. That is what is happening now. So let me just repeat the 

question. Is the task force focused on our central question today, 

which is ensuring that all of the revenue into the Trust Fund is 

spent for authorized uses under statute? 

Ms. DARCY. It is one of the issues that will be focused on, Senator. We will also be looking at the uses for the other trust funds, 

including the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. This is a navigation 

system; it is not just a port system, it is an inland waterway system as well, that we must maintain given the other competing 

uses, as well as what the other agencies, including OMB and the 

Department of Transportation, and Commerce, can bring to the 

table as we look at it as a system. 

Senator VITTER. Let me ask a related question that I mentioned 

in my opening statement. A lot of folks, including me, think it is 

going to take more resources to fully maintain this vital infrastructure that is important for the economy. Do you think it is reasonable to expect the folks affected, like industry, to pay more into 

anything when it is being diverted, in this case, to unrelated uses? 

Ms. DARCY. I don’t think that we would expect people to pay 

more. I understand, that since the total balance is not being spent 

in the intended use, that there would be a concern by those paying 

the tax that there be some way to get the return on what it is they 

are paying for. 

Senator VITTER. I will close with this. I am out of time. I think 

you all have already proposed they are paying more in some instances, like, for instance, lockage fees, just one instance. I am just 

pointing out I think it is a commonsense nonstarter to even have 

30 

that discussion if half of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is 

being diverted for unrelated purposes. Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator. 

What we are going to do is Senator Boozman will ask his questions and then we will go to Senators Barrasso and Sessions to use 

their 5 minutes for either an opening statement, questions, or both. 

Senator Boozman. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Again, thanks for being here, and we do appreciate your office. 

You have always been very open as we have approached you with 

different difficulties relating to all of this and, like I say, we appreciate that. You were a big help with the recent crisis on the Mississippi River, which is kind of an ongoing thing with the dredging 

and stuff, making it such that we were able to get our farm products out. Again, you can’t always help us, but you always do listen, 

and we do appreciate that. 

As Senator Boxer mentioned, in your data and in a recent CRS 

report, it keeps coming up the busiest 59 ports are available less 

than 35 percent of the time as far as their full channel width and 

depth; and then the CRS report goes on to point out that that 

makes it such that the vessels are less efficient, they can’t carry 

as much, there is essentially more prone to accident and things like 

that. So that is a serious problem; I think we all agree with that. 

In your testimony you mention while the Corps could spend more 

on harbor maintenance and related work, the amount proposed in 

the 2000 budget for this purpose, which is financed from the HMTF 

is an appropriate level, and then you go on considering the other 

challenges that you face. 

I guess, for me, it is hard to reconcile that. If only 35 percent is 

operational on a given day, and yet to come back and say that you 

are happy with the funding that you are getting. 

Ms. DARCY. I think I said appropriate, not happy. But in looking 

at the overall budget for the Corps of Engineers, we have to manage for all of the missions within the Corps, we operate under a 

cap, and we know that if you increase one mission, there must be 

a decrease somewhere else within the program. As I said in my statement, over one-third of our budget, $1.7 billion, is spent on navigation, and that additional money that does 

not come out of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is spent on 

other studies or construction, because the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund does not fund construction. 

Senator BOOZMAN. So you mention the cap, which is a concern, 

and you also mention that we are going to be increasing the money 

spent from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. So where is that 

coming from, is that new money or is that money that you are essentially shuffling around, so that something else under the cap is 

going to suffer? 

Ms. DARCY. The 2013 budget request which includes $848 million 

is $90 million more than Fiscal Year 2012. Within our program we 

had to make a decision as to how to balance preograms, because 

we are still under the $4.7 billion program. We did put more money 

on activities reimbursed from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, 

so some of the other programs like some of our other operation and 

maintenance activities were reduced. Although operation and mainVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:19 Mar 09, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\_EPW\DOCS\93390.TXT VERN
31 

tenance has also increased in our overall budget over the last couple of years. We would have to take decreases in some other programs, including some of our CAP programs, which are our small 

project programs. Again, the overall program has to be balanced 

across all the business lines within our budget. 

Senator BOOZMAN. So I guess that is really the real problem. It 

doesn’t matter how much we put into the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund; the reality is it really wouldn’t be any additional new 

money. 

Ms. DARCY. No. But also within the budget process, when the appropriations committees get their 302(b) allocations, there is a cap 

in there, and there is Army Corps of Engineers within that 302(b), 

there is the Nuclear Program, there is the Energy Program. So the 

balance within that allocation would have to either be increased in 

order to accommodate increases across all the programs. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Right. OK. Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

Senator Barrasso, welcome. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

We agree in a bipartisan way that our Nation’s harbors and 

ports are vital to the economic growth of the entire Country. The 

majority of our Nation’s ports are along the coasts and the Great 

Lakes, the Gulf of Mexico, but the products that our Country exports come from all 50 States and, in the case of the west, many 

are exported from river ports. I think it is vital that the Country 

maintain all ports for the benefit of the people whose jobs depend 

on these exports and the communities where they live. 

So American exports really are one of the backbones of our economy, and it doesn’t matter which sector of the economy, whether 

it is high-tech manufacturing, whether it is the aerospace industry, 

automobile production, pharmaceuticals, ranches, farms, mineral 

extraction. All of these sectors require modern, fully functioning 

ports and growing ports to export our products. 

Now, the White House has stated that it is putting a priority on 

maintaining and improving ports, streamlining the barriers to port 

projects. In July of last year, the President established the White 

House Task Force on Ports. The mission calls for ‘‘improved coordination and streamlined review of investments in port-related infrastructures.’ Last July, on the 19th, the White House announced 

that five major ports in the eastern United States would receive 

help in making ‘‘the permitting and review process for infrastructure projects more effective and efficient, saving time while driving 

better outcomes for local communities.’ Those ports include, as you 

know, Jacksonville, Savannah, New York, New Jersey, and the 

Port of Charleston. 

Madam Chairman, I believe that all American ports, especially 

in the west, need a quicker, more efficient review process for building and expanding their operations as well. 

So the questions that I have are do you agree with the President’s initiative with regard to the need for expanding port projects 

across the Country? 

32 

Ms. DARCY. Yes, Senator. 

Senator BARRASSO. In his State of the Union Address, going back 

even to 2010, President Obama announced the National Export Initiative, stating, ‘‘We will double our exports over the next 5 years, 

an increase that will support 2 million jobs in America.’ 

How close do you think we are to achieving that goal? 

Ms. DARCY. I think we will achieve the goal by 2015. I think the 

fact that this budget reflects an increase in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, as well as other investments in navigation, will 

help to prove that not only within the Army Corps of Engineers, 

but across the Government, including the Department of Transportation. 

Senator BARRASSO. Yesterday, the Commerce Department reported that the U.S. economy had actually shrank, which would 

defy the expectations. CNBC reported that the economy shrank 

from October through December for the first time since the recession ended, and they had a number of different reasons that they 

listed, one of which was fewer exports. So I don’t know if you are 

aware of the report, but do you believe we need to increase the export of all American goods by mobilizing and modernizing our Nation’s ports in an expeditious and fiscally responsible manner to 

help address this falling exports? 

Ms. DARCY. I think that we do, and I think that we will be able 

to meet the goal by 2015. 

Senator BARRASSO. Finally, you said in your written testimony 

the White House created this Task Force on Ports in July of last 

year. According to the White House announcement, the Task Force, 

they said, will develop a strategy to inform future investment decisions and identify opportunities for improved coordination and 

streamlined review of investments and port-related infrastructures. 

Now, your agency is one of the 10 Federal agencies involved in 

this project. Can you give us an update as to the progress of the 

Task Force? 

Ms. DARCY. Yes, Senator. Actually, I think we have a meeting 

next week, but I have to check. What we have done is establish the 

principles of what it is we want to move forward on, and part of 

what we have already done, is working with the other Federal 

agencies, looking across programs as to where we are making our 

investments. 

For example, the Corps of Engineers, as you know, operates and 

maintains and dredges ports and harbors, and the Department of 

Transportation has what is called the TIGER Grant Program, 

where they make investments on the land side at different ports 

around the Country. Working with the Department of Transportation, we have looked at where we have our ports deepening and 

where it would make sense for an investment to be made on the 

land side, so that we are not working at cross purposes with the 

Federal investment in that port on the land side. 

Senator BARRASSO. Well, thank you. I think all of us look forward to seeing the Task Force recommendation in a timely manner. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much. 

