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

25–113 PDF 2017

S. HRG. 112–977 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT: GROWING THE ECONOMY AND PROTECTING PUBLIC 

SAFETY 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 20, 2012 

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

( 

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

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND 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 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

BETTINA POIRIER, Majority Staff Director 

RUTH VAN MARK, Minority Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

SEPTEMBER 20, 2012 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

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

Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland ................ 2 

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

statement .............................................................................................................. 24 

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

Vitter, Hon. David, U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana ............................ 85 

Merkley, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon ................................ 87 

Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 91 

Sessions, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama, prepared statement ...................................................................................................................... 93 

WITNESSES 

Herrmann, Andrew, P.E., President, American Society of Civil Engineers ....... 25 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 28 

Bridges, Jerry A., Chairman of the Board, American Association of Port 

Authorities, and Executive Director, Virginia Port Authority ......................... 35 

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

Calhoun, Rick, President, Cargo Carriers, Cargill, Incorporated ........................ 41 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 43 

Soth, Jeffrey, Assistant Director, Legislative and Political Department, International Union of Operating Engineers ............................................................. 51 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 53 

Kavinoky, Janet, Executive Director, Transportation and Infrastructure, and 

Vice President, Americans for Transportation Mobility Coalition, U.S. 

Chamber of Commerce ......................................................................................... 60 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 62 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL 

Letter to Senators Boxer and Inhofe from the American Iron and Steel Institute, September 20, 2012 ..................................................................................... 101 

(1) 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT: 

GROWING THE ECONOMY AND PROTECTING 

PUBLIC SAFETY 

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 2012 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room 406, 

Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer (Chairman of 

the Committee) presiding. 

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

and Boozman. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much to our witnesses. 

In today’s hearing we will look at how the Water Resources Development Act, known as WRDA, supports critical infrastructure 

nationwide and promotes economic growth and protects public safety. 

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

Corps of Engineers, provides many benefits to American families 

and businesses, including maintaining navigation routes for commerce and reducing the risks of flooding. 

Later this year I hope to move forward with a Water Resources 

Development Act, with a WRDA bill. I have already been working 

closely with Senator Inhofe and look forward to working with my 

colleagues on both sides of the aisle to advance this bill. 

As we will hear from our witnesses today, water resources legislation can boost the economy, create jobs, and help protect lives 

and property in communities across our great nation. 

U.S. ports and waterways, many of which are maintained by the 

Corps, moved 2.3 billion tons of goods in fiscal year 2011, and 

Corps flood risk management projects are estimated to have prevented $28 billion in damages, so when we look at this WRDA bill 

we are really looking at investments that save multiple dollars. 

The Water Resources Development Act and the projects, policies, 

and programs it authorizes are essential components of creating 

jobs and keeping our economy growing. 

In my home State of California, we are facing some of the nation’s most critical water resource challenges. Many communities 

rely on the projects and programs authorized by WRDA. Our ports 

are some of the busiest in the world. Continued maintenance of 

2 

port facilities is critical for the commerce and the jobs that rely on 

these economic hubs. 

California also faces significant flood risk. There are a number 

of critical flood protection projects across our State that are necessary to protect life and property. For example, the levees around 

the Natomas Basin in Sacramento require significant improvements to reduce flood risk for the tens of thousands of Californians 

they protect. According to the Corps, these levees also protect over 

$7 billion in property and critical Federal, State, and local infrastructure, and the project to rebuild the Natomas levees can move 

forward as soon as we pass water resources legislation. 

I would like to enter letters to the record from the Sacramento 

Area Flood Control Agency and Representative Doris Matsui supporting efforts to pass a WRDA bill and to authorize the Natomas 

levee improvements. Without objection, I will do that. 

[The referenced information was not received at time of print.] 

Senator BOXER. Like Natomas, there are many more lifesaving 

projects around the country that are ready to be built following the 

passage of the WRDA bill. That is why I believe we must move 

quickly. 

Working together with Senator Inhofe and other members of this 

Committee, I am hopeful we can repeat our recent success on 

MAP–21, and we know that that transportation bill was not easy, 

but we got it done. We got it done for the people; we got it done 

for the economy. We crossed party lines to get it done. There is no 

reason we can’t get a WRDA bill done. We have challenges, but we 

will figure out how to work those out. 

So I am very grateful to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle 

for their interest in this issue, even though there aren’t too many 

people here. They are working on how to resolve issues on the floor 

right now. But I know that this hearing is important, and if we can 

lay the groundwork I am hoping we can meet during the lame duck 

and get a bill to the floor. 

So at this point, since I don’t see any Republicans here, we will 

turn to Senator Cardin. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND 

Senator CARDIN. Madam Chair, first let me thank you for holding this hearing and underscore the importance of the WRDA reauthorization. There are not a lot of Members here because I think 

I have five of my committees that are meeting at the same time, 

so this is the day that we believe we might be recessing until after 

the election, so there are a lot of things going on. 

I am going to ask consent that my entire statement be made part 

of the record. 

Senator BOXER. Without objection. 

Senator CARDIN. And I want to compliment the Chair. They said 

we couldn’t get MAP–21 done. We got MAP–21 done, and that was 

the leadership of Senator Boxer and Senator Inhofe recognizing the 

importance of surface transportation reauthorization to our national economy, and we got the job done. It was this Committee 

that got the job done. When they said it couldn’t get past the 

House, we got it past the House because of the persistence of this 

3 

Committee, the transparency and process that was used by this 

Committee. 

Madam Chair, I know you are going to make the same commitment on WRDA, to do that in an open process. I know Senator 

Inhofe. I know that he is sincere in trying to get this reauthorization done, and I think it gives great promise to the people of this 

country. 

You are exactly right. It will be bipartisan because we understand this is economic growth and jobs for our country. It translates into jobs, and that is very, very clear. 

Keeping shipping channels open for commerce is critically important to our nation. One out of 11 containers that are transported 

internationally either originate or come to the United States ports, 

so keeping our channels in proper shape and maintenance is critically important. 

Let me just talk a moment about the Port of Baltimore. Last 

year 853,000 tons of general cargo, No. 1 in the nation on trucks, 

No. 1 in the nation on roll-on/roll-off cargo, No. 1 on gypsum, sugar, 

and iron ore. And I could give you a lot of other reasons why the 

Port of Baltimore is critically important to our national economy. 

But let me talk about what it means to the people of Maryland: 

14,630 direct jobs in the Port of Baltimore. That is why the water 

reauthorization bill is important; 108,000 jobs related, directly related to the Port’s activities; $3 billion to our economy; $304 million 

in State and local Federal revenues come in, tax revenues, as a result of the activities. And that is just the Port of Baltimore. Multiply that times the other ports around our nation. 

So this is a smart investment, but having the honor of the Chair 

of the Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife, let me also point out 

how important the WRDA bill is to restore and protect our coastal 

ecology. 

The work that is done here is critically important. I could tell 

you about the work on Ocean City on the beach renourishment. It 

has worked. It has worked. We have gone through major storms, 

and we have seen that as a result of the attention that was paid 

to our beaches we have protected the important investment on our 

shorelines from an economic perspective. 

Let me mention the Conowingo Dam as a challenge. The 

Conowingo Dam acts for reservoirs to protect a lot of pollutants 

from going into the Chesapeake Bay, Susquehanna River to the 

Bay. It is critically important that we do the maintenance work at 

the Conowingo Dam in order to prevent those pollutants from ending up in the Bay. We now know, as a result of major storms, that 

the current protections are inadequate. Another reason why we 

need a WRDA reauthorization bill. 

Let me talk about Poplar Island. I will talk about this frequently. 

I want to thank Senator Sarbanes, my predecessor. It was his original authorization that allowed us to say we cannot only have a site 

for dredge material, but we can make into an environmental asset. 

That is exactly what has happened to Poplar Island. Yes, we put 

dredge material, but it is an 1100-acre sanctuary for wildlife. The 

Maryland terrapin is alive and well. I am not necessarily referring 

to our football team at the University of Maryland, but I am referVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:57 Aug 16, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\25113.TXT SONYA
4 

ring to the terrapin, itself. We are finding the habitat for young 

terrapins so we can preserve that species for future generations. 

Madam Chairwoman, I want to ask consent that the statement 

from the National Wildlife Federation be made part of our record. 

They have worked very closely with us in protecting our coastal 

ways. I would ask consent that that be included in the record. 

Senator BOXER. Without objection. 

[The referenced information follows:] 

5 


25113.001
6 


25113.002
7 


25113.003
8 


25113.004
9 


25113.005
10 


25113.006
11 


25113.007
12 


25113.008
13 


25113.009
14 


25113.010
15 


25113.011
16 


25113.012
17 


25113.013
18 


25113.014
19 


25113.015
20 


25113.016
21 


25113.017
22 

Senator CARDIN. So I just really want to thank the Chair for 

holding this hearing. I think the reauthorization of WRDA—it has 

been 5 years, it is critically important we get this done. I think the 

timing is now to start the process. We understand the realities of 

the calendar, but I applaud you for this, and I look forward to 

being part of the process where we complete a reauthorization of 

WRDA. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Cardin follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

Madam Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today on another excellent 

jobs bill that our Committee will be taking up in the near future. It was my great 

pleasure as a member of this Committee to work in a cooperative, bipartisan manner to pass a comprehensive transportation bill earlier this year. The high quality 

jobs created by that bill are more important today than ever, and I am proud that 

this body was able to put partisan differences aside and work together for the good 

of the American people. It is the way that our legislative process is meant to work. 

I see the same bipartisan spirit and potential economic benefits from Water Resource Development projects. Just like improving our transportation infrastructure, 

• keeping shipping channels open, 

• protecting and restoring coastal ecology, and 

• repairing dams 

have considerable impacts on both local economies and the national economy. These 

are the kinds of projects we are here to discuss today. 

The projects we will be working to reauthorize under WRDA are exactly the kinds 

of investments that will help put Americans back to work, all while improving our 

public infrastructure and protecting our environment. 

BENEFITS OF WRDA TO MARYLAND’S ECONOMY

The last time WRDA passed in front of this Committee was 2007. It received overwhelming bi-partisan support and jump started critical infrastructure projects 

across the country. 

Every year the Corps clears tons of eroded sediment from the Federal navigation 

channels that lead into and out of the Port of Baltimore. Keeping this port open and 

the channels dredged is essential not just for Maryland, but for the nation. In July 

of this year the Port of Baltimore handled a record 853,818 tons of general cargo. 

This cargo would not have reached the port if it were not for WRDA funded dredging efforts. 

Among the 360 U.S. ports, Baltimore is ranked No. 1 for handling: 

• Trucks and 

• Roll on/roll off cargo (i.e. automobiles, trucking trailers, and freight cars), 

and is the country’s second largest automobile exporter, 

• Imported forest products, and 

• Gypsum, sugar, and iron ore. 

The Port of Baltimore is directly responsible for generating 14,630 direct jobs and 

another 108,000 related jobs. Over $3 billion of personal wage and salary income 

is generated by the port, which results in $1 billion of purchases from local business 

and $304 million in tax revenues for the State, county, and municipality. 