Senator Sessions, welcome. 

33 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA 

Senator SESSIONS. Madam Chairman, involved as I know Senator 

Inhofe is now with the Armed Services hearing on the confirmation 

of former Senator Hagel, and I am sorry to have missed earlier. 

Thank you for having this hearing, Madam Chairman. I congratulate you particularly because looking at the amount of money spent 

under the energy and water appropriations, harbor maintenance is 

about 1 percent. So it is an important 1 percent, and I am glad that 

you found time to have a hearing on it. It is not as much money 

as has been coming in. 

We have a chart, I think, as you just pointed out, has been mentioned before, but this indicates in blue how much of the funds that 

are coming in are actually spent on harbor maintenance and how 

much finances the rest of the Government, and our smart staff 

found that that surplus would make a huge difference for harbors 

and ports, but only funds for the Government for 3 hours, in terms 

of what it would contribute to the overall spending. 

So thank you for your presence here, and I think we will be looking at how to deal with some of the issues. I am skeptical about 

proposals that give the Corps more authority and Congress less 

control over water resources, and I am skeptical about creating 

new programs when we are having a hard time funding the ones 

we have, and I do think we have to confront this issue of our ports 

and how we get there. 

I know the Chairman and Ranking Member understand that one 

of my problems is fixing this surplus or using more of it has budget 

consequences that we can’t ignore, and that makes it harder than 

we would like it to be. The President has submitted spending the 

money in that fashion and Congress has gone along with that, so 

if we change it, it won’t be as easy as a lot of people might think, 

but I think we need to work in that direction. 

So I guess I won’t ask any questions now, Madam Chairman. 

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to be here. 

I guess I would just ask Secretary Darcy would this surplus, if 

it allowed to be utilized by you and for harbor maintenance, make 

a substantial improvement in our ability to meet the needs of harbor maintenance? 

Ms. DARCY. It would. 

Senator SESSIONS. That is an easy question. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Well, that is the point of this hearing. We thank 

you for your honest answer, and your very good question and your 

brilliant staff’s chart. 

Now, we thank you very much, and we will work closely with 

you, as we have in the past, on this whole harbor maintenance 

issue, because it will, Senator Sessions and Senator Boozman, a big 

part of our WRDA bill. So we really want to reform this situation 

so we don’t put somebody like Jo-Ellen Darcy in a tough situation, 

and the future Jo-Ellen Darcys, because this is an issue that both 

Republican and Democratic presidents have handled the same way; 

they have never spent on the harbor maintenance what comes into 

the Fund. So we thank you very much. 

34 

We will ask our second panel to come up and, as they do, I will 

be introducing Michael Christensen and Senator Vitter will be introducing Mike Lorino, Senator Sessions will be introducing Mr. 

Lyons, and I will introduce Mr. Cairns. Is that right? OK. 

So please step forward. This is an excellent panel we have coming forward because they work with these issues and these policies 

every single day. 

So, Mr. Christensen, I will introduce you. You are the Deputy 

Executive Director of Development and No. 2 ranked executive at 

the Port of Los Angeles. That is a big job. You are responsible for 

oversight of the planning, the permitting, the design, and construction of all port infrastructure. 

Mr. Christensen is a transportation engineer with over 35 years 

of experience in the planning, design, and construction of a wide 

variety of port, rail, and highway programs. Mr. Christensen also 

serves as Chair of the California Marine Affairs and Navigation 

Conference, and he is a member of the California Association of 

Port Authorities. 

Well, welcome to you, and I am sure you can’t wait to get back 

home after witnessing some of the winds out there. Please do begin 

your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL R. CHRISTENSEN, PE, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT, PORT OF LOS ANGELES; CHAIR, CALIFORNIA MARINE AFFAIRS AND NAVIGATION CONFERENCE 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you very much, Chairman Boxer, 

Ranking Member Vitter, and Senators for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the Port of Los Angeles, the California Association 

of Port Authorities, and the California Marine Affairs and Navigation Conference. I am Michael Christensen and, as was mentioned, 

I am the Deputy Executive Director at the Port of Los Angeles responsible for all of the capital improvements and infrastructure at 

the Nation’s largest container port. 

The Port of Los Angeles, in conjunction with our neighbor, the 

Port of Long Beach, handles over 40 percent of all the containerized goods that come into the United States, worth approximately 

$311 billion. This cargo supports about 900,000 regional jobs, nearly $40 billion in annual wages and tax revenues, and nationally the 

goods that come through the port complex of Southern California 

support also about 3.5 million jobs throughout the United States. 

We are not tax supported; instead, our revenues are all derived 

from fees and from other shipping service revenue. 

Now, I am testifying today on behalf of a number of organization. 

One is the California Association of Port Authorities, which is comprised of the State’s 11 publically owned commercial ports. It is 

dedicated to maintaining vigorous and vital port industry throughout the State of California. 

I also serve right now as Chair of the California Marine Affairs 

and Navigation Conference, which is also a consortium of California harbors and ports, both large and small, along with marine 

interest groups dedicated to optimizing California’s maritime benefits by supporting the maintenance and improvement of California’s 

harbors, ports, and navigation projects. 

35 

We very much appreciate the purpose of this hearing on HMT. 

It is a critical source of funding, as has been mentioned a number 

of times, for the ports and harbors not only within our State, but 

also within the entire Country in order to keep us globally competitive. With the sense of Congress in support of full use of the HMT 

that was included in MAP–21 and the changes contemplated in 

this draft of the WRDA, we are encouraged that are being taken 

to improve HMT. 

The maintenance that is funded by HMT supports a well-functioning navigation system that includes the ports and harbors that 

accommodate a wide variety of commodities: containers, bulk 

goods, agriculture products, automobiles, fisheries, and also serve 

these facilities of service critical harbors of refuge. The system not 

only supports jobs in operation and maintenance, but facilitates 

trade that supports jobs throughout the supply chain throughout 

the United States, reduces the transportation costs for American 

businesses, and ultimately keeps the prices lower for American consumers. 

For this reason, the California ports support the following: No. 

1, full utilization of HMT revenues for operations and maintenance 

purposes; No. 2, the prioritization of HMT funds for use on traditional O&M purposes, including maintenance of Federal navigation 

channels, disposal sites, selected in-water projects such as breakwaters and jetties, and studies; No. 3, more equitable return of 

HMT funds to the systems of ports of California; and, No. 4, a costshare formula for maintenance that reflects the current cargo fleet. 

First, we believe HMT should be fully used for O&M purposes. 

Appropriations from the HMTF have lagged behind receipts for 

several years, leaving a surplus and deferring maintenance on our 

Nation’s system of ports and harbors. Achievement of full use of 

the HMT should be additive in nature. That is, in a given fiscal 

year, the guarantee of full utilization should not be achieved by 

taking funds from other U.S. Army Corps priorities. 

We commend you for including the full utilization and the additive aspects in this draft of the WRDA. We support a more equitable allocution framework within WRDA. Even if HMT funds are 

fully utilized for O&M, we believe efforts should be made to increase the funding return to systems that contribute large amounts 

to the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

One of the reasons we believe in this approach is because the 

users, not the ports, pay into the harbor maintenance tax. The 

users of the California port systems, for example, have reasonable 

expectation that the money they pay would be returned to the systems that they use. 

Now, based on these facts, we believe that an equitable return 

should be part of an HMT reform effort and, in fact, the American 

Association of Port Authorities has come out with an equity principle that I am sure they will be sharing with you. 

Senator BOXER. I am going to ask you to sum up, if you can. 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. In conclusion, I would like to again thank you 

again, Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Vitter, for 

prioritizing the WRDA authorization and allowing me the opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of the California Ports and 

Harbors. I would like to reiterate our support for full utilization of 

36 

HMT for its intended purpose, an equitable return in updating the 

cost-share formulas. As you continue to work on the reforms for 

HMT, the California ports would like to offer our continued assistance and support. Please refer to my written testimony for some 

of the other information, and I am available for questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Christensen follows:] 

37 


93390.016
38 


93390.017
39 


93390.018
40 


93390.019
41 


93390.020
42 


93390.021
43 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Mr. Christensen. 

Due to his schedule, Senator Sessions, we are going to ask you 

to introduce your witness, Mr. Lyons, who will then testify, and 

then we will move to Mr. Lorino, introduced by Senator Vitter. 

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you. Appreciate that very much. 