Although a major economic engine for Maryland, the Port of Baltimore isn’t the 

only beneficiary of WRDA projects; WRDA projects also have a tremendous impact 

on Maryland’s coastal communities. Maryland puts the Bay’s dredge material to 

good use on coastal habitat, beach, and island restoration projects. 

Along our Atlantic coast, powerful winter storms and tropical cyclones can cause 

considerable beach erosion—threatening the economic vitality of our premier Atlantic coast resort city, Ocean City. Since 1990 the Corps has supported a very successful, effective Atlantic coast protection program that involves replenishing the natural beaches that border Ocean City. This is the type of important work that WRDA 

can facilitate. 

IMPACTS OF WRDA TO NATIONAL ECONOMY

Although I could go on all morning naming WRDA projects that are helping Maryland communities, WRDA is not just about Maryland—these projects are critically 

important for all Americans. For example, according to the Research and Innovative 

23 

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. 

This results in ships having to light-load, which increases the cost of shipping and 

in turn increases the cost of goods at the cash register. At a time when Americans 

are struggling, any change in the cost of goods makes a direct difference to people’s 

bottom lines. Moreover, well maintained harbors will help 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. 

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF WRDA

As critical as WRDA is from a jobs standpoint, it is not merely a jobs bill. WRDA 

is also a major tool in our efforts to protect and restore our natural environment. 

In fact, WRDA 2007 established that WRDA projects ought to fulfill the dual goals 

of promoting sustainable economic development and protecting the environment. 

Environmental commitment—including ecosystem conservation and the use of nonstructural alternatives—is built right into current law. A reauthorization of WRDA 

offers a unique opportunity to benefit ecosystems across the nation. 

In Maryland, WRDA is directly tied to some of our most critical environmental 

efforts. For example, we now know that the sediment build up behind Conowingo 

Dam and two other reservoirs meant to keep harmful nutrients out of the Chesapeake Bay has reached critical levels. If this important infrastructure can no longer 

function, the Bay will surely suffer—the oxygen will be depleted, the water will 

cloud, the fish will die—all of the careful efforts of State, Federal, and local stakeholders to restore this magnificent Bay will be threatened. Officials are looking at 

options now for how to address this deeply disturbing circumstance. But no matter 

how this issue is ultimately addressed, the Corps is likely to be central to the solution. 

In Maryland, WRDA has a history of providing critical environmental restoration 

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. 

Similarly, WRDA has allowed us to go forward with an innovative project at Poplar Island. Poplar Island is the premier dual benefit dredge disposal site in the nation, but it is also a 1,100-acre sanctuary to hundreds of species of shore and water 

birds and Maryland’s State reptile, the terrapin. 

Poplar Island is now home to the nation’s largest terrapin research and propagation station, as well as home to the terrapin head start program which allows Maryland elementary schools to adopt and raise baby terrapins during the winter. None 

of this would have been made possible without WRDA funding. 

It has been 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 hearing from today’s witnesses and 

working with my colleagues on the latest reauthorization of WRDA. 

Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. Well, Senator Cardin, let me say you are a very 

important piece of this puzzle, because you know how to get things 

done. As a matter of fact, I am going to read just parts of Senator 

Inhofe’s opening statement that he sent. He was unable to be here 

today, which I regret because he is my partner in this. He mentions your name, so I just thought you would be interested in this 

in a good way. 

He says: ‘‘Thank you, Madam Chairman, for holding this hearing. I would like to thank our witnesses for testifying.’’ 

I am just reading parts of this. He says: ‘‘As a fiscal conservative, 

I strongly support the overall goal of cutting Government spending; 

however, I firmly believe there are two areas worthy of spending 

24 

taxpayer dollars. They are defense and infrastructure. It may not 

be as headline grabbing as some other areas of Government spending, but spending on infrastructure not only has job creation benefits, but it is essential for long-term economic growth.’’ 

Then he says: ‘‘Senator Cardin, in the Subcommittee on Water 

and Wildlife, has held two hearings to make the case for investments in our drinking water and clean water infrastructure. We 

learned that improving water infrastructure yields significant economic benefits. The Department of Commerce estimates that $1 invested in water infrastructure generates more than $2 in economic 

output in other industries, and that each job created in the local 

water and sewer industry creates nearly four jobs in the national 

economy. The U.S. Conference of Mayors noted that each public 

dollar invested in water infrastructure increases private, long-term 

GDP output by more than $6. I want to thank them for their leadership, too, and for bringing this issue to the forefront.’’ 

And then he says: ‘‘The Chairman and I have repeatedly signaled 

our strong desire to move the bipartisan WRDA bill. My staff and 

other members of the Big Four’s staff have been working hard to 

negotiate a bill. We recognize there are pressing policy challenges 

that range from modernizing our ports and inland waterways to 

streamlining the Corps’ study and planning process.’’ 

He concludes: ‘‘In my home State of Oklahoma, we have our 

share of water resources challenges. These run the gamut from 

flood control to inland navigation to water supply. Oklahoma’s and 

the nation’s water resources policy issues and projects can no 

longer keep waiting for congressional action. I strongly support 

moving forward with the bipartisan WRDA bill, and I encourage 

my colleagues to do so,’’ and so on. 

I want to put the full statement of Senator Inhofe in the record. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Inhofe follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA

Thank you, Madam Chairman, for holding this hearing. I also would like to thank 

our witnesses for testifying before us this morning. 

Today we are here to discuss a very important piece of legislation that this Committee is responsible for: the Water Resources Development Act, which authorizes 

projects and policy changes to address the nation’s pressing water resources challenges. 

As a fiscal conservative, I strongly support the overall goal of cutting Government 

spending; however, I firmly believe that the two areas worthy of spending taxpayer 

dollars are defense and infrastructure. It may not be as headline grabbing as some 

other areas of Government spending, but spending on infrastructure not only has 

job creation benefits but is essential for long-term economic growth. 

This year many of this Committee’s activities focused on this important issue. 

Most notably, we came together in a bipartisan way to pass a highway bill despite 

numerous challenges. For that, I want to thank the Chairman for her leadership 

and dedication. Not everyone thought we could get it done, but we proved them 

wrong. 

Senator Cardin’s and Senator Sessions’ Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife held 

two hearings to make the case for investments in our drinking water and clean 

water infrastructure. We learned that improving water infrastructure yields significant economic benefits. The Department of Commerce estimates that $1 invested in 

water infrastructure generates more than $2 in economic output in other industries 

and that each job created in the local water and sewer industry creates nearly four 

jobs in the national economy. The U.S. Conference of Mayors noted that each public 

dollar invested in water infrastructure increases private long-term GDP output by 

25 

more than $6. I want to thank them as well for their leadership and for bringing 

this issue to the forefront. 

Now this Committee is turning its attention to the nation’s water resources infrastructure. Like these other types of infrastructure, water resources infrastructure 

provides a good return on our investment in the form of economic benefits, job creation, and helping improve protection from flooding and other natural disasters. Our 

witnesses are here to further demonstrate the case for passing a WRDA bill. 

WRDA should be passed on a regular basis. Unfortunately, the last WRDA bill 

was enacted in November 2007—almost 5 years ago. At that time, we came together 

with the House to override a presidential veto because we recognized the significance of this legislation. 

During consideration of that last bill, Paul Weyrick described the need for preserving the authorization and appropriations process in a column for Townhall. He 

said, ‘‘It is a discipline which is necessary if Congress is to display any resemblance 

of fiscal responsibility.’’ Mr. Weyrick also correctly pointed out that it is an ‘‘important discipline against uncontrolled earmarking,’’ and it helps to limit authorizing 

on appropriations bills. This rationale holds true today, and in some ways it is even 

more important that we preserve this process. 

To that end, the Chairman and I have repeatedly signaled our strong desire to 

move a bipartisan WRDA bill. My staff and the other members of the Big 4 staff 

have been working hard to negotiate a WRDA bill. We recognize that there are 

pressing policy challenges that range from modernizing our ports and inland waterways to streamlining the Army Corps study and planning process. 

In addition, 17 projects with a Chief’s Report have been referred to Congress by 

the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works), Ms. Jo-Ellen Darcy. The projects 

range from critical flood control projects that help protect the public to port construction projects that will prepare us for the Panama Canal expansion. They have 

gone through many years of study to determine if there is a Federal interest in addressing the water resources issue and whether or not the project is economically 

justified and feasible from an engineering standpoint. In addition, these projects 

have a local sponsor that shares the cost. Congress, starting with the EPW Committee, must make an individual investment decision as to whether each project 

should receive authorization. WRDA is the bill where Congress makes those decisions. Only then is the authorized project eligible to compete for funding through 

the appropriations process. 

In my home State of Oklahoma, we have our share of water resources challenges, 

too. These run the gamut from flood control to inland navigation to water supply. 

Oklahoma’s and the nation’s water resources policy issues and projects can no 

longer keep waiting for congressional action. I strongly support moving forward with 

a bipartisan WRDA bill, and I encourage my colleagues to do so as well. 

I look forward to hearing the witnesses’ testimony. 

Senator BOXER. So this is really important, because it is sort of 

a similar type of partnership that we had, and some of you were 

part of that partnership on the highway bill. No one thought it 

could be done, so we believe it can be done. Working with not only 

Senator Inhofe but Senator Baucus and Vitter and Cardin and Sessions and all the members of this Committee, you know, I am very, 

very hopeful. 

To that end, we have assembled a really good and important 

panel this morning, and I am very hopeful that we will get encouragement from you to press forward. We will see what you say. 

So why don’t we start with Andrew Herrmann, President of 

American Society of Civil Engineers. 

Mr. Herrmann. 

STATEMENT OF ANDREW HERRMANN, P.E., PRESIDENT, 

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CIVIL ENGINEERS 

Mr. HERRMANN. Madam Chairman and members of the Committee, my name is Andrew Herrmann. I am President of the 

American Society of Civil Engineers. 

It is an honor for me to appear before this Committee to discuss 

the importance of a Water Resources Development Act to our naVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:57 Aug 16, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 S:\_EPW\DOCS\25113.TXT SONYA
26 

tion’s overall economic health, global competitiveness, and public 

safety. 

Last week ASCE released our latest Failure to Act economic 

study on the nation’s ports. Our marine and inland waterways 

ports are critical links that make international commerce possible; 

however, our report found that continued under-investing in port 

infrastructure could threaten more than 1 million U.S. jobs between now and 2020. The report also found that investment needs 

for the nation’s ports total $30 billion, while planned expenditures 

are only about $14 billion. That leaves a total investment gap of 

nearly $16 billion. 

If we don’t invest more, transporting goods will become costlier, 

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

in the global market. To remain competitive, U.S. ports will require 

investment in the coming decades beyond the $14 billion expected. 

By closing the investment deficit between now and 2020, the U.S. 

can eliminate this drag on economic growth. Therefore, a comprehensive WRDA bill is critical at this juncture. 