Mr. James K. Lyons, we call Jimmy, has served as Director and 

CEO of the Alabama State Docks since 1999. He is a senior port 

director, one of them around the Country. A native of Mobile. He 

spent four decades in the maritime industry. The port has done exceedingly well, Jimmy. Congratulations on your leadership. We 

have seen hundreds of millions of dollars in capital improvements. 

Those investments are paying off. Steel shipments were up in 

2012 26 percent; containers were up 31 percent; export coal shipments increased substantially. So the port is doing well. It also is 

unusual in the sense that we export a lot more out of the Mobile 

Port than most ports as a percentage of the cargo, and that reduces, in some way, the money that comes in, but it is really great 

for job creation and that sort of thing. 

So he is involved in many activities, including being on the 

Board of Directors of the Federal Reserve Bank in Birmingham and 

married to Beth Marietta Lyons, an attorney and prominent 

Mobilian herself. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Mr. Lyons, I won’t call you by your first name, although I am extremely tempted to. Mr. Lyons, we really do welcome you, and the 

floor is yours. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES K. LYONS, DIRECTOR & CEO, ALABAMA 

STATE PORT AUTHORITY 

Mr. LYONS. Thank you, Madam Chairman, Ranking Member 

Vitter, and distinguished members of the Committee. Thank you 

for this opportunity to discuss the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund. 

I am going to try to bring a little bit of local perspective to some 

of the facts and figures that I have here in my written statement. 

These facts and figures have been quoted several times here today, 

but I will try to bring a little bit of local perspective and just sort 

of bringing it down into the micro aspect. 

Mobile is amongst the 90 percent of the Nation’s top 50 ports in 

foreign trade commerce that require regular maintenance dredging. 

In total, dredged ports move nearly 93 percent of all waterborne 

commerce by weight annually. 

The 35 percent availability is a very real figure, something that 

we can attest to from Mobile, and in talking to my fellow port directors in other ports, I believe this is a very real number. As an 

example, between 2006, after we finished the dredging cycle that 

included supplemental funding that came as a result of Hurricane 

Katrina, and 2011, Mobile had only half of our authorized width in 

much of our 30-mile-long channel. These conditions caused numerous groundings, forced restrictions in vessel traffic, and, in short, 

cost the shippers using our port a great deal of time and money. 

The budget versus the appropriation in Mobile is, again, very 

real, just as it is. We saw the figures in the chart that Senator SesVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:19 Mar 09, 2015 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\_EPW\DOCS\93390.TXT VERN
44 

sions put up. Mobile’s 2012 budget was $22.6 million, but we really 

need $28 million to fully maintain our authorized width and depth. 

So enough money is not being appropriated in the Mobile harbor 

project, and the same applies to many of our other projects that require dredging. 

These poorly maintained harbors increase the cost for all port 

users, reduce U.S. global competitiveness, and exacerbate the 

maintenance dredging backlog, all of which adversely impact the 

U.S. tax base and the job market. 

Aside from dredging backlogs and funding shortfalls, we are 

deeply concerned with how the Nation’s ports will be expanded, 

funded, and maintained in the current fiscal climate. 

As Congress considers requests for use of the Trust Fund to resolve the dredging conundrum, we ask Congress to consider the 

long-term relevance and economic impact of ports within the context of re-examining the base of all major Federal spending and tax 

programs. 

There is legitimate need for port investment to serve larger vessels transiting most trade lanes. Any Federal project investments 

will ultimately draw on the trust as deepened and widened channels are brought online. We recognize the link between fee collections and expenditures is complicated. Increased maintenance 

spending on harbors will impact the Federal deficit unless spending 

in other areas is decreased or other collections are increased. 

We also understand guaranteed funding for dredging, and the 

budget protects dredging obligations from competing interests with 

revenue sources of type. We are also mindful that any guarantee 

limits congressional discretion to make tradeoffs in spending priorities. Our fiscal realities necessitate policies that discourage zero 

balance or expanded uses of the Trust Fund. 

The Committee has been very supportive of dredging in large 

and small ports, and we applaud the Committee’s work in MAP– 

21. Congressional intent notwithstanding, there is still no provision 

to dedicate Trust revenues to fully maintain our ports. 

Regardless of how increased allocation for port maintenance 

dredging is addressed absent offsets otherwise, solutions are likely 

to increase the Federal deficit. 

The Port Authority supports fiscally responsible priorities in the 

use of the Trust Fund and encourages Congress to mandate full 

maintenance funding of existing Federal projects first and foremost. We also request Congress resist expanded use of the Trust 

to guarantee a reliable maintenance funding source for future 

growth. 

The State Port Authority thanks the Committee for its leadership in recognizing the nexus between water resources and economic prosperity. Thank you for this opportunity, and I would be 

glad to address any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lyons follows:] 

45 


93390.022
46 


93390.023
47 


93390.024
48 


93390.025
49 


93390.026
50 


93390.027
51 


93390.028
52 


93390.029
53 


93390.030
54 

Senator SESSIONS. Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Yes, go right ahead. 

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you for that. 

One point I would like to make that is important, I think, to all 

our ports, Jimmy, and that is the ports themselves are supported 

locally, too, by State funding and bond issues and that kind of 

thing. We are not asking the Federal Government to do all of this 

work. Can you give us an indication of how much the State has 

helped you maintain your operation? 

Mr. LYONS. Our State really does not provide—they have provided us with some capital funding. In my tenure, in the last 14 

years, they have provided some capital funding that enabled us to 

serve as a basis for a large capital program, a 10-year program 

that we did. That was $100 million out of $700 million. But as far 

as operations, debt service, etcetera, we are a self-sustaining entity. 

We are an enterprise agency; we strive to make money so that we 

can generate capital to continue to reinvest in our facilities and pay 

our share of the Federal project. 

Senator SESSIONS. That is a bond issue that you pay back? 

Mr. LYONS. It is. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. 

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. So am I right to assume that this funding for 

O&M is very important to you, because the State doesn’t do that? 

Mr. LYONS. Yes, it is critical. The State has not stepped in on 

any of the O&M or any of the expansion projects that we have done 

over the last 14 years; it has been all Port Authority. 

Senator BOXER. I think that is an important point because, Senator, this is really a classic case of private-public partnership. But 

we do have this important role, and you will be happy to know, before you came in, I am sure you know this, that we are working 

very closely with your staff and all of us to make sure that these 

funds are spent for their purpose, the purpose for which they are 

being collected, and it is critical because right now the funds are, 

frankly, going to make it look like we have a stockpile of $6 billion 

somewhere, which, as Senator Vitter points out, is illusory. 

So what we are going to do now is turn to Senator Vitter to introduce his witness, Mr. Lorino, and then we are going to go to Mr. 

Cairns. After that we will turn to Senator Cardin and Senator 

Cardin will have the opportunity, after the last witness, to make 

his opening statement and then ask whatever questions. 

OK. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I want to welcome Captain Mike Lorino. Captain Lorino is a lifelong resident of Louisiana, living along the Mississippi River for almost 40 years of his life. He was first elected to the oldest pilot association on the entire river in August 1972, and after a 5-year apprenticeship he was fully commissioned as a bar pilot in 1978. 

Then he served on the board of that bar pilot’s association, then as 

vice president, and today he serves as president of that important 

association. 

For those of you who aren’t familiar with what a pilot, a river 

pilot, not an airline pilot, is, they safely guide those huge ships entering the mouth of, in this case, the Mississippi River to ports and 

55 

avoid accidents, any one of which could cause a multibillion dollar 

industry to come to a dead stop and maybe be an environmental 

disaster. So he is a true expert. 

He proved his expertise a couple years ago, in June 2011, June 

9th. A big ship, the Ratna Puja, ran aground in the lower Mississippi, just above Cubits Gap. The way I found out about it at 

6:30 in the morning is Mike Lorino called me and said the entire 

lower Mississippi is shut down right down. 

Authorized depth is 45 feet. That depth at the time was, maximum, 42 feet; and it ran aground, shut the whole river down. 

What is even more interesting is the way the Corps found out 

about it. General Peabody, who is in charge of dredging, was when 

I called him at 6:32 in the morning. I had been arguing with General Peabody to properly dredge the lower Mississippi for a week 

right at that time. He had resisted. Needless to say, the dredges 

arrived that afternoon, finally. 

But that is what we need to avoid, shutting down something like 

the entire lower Mississippi. By the way, it could have been much 

worse because the cargo on the Ratna Puja was black oil. Thank 

God we didn’t have a big spill. 