Seven years after Hurricane Katrina, there is still no national 

levee safety program. While FEMA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers have made great strides in creating an inventory of the location of the nation’s levees, when examined, the conditions of 

many of these levees are worse than originally anticipated. Congress needs to enact a new levee safety program which should be 

modeled on the successful national dam safety program and should 

require the Federal and State governments to conduct mandatory 

safety inspections for all levees. 

Flooding from Hurricane Katrina and more recently Hurricane 

Isaac demonstrated the need for consistent, up to date standards 

for levees based on reliable engineering data on their location, 

function, and condition. As demonstrated in New Orleans earlier 

this month, efforts to build a suitable levee system have paid off 

with better protection for those residents behind the levee; however, the levee system will require continued maintenance in order 

to provide state of the art protection for years to come. 

Next, WRDA should include Senate bill 3362, the Dam Safety 

Act of 2012. This bipartisan bill would reauthorize a national dam 

safety program through 2016 and provide grants to improve State 

dam safety programs through training, technical assistance, inspections, and research. 

State governments are responsible for ensuring the safety of 

most dams, but many State programs are under-funded and understaffed. The Dam Safety Act would provide $13.9 million annually 

for State dam safety programs to continue to provide vital services. 

Last night the House passed the FEMA reauthorization, which included $10.9 million annually for the dam safety program. 

Unfortunately, flooding still remains one of the most prevalent 

natural disasters in the United States. Development in flood prone 

areas has increased, and inhabitants are subjected to periodic 

flooding and devastation. Communities need the protection of an efficient flood plain management program implemented before a flood 

occurs. By recognizing the likelihood of future flooding and the beneficial aspects of the natural floodplain, communities can become 

disaster resistant. 

27 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has been combating floods for 

decades and has proven a vital partner for national floodplain management. The Flood Control Act of 1960 created the floodplain 

management services program, allowing for the Corps to use its 

technical expertise in floodplain management to help both Federal 

and non-Federal entities deal with floods and floodplain related 

matters. 

This program provides assistance and guidance in the form of 

special studies on all aspects of floodplain management planning, 

including the possible impacts of all floodplain land use changes on 

the physical, socio-economic, and environmental conditions of the 

floodplain. Study scopes range from helping a community identify 

present or future floodplain areas and related problems to a broad 

assessment of the various remedial measures that can be effectively used. 

But the Corps has been faced with reduced appropriations over 

the past several years, making the mission more complicated. The 

Office of Management and Budget reported last week that the civil 

works program faces a reduction of $505 million in fiscal year 2013 

under the sequestration authority of the Budget Control Act of 

2011. If Congress does not act, the Corps would lose $34 million 

of the $415 million in fiscal year 2013 budget authority for flood 

control and coastal emergencies. 

Continuing to under-invest in the Corps civil works program will 

only put our national floodplain programs and Federal water resources infrastructure at risk. ASCE urges all levels of government 

to partner and adopt proactive floodplain policies and to inform 

residents in floodplains of the hazards associated with development 

in high risk flood prone areas. 

In conclusion, deferring water resources projects creates costs 

that reverberate throughout our economy. ASCE looks forward to 

working with the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee as you develop a WRDA bill. 

Thank you, Senator Boxer. This concludes my testimony. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Herrmann follows:] 

28 


25113.018
29 


25113.019
30 


25113.020
31 


25113.021
32 


25113.022
33 


25113.023
34 


25113.024
35 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Jerry Bridges, Chairman of the Board, American Association of 

Port Authorities, and Executive Director, Virginia Port Authority. 

Welcome, sir. 

STATEMENT OF JERRY A. BRIDGES, CHAIRMAN OF THE 

BOARD, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF PORT AUTHORITIES, 

AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, VIRGINIA PORT AUTHORITY 

Mr. BRIDGES. Good morning, Senator, Ranking Member Inhofe, 

and Members. I want to thank you for the opportunity to provide 

testimony to the Committee on Environment and Public Works on 

the need for a Water Resources Development Act. 

I am Jerry Bridges, Executive Director of the Virginia Port Authority. I appear today as Chairman of the Board of the American 

Association of Port Authorities, which represents the interests of 

the leading U.S. public port authorities, as well as public port authorities throughout the western hemisphere, from Canada to Argentina, including the Caribbean. My testimony today, however, is 

on behalf of the AAPA’s U.S. public port members. 

Since the water bills are critically important to the health of the 

port industry, we appreciate the Committee’s leadership in addressing the need for the Water Resources Development Act. I will 

focus my comments today on the need to authorize new projects to 

keep the nation competitive in a world economy and promote jobs 

and economic activity here at home. 

I will also address the need to put streamlining and efficiency 

measures in place that will allow projects to move along more 

quickly. We can no longer take decades to respond to economic opportunities that occur daily. Seaports and their industry partners 

provide over 13 million high paying, family wage jobs and contribute more than a quarter of the nation’s GDP. 

The historic partnership between seaports and the Federal Government finds its root in the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution and is the oldest and most Federal of all the Corps of Engineers’ mission. That partnership has built much of the waterside 

infrastructure we maintain and use today. 

The U.S. ports and its partners will spend $46 billion over the 

next 5 years to improve their infrastructure. However, increasingly 

we find that the Federal partner is unable to uphold its part of the 

bargain in financing new infrastructure and channel improvement 

projects. As a result, the growth in jobs and income is not being 

realized at the same extent as in the past. 

We are calling upon the Committee to consider a series of 

streamlining and efficiency provisions that will permit more flexibility and new options for financing and maintaining Federal channel projects. 

Having been a port director of major ports on both the east and 

the west coast, I can unequivocally assure you dredging impacts 

the bottom line of every port in the country on the docks, at the 

terminal, and in the yards. 

It also directly impacts the transportation savings we are able to 

create for all of those who depend on ports and Federal channels 

that handle over 90 percent of our world trade. Dredging directly 

equates to jobs, incomes, and international competitiveness, and 

36 

not just for coastal States. On average, every State depends on as 

many as 15 different seaports for its overseas trade. 

This week the American Society of Civil Engineers released its 

report entitled, Failure to Act: The Economic Impact of Current Investment Trends in Airports, Inland Waterways, and Marine Port 

Infrastructure. This report concluded that aging infrastructure for 

marine ports, inland waterways, and airports threatens more than 

1 million U.S. jobs. We cannot let that forecast become a reality. 

Earlier I mentioned the critical role this Committee plays in authorizing projects, modification to existing projects, and providing 

Federal authority and policy direction. Our friends in the dredging 

industry like to say it all begins with dredging, when in reality it 

all begins with you. Projects cannot start, construction will be 

modified until you have done your due diligence in identifying the 

best sets of provisions needed to move ahead projects under consideration. We need this process to be regular and reliable as we attempt to keep up in a competing world market. 

We believe it is now time to revisit the 26 year old harbor maintenance tax trust fund authorization in 1986 WRDA that is the sole 

source of reimbursement for Federal maintenance dredging funds. 

Port and harbor users are paying for 100 percent of maintenance 

dredging and getting half in return. The tax revenue collected currently is about $1.5 billion annually, and fully applied should be 

adequate to maintain Federal channels once they are restored to 

their constructed dimensions. 

Finally, we are commending Committee leadership for recognizing the nexus between water resources development and economic prosperity. Limited spending under-investment in the nation’s seaport water infrastructure limits job creation, resulting in 

higher consumer prices and penalizes exporters with higher transportation costs. We urge you to develop and pass the Water Resources Development Act at the earliest possible time. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bridges follows:] 

37 


25113.025
38 


25113.026
39 


25113.027
40 


25113.028
41 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much for that. 

Rick Calhoun, President, Cargo Carriers, Cargill, Incorporated. 

Welcome, Mr. Calhoun. 

STATEMENT OF RICK CALHOUN, PRESIDENT, 

CARGO CARRIERS, CARGILL, INCORPORATED 

Mr. CALHOUN. Thank you, Chairwoman Boxer and members of 

the Committee. Thanks for the opportunity to testify about the 

state of our waterways and the economic job creation opportunities 

associated with investment in water resources. 

My name is Rick Calhoun. I am the President of Cargill Carriers, 

a business of Cargill, Incorporated. I am also the immediate past 

Chairman of the Waterways Council, the public policy organization 

advocating for water and well maintained national system of ports 

and inland waterways. 

Cargill is an international producer and marketer of food, agricultural, financial, and industrial products and services. Our company employs 140,000 people in 65 countries. 

Today I urge the Committee to act on a Water Resources Development Act to improve the nation’s waterways system and increase 

infrastructure investment. Our nation’s waterways have remained 

a reliable transportation mode because of the vision of past Congresses and hard work of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but 

in the future we believe that without immediate action to alter delivery schedule of projects needed to enhance our infrastructure, 

the system’s reliability could be challenged. 

Waterways are critical to keeping our domestic supply chain 

competitive. Corps of Engineers’ statistics note a $14 per ton cost 

savings for shipping on inland waterways versus other modes. 

Translated, a farmer, shipper, and consumer cost savings. Without 

water-borne cargo, our domestic products would congest the nation’s highway and rail lines, increasing shipping and consumer 

costs for all Americans. 

For 200 years America’s river systems attracted private capital 

investment because it has been consistently dependable transportation mode. This natural resource increases U.S. competitiveness, 

supports global markets for a range of commodities, and creates 

American jobs. One can always count on the river system to work; 

however, the system’s reliability is fast becoming a questionable assumption. 

Despite the efforts of industry to modernize their operations for 

21st century economy, on the rivers we rely on 1930s technology. 

Of the 238 Corps locks, 56 percent are over 50 years old—well beyond their design life, and 34 locks are over 80 years old. If not 

addressed, this infrastructure hinges on the brink of collapse. 

Moreover, these projects are not built in a day. They take years, 

even decades, to construct. 

The Ohio River’s Olmstead lock and dam project underscores the 

system’s deficiencies. Authorized by Congress in 1988 at $775 million, the project was to be completed within 12 years. Almost 25 

years later, the project is nowhere near completion and has 

ballooned to a cost of over $3 billion. 

While Olmstead is draining the inland waterway trust fund, 

other navigation projects are on hold and crumbling before our 

42 

eyes. Without a change, we won’t see critical construction and 

major rehabilitation projects completed in our lifetime. With completion dates for some as late as 2090, the navigation project financing business model is broken and needs repair by Congress. 

In 2010 industry and the Corps developed recommendations 

aimed at the waterways system viability. Called the capital development plan, it recommends prioritizing projects system-wide, improving the Corps’ project management processes to deliver project 

on time and on budget, and recommending an affordable funding 

mechanism with increased investment from both industry and the 

U.S. Government. The plan recommended increase in annual 

spending on lock and dam projects from $170 million to $380 million, estimating it would be enough to complete 25 major projects 

over the next 20 years compared to just 2 under the current funding scheme and Olmstead’s cost escalation. 

The capital development plan was converted into legislation by 

Congressman Ed Whitfield and Jerry Costello, H.R. 4342. The Way 

Forward Act of 2012 now has 27 bipartisan House cosponsors and 

has been endorsed by more than 200 organizations. 