Thank you, Mike, for being here. 

STATEMENT OF MIKE LORINO, PRESIDENT, 

ASSOCIATED BRANCH PILOTS 

Mr. LORINO. Thank you, Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member 

Vitter and distinguished members of the Committee. 

Chairman, I was honored to be here last year at this, but I can 

say this, listening to the conversations thus far this morning, I can 

see this process has grown legs and is moving forward, and I need 

to commend you and also the Ranking Member and members of 

this Committee for doing that. It is unbelievable how much can be 

done in 1 year when you put your mind to it, as we do, too. 

But the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is not a Louisiana 

issue, it is a Nation issue. It is an ad valorem tax for dredging jetties, breakwaters, and it is being abused. Seven million dollars is 

just being moved somewhere else. 

A little bit about the Mississippi. The Mississippi River touches 

31 States and two Canadian provinces. We have five deepwater 

ports, the largest complex in the world. Not in the United States; 

in the world. Last year, my association that I represent, we did 

12,000 ships in the Mississippi River. There was 40,000 movements 

of vessels from the mouth of the river to Baton Rouge, 40,000 in 

1 year. It is unbelievable. Thirty percent of the Nation’s oil, 60 percent of the Nation’s grain is shipped out of the Mississippi River 

system. 

If we would shut down the Mississippi River, and that has happened a few times, it is $295 million a day for the Country, and 

grows exponentially after the fourth day. A hundred percent of the 

channel helps us maintain cost effectiveness in the world market, 

$0.13 per bushel saving over highways or rail when dimensions are 

100 percent. 

Narrow channels hinder our ability to compete globally. What 

happens there, a ship will come in to load cargo and he can’t get 

it all on that ship. So one would think, well, we will send it to the 

56 

West Coast. That works for 1 year. After that we cannot compete 

with Brazil and Argentina. Now our prices are gone. Our farmers 

in the heartland lose that business. It is not acceptable when we 

have this money coming in. 

A closed Mississippi River system would dramatically affect gas 

prices, grain prices, all exports and imports. After our Hurricane 

Katrina, gas prices went up overnight because we had the refineries on the river. We couldn’t get fuel oil out; we couldn’t get aviation oil out. It is unbelievable. We need this. 

Someone mentioned about environmental. That is gigantic. We 

had an oil spill down there with BP. We have tankers coming in 

the Mississippi River system with 600,000 barrels of oil on one 

ship. If that ship runs ground and puts a hole, we have another 

BP in the Mississippi River system. But the travesty for that is 

very simple: that ship is paying. It is importing here, paying that 

tax, and here he could run aground and have another problem after 

he is paying money to come into the United States. That is unacceptable, ladies and gentlemen. 

Current draft at the present time is 45 by 700 feet. Channel 

width is crucial. Last year we were down to 100 feet from 750. We 

had to have one-way traffic. 

Now, I must say something. The Corps of Engineers does a great 

job when they have equipment and money, Chairman. I just wanted to make sure I said that for the record. 

The cost for the Mississippi River for the last 5 years, we have been underfunded by approximately $50 million a year. Fifty million a year. You know what I have to look for, and it is a shame 

in our great Country? I have to look for a catastrophe to put a supplemental on there to get funding. That is not the way it should 

be. That is not the way it should be. 

Safety. Safety is a huge, huge factor. Chairman, you had an incident out there in California a few years ago. You know what happens when oil is dropped in the water: everybody is concerned; especially a pilot, especially the owners. We can’t have that. It happens sometimes with human error. It happens sometimes with mechanical. But it is not acceptable to have it happen when we have 

money coming in to keep our channels and ports open to project dimensions. 

The Administration said they would like to double exports. How 

can we double exports when I can’t load what we have today? It 

is impossible. I am just a pilot. 

Solutions? We need the legislation that the Chairman and Ranking Member and this Committee are talking about. We need the 

point of order to be used. I know why the point of order, nobody 

wants it, because then you can challenge it and stop it. We need 

to have it like they have it in the Aviation Fund, so we can have 

this money directed for what it needs to be used for. This is a problem that can be fixed with no new taxes. The money is being collected. 

Solution? Yes, ma’am, I am finished. Solutions? We need 100 percent. 

I thank you once again, Chairman Boxer, for this invitation, 

Ranking Member and distinguished members, and I would be 

happy to answer any questions. 

57 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lorino follows:] 

58 


93390.031
59 


93390.032
60 


93390.033
61 


93390.034
62 


93390.035
63 


93390.036
64 


93390.037
65 


93390.038
66 


93390.039
67 


93390.040
68 


93390.041
69 

Senator BOXER. Well, Mr. Lorino, let me thank you for that excellent testimony, beautiful testimony. You make the point. If our 

roads, well, you didn’t say roads, I am saying if our roads and our 

waterways are clogged, we can’t double exports. We can barely 

keep up with what we have got. Your State and my State particularly understand this, other States as well. 

I am going to call on Senator Vitter just to bid his farewell, because he is going off to give a—I mean to question Senator—— 

[Laughter.] 

Senator VITTER. Well, I want to particularly thank Mike for his 

very concrete, persuasive testimony. I just want to underscore two 

things about what he said and then make a final comment about 

what we are working on. 

First of all, I want to underscore, because maybe not everybody 

heard it, lower Mississippi River, biggest waterway in the Country, 

one of the biggest in the world, reduced in some cases to one-way 

traffic. That is like having the biggest interState in the Country 

and people around there get up 1 day and there is an announcement, oh, I–10 is one-way today for the foreseeable future. If you 

want to go east, you better go from midnight to noon; if you want 

to go west, plan on noon to midnight. Crazy. Crazy. 

Second, funding for the lower Mississippi, this is the last 5 years 

Mike talked about, average funding in the normal process, under 

$60 million. The average total funding after the supplementals we 

need to manufacturer, over $130 million. That is not the full need 

because that even involves restricted width and depth. 

My final statement is we are hard at work and making a lot of 

progress on a fully bipartisan WRDA. We are going to come out 

with that relatively soon and it absolutely is going to address this 

crucial challenge. I thank all of you and all the Committee members, particularly the Chair, for that work. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Senator Vitter. 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam Chairman? 

Senator BOXER. Let me just tell you what I plan to do, and then 

I will call on you. I was going to have our last witness, because we 

interrupted our witnesses, our last witness, then I was going to go 

to Senator Cardin, Senator Whitehouse for your opening statement 

and questions. Did you have a particular response? 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I had hoped to respond before the Ranking 

Member left, but he has now left. 

Senator BOXER. Oh. 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. So I will make my point during my opening 

statement time. 

Senator BOXER. That would be wonderful. I am sorry. I know he 

is rushing off to question. 

So we will move on to Mr. Cairns is a professional engineer with 

over 25 years of engineering and management experience, with the 

last 20 working exclusively in the port and maritime engineering 

field. Mr. Cairns presently serves as the Northeast Regional Manager for the ports and marine groups within AECOM. He is the 

past chairman of the American Society of Civil Engineers Committee on Port and Harbor Engineering. He is presently a member 

of the Board of Coasts, Oceans, Ports and Rivers Institute of the 

70 

ASCE. So he understands these issues from a very broad perspective. 

We look forward to your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF ANDREW H. CAIRNS, PE, PMP, BOARD MEMBER, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS’ COASTS, 

OCEANS, PORTS AND RIVERS INSTITUTE; PORTS & MARINE—NORTHEAST LEAD, AECOM 

Mr. CAIRNS. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Senator Vitter 

and members of the Committee, it is an honor for me to appear on 

behalf of the American Society of Civil Engineers to discuss the importance of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and to our Nation’s overall economic health. 

The United States has approximately 300 commercial ports, 

12,000 miles of inland and intercoastal waterways, and 240 lock 

chambers which carry more than 70 percent of the U.S. imports. 

However, in order for this system to remain competitive, U.S. marine ports and inland waterways will require investment in the 

coming decades beyond the $14 billion currently expected to be 

spent. 

According to the ASCE’s Failure to Act Economic Study, aging 

infrastructure for marine ports and inland waterways threatens 

more than 1 million U.S. jobs. Additionally, between now and 2020, 

investment needs in the marine ports and inland waterways sector 

will total $30 billion nationwide. 

With planned expenditures only expected to be about $14 billion, a total Federal investment gap of nearly $16 billion remains. 

Meanwhile, the costs attributed to delays in the Nation’s inland waterways system were $33 billion in 2010, the cost is expected to 

increase to nearly $49 billion by 2020. 