Industry is willing to invest and add more to the inland waterway trust fund and to protect our river investments. Cargill and 

our waterways partners are willing to accept a significant increase 

in the diesel user fee if we are to provide an efficient plan that will 

result in a reliable river, but we cannot and should not act alone. 

The United States must increase its investment as waterways infrastructure modernization occurs worldwide so that we can compete on a global stage to capture the promise of the Panama Canal 

Project scheduled for completion in 2014. 

The time for action is now. Without it, lock closures will choke 

economic recovery and hamper growth. Congress must support the 

Corps’ work so we don’t face the catastrophe of irreparable damage 

to the U.S. economic which could cost the U.S. Government far 

more in disaster relief and repair. 

In summary, Cargill urges this Committee to bring forward a by 

WRDA bill immediately in order to change the path to failure that 

we are currently on today as a nation. Further, we support the efforts of several Senators to address the infrastructure challenges of 

our ports and inland waterways and we encourage this Committee 

to support those efforts as well. 

Thank you for the opportunity to share Cargill’s views. I am 

happy to answer questions and respond to specific inquiries going 

forward. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Calhoun follows:] 

43 


25113.029
44 


25113.030
45 


25113.031
46 


25113.032
47 


25113.033
48 


25113.034
49 


25113.035
50 


25113.036
51 

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

Jeffrey Soth, Assistant Director, Legislative and Political Department, International Union of Operating Engineers, welcome to you. 

STATEMENT OF JEFFREY SOTH, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, LEGISLATIVE AND POLITICAL DEPARTMENT, INTERNATIONAL 

UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS 

Mr. SOTH. Thank you, Chairman Boxer. It is an honor to join you 

today. 

My name is Jeffrey Soth. I am the Assistant Legislative and Political Director of the International Union of Operating Engineers. 

The Union represents approximately 400,000 men and women in 

the United States and Canada. Every day across the United States 

thousands of IUOE members are building the nation’s locks and 

dams and dredging the nation’s key navigation channels. That is 

why my testimony today relates to the direct employment and job 

opportunities connected with WRDA. 

The essence of my message today is this: a strategic, targeted investment in the nation’s navigation network can have a dramatic 

direct employment effect on the hardest hit segment of the economy while simultaneously delivering medium and long range benefits to American competitiveness. 

I would like to touch quickly on work force development in the 

construction sector. With over 100 facilities and 1,000 instructors, 

the International Union of Operating Engineers possesses extensive experience in work force capacity. Most importantly, this expertise is reflected in the skills and productivities of members of 

the IUOE. 

Apprenticeship is the industry accepted training model for craft 

workers in the industry. It is a system of on the job training combined with classroom instruction. For workers, the model delivers 

progressive wages over the term of training. Usually for operating 

engineers that is 3 or 4 years. It delivers a nationally recognized 

portable credential at the completion of the training, and delivers 

future training opportunities and higher earning potential to workers. These skills allow operating engineers and other craft workers 

in the industry to obtain some of the highest earnings in the private sector for production workers. 

Production and non-supervisor workers in the heavy and civil engineering subsector earn over $25 an hour. That compares to less 

than $20 an hour for production workers in all of the private sector. 

For employers, the apprenticeship model delivers important benefits, as well. First and foremost, it delivers skilled workers. Employers jointly manage these programs. They develop the curriculum, direct the resources, and ensure thereby that the training 

meets their needs. Apprenticeship delivers a pipeline of new entrants into their companies, and most importantly, through increased productivity and safety, apprenticeship reduces the bottom 

line for contractors. 

Let me turn quickly to the current labor market conditions in the 

construction sector. Senator, you have a couple of charts there that 

may be helpful for you as I go through this part of my testimony. 

52 

Unemployment, as you can see on the first chart there, unemployment rate in construction has dropped to a nearly 4-year low, 

a 46-month low. It is at 11.3 percent right now. Unemployment in 

the industry peaked at over 27 percent in February 2010. Construction has consistently endured the worst job picture of any industry 

during the Great Recession, and unfortunately, that is still true 

today. Construction employers added just 1,000 workers to their 

payrolls in August, and employment has changed little in the last 

2 years. There are over 2 million fewer workers in the industry 

than there were at the start of the recession, as you can see in the 

second chart. 

In heavy and civil engineering construction, contractors added 

just 2,800 jobs in August. This sector has 16 percent fewer jobs 

than it did before the start of the recession. 

Let me be clear, Senator. The operating engineers sincerely appreciate your leadership and the leadership of the Committee to 

enact MAP–21. The legislation avoided an economic catastrophe 

and will add modestly to job growth in construction, but we strongly believe more needs to be done. 

As you have heard from Mr. Herrmann, the ASCE just produced 

an important economic analysis entitled, Failure to Act: The Current Trends in Investment in Ports and Inland Waterways. The report makes plain that a $16 billion funding gap exists. To put it 

simply, your leadership is necessary to fill this gap. By doing so, 

Congress can meet the short-term needs of the construction industry while laying the foundation for long-term vitality of the national economy. 

WRDA capital improvements can drive job growth in the anemic 

construction sector. It is clear from analyzing other types of infrastructure investment that roughly 30,000 job years are created for 

every $1 billion invested in infrastructure. But here is the key. 

Here is the important point: 10,000 of those jobs, about one-third 

of them, are created in the construction sector. 

To summarize, the construction sector has endured the worst unemployment of any industry in the nation during the Great Recession. Family sustaining jobs, American jobs at higher than average 

wages can be created through investments in the nation’s waterways. 

The International Union of Operating Engineers believes that 

now is the time for targeted investments in the Water Resources 

Development Act. Such a move can change the course of the construction sector’s economic recovery and lay the foundation for the 

country’s future prosperity. We hope you agree. 

We appreciate the opportunity to comment, Senator. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Soth follows:] 

53 


25113.037
54 


25113.038
55 


25113.039
56 


25113.040
57 


25113.041
58 


25113.042
59 


25113.043
60 

Senator BOXER. I won’t keep you guessing. I agree. 

And now it is my pleasure to introduce Janet Kavinoky, Executive Director, Transportation Infrastructure, and Vice President, 

Americans for Transportation Mobility Coalition, United States 

Chamber of Commerce. 

I want to just say publicly, Janet, how much I appreciated all 

your work during MAP–21. It was essential. You reached out to a 

lot of people in the House that only you could do. I really appreciate it. 

STATEMENT OF JANET KAVINOKY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE, AND VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICANS FOR TRANSPORTATION MOBILITY COALITION, U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 

Ms. KAVINOKY. You are very welcome, Senator. It was a true 

partnership of a lot of people in this room. Many of us will be back 

to work with you on WRDA, so that is why we very much appreciate the opportunity to be here to testify about economic and job 

benefits of water resources infrastructure. 

We, of course, appreciate this Committee’s long tradition of leadership and bipartisanship on infrastructure issues, and in particular, the efforts to guide MAP–21 to its successful conclusion. 

We often refer to transportation in terms of surface, air, and 

water modes. This Congress has tackled runways, roadways, and 

railways this year. Now it is time to finish the job and focus on 

water resources, and in particular, navigation. 

As we look at this issue, we find that transportation has a direct 

influence on the U.S. economy. Cargo and related activities in our 

ports, on our coastal inland waterways, the Great Lakes, and the 

St. Lawrence Seaway are integral to the global supply chain and 

sustain more than 13 million jobs. One-third of the short tons 

moved in water-borne commerce is bound for foreign markets that 

represent 73 percent of the world’s purchasing power, 87 percent 

of its economic growth, and 95 percent of its consumers. The inland 

waterways system helps make American producers competitive by 

supporting low cost transportation commodities. 

Unreliability and outdated infrastructure increase the cost of 

transporting these commodities and threatens U.S. competitiveness. 

In addition, this Committee made stretching every Federal highway program dollar a priority in MAP–21, but our outdated and 

unreliable inland waterways infrastructure undermines that good 

work. For example, on the upper Mississippi River, transportation 

accounts for 75 to 80 percent of the aggregates cost in that region. 

The industrial lock in New Orleans, which allows all cargo bound 

for east coast and gulf ports to exit the Mississippi, is so small that 

only four barges can go through at once. All because Warren Paving brings eight-barge tows to Gulfport; those barges must first be 

broken in two, then an assist boat hired to push half the barges 

through the lock at a time, and then the eight barges are put back 

together before proceeding. It is a major expense, and that is only 

one location. 

As Mr. Calhoun noted, a high percentage of the locks on the Mississippi River are 50 years old or more. It is not uncommon for a 

61 

tow to sit 2 or 3 days waiting to get through some of the locks, and 

such a delay imposes significant additional costs. 

Since you have already heard from AAPA, I will simply agree 

that our inland and coastal ports across the country face challenges 

posed by shifting trading patterns as a result of the expansion of 

the Panama Canal in competition from Canada and Mexico. Pressing needs include last mile investment, land site congestion management, capital dredging projects, and of course maintenance 

dredging of channel and harbors which could be addressed through 

full annual utilization of the harbor maintenance trust fund. 

The challenges facing the marine transportation system are well 

documented. The Chamber recommends legislative actions in four 

general areas: improving Federal coordination; establishing priorities to maintain, modernize, and expand the system; increasing investment, both public and private; and creating conditions for successful project delivery. 

The Chamber is among the 200 organizations that endorse the 

inland waterways capital development plan now in legislative form 

in the House. The plan presents a 20-year construction and rehabilitation schedule, recommends raising the inland waterways diesel fuel tax, and promotes modifying authorized depths and widths 

for harbors and channels as needed. 

A WRDA bill should create the conditions for successful Army 

Corps project delivery, including providing for adequate reliable 

funding, streamlining and putting deadlines on the feasibility 

study process, and allowing the Corps to enter into continuing contracts for critical projects when they are consistent with congressional and Administration priorities. 

And we agree with other stakeholders that it is critical and urgent to address the speed, cost, and oversight of the Olmstead 

Locks and Dam project in order to free up resources for other capital construction efforts along the inland waterways system. 

The total value of water-borne freight is estimated to increase by 

43 percent domestically and 67 percent internationally by 2020. 

The U.S. marine transportation system must accommodate those 

increasing freight volumes, so this Committee can and should act 

with the similar bipartisan spirit that resulted in a unanimous 

Committee vote that set up MAP–21 for success on the Senate 

floor, and in the same way the Chamber supported this Committee 

on MAP–21, we will continue to do so with the Water Resources 

Development Act. 

So thank you very much for your ongoing partnership with the 

Chamber on infrastructure, and I am happy to answer any questions you may have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Kavinoky follows:] 

62 


25113.044
63 


25113.045
64 


25113.046
65 


25113.047
66 


25113.048
67 


25113.049
68 


25113.050
69 


25113.051
70 


25113.052
71 


25113.053
72 


25113.054
73 


25113.055
74 


25113.056
75 


25113.057
76 


25113.058
77 


25113.059
78 


25113.060
79 


25113.061
80 

Senator BOXER. Thank you all. 

We have been joined by Senator Whitehouse. If it is OK with 

him, I will ask a first round of questions for 5 minutes, and then 

I will give you 10 minutes to do an opening statement and round 

of questions. Is that fair? 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. That is more than fair. Thank you, Chairman. 

Senator BOXER. Anything for you, sir. 

Mr. Soth, your testimony highlighted some of the jobs associated 

with water resources projects. I don’t think people realize how 

many jobs are created and sustained. Could you go through that 

a little bit more? Spell it out, the types of jobs. And are they good 

paying jobs? 

Mr. SOTH. The Bureau of Labor Statistics tells us that there are 

four occupations primarily associated with this kind of construction: laborers, operating engineers, carpenters, and truck drivers, 

Teamsters. Those four occupations dominate most of the work activity. We do the whole range of things in lock and dam construction consistent with operating engineers. We run cranes, backhoes, 

excavators, you name it. 

When it comes to dredging, there is a unique set of equipment 

there. We use hydraulic barges, hydraulic machinery that is doing 

the excavation, and have really complex technology GPS systems 

associated with them, but it is a little bit of a unique craft. I mentioned in 1927 actually the International Brotherhood of 

Steamshovel Operators and Dredgemen were merged into the 

International Union of Operating Engineers, so really dredging is 

in our middle name in some respects, too, and is an important part 

of our work. 

Senator BOXER. And just so people understand, am I correct 

when I say these jobs are private sector jobs? 

Mr. SOTH. Absolutely, 88 percent of all business establishments 

in the heavy and civil engineering subsector of construction are private sector, and virtually all of our employers are private sector. 

The operating engineers are directly hired by some ports around 

the country, as well, but that is a relatively small number. Virtually all of our employers in the industry are private sector employers. 

Senator BOXER. I think it is very important, because there is a 

lot of dispute about, you know, is this private sector, public sector. 

Frankly, as far as I am concerned, whether it is a local port authority or private sector business person, my concern is getting the job 

done so we can move goods, so we can compete. But the fact is, you 

are saying the vast proportion of these jobs are private sector jobs. 

Are they well paying, good paying jobs? 

Mr. SOTH. Yes. They certainly are. Our training in the industry 

allows us to command some of the highest private sector wages for 

production workers that are available out there. As I mentioned in 

my testimony, that average wage for production and non-supervisory worker is over $25 an hour, and in all of the private sector 

I believe it is $19.50 an hour currently. That is the most up to date 

data there is out there. So just based on the nationally available 

data, that is certainly true. 

81 

But operating engineers, members of my union, tend to make, frankly, even more money than that $25, as well as the benefit 

packages when you are a member of the Operating Engineers 

Union. So those health and welfare benefits, those investments in 

our pension, those are critical to maintaining communities and 

maintaining the livelihood and welfare of our members. 

Senator BOXER. So these are jobs that you can support a family 

on, that you can get into the middle class on, and these are jobs 

that mostly come from the private sector, which is why my next 

question is for Janet Kavinoky, who really represents the voice 

here of business overall. We have different business voices, but you 

do represent the Chamber of Commerce. 

Now, we are facing tough decisions on where to invest our limited Federal dollars, and we hear many arguing for reduced spending on a variety of programs. Unfortunately, they include big cuts 

in Federal infrastructure. Why is it important to the economy to 

continue to invest in water resources infrastructure even in tight 

budget times, Ms. Kavinoky? 

Ms. KAVINOKY. I think many of my fellow panelists have made 

the point that water resources infrastructure is really about supporting U.S. businesses and U.S. jobs. When one-third of the waterborne cargo is bound for the markets that contain 95 percent of 

consumers, we know that there aren’t a whole lot of alternatives 

for that cargo to get overseas. 

Senator BOXER. Right. 

Ms. KAVINOKY. And so whether you are in grain industry, such 

as Cargill, you are in the energy industry, you are doing wood and 

wood products, you are moving aggregates that benefit transportation in other areas, you need that low cost transportation. Otherwise, other countries are going to start producing those things and 

selling to those markets where the growth is. 

So ultimately it really comes back to being, as we have said for 

years, the physical platform of the economy. If you don’t have one 

that is reliable, that is predictable, that is safe, and that provides 

opportunities to support future growth, we won’t be able to compete 

as a country on the basic food, fuel, the feedstocks of what we have 

in the rest of our manufacturing and services sector. 

Senator BOXER. So is it fair to say—because I don’t want to misquote you—that the Chamber’s position is this is an important investment, should be continued? 

Ms. KAVINOKY. The Chamber of Commerce is very consistent in 

saying we need to increase Federal investment in infrastructure, 

and in the areas where the industries are supportive of user fees, 

such as, of course, you saw in the inland waterways capital development plan, we believe that those user fees can support deficit 

neutral increases in infrastructure investment. 

Senator BOXER. OK. 

We have been joined by Senator Vitter. Welcome, Senator. I just 

promised Senator Whitehouse that he would be able to do 5 minutes of his opening statement and 5 minutes of questions, then we 

will turn to you for 5 minutes opening statement and 5 minutes of 

questions. 

I just wanted to say the reason I asked labor and management 

to sit next to each other, I want to make the point here that we 

82 

are united, business and labor, on this, just as we were on the 

highway bill, and I think the tone is set here at this hearing for 

action. You are both calling for action. You are both raising the 

alarm for action. I so hear you and I am very determined. If I had 

my way, I would have had this as a markup today, but we hopefully can do it in the lame duck. 

Senator Whitehouse, and then Senator Vitter, 10 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you so 

much for hosting today’s hearing on the Water Resources Development Act, known affectionately as WRDA around here. 

The nation’s water infrastructure is indisputably crumbling, and 

a meaningful reauthorization of WRDA would play a very important role in both rebuilding that infrastructure and rebuilding our 

economy. 

While WRDA possibilities are more limited than they have been 

in the past, they remain key local and national opportunities for 

progress. 

At the local level, for me, Madam Chairman, authorization for 

Rhode Island’s Point Judith Harbor of Refuge should be added to 

fully consider shoreline protection benefits in the ongoing cost-benefit analysis for repairing that breakwater. The Army Corps is 

presently conducting a major rehabilitation study for the breakwater forming the Point Judith Harbor of Refuge, evaluating the 

effectiveness of the breakwater in its current condition. Adding 

shoreline protection as a purpose in the project’s authorization will 

ensure that the Corps can fully evaluate and incorporate those benefits in its analysis and design for that project. 

Another small local project is in Warwick Cove, where the navigation channel boundaries must be updated for the Warwick Harbor Management Plan to be approved. 

At the national level there are two issues I think we need to address. One is an increase in continuing authority program limits, 

cap limits, and a second is reauthorization of the national dam 

safety program. 

Cap limits first. Cap limits have not been adjusted for inflation 

or for construction cost increases. The limit for the section 205 

flood control authority, for instance, hasn’t been adjusted since 

1999, and it remains at $7 million. According to a Congressional 

Research Service review of the Army Corps manual, a likely construction project under this authority that would cost $5 million for 

levees and floodwalls in 1999 would nowadays be estimated to cost 

almost $11 million. If you went to the Consumer Price Index as 

your inflation rate, that $7 million project in 1999 would now 

amount to $10 million. So I propose adjusting the per project 

spending limit for the section 205 cap, and I encourage similar increase for all other cap authorities. 

On dams, Rhode Island has more than 700 dams. Many of them 

are very old. The famous Slater Mill Dam that ushered in the industrial revolution was built in 1793. Many of our dams are in poor 

condition: 179 are rated high risk or significant risk. We are the 

83 

second-most densely populated State in the country, so this issue 

of dam failure warrants serious public safety attention. 

This was a real concern during the devastating 2010 floods. 

There were people sitting and watching at dams. Will they hold? 

Rhode Island’s tale isn’t unique. The nation’s dams collectively 

received a grade of D from the American Society of Civil Engineers’ 

2009 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure. They cited more 

than 4,000 deficient dams, which included more than 1,800 that 

would result in loss of life if they failed. 

The WRDA bill provides us an opportunity to reauthorize the national dam safety program. Thanks to Senator Akaka’s leadership 

and to the bipartisan hard work of Senators Boozman and Crapo, 

important legislation to reauthorize this program, the Dam Safety 

Act of 2012, is ready to be incorporated into a WRDA bill. This bill 

would improve dam safety across the nation without increasing 

cost to the Government. 

The national dam safety program helps States check for deteriorating dam conditions and helps ensure that States have the technical assistance, training, and procedures they need to prevent 

dams from reaching a condition that puts communities in danger. 

Rhode Island really relies on its partnership with the FEMA dam 

safety program for funding, for dam hazard classifications, for inundation maps, and to develop emergency actions plans which are 

required for all high hazard and significant hazard dams. National 

dam safety program assistance funds were used by the Rhode Island EMA to complete emergency action plans for high hazard 

dams, to inspect high hazard and significant hazard dams, and 

make recommendations for their repairs or maintenance, to classify 

dams, and for aerial photography of dams. 

Per the dam safety regulations, high hazard dams are to be visually inspected every 2 years, and significant hazard dams every 

5. That is 65 full inspections each year that we depend on to ensure communities throughout Rhode Island are protected from 

these deteriorating structures. 

Mr. Herrmann, we particularly appreciate the support from the 

American Society of Civil Engineers for this bill, as well as the support from the Association of State Dam Safety Officials. 

One final comment on a common theme in the witnesses’ testimony that I think all of our States here, Louisiana, California, and 

Florida can agree with, and that is the importance of port infrastructure for jobs and local economies. We have seen this first-hand 

in the Ocean State. Our ports in Providence and Quonset Point 

have been bright spots throughout our prolonged recovery. Quonset 

Point is poised to surpass Los Angeles, believe it or not, Madam 

Chairman, to become the sixth largest point of entry for automobile 

imports into the U.S. 

With the help of a TIGER grant that Senator Reid and I fought 

very hard for, the Quonset Port has reinforced their pier and purchased a mobile port crane, significantly increasing the capacity to 

process cargo and positioning Quonset as a potential hub for the 

assembly of offshore wind turbines, which could mean up to 800 

jobs at that port. 

Rhode Island’s ports and ports throughout the country are critical to the flow of commerce and to providing jobs for hard working 

84 

Americans. As we work toward a WRDA reauthorization, I agree 

with the witnesses that we should not lose focus on the importance 

of our ports. 

Since I mentioned Mr. Herrmann in my remarks, let me ask if 

he would be interested in speaking for a moment on the question 

of the dam safety program. Once again, I appreciate the support of 

the Society of Civil Engineers, and I think your calling out America’s infrastructure with these grades has been important to sharpen America’s focus on this issue, and the fact that we have a D for 

the dam infrastructure in this country when so much life and so 

much property exists in the wake of the catastrophe to ensue if 

dams let go was a very important signal. 

Mr. Herrmann. 

Mr. HERRMANN. Thank you, Senator. 

As you mentioned earlier, the Report Card for America’s Infrastructure gave our nation’s dams a grade of D. That was a 2009 

Report Card. We have another one coming out in 2013, which we 

will take a look at the grade at that point. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Are you expecting much improvement? 

Mr. HERRMANN. We are looking at the numbers right now, coming up with it. I am not saying one way or the other at this point. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. OK. 