Unfortunately, even with the ever-growing price tag, these costs 

do not address the landside connections or ‘‘inside-the-fence’’ infrastructure that is the responsibility of the port authorities. Therefore, the Nation will either need to pay for much needed investments in our ports and harbors now, or will pay more severely in 

lost labor, exports, and GDP down the road. 

Historically, the Nation’s marine ports and inland waterways 

have been the critical link that make international commerce possible. However, with the scheduled expansion of the Panama Canal 

by 2015, the average size of container ships will increase significantly, while many U.S. ports still require significant harbor and 

channel dredging to handle these larger ships. 

If the Nation makes an additional investment of $15.8 billion between now and 2020, the United States can eliminate this drag on 

our economic growth. However, if the Country does not make the 

needed investments, transporting goods will become costlier, prices 

will rise, and the United States will become less competitive in the 

global market. 

Therefore, the key solution to ensuring that the Nation’s ports 

remain competitive is restoring trust back into the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund. 

In 1986 Congress enacted the Harbor Maintenance Tax to recover operation and maintenance costs at U.S. coastal and Great 

Lakes harbors. The tax is based on the value of goods that are 

71 

being shipped and then placed into a trust fund that is used for 

maintenance dredging of Federal navigational channels. However, 

dredging the Nation’s ports and harbors has suffered from years of 

under-investment. 

The Corps of Engineers estimates, as we have heard many times 

today, that the dimensions of the Nation’s 59 busiest ports are 

available less than 35 percent of the time. This creates an environment where vessels must carry less cargo or adapt to increasing 

delays. In Fiscal Year 2013, the Obama administration requested $839 

million to be appropriated from the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund. This amount equals only 50 percent of the total estimated 

revenues in the Trust Fund, and nowhere near the estimated 

needs, which, according to the Army Corps of Engineers, is between 

$1.3 billion and $1.6 billion annually. 

This troubling trend toward reduced investments has led to evergreater balances in the Trust Fund, with the unexpended balance 

growing to more than $6 billion by September 2013, according to 

the Office of Management and Budget. Therefore, the Committee 

should include a provision in the Water Resources Development 

Act requiring the total of all appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund be equal to all revenues received by the Trust 

Fund that same year. 

While ASCE understands that this is a complex issue, the longterm viability of our Nation’s ports requires action to be taken to 

ensure revenues in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund are expended for their intended purpose. 

ASCE supported language that would do just that in the WRDA 

draft that this Committee discussed last fall. ASCE has also supported bipartisan legislation from the last Congress that would tie 

Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund expenditures to revenues. 

In the 112th Congress, Senator Levin’s Harbor Maintenance Act 

received 37 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle. While the companion legislation in the House, the Realize America’s Maritime 

Promise, or RAMP, Act, received 196 cosponsors. 

Congressman Boustany reintroduced the RAMP Act last week, 

and the bill has already seen 48 Members of Congress sign on. 

In conclusion, ASCE applauds the Environment and Public 

Works Committee for working to fix the funding for shortfalls out 

of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and looks forward to working with the Committee on a WRDA bill this year. ASCE also looks 

forward to sharing with this Committee the inland waterways and 

ports grades in our 2013 Report Card, scheduled to be released on 

March 19. 

Thank you, Senator Boxer. This concludes my testimony, and I 

would be pleased to answer any of your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cairns follows:] 

72 


93390.042
73 


93390.043
74 


93390.044
75 


93390.045
76 


93390.046
77 


93390.047
78 


93390.048
79 

Senator BOXER. Well, thank you all very much. 

So here is the way we are going to go. We are going to give 10 

minutes each to Senators Cardin and Whitehouse and Boozman. So 

go ahead. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND 

Senator CARDIN. Thank you, Senator Boxer. I don’t intend to use 

the 10 minutes, but first let me apologize for not being here for this 

entire hearing, because this is a critically important subject matter 

and hearing. But, as you know, the conflicts are I had to chair a 

Senator Foreign Relations briefing. The urgency here is clear. 

Mr. Lorino, put me down with your enthusiasm as to the urgency 

of this matter, I am totally with you. I am going to ask my full 

statement be put in the record. 

Senator BOXER. No objection. 

Senator CARDIN. Madam Chair, I will have questions for the 

record for Ms. Darcy as it relates to specific projects in Maryland. 

The economic impact of the work that we are doing here is clear: 

this is jobs, jobs. It is making America competitive. The 

globalization of commerce. We have to be competitive. We have set 

up a mechanism in which to be competitive and we are not using 

that mechanism; the funds are sitting there. 

I applaud the Chairman, I applaud the Ranking Member. We 

work together; this is not a partisan issue. Working together on an 

extremely important bill, the Water Reauthorization Act. We have 

to get it done. We have to get this to where it needs to be done. 

As we have already stated, the top ports in our Country handle 

90 percent of the commerce and they are only dredged to their authorized depth and width 35 percent of the time. The impact here 

is incredible. 

I can talk about the Port of Baltimore. Since 2005, the costs in 

the Port of Baltimore has gone up 55 percent to maintain our port 

to the competitive depth and width. The funding during that period 

of time has been flat. Well, you can just do the simple arithmetic 

here, Madam Chairman. We are not going to be as competitive as 

we need to be. 

The equity issue here. From 2004 to 2010, the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund generated revenue through the Port of Baltimore 

at $227 million. We received $157 million. Where is the fairness 

here? The moneys are there. The Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund 

was created to produce the revenues needed to do the work, and 

now we are not using those revenues. We have to do a better job. 

What is the impact? Well, vessels are loaded at a lower level; less 

efficiency, less competitiveness, and we lose jobs in the United 

States as a result of not doing what the law intended to be done. 

So there is a sense of urgency here. 

The Port of Baltimore is ranked ninth among U.S. commercial 

ports in terms of total value of goods moved through the port. In 

July 2012, the Port of Baltimore handled a record 853,000 tons of 

general cargo. This cargo would not have reached the port if it 

were not for the projects financed through the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund. 

80 

In preparation for the opening of the expanded Panama Canal, 

the Army Corps, the Maryland Port Administration, and the regional freight logistics companies have been working fast to make 

the Port of Baltimore the East Coast premier international shipping destination. Between the newly operational super postPanamax cranes at Seagirt, the planned intermodal transfer facilities in Baltimore City, and the deepening of the Federal channel, 

the Port of Baltimore is open for business. 

But let me make it clear. We need the projects to maintain the 

dredging capacities for this to work. My predecessor, Senator Sarbanes, originally got authorization for Poplar Island. I mention it 

frequently here. It is a dredge site. It also is an environmental 

treasure, Madam Chair. We did both. We have a dredge site plus 

a restoration of our barrier islands that were disappearing in the 

Chesapeake Bay. 

Well, we need to make sure that the Poplar Island expansion is 

adequately authorized, and I am working for the Corps, and I will 

have a question for Ms. Darcy, that we have to make sure that that 

is, and I thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member, for working 

with us on the WRDA bill to make sure that that is handled. That 

is an important site for dredge material and environmental restoration. 

We have a Hart Miller Island issue that we are working between 

the State and the Army Corps. We have Pearce Creek, which is another site for dredge material that we have to work through. On 

the environmental front we have the Conowingo Dam. I mention 

that because there is incredible environmental risk to sediment 

being contained by the Conowingo Dam. We have had a couple 

studies. We have to get a game plan to deal with that. 

So, Madam Chair, I just want to underscore the importance of 

the work that you are doing, that the Ranking Member is doing. 

There is an urgency here. It is very much competition and it is very 

much the investments that we make paying off for our Country. As 

I said, I applaud the witnesses that are before us for being here, 

for your working with us, for your somewhat understanding of the 

political process that we have to go through here. But this should 

be one in which we reach out together and do what is right for our 

Country. 

I will have some questions for the record for Ms. Darcy, and I 

thank again the Chairman for her courtesy. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Cardin follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

Madame Chairman, I appreciate you holding this hearing today to discuss the importance of America’s ports and the work the Corps does to maintain the economic 

viability of our ports. I also want to congratulate Senator Vitter on becoming our 

new Ranking Member. I appreciate and share his interest in reauthorizing the 

Water Resources Development Act and I am grateful that the two of you are not 

wasting any time in getting back to work on the 2013 WRDA bill. 

I am hopeful that our committee will build on the bi-partisan success we had in 

passing MAP–21 in the last Congress. 