Mr. HERRMANN. We are going to keep a lid on it. 

One thing that is interesting is that if we looked at the cost to rehabilitate just the most critical dams, that would be $16 billion. 

If we looked at the cost to rehabilitate all the dams, that would be 

$51 billion. It is a large number. It is something that we need to 

do to protect the public safety. 

As you mentioned the high hazard dams, those are ones that, if 

they fail, they could cause loss of life and property, and they are 

very critical. We really should be looking to repair those as soon 

as we can. 

Dams are very important, as you have brought up, and there are 

a number of areas where we can address that. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Let me ask one additional question in the 

minute and a half that I have remaining, and that is: there is an 

old New England expression that a stitch in time saves nine. That 

infrastructure repair, if it is done promptly, can be more cost effective than if the infrastructure is allowed to further degrade and 

more complex and costly repairs are acquired, or as Senator Vitter 

saw in his State, God forbid, the infrastructure fails, and there are 

catastrophic consequences from that failure. 

It strikes me that, particularly when we are in a very low interest environment, the mathematics of infrastructure investment 

would suggest investing now while the costs of the project are 

where they are now, rather than at the higher level that they will 

be later, and that the interest costs are not going to offset that the 

way it might in a 17 percent or 18 percent interest rate environment, because interest rates are now so low. 

Does anybody have any comment on the fiscal merit of moving 

on infrastructure now in this low interest environment? 

Mr. HERRMANN. The investment for maintenance for these early 

works, one of our State agencies has put together a statistic that 

for every dollar you spend in maintenance you save $16 in repairs 

85 

and rehabilitations later one. So clearly investing now in maintenance and keeping these things in good order definitely pays off in 

the future. It is an investment. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. So even if you are a fiscal conservative 

you should support this kind of investment? 

Mr. HERRMANN. It pays back more than you are investing. 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

We are going to have Senator Vitter for 10 minutes, and then we 

are going to turn to Senator Merkley for 10 minutes. 

Senator Vitter, you can do an opening statement and then questions, however you want to use your 10 minutes. All right? But we 

are going to go to Senator Vitter for 10 minutes first. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID VITTER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam Chair, for this important 

hearing, and thanks to all of the witnesses. 

I certainly strongly, strongly support the priority of passing a 

good, robust WRDA bill as soon as possible. It is my absolute top 

priority on this Committee. It has been 5 years. That is way too 

long to get a solid, robust water resources bill. And I am frustrated 

we are taking it up at the very, very end of this Congress, but better late than never. We need to take it up and act as quickly as 

possible, including if it bleeds into next year as soon as possible in 

the new Congress. 

I appreciate all of the witnesses here and all of your testimony, 

but my frustration, Madam Chair, which I hope we can correct 

with a future hearing, is that the central player in all of this isn’t 

here, the Corps of Engineers. My single biggest goal in the new 

WRDA goal is significant, important reform of the Corps of Engineers’ bureaucracy and process. 

The fact of the matter is, the Corps of Engineers is a broken bureaucracy, and their process for projects—whether it is maritime, 

flood control, other vital infrastructure projects—is a broken process. That is for a whole host of reasons, some of which lay at their 

doorstep, some of which lay at ours in Congress or ours as a nation. 

My goal in saying this is not to point fingers; it is to focus on 

a real problem that I think needs to be at the center of this WRDA 

effort, because if we don’t fix this broken process we will never 

begin to touch all of that infrastructure that needs upgrade and investment. 

I hope we have a hearing soon focused on the Corps, focused on 

the fact that so often projects are studied and re-studied and then 

re-studied for literally decades before a shovel hits the ground. And 

as you might expect, costs over that time go through the roof, so 

we are like a dog running after its tail, never, ever coming close 

to catching it. 

I hope we will talk about the RAMP Act and the fact that dedicated funds from the maritime industry that are supposed to be 

used for dredging are essentially stolen, half of it stolen every year 

for other unrelated programs in the Federal budget. 

And certainly in this process I hope we will talk about a proposal 

I have with Bill Nelson of Florida, a bipartisan proposal to push 

86 

more project manager responsibilities for more of these projects 

down to the State and local level, where I am convinced the work 

can be led to the same standards but much quicker, much cheaper. 

That is essentially what we do on the highway side. We have a 

Federal Highway Administration, but they are not the project manager on every Federal highway project. In fact, they are basically 

the project manager on none of them, and we move that responsibility to the State and local level generally, with good results expediting and cost saving. 

We need to focus on this important need to fundamentally reform 

the Corps as a bureaucracy and the Corps process, or else I am 

afraid we can pass WRDA and one a few years down the line and 

a third one after that, and we will continue to be a dog running 

after its tail, never coming close to catching it. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Before I call on Senator Merkley, I wanted to tell you that we 

have been working with your staff in good faith for a long time 

now, and with Inhofe and Baucus, the Big Four, so I am a little 

frustrated, too, because we don’t have specific, in writing, back 

from everybody. 

So the way I am going to approach it, and I think it is going to 

be good, is I will put together a draft, sort of my idea of what it 

should be, and then we will give that to your staff, to Senator 

Inhofe’s staff, to Senator Baucus’ staff to re-write it, cross it out, 

add, and then I would hope you could have that, since we are all 

frustrated. It has been way too long. 

I would say one of our major problems is the Congress—not me— 

voted to do away with earmarks. I think it is ridiculous. I think 

as a result of that you have Administration with all the power, 

whether it is this one or a Romney one or a Bush one. I believe 

it is our job. But sadly, we can’t get it done because President 

Obama believes there should be no earmarks, agrees with the majority of the Congress. Not me. 

I say not me with feeling, because I personally—and I don’t even 

know where Senator Vitter stands on it. It is not important for this 

conversation except I trust him and Senator Landrieu on what is 

happening on the ground in his State more than I trust any Administration. I trust myself, Senator Feinstein. I trust Senators 

and Members of Congress who know the ground on which they live 

to make these decisions. That is the reason it is frustrating for all 

of us. 

We all have different reasons to be frustrated, and I do look forward to working with you on reforming the Corps. I know the frustration you have had. I have done everything in my power to help 

you in Louisiana, and you have helped me with Sacramento and so 

on. So I just want you to know that I am excited to hear your enthusiasm for a bill. 

It is worth noting that the last bill passed out of this Committee 

was quite bipartisan, to the extent that it was vetoed by George W. 

Bush. What did we get? Seventy votes, I think, and an override 

plus. So it is very strongly supported. 

We have our challenges because there are no more earmarks, so 

we have to figure out a way to set in place standards for projects, 

87 

and we are not going to have any earmarks because we can’t because there will be a hold on the bill, it goes nowhere. So we won’t 

have projects; we will have standards for projects, and that is what 

we are working on. 

So just to reiterate, because I think it is very important because, 

Senator Vitter, you have expressed the feelings of a lot of people 

around here when you say it has been far too long since we have 

had a WRDA bill. I couldn’t agree with you more. It was far too 

long until we had a highway bill, and with your help and others 

we broke that, and we can do it again. Regardless of who heads 

this Committee, I am not worried about WRDA. I am worried about 

other things, but not worried about WRDA, so we will get a WRDA 

bill done. 

But just to expedite it, I will get my dream bill in place, give it 

to you and your staff, give it to Senator Inhofe and his staff, give 

it to Senator Baucus. Take a pencil and a pen, cross out, add, and 

let’s get started. And then if that process goes well over this period 

of time when we are not here, as soon as we get back, if we can 

reach agreement during the break, and maybe we will talk during 

that time, sir, then we can bring the actual bill for markup in the 

lame duck, just to put our marker down and take it to the leadership on both sides. 

I now call on Senator Merkley. Sorry I went on so long, Senator. 

Go ahead. You have 10 minutes. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MERKLEY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Senator MERKLEY. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And 

thank you all for being here. I think this hearing is very important 

to create some momentum. 

I hold a lot of town halls. I think it is now 144 since I was elected. At every town hall I start with a half-hour pre-meeting with 

the mayors and city commissioners and State legislators and county commissioners, and it is very hard to get through any one of 

those gatherings without a number of key water projects being 

raised, water projects of the type that would be funded through the 

Water Resources Development Act or WRDA bill: waste treatment, 

bank and wetland restoration, dredging for channels, navigation 

channels, dredging for turning basins, levee repair, levee recertification, dam repair, and so on and so forth. 

So I appreciate the testimony you have brought forward to help 

focus attention on this vital infrastructure; not only this is a great 

time to be building infrastructure in America when the construction industry is flat on its back and interest rates are low. 

So I know that projects may not be identified as in the past. Certainly I will be advocating for whatever pools of grant or financing 

exist for the projects in Oregon. I have a long list here of projects 

that I have talked with Oregonians about, often essential to the 

success of our communities, both urban and rural. 

I know you all hear this type of report from virtually every Senator, but probably the reason that everyone up on this panel comes 

from a coastal State is it is a particularly powerful issue if you 

come from a State where the economy is dependent upon port access, ocean access, as our States are. 

88 

I wanted to connect with you all in terms of one key piece of this 

puzzle, which is the harbor maintenance trust fund. It is my understanding that collections have far exceeded the funds that have 

been appropriated for harbor maintenance, resulting in water ‘‘surplus.’’ I put surplus in quotes because I believe a surplus has essentially been dedicated to national debt. But it means harbors are 

paying a very specific fee for a very specific purpose, for a purpose 

that is not adequately funded, and yet the funds are being diverted. 

I would just like to hear from you all whether you support this 

current policy of diverting funds, or you would like to see these 

funds utilized for the reason that they are collected in the first 

place. 

Janet. 

Ms. KAVINOKY. Thank you, Senator. 

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a strong supporter of the 

RAMP Act. We absolutely believe that the funds that are deposited 

in to the harbor maintenance trust fund should be fully utilized 

every year for their intended purpose. There is no reason to let 

maintenance dredging needs go unaddressed while dollars that 

users are paying sit in a fund. In fact, Senator Vitter has been such 

a strong supporter of full utilization of the harbor maintenance 

trust fund. You have. Many others have. And the Chamber will 

continue to fight with the coalition to find a solution so that those 

funds can be used for their intended purpose. 

Senator MERKLEY. Would anyone else like to comment? 

Mr. Bridges. 

Mr. BRIDGES. Yes, thank you. The AAPA completely agrees with the Chamber in this matter. Currently, we believe there is a $6.4 

billion balance in this trust fund, $1.5 billion being collected, and 

yet only $800 million is appropriated for this very worthwhile 

cause. 

So we fully and strongly are committed to full use of the harbor 

maintenance tax for the intended purposes. 

Senator MERKLEY. I would ask, Madam Chair, do you think this 

is a possibility as we debate a WRDA bill that we can possibly get 

the harbor maintenance trust fund dedicated to actually being used 

for—— 

Senator BOXER. That would definitely be something that I want 

to do. 

Senator MERKLEY. Thank you. And thank you, Senator Vitter, for 

being a champion on this topic. I appreciate that. I go to community after community after community that says, What are we 

going to do about the siltation of our channel that we have been 

dedicating funds to, we have been contributing funds to this purpose, and the work is not getting done because it is sitting in a 

bank account somewhere. I just think that Senators who don’t 

come from coastal States and understand how important those 

ports are, we need to collectively, from inside the building and from 

outside the building, educate them about that. 

I would like to turn to another issue. Janet, this may be something in your world, but one of the previous Water Resources Development Acts had a section designed to streamline the permitting 

process for both large and small entities, section 214, and I wanted 

89 

to find out what are the results. I would open this up to anybody 

who would like to respond to it. But whether this authority for 

streamlining the permitting has been beneficial in trying to do 

work more effectively, more efficiently. 

Ms. KAVINOKY. Senator, as a matter of fact the Chamber is a 

strong supporter of section 214. When we talk to our members, our 

partners like the Pacific Northwest Waterways Association, what 

we have found is it has helped make significant strides. That is 

something I think can be built upon in the next WRDA bill. As 

Senator Vitter and Senator Boxer talked about, the frustration, the 

need for Corps reform means that we can take the best elements 

of section 214 and find additional ways to streamline processes and 

increase those partnerships. 

I will be happy to address some of the more specific benefits for 

you in some follow up questions if you had those for the record. 

Senator MERKLEY. Great. Thank you. 

Would anybody else like to comment on this? 

Mr. BRIDGES. Yes, I would like to echo those sentiments and just 

magnify by saying that more than half of the Corps’ districts are 

currently using this process. It has been very beneficial to the 

agencies that have been involved in that partnership. So we would 

encourage making section 214 a more permanent part of any future 

WRDA bills. 

Senator MERKLEY. Well, thank you. I just want to close by, 

again, appreciating your testimony and your help in bringing expertise to build momentum. 

Madam Chair, thank you for spearheading this effort. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Senator. 

We have been getting a very good, united response from all of 

you. I just have one more question I was going to ask Mr. Calhoun. 

I believe the next WRDA bill should look at the issues addressing 

the inland waterways, and this is particularly interesting to Senator Inhofe. He is very concerned about this. Many recognize we 

need to ensure the system is functioning as efficiently as possible, 

and I plan to work with my colleagues to evaluate recommendations for improvement of the system. How much longer do you 

think the existing system can continue to operate before we face 

significant impacts on its ability to reliably move goods? 

Mr. CALHOUN. No longer at all. We are facing issues today on the 

riverways. Over the weekend, this happened to be an accident, but 

at lock and dam 27, that lock has been shut down, reopened at 

midnight last night, and created economic harm of $2.5 million to 

$3 million a day due to being shut down. So these closures, whether they are scheduled or unscheduled due to maritime accidents or 

due to just deteriorating of the infrastructure, continue to create 

problems for navigation, and it is adding cost to the system. It is 

still operating, but at a much higher cost. And as the cost goes 

higher, we become less competitive in world markets. 

I can’t predict when we are going to see another lock wall collapse and fall into the river. I am not an engineer. We are very reliant upon the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to tell us what needs 

to be done and what the priorities are. 

I was part of the Inland Waterways User Board when we addressed the capital development plan, and we went through and we 

90 

tried to prioritize the projects and identify which ones were in the 

worst shape; we tried to identify which ones created the most economic benefit for the nation. It is very, very clear that we need to 

do something, and we need to do something now. 

Senator BOXER. Does anyone else want to add to that issue about 

your concern about the ability to operate without moving forward 

with a robust bill? 

Ms. KAVINOKY. Certainly, as I pointed out in my oral statement, 

there are many areas of the economy that are affected currently. 

Look at the aggregate industry and how that could erode the benefits of the Federal highway bill. It is also important to point out 

that we talk a lot about containerized goods movement, but in particular in southeast Louisiana and southwest Texas, or I may have 

that wrong and it could be southwest Louisiana and southeast 

Texas. That might make more sense. 

The nation’s crude oil industry and refining are strongly dependent on having adequate harbor depths and channels. We are talking about America’s energy security. We are talking about the 

movements of the pulpit paper industry. America’s steel industry 

is strongly dependent on waterways. And we hear again and again 

from our members that unreliability, the question of can we actually get it there on time, is fairly significant. 

So I think across the board we need to address these issues. We 

are seeing problems already today. 

Senator BOXER. Yes. Well, I thank you all. I was going to say 

something here, and I think I will about how we are going to proceed. I already said I am going to put together a bill, and I am 

going to get it to my colleagues on both sides for their comment, 

and then hopefully we will have a really good draft that is a bipartisan draft. 

At the point that we have a bill, I hope I can call on each and 

every one of you to help us, because we did that with the highway 

bill. It was very successful. So if you all get a call from me, I hope 

you will take it. Can I get that assurance? Excellent. I am not suggesting after I speak to you that you will be part of the effort, but 

I think you will be, because I do plan to have a bipartisan bill and 

a strong bill. 

I see Senator Boozman is here. I was just going to close down, 

but I am happy to stay for you, sir. Go right ahead. I will defer 

closing down. Use your time for whatever you want. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Sure. 

Senator BOOZMAN. That is very kind. 

Senator BOXER. Sure. 

Senator BOOZMAN. This is so important. I really just wanted to 

thank you and Senator Inhofe for having this hearing and certain 

to express the fact that I am totally committed to going forward 

with the process. 

With that, what I would like to do is put my opening statement 

into the record. 

Senator BOXER. Absolutely. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Boozman was not received at 

time of print.] 

91 

Senator BOOZMAN. Again, I apologize for not being here. We are 

in a situation now where we have got probably 2 weeks’ worth of 

work to do in about 2 and a half or 3 days. 

Senator BOXER. That is right. 

Senator BOOZMAN. So it makes it very, very difficult. But I do appreciate you all being here, appreciate the testimony. I had an opportunity to look at some of that and will continue to look at it now 

that we have had the hearing. 

As I came in I was listening to Senator Boxer with the admonition that you might be hearing from her on the phone and things 

like that. I think the good thing in this particular situation, we 

hear a lot about the in-fighting of Republicans and Democrats, but 

I think we are all united on the Committee to get this done. 

Senator BOXER. We are. 

Senator BOOZMAN. I appreciate your leadership, Senator Boxer. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. I am so glad you came, and 

I just was going to tell your staff we are going to present a draft 

bill to everyone to take a pen to and add, subtract, comment, whatever you want to do, because we really need to have a hearing on 

the bill when we get back after the election, so that is the goal. 

I appreciated how you helped us on Highways. I appreciate how 

you are helping on this, because we all agree on this one. I mean, 

today I have sitting next to each other the Chamber of Commerce 

and the Union, just as an example. It is the same idea. 

Staff looked up when we overrode the veto of President Bush on 

the WRDA bill. We had, I think, 77 votes to override. It is clear 

that we need to get these things done. 

I really want to say thank you to all of you. You all were eloquent; you were clear. There is no doubt about what we need to 

do, and we need to do it quickly. I look forward to working with 

colleagues on both sides, and certainly working with all of you. 

I ask unanimous consent to enter letters and testimony to the 

record supporting action on the WRDA bill: the Associated General 

Contractors, Association of State Dam Safety Officials, National 

Waterways Conference, National Levee Issues Alliance, Association 

of State Floodplain Managers, The Nature Conservancy, the Water 

Resources Coalition. 

[The referenced information was not received at time of print.] 

Senator BOXER. This reminds us of when we undertook the highway bill, so let’s hope that our efforts, Senator Boozman, have the 

same effect: that we get this done as soon as possible. 

I look forward to working with everybody on it. 

Thank you so much. We stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:20 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

[Additional statements submitted for the record follow:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

Madam Chair, Ranking Member Inhofe, thank you for having this hearing today 

to spotlight the benefits of investing in our nation’s water resources. 

Today’s hearing is about the job creation potential of investing in water infrastructure—ports, navigation, inland waterways, flood control, and environmental 

restoration. 

I’d like to start by talking a little bit about the context in which I view this legislation. 

92 

I have a short recipe to continue to drive our recovery: tax reform, infrastructure, 

workforce, R&D, and trade. 

As I frequently pointed out during our efforts to pass an aviation bill and a transportation bill earlier this session, now is a critical time to be focused on infrastructure investment. 

However, it is also a particularly challenging time, as both Federal and State governments are facing daunting deficits. 

In this context, I believe that a WRDA bill can address three of the five points 

of my plan: we can invest in water infrastructure that boosts trade and helps us 

sell American products around the globe, and we can do so in a way that is fiscally 

responsible. 

In other words, we must continue to invest, but we must also to invest more wisely. 

There are some excellent examples of such projects in my State of Delaware. 

We are in the process of deepening the main channel in the Delaware River from 

40 to 45 feet. 

This will help ports up and down the river, including the Port of Wilmington, to 

accommodate new, bigger ships that will begin arriving on the East Coast when the 

Panama Canal expansion is complete. 

A deeper channel means greater trade—that is a message I heard from businesses 

at the Port of Wilmington when I visited recently. 

Flood control projects along Delaware’s Atlantic coast are another great example. 

These projects protect our coastal population and property from storm damage, 

which supports an entire tourism industry along the Delaware coast. 

Tourism is the fifth-largest private sector employer in Delaware representing about 15,000 full time jobs and $750 million in annual revenue. 

So investment is critical. However, as important as projects like these are, we also 

need to be mindful of provisions that can make sure our investments are smart, 

strategic, and prioritized. 

That’s why I was proud to support key reforms in our last WRDA bill, in 2007. 

For example, I was proud to lead on an amendment to require independent peer 

review of projects. 

In 2006 the Government Accountability Office had reported to Congress that recent Corps studies ‘‘did not provide a reasonable basis for decisionmaking’’ because 

of ‘‘errors, mistakes, and miscalculations, and used invalid assumptions and outdated data.’’ 

Since then, this measure has brought greater transparency to the value of Corps’ 

projects and the way that they are designed, built, and operated. 

But this provision, which enjoyed wide support in 2007, is slated to expire in 

2014. 

Similar reforms from 2007 have resulted in a stronger and more cost effective program that better supports our economy, better protects our people, and is more 

mindful of taxpayers. 

It was a pleasure to work with this Committee to pass these provisions in 2007, 

and since then we’ve worked to ensure that they are well implemented and having 

the desired impact. 

As we move forward, let’s not forget these reforms. Some of the best advice I ever 

received was, ‘‘Find out what works, and do more of it.’’ 

Well, now is the time to examine how well they are working, and do more of it. 

And where they are not working, we must revisit and improve these policies. 

Shifting gears, I’d like to talk for a minute about a recent feature in my State’s 

newspaper, the Delaware News Journal. 

The feature included more than a dozen articles over the course of an entire week 

that showed that the sea level along the Delaware coast is rising, and communities 

are facing major challenges as a result of this. 

Now, I have been convinced by the data that this is a result of global climate 

change. 

But whether it is due to climate change or not does not actually matter. Because 

it is a fact that in Delaware and other States, every year the water line is higher. 

We must take steps to ensure that the people and communities who depend on 

Corps projects can have confidence that those projects are built with rising seas in 

mind and are built to withstand the stresses of stronger and more frequent storms. 