The high quality jobs associated with maintaining and building our infrastructure 

makes reauthorizing WRDA all the more important. The Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund, and the Army Corps projects it supports, keep our shipping channels open 

and maintain America’s leadership in today’s global economy. 

81 

The 2007 WRDA received overwhelming bi-partisan support from this committee. 

The projects that bill supported provided critical employment opportunities at a 

time when were beginning to face uncertain economic times. Now, we’ve come back 

from the brink of economic catastrophe and reauthorizing WRDA this year will help 

keep our economy on the right course. 

IMPACTS OF WRDA TO NATIONAL ECONOMY

WRDA projects are critically important for to the U.S. economy. For example, according to the Research and Innovative Technology Administration, today 1 in every 

11 shipping containers engaged in global trade is either bound for or originates from 

a U.S. port. 

However, the Corps of Engineers estimates that our top-priority harbors, those 

that handle about 90 percent of the commercial traffic, are only dredged to their 

authorized depths and widths about 35 percent of the time. 

Costs have risen more than 55 percent for the Baltimore District and 40 percent 

for the Philadelphia District since 2005, while funding levels have remained essentially flat. As a result the Baltimore District is performing about 20 percent less 

dredging each year, the Philadelphia District about 50 percent less. 

In the Philadelphia District, some dredging funding is also diverted to address 

other needs, such as bridge maintenance. 

The Port of Baltimore has been affected by underfunding for maintenance dredging. Over the period 2004–2010, Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund taxes generated 

by imported cargo at the Port of Baltimore totaled approximately $227.7 million. Yet 

during this period, only $154.7 million of dredging was completed in the channels 

leading to the Port. 

Each year approximately 4–5 million cubic yards of material must be removed 

from the Port of Baltimore’s channels to maintain the authorized depth and width. 

Given the highly competitive nature of maritime commerce, it is important that Port 

of Baltimore channels be maintained at their authorized depth and width on a yearround basis and that adequate dredged material placement capacity is available in 

order to retain and enhance the advantages of the Port of Baltimore. 

This results in ships having to light-load, which increases the cost of shipping 

and, in turn, increase the cost of goods at the cash register. These days many Americans are watching very carefully what they spend at the store and any change in 

the cost of goods has a direct impact on their consumer decisions. 

Moreover, well maintained harbors decrease costs for American companies who 

are shipping goods abroad, thereby giving American producers an advantage in the 

global marketplace. It is therefore imperative that we ensure that the resources are 

in place to maintain the shipping infrastructure that our nation relies on. 

BENEFITS OF WRDA TO MARYLAND’S ECONOMY

Every year the Army of Corps Engineers, in partnership with the Maryland Port 

Authority, works to maintain Maryland’s vital navigation channels by clearing tons 

of eroded sediment from the Federal navigation channels leading in and out of the 

Port of Baltimore. Keeping our port open and the channels dredged is essential not 

just for Maryland, but for the Nation. 

The Port of Baltimore is ranked ninth among all U.S. commercial ports, in terms 

of total value of goods moved through the port. In July 2012, the Port of Baltimore 

handled a record 853,818 tons of general cargo. This cargo would not have reached 

the port if not for Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund projects. 

In preparation for the opening of the expanded Panama Canal, The Army Corps, 

the Maryland Port Authority and our regional freight logistics companies have been 

working fast to make the Port of Baltimore the East Coast’s premiere international 

shipping destination. Between the newly operational Super-Post Panamax Cranes at 

Seagirt, the planned Intermodal transfer Facility in Baltimore City and the deepened Federal channel: The Port of Baltimore is open for business. 

All of the cargo that comes through the Port would not be possible without the 

dredging projects that are supported by revenues paid into the Harbor Maintenance 

Trust Fund. 

The extensive work that is done to maintain Maryland’s shipping channels generates a great deal of dredge material that needs to be disposed of in a safe and 

responsible manner. The Corps and the State have worked successfully over the 

years to redevelop the barrier islands that have historically been present in the 

Chesapeake Bay using dredge material from the Harbor. As the constructed islands 

reach their designed capacity the State and the Corps need work to close these facilities and move on to the next disposal site. 

82 

I was recently informed that the Baltimore Corps District is working to revise its 

Dredge Material Management Plan (DMMP) to reflect the closure of Hart-Miller Island (HMI). The new Cox Creek facility will replace HMI as the disposal site for 

dredge material in the DMMP for Baltimore dredging projects. I am pleased that 

the discussions I facilitated between the Baltimore Corps District and the State are 

resulting in revisions to the DMMP in that reflect a mutually agreeable fee structure and location for where dredge material will be disposed of in the future. I will 

continue to follow the development of this process and will be in contact with the 

Assistant Secretary as the revised DMMP makes its way to her for approval. 

I’d be remiss if I didn’t also take this opportunity to mention the important work 

the Corps is doing in Maryland, and throughout the Bay region, to provide critical 

environmental restoration of natural resources. The Corps’ shoreline protection, 

sediment management, and oyster and habitat restoration programs are integral to 

Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts. And since oysters represent more than just a 

source of income for Maryland’s watermen—they are natural biological filters continually cleaning up the Bay ? WRDA’s habitat restoration is leading to long-term 

solutions for water quality in the Bay. 

It has been more than 5 years since Congress passed the last WRDA legislation. 

It is essential to our Nation’s infrastructure, economy, and environment that we 

work together to craft a strong, effective bill. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the latest reauthorization of WRDA. Thank You. 

Senator BOXER. Well, we thank you for your passion, because 

this is really serious business, and we are lucky to have the Committee that we have. 

Senator Whitehouse. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you 

for holding this very important hearing. I just want to say that I 

come at this issue with a particular history and a particular context, and particularly when I hear Mr. Lorino and his wonderful 

voice and the message that he brings from the Mississippi and the 

Gulf Coast about the urgency of their problems, and that is that 

not too long ago in Congress we passed a piece of legislation that 

conferred an enormous multibillion dollar benefit along the Gulf 

Coast, and we did so as the result of an agreement that was 

reached that the bulk of the benefit was going to flow to the Gulf 

Coast, but that there would be a small portion that would accrue 

to the benefit of all coastal and Great Lakes States. 

After the agreement that allowed that to go forward was reached, 

the part that went to the benefit of all coastal and Great Lakes 

States was stripped out. An agreement was made and an agreement was broken. I am inclined to, and I want to, support enhanced traffic on the Mississippi River. I want to support the protection and growth of the port in Louisiana and, frankly, in Los Angeles and Alaska, and everywhere else. But the past bargain has 

to be honored for me to be very enthusiastic about going forward 

with further benefit that goes to the Gulf and to the Mississippi, 

and I just want to make that point. 

Senator BOXER. I understand how you feel. I certainly shared 

that disappointment. All I can say is we need to move forward on 

a WRDA bill, and I would like to work with you because you have 

a couple small ports there. Maybe there is a way to help you 

through this WRDA bill. 

Bettina, I would like to work with Senator Whitehouse and the 

ways that we can work with his State, because there is no question 

we need this WRDA bill for the good of the Country. 

83 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. But it is also, if I might say, Madam 

Chairman, it is a matter of the good of the Senate. If agreements 

are that easily broken after they are made, then the sinews of the 

Senate begin to come apart, and I think it is fair for Senators who 

have been on the receiving end of a broken agreement to insist on 

the honoring of an agreement that I believe, thought, everybody 

had entered into in good faith. 

Senator BOXER. Right. There is a lot of reasons for this; some of 

them come from the House, et cetera. But the point is, in my view, 

if you listen to John Kerry yesterday, which you did, he made an 

unbelievable speech, and I hope all colleagues would read it. We 

have to treat each other better. Yours is an example of not treating 

each other the way we should. However, there is always tomorrow 

and a chance to recoup and come together and move forward, and 

I pledge to you that I will try to do that in the WRDA bill. 

We are going to have a WRDA bill, and let’s make sure that everybody is enthusiastic about it, including the small States and the 

States with inner harbors and the rest. We need this for the good 

of our Country, and we are going to always have these problems 

if we don’t come together and keep our bargains. 

So as somebody who always has kept her bargains, as far as I 

can remember, I would love to work with you on this WRDA bill 

in a way that gives you some redress. It is not going to make up 

all the ground, but I hope you would work with me on that. Would 

you do that? 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. We will, of course, work with you. 

Senator BOXER. Good. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. I appreciate the support that you were 

able to give to our efforts in the previous effort that has turned into 

a broken agreement. 