This is not just an issue for coastal States. Record flooding in the Midwest and 

Northeast last summer and the drought that we are still suffering through across 

this country are both evidence that we need to be developing projects with a changing climate in mind. 

This Committee has tackled big issues several times this year, and I am confident 

that we can find agreement on a path forward on this legislation. 

93 

1 U.S. Department of Transportation, State Transportation Statistics: 2011, available at http:// 

www.bts.gov/publications/stateltransportationlstatistics/ 

stateltransportationlstatisticsl2011/index.html. 

If you doubt that for 1 minute, just look at how this Committee’s leadership defied 

the naysayers to pass a transportation bill. 

So in closing, let me say that I am delighted that Chairwoman Boxer and Ranking 

Member Inhofe are using every last minute to try to address the important priorities of America. 

I want to commend our leaders at Environment and Public Works for putting 

such a high priority on moving this bill, and I hope that we can continue work on 

this important legislation when Congress returns after the election. 

Thank you. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA

Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe, for 

holding today’s hearing. We are almost 5 years removed from the last time Congress 

passed a Water Resources Development Act, and today America’s program for maintaining and modernizing our ports, waterways, locks, dams, and levees is in need 

of attention. For that reason, I applaud you both for dedicating yourselves and your 

Committee staff to this important issue. In my opening remarks this morning, I 

would like to share my thoughts about priorities that I think are important for this 

Committee to consider when crafting the next WRDA bill. 

First, we need to redouble our efforts to accomplish important infrastructure improvements at the least possible cost to the taxpayer. Even during periods of tight 

budgets, maintaining and improving our infrastructure is a critical function of the 

Federal Government and can actually save taxpayer dollars in the long run. My 

State knows first-hand the value of America’s water resources infrastructure. Alabama is home to over 1,270 miles of navigable waterways (ranked 6th nationally 

in terms of total inland waterway mileage), 1 and the Army Corps of Engineers operates more than a dozen locks in Alabama that facilitate commercial and recreational 

boat traffic. 

We also have one of the nation’s largest full service seaports, the Port of Mobile, 

which provides a waterborne transportation link to more than 20 States and markets around the world. In June of this year the Alabama State Port Authority welcomed the first Post-Panamax sized container ship to the Port of Mobile—the first 

of many large international container ships that will be frequenting Mobile in the 

years ahead. The Alabama State Port Authority and its partners have invested more 

than $340 million in recent years in facility improvements and modern technology 

to accommodate the increased demand for the port that will result from opportunities such as the expansion of the Panama Canal. 

Homegrown economic development projects also demonstrate the importance of 

our ports and inland waterways to the nation’s economy. I recently visited a coal 

mining operation in Alabama owned by Walter Energy, which is a leading coal producer headquartered in Hoover, Alabama. Walter Energy employs approximately 

4,400 employees and contractors and has operations in the United States, Canada, 

and the United Kingdom. In May of this year Walter Energy announced plans for 

a 6-year, $1.2 billion economic development project in Alabama referred to as the 

‘‘Blue Creek Energy Project.’’ This project will involve new coal mines (the largest 

of which will be located in Tuscaloosa County, Alabama), river port operations (including a barge loading terminal in Walker County, Alabama, on the Black Warrior 

River), a new coal loading terminal at the Port of Mobile, and other investments 

throughout the State. The Blue Creek Energy Project is expected to begin producing 

up to 4 million tons of coal for export starting in 2018 with employment exceeding 

500 workers. This important project provides an excellent example of the critical 

role that our nation’s ports and inland waterways can play in the development of 

American energy resources, job creation, and economic development. 

Indeed, proper investment in our nation’s water resources infrastructure is critical 

to the nation’s economy, environment, and national security. This is a national 

issue, not tied only to one particular State. Regrettably, President Obama’s $840 billion stimulus program in 2009, which was sold on the idea of infrastructure investment, spent less than 4 percent on infrastructure projects (and a small sliver of that 

was spent on water resources infrastructure). I would urge the Committee to give 

serious consideration to all reasonable proposals that will facilitate modernization 

of our nation’s water resources infrastructure in a timely, cost effective, and equitable manner. 

94 

Second, I would urge the Committee to focus on much needed reforms to the Army 

Corps Civil Works program that will ensure that the nation obtains the maximum 

return possible on its water resources. At this time, I would like to submit for the 

record comments provided to my office by the Coalition of Alabama Waterways 

along with an editorial published last year by an Alabama member of the Inland 

Waterways Users Board regarding needed reforms to the nation’s program for maintaining and modernizing the inland waterway system. This letter and the editorial 

raise important concerns, and I would ask that these concerns be reviewed and considered by the Committee. 

Likewise, I understand that Representative Ed Whitfield recently introduced a 

bill, The WAVE4 Act, which has been endorsed by the national waterway associations and is cosponsored by dozens of Members of Congress, including Representatives Bonner, Sewell, Rogers, Bachus, and Aderholt of Alabama. I am informed that 

this proposal recognizes that commercial users of the inland river system are willing 

to accept an increase in the inland waterways fuel charge if that increase is combined with other important reforms to the Corps Civil Works program. I look forward to learning more about this proposal. 

Third, I would also urge the Committee to give close consideration to the condition 

of our nation’s flood control projects, including the safety of dams and levees in the 

United States. The Committee should also evaluate ways to provide assistance, in 

a cost effective manner, for State level water supply infrastructure needs. 

Fourth, I am also concerned that the Army Corps is increasingly exceeding the 

limits of its discretion to reprioritize water project purposes without the involvement 

of Congress. I would urge the Committee to ensure that the next WRDA bill contains provisions establishing specific limits to ensure that the Army Corps does not 

make material changes to the uses for specific purposes at water resources projects 

without authorization from Congress. 

Fifth, I would urge the Committee to consider ways to ensure that the Inland Waterways User Board—the Federal advisory committee established by Congress in 

1986 to advise the Congress and the Army Corps on inland waterways issues—has 

a full complement of members in order to conduct the activities entrusted to the 

board by Congress. I understand that there was a delay in the Corps’ acting upon 

several recent nominations to the board, one of which involved a nominee from Alabama, and that the board, for a time, lacked a quorum of members necessary to conduct business. Consideration should be given to finding ways to ensure that this scenario is not repeated. The Committee should also closely review and scrutinize the 

Army Corps’ recent proposals to alter the organization and composition of the Users 

Board. 

Sixth, I am concerned by the Administration’s failure to properly implement certain directives of the Water Resources Development Act of 2007. For example, section 2031 of WRDA 2007 directed the Secretary of the Army to update the 1983 

‘‘Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water and Related 

Land Resources Implementation Studies.’’ The Corps was directed to make these revisions within 2 years and to provide Congress with an ‘‘explanation of the intent 

of each revision, how each revision is consistent with [section 2031], and the probable impact of each revision on water resources projects . . . ’’ However, the current 

Administration removed this effort from the control of the Corps and handed it to 

the White House Council on Environmental Quality, which initiated a much broader 

effort to completely rewrite the principles and guidelines in a manner inconsistent 

with the clear direction of Congress in WRDA 2007. I would urge the Committee 

to review this and other situations where the Administration and/or the Corps has 

failed to follow the directions of the Congress as embodied in prior WRDA bills. In 

addition, I would urge the Committee to find ways to streamline the environmental 

review process for water resources projects to ensure that projects are reviewed and 

approved under reasonable timeframes, and that appropriate exclusions are provided where warranted. 

Seventh, the Committee should also consider the impact of recent Corps initiatives to alter operations at certain lower use locks in a manner that will adversely 

impact recreational and commercial navigation. On September 17, 2012, I sent a letter—joined by other members of the Alabama congressional delegation—to the Army 

Corps expressing significant concerns with their decision to implement operational 

changes at several Corps locks in Alabama. It is my understanding that the Corps 

intends to drastically reduce or no longer perform lockages for recreational 

watercraft on certain waterways, including the Alabama and Chattahoochee Rivers, 

and that the Corps has made other lock operation changes impacting both commercial and recreational vessels on these and other rivers in our State. We have been 

informed that the Corps intends to begin implementing this new initiative as early 

as October 7, 2012. This decision appears to have been made without adequate pubVerDate Aug 31 2005 06:57 Aug 16, 2017 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 S:\_EPW\DOCS\25113.TXT SONYA
95 

2 I am a co-sponsor of the ‘‘Implementation of the Simpson-Bowles Spending Reductions Act’’ 

(S. 1936). This bipartisan bill would implement seven specific spending reforms recommended 

by the Simpson-Bowles Commission including an end to the unwarranted use of earmarks. 3 CRS, Army Corps of Engineers Water Resource Projects: Authorization and Appropriations, 

at 2 (Aug. 19, 2011). 

lic notice, public hearings, or an opportunity for the affected stakeholders to submit 

comments for the Corps’ consideration. While I understand that the Corps is acting 

as part of a national initiative to prioritize the use of available funds, it is troubling 

that the Corps seems to be acting unilaterally, without the substantial involvement 

of Congress or key stakeholders, in a manner that will prevent recreational users 

in Alabama from navigating many parts of our State’s incredible network of waterways. This initiative will also impact the commercial use of these waterways and 

could, thereby, harm economic growth in the region. I would ask our Committee to 

review this Corps initiative as part of the WRDA process. 

Finally, I would like to conclude by urging caution on at least two budget related 

aspects of your important work. One, I will not be submitting any earmarked authorization requests at this time for at least a couple of reasons. I believe that 

abuses of the authorization and appropriations processes have contributed to our 

nation’s massive debt problem. Until such time as our nation’s fiscal situation improves and much needed reforms to the earmark process are enacted, I cannot support legislation containing earmarks that violate the letter and spirit of the current 

earmark moratorium. In May 2007 I voted in support of final passage of the WRDA 

bill in the Senate but was compelled to oppose the final conference report that spent 

$9 billion more than the Senate versions and contained billions of dollars in authorizations for earmarked projects that were added during the House-Senate conference. I remain hopeful that the same dynamic will not be repeated during this 

WRDA process. 2

Beyond these earmark concerns, there is already a substantial backlog of authorized water resources projects, which strongly suggests that authorizing a slate of 

new projects would be imprudent at this time. A recent report by the Congressional 

Research Service (CRS) identified a backlog of more than 1,000 authorized activities 

and construction projects totaling more than $60 billion, 3 an amount which exceeds 

by more than 10-fold the Army Corps Civil Works budget for fiscal year 2012. As 

importantly, it is imperative that the next WRDA bill comply fully with the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93–344) and the Budget Control Act of 2011 

(Pub. L. 112–25). As the Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee, my 

staff and I will be reviewing any budget related considerations very closely. 

Again, thank you, Chairman Boxer and Senator Inhofe, for setting aside time this 

morning to discuss these very important matters. I look forward to hearing from our 

witnesses and to working with you both on a Water Resources Development Act in 

the months ahead. 

[The referenced information follows:] 

96 


25113.062
97 


25113.063
98 


25113.064
99 


25113.065
100 


25113.066
101 

[Additional material submitted for the record follows:] 


25113.067
102 

Æ 


25113.068