Senator BOXER. Well, we are going to make another effort. There 

may be a way we can do something for the smaller ports here that 

really gives them an opportunity, because when you listen to Senator Whitehouse talk about his State, his State is in jeopardy right 

now, we know that, because of what is happening with the rising 

sea levels. He just needs to have some attention paid. In the last 

WRDA bill he was knew, I remember it. We really didn’t do what 

we should do. 

By the way, just saying to colleagues who are here, we had a 

really hard time drafting this bill because there are no more earmarks, and we have to take care of our States. So the way we did 

it here is to make sure that any project that had a complete Corps 

report which was sent down from the Corps would get funded without naming any projects or getting into all that. This could be very 

well the last WRDA bill that we can figure out how to do without 

naming projects; after this one it is going to get increasingly more 

difficult. 

But I think we figured out a way to walk the walk on here without the earmarks and get it done right, and I look forward to working with you, Senator Whitehouse, to make sure that this bill reflects the priorities of your State. That is all I can say. I can’t undo 

what was done, but I can move forward and make sure that we try 

to look at your priorities and answer them in this bill. 

Senator. 

84 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think we all 

agree, the panel, the Committee, the audience, whatever, that we 

need to, I would like to say, protect the integrity of the Trust Fund, 

but we need to establish some integrity, almost, before we protect 

it and go forward, much like the Highway Trust Fund and the 

Aviation Trust Fund and things like that. So that is pretty easy. 

It is difficult to get done, but we can at least reach agreement. 

The more difficult thing is, and we really have a varied panel 

with our ports and our engineer, is, once you have the trust fund, 

how do you divvy it up, realizing that it is a system-wide whatever? 

Los Angeles is remarkable in the sense that you have all this highvalue stuff coming in there. You are creating about, I think, over 

13 percent of the revenue that comes in, and because of the nature 

of your port you need more than what you are getting, but you are 

not getting very much of that 13 percent out. Some of our other 

ports, again, through no fault of their own, are in situations where 

there is a lot more silting; there is just a lot more need for dredging 

and things, and that is the difference in the East Coast and the 

South. It is just the way it is. 

So I guess what I would like to know from you all, that is not, 

and then the other thing that we have is the protection of, as Senator Crapo mentioned, again, my ports that lead into the Mississippi River that ultimately come out and create some of this 

traffic, how do you do all that? I guess what I would like to know 

from you all is what are your thoughts on that, how we can address 

the problem of, once we get the Trust Fund dollars that we like, 

or even dealing with what we have, what are your thoughts on 

equalizing the funding mechanism? We will start with California, 

the port that is funding a large part of it. 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Thank you for your question, Senator. I believe that the biggest hurdle is getting the full use for intended 

purposes. That is the biggest hurdle that we can see. As Captain 

Lorino mentioned, and Mr. Lyons, the Corps of Engineers, from our 

perspective, does a pretty good job once they are funded, once they 

get the money they need for things. They have a system for racking 

and stacking and prioritizing. In our State they do a pretty good 

job; they just don’t have enough money to cover the priorities that 

have already been established. So, from my perspective, if the HMT 

could be spent fully for its intended purpose, the major part of the 

problem would be dealt with. 

Senator BOOZMAN. OK. 

Mr. LORINO. Senator, thank you for the question. As I mentioned 

when I started my testimony, this is not a Louisiana issue, this is 

a Nation issue. I just wanted to make sure that was there. But how 

do you do it? It is going to be tough, but you hit the nail on the 

head. Every port is not the same; every port is unique to itself. The 

Mississippi River, the area where we pilot, where my association 

pilots, shows up every year. I can look at you right now and say 

we will spend $83 million next year, at least. The only question is 

is it going to be more than that. 

So do you look at it on what the value that your port is bringing 

in or exporting? Do you tie it into jobs? Do you tie it into the 

amount that you have to spend over a 10-or 12-year period? I don’t 

have those answers right off the top of my head, but I do know one 

85 

thing, and I have been told this by the Corps: that if we can receive 

the full authorization from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, it 

should take care of all of our ports, no matter where they are, for 

their projects. That is the way it should be, because every port is 

importing cargo that is paying that money. I really believe the answer to it would be get all the money and then figure it out on an 

economic basis or a condition basis, one of those two. 

So that is the best I can say on that, sir. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Mr. Lyons real quick, and then Mr. Cairns. 

Mr. LYONS. Senator, one thing I have learned about being around 

ports for about 40 years is that they have one thing in common, 

and that is that they are all different. They are different in the 

types of cargos that they handle; some high-value, some low-value. 

Some ports handle a lot of electronics; some ports handle a lot of 

low-value manufacturing raw materials. Some ports need a great 

deal of dredging; some ports need none. 

The Harbor Maintenance Tax, in my view, is a tax that is paid 

by the consumers of these goods that are imported into our Country, whether they are a person who buys a TV in Arkansas or Alabama, or a company that is buying wood fiber from Brazil and 

using it to manufacture something else. They are who are paying 

this tax. So that tax is paid by all the taxpayers. The tax, like all 

of our taxes, should be allocated to where they are needed. I think 

our biggest concern really needs to be that we, first of all, direct 

all of the money to take care of all of the dredging needs that we 

have throughout this Country. I agree with you that the inland waterways, which is a separate issue from the Harbor Maintenance 

Tax, is a big, big issue. We have it in Alabama, as you do in Arkansas. 

So I think the big issue is to, first and foremost, get the tax allocated out to take care of all of the dredging needs, whether in Louisiana or whatever State or whatever port. Second, if there is something left over, then we can talk about that. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Very quickly, Mr. Cairns. 

Mr. CAIRNS. Sure, Senator Boozman. 

ASCE agrees with you that it is really trying to get the intended 

funds used for what their purpose is, so if the harbor maintenance 

funds are there, they should be used and spread about to the 

projects that have those needs. As far as the equity, really, ASCE 

doesn’t have a position on which ports and how that should be. 

Senator BOOZMAN. You are a wise man. 

Thank you very much. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator. 

So I have just a few questions. 

Mr. Christensen, you laid out four recommendations in your testimony: first, full use of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund; second, equity for ports that contribute the most; third, allowing the 

Highway Maintenance Trust Fund to fully maintenance up to 50 

feet; and, fourth, prioritization of traditional maintenance dredging. 

I am asking you, because these are so important to California, 

that moves 40 percent of the cargo through, the imports, could you 

elaborate on why these recommendations would be beneficial for 

ports around the Country? 

86 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Yes, Senator. Before I start, Senator, let me 

reiterate my thanks to you and the Ranking Member and the Committee for doing this. This is such a great thing to be talking about. 

As I mentioned, full utilization gets us mostly where we need to 

be, and I think, as we have heard from some of the other members 

of the panel, that is the big issue; get it spent for its intended purpose. So that is our No. 1 ask. 

The No. 2, about prioritization of funds for their traditional purposes, we agree that that needs to be in the water. This needs to 

be spent on things that have a direct—— 

Senator BOXER. You think that is important for all the ports, not 

just our port? That is the point I am making. 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. Absolutely. This is, I think, as Captain Lorino 

had mentioned, it is a nationwide issue, it is a nationwide problem. 

It is a California-wide problem. In California, our ports operate as 

a system, and while you have three larger container ports, you also 

have quite a number of other ports that are working to support 

their niche functions. The ports, by their very nature, are entrepreneurial; they operate as a business. 

The free market system has, in essence, brought these ports in 

California to their own specialty; they each do something very well. 

We feel we do containers very well. There are other ports that do 

bulk shipments very well. They all have to be maintained to keep 

this system operating. If they don’t, if one of the wheels comes off 

on one of those other ones, it affects everyone, because those other 

uses get piled on. 

Senator BOXER. We call our ports a river highway. 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. We do. 

Senator BOXER. Which I think was Ray LaHood’s idea, looking 

at all the ports together as a highway. 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. That is right. In fact, we have a demonstration project in California, as you are well aware, Senator, in the 

Port of Stockton. 

Senator BOXER. Yes. 

Mr. CHRISTENSEN. But even the Port of Stockton is suffering because of lack of maintenance funding. They have shoaling that 

means that iron ore ships loaded in Stockton cannot leave full, they 

have to leave light-loaded; they go to Oakland and then they get 

topped off. That is extremely inefficient. 

Senator BOXER. Well, let me thank you for your very clear testimony on those four things, because I do think they apply across the 

board here. As we look at extreme weather we see more problems 

with dredging, too, because there is more silt coming down and 

more problems. So this is absolutely essential. 

Mr. Lorino, my final questions are for you, and then I will turn 

it over to Senator Whitehouse, should he have some followup questions. 

I just thought your testimony was so good because I know what 

you have gone through in Katrina; I was there and I understand 

the unique challenges in some way because the beauty of that 

State is all around, and in the middle of all that you have all this 

heavy industry and all this port activity. The balance of that is so 

important is so important. If there is a problem, everything is hurt. 

87 

So I wanted to ask you about beneficial uses of dredge material. 

In your testimony you raised the possibility that increased spending from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund could create additional opportunities for beneficial use of dredge materials, such as 

wetlands restoration, and it was mentioned by Senator Cardin. 

Could you elaborate on some of the beneficial uses of dredge material that might be realized if we increased investment in dredging 

navigation channels? 

Mr. LORINO. Chairman Boxer, yes, ma’am. First of all, I did meet 

you down there during that time, and I just wanted to say thank 

you very much. It was very nice for you to come down and do that, 

along with other Members of Congress. 

But beneficial use in the State of Louisiana is a very tough issue, 

and it is only tough because of one thing: money. As I discussed 

a few minutes ago, we have $83 million to spend, and that is picking up sediment that comes down every year. The State would love 

us to use that for beneficial use. We would love to use that for beneficial use. But we are barely keeping our channel open. To use it 

for beneficial use, we have to transport it further. That would take 

time. There is not enough dredges to do that at the present time. 

So we have this conflict that is going back and forth. 

What I would like to see, if we could, and we are looking at a 

50-foot channel also on the Mississippi River. Someone mentioned 

on the East Coast about the port study to get the 50 feet. They left 

out the bulk port, and that is very important. The Mississippi 

River is a bulk port. But if we could dredge, we could use a 

cutterhead dredge and build the coast down in Plaquemines Parish 

that was devastated by Katrina. 

But we need the money and it has to be a combination between 

our State and the Federal Government; it can’t just be the Federal 

Government, it has to be the State also. We work on that a lot, but 

it is a very difficult issue to tackle when we can barely keep our 

head above water to keep the channel open the way we are doing 

it now, if I am making any sense. 

Senator BOXER. You do. You do. I mean, it all comes down to the 

resources. It just seems so unfair to me when people pay into a 

fund and then the fund is not used for that purpose. I just feel it 

is, in a way, defrauding people. It is not right, and that is why we 

are going to hope to move in a very bipartisan way to change that. 

I would ask Senator Whitehouse if he has some closing questions. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. I have time for questions, but I have no 

time for answers, so what I would like to do is to ask the questions 

for the record and ask you to get back to me, if I could, and it is 

for the port operators who are here. 

Senator BOXER. Well, why don’t you ask your questions. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Two questions. The first is, in your particular port, what are you seeing, looking forward, that would affect 

you as the result of bigger storms, rising seas, and other effects of 

climate change, and how are you responding to those threats? That 

is question one. 

Question two is the American Port Operators Association is a 

strong and staunch supporter of a process that goes by the rather 

88 

unhelpful name of Marine Spatial Planning. Are you engaged in 

that in your areas? Is it beneficial, and how? 

AMr. Lorino, you may very well have views on that. You are invited to join, if you would like to. Any witness who cares to add 

something to that is welcome to add. 

But I have a noon meeting that I have to be on time for and I 

apologize. But I want to again thank the Chairman for this hearing 

and for bringing us together around this very important issue. 

Senator BOXER. I thank you, Senator, so much. We really do look 

forward to working together, and I hope on a pretty fast track. 

There is a lot that the Senate is going to be doing, and we want 

to sort of maybe get it started in a very positive direction. 

All of you have been so articulate, every one of you, and I 

couldn’t imagine a better panel for what we are trying to accomplish here. 

We stand adjourned. We thank you and we look forward to working with you. We are asking you to help us get this WRDA bill. We 

will call you when we feel we are running into some waves. Thank 

you very much. 

[Whereupon, at 11:57 a.m. the committee was adjourned.] 

[Additional statements submitted for the record follow.] 

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Madam Chairman, 

The Water Resources Development Act is about strengthening our water infrastructure, and nowhere have we seen a clearer reminder of the need to improve our 

water infrastructure than in my State of New Jersey. 

Since Superstorm Sandy hit our shores, we have seen the catastrophic damage 

that can be caused when infrastructure is unprepared for the force of an extreme 

weather event. 

The storm sounded the alarm that the Federal Government must invest in infrastructure to recover from the storm and build it stronger so we are prepared for the 

next storm. 

That’s why the Sandy supplemental appropriations law I helped write contains 

funding to rebuild and expand Army Corps beach projects and other infrastructure 

projects critical to protecting communities. 

But let’s be clear: our changing climate means severe storms will become more 

and more common, and that means a new WRDA bill must make it permanent policy to build these infrastructure projects stronger than before. 

During Sandy, we also saw the limits of our outdated water infrastructure when 

two (2) water treatment facilities were damaged, with one (1) plant leaking millions 

of gallons of sewage into Newark Bay as a result. 

So we must include smart financing programs in the WRDA bill, to ensure our 

clean water infrastructure is modern and effective. 

Sandy also damaged the Port of New York and New Jersey, which is the largest 

port on the East Coast and serves more than one-third (1/3) of the country. More 

than two-hundred seventy thousand (270,000) jobs depend on this port. 

But the majority of the port’s terminals were shut down for more than a week 

because of power outages, structural damage, and hazards in the water that could 

impair ships. 

We learned from Superstorm Sandy that the effects of extreme weather events on 

our ports can be devastating to the economy. 

Madam Chairman, the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund is critical to maintaining 

and repairing our ports. We need to ensure the strength of this fund, but we must 

do so in a responsible way that does not compromise the Army Corps’ flood control 

projects. 

I look forward to working with Chairman Boxer and our new Ranking Member, 

Senator Vitter, on a new WRDA bill that can take the important next steps to modernize our infrastructure, strengthen our ports, and protect our communities. 

89 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI

I want to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member for holding this hearing on 

a matter that is vital to America’s economic prosperity and important to my State 

of Mississippi. 

Our ports are gateways to global commerce, fuel economic development, and support millions of American jobs. Failing to make the proper investments at this critical time would have a serious impact on jobs and economic growth. The expansion 

of the Panama Canal has generated new interest in U.S. ports along the Gulf Coast 

and Eastern Seaboard. 

By 2015, the Canal will have the capacity to accommodate significantly larger 

cargo ships. As global trade increases, we must be ready to take full advantage of 

growing import and export opportunities. According to a June report by the Army 

Corps of Engineers’ Institute for Water Resources, the expansion of the Panama 

Canal could provide significant opportunities for our Gulf and South Atlantic ports 

to become more competitive. Geographically, ports in these regions are positioned 

to be the most impacted by the expansion. U.S. ports need to be ready for postPanamax vessels, which will play a major role in facilitating greater global trade. 

These vessels are expected to make up an estimated 62 percent of all container ship 

capacity by 2030. The boost in maritime commerce means States like Mississippi 

will be able to capitalize on international trade opportunities that would benefit the 

entire country. 

Because shipping is less expensive than other types of transport, reliable port capabilities help keep our country’s trade market competitive. Yet, there are challenges. Despite opportunities for maritime commerce, our Nation’s ports face numerous hurdles. America’s 59 busiest ports are maintained at authorized widths and 

depths only 35 percent of the time. The Corps estimates a backlog of $2.2 billion 

in current harbor maintenance projects. 

Although the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund collects sufficient revenue each 

year—and has a surplus of nearly $7 billion—these funds are not utilized for their 

intended purpose. Mississippi’s State port at Gulfport has been dredged to its authorized depth of 36 feet only once since recovering from the destruction of Hurricane Katrina. Today, some areas of the channel are as shallow as 32 feet. This restricts Gulfport’s throughput capacity and its associated economic benefits. 

I would like to know Assistant Secretary Darcy’s views on this issue and what 

the Corps is doing to address dredging needs—particularly when lack of maintenance dredging makes a port less competitive in securing future maintenance dredging. For Mississippi’s State port, this has become a vicious cycle that must be addressed. I am also curious to know why the Corps’ funding needs for dredging and 

other activities are not accurately reflected in the Administration’s budget from year 

to year. 

Again, I thank the Committee for holding this important hearing. 

Æ