43–400 PDF 

Calendar No. 876 

110TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 110–416 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

BILL, 2009 

JULY 14, 2008.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DORGAN, from the Committee on Appropriations, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 3258] 

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 3258) making appropriations for energy and water development and related 

agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for 

other purposes, favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do 

pass. 

Amount in new budget (obligational) authority, fiscal year 2009 

Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $33,767,000,000 

Amount of 2008 appropriations ............................... 31,508,398,000 

Amount of 2009 budget estimate ............................ 31,695,700,000 

Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 

2008 appropriations .......................................... ∂2,258,602,000 

2009 budget estimate ........................................ ∂2,071,300,000 
(2) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 4 

Summary of Estimates and Recommendations ..................................................... 4 

Title I: 

Department of Defense—Civil: Department of the Army: 

Corps of Engineers—Civil: 

General Investigations ....................................................................... 21 

Construction, General ........................................................................ 33 

Flood Control, Mississippi River and Tributaries ........................... 53 

Operation and Maintenance, General .............................................. 56 

Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies .......................................... 79 

Regulatory Program ........................................................................... 79 

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program ......................... 80 

General Expenses ............................................................................... 81 

General Provisions—Corps of Engineers—Civil .............................. 83 

Title II: 

Department of the Interior: 

Central Utah Project Completion Account .............................................. 85 

Bureau of Reclamation: 

Water and Related Resources ........................................................... 85 

Central Valley Project Restoration Fund ......................................... 93 

California Bay-Delta Restoration ...................................................... 94 

Policy and Administration ................................................................. 94 

General Provisions—Department of the Interior .................................... 94 

Title III: 

Department of Energy: 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ............................................... 97 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability ..................................... 104 

Nuclear Energy .................................................................................. 105 

Fossil Energy Research and Development ....................................... 107 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ........................................ 110 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve ............................................................. 110 

Northeast Home Heating Oil Reserve .............................................. 110 

Energy Information Administration ................................................. 110 

Non-defense Environmental Cleanup ...................................................... 111 

Uranium Enrichment Decontamination and Decommissioning Fund .. 113 

Science ........................................................................................................ 113 

High Energy Physics .......................................................................... 113 

Nuclear Physics .................................................................................. 114 

Biological and Environmental Research .......................................... 114 

Basic Energy Sciences ....................................................................... 116 

Nuclear Waste Disposal ............................................................................ 118 

Departmental Administration .................................................................. 119 

Office of Inspector General ....................................................................... 120 

Atomic Energy Defense Activities: 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Weapons Activities ...................................................................... 120 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ............................................. 127 

Naval Reactors ............................................................................ 129 

Office of the Administrator ........................................................ 129 

Environmental and Other Defense Activities: 

Defense Environmental Cleanup ...................................................... 129 

Other Defense Activities .................................................................... 133 

Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal ...................................................... 133 
Page

3 

Title III—Continued 

Department of Energy—Continued 

Environmental and Other Defense Activities—Continued 

Power Marketing Administrations: 

Operation and Maintenance, Southeastern Power Administration ....................................................................................... 134 

Operation and Maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration ....................................................................................... 134 

Construction, Rehabilitation, Operation and Maintenance, 

Western Area Power Administration ..................................... 134 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: Salaries and Expenses .. 135 

General Provisions—Department of Energy ........................................... 157 

Title IV: 

Independent Agencies: 

Appalachian Regional Commission .......................................................... 158 

Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ................................................. 159 

Delta Regional Authority .......................................................................... 159 

Denali Commission ................................................................................... 159 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission .............................................................. 159 

Office of Inspector General ................................................................ 160 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board .................................................. 160 

Tennessee Valley Authority Office of the Inspector General ................. 161 

Title V: General Provisions ..................................................................................... 162 

Compliance With Paragraph 7, Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 163 

Compliance With Paragraph 7(c), Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 163 

Compliance With Paragraph 12, Rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules of the 

Senate ................................................................................................................... 164 

Budgetary Impact Statement ................................................................................. 173 

Disclosure of Congressionally Directed Spending Items ...................................... 173 
(4) 

PURPOSE 

The purpose of this bill is to provide appropriations for the fiscal 

year 2009 beginning October 1, 2008, and ending September 30, 

2009, for energy and water development, and for other related purposes. It supplies funds for water resources development programs 

and related activities of the Department of the Army, Civil Functions—U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Civil Works Program in title 

I; for the Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation in 

title II; for the Department of Energy’s energy research activities, 

including environmental restoration and waste management, and 

atomic energy defense activities of the National Nuclear Security 

Administration in title III; and for related independent agencies 

and commissions, including the Appalachian Regional Commission, 

Delta Regional Authority, Denali Commission, and the Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission in title IV. 

SUMMARY OF ESTIMATES AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The fiscal year 2009 budget estimates for the bill total 

$31,695,700,000 in new budget (obligational) authority. The recommendation of the Committee totals $33,767,000,000. This is 

$2,071,300,000 above the budget estimates and $2,258,602,000 

above the enacted appropriation for the current fiscal year. 

SUBCOMMITTEE HEARINGS

The Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water held six 

sessions in connection with the fiscal year 2009 appropriation bill. 

Witnesses included officials and representatives of the Federal 

agencies under the subcommittee’s jurisdiction. 

The recommendations for fiscal year 2009 therefore, have been 

developed after careful consideration of available data. 

VOTES IN THE COMMITTEE

By a vote of 28 to 10 the Committee on July 10, 2008, recommended that the bill, as amended, be reported to the Senate. 
(5) 

TITLE I 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

INTRODUCTION

The Corps of Engineers is made up of approximately 35,000 civilian and 650 military members that perform both military and civil 

works functions. The military and civilian engineers, scientists and 

other specialists work hand in hand as leaders in engineering and 

environmental matters. The diverse workforce of biologists, engineers, geologists, hydrologists, natural resource managers and 

other professionals meets the demands of changing times and requirements as a vital part of America’s Army. 

The Corps’ mission is to provide quality, responsive engineering 

services to the Nation including: 

—Planning, designing, building and operating water resources 

and other civil works projects. (Navigation, Flood Control, Environmental Protection, Disaster Response, et cetera) 

—Designing and managing the construction of military facilities 

for the Army and Air Force. (Military Construction) 

—Providing design and construction management support for 

other Defense and Federal agencies. (Interagency and International Services) 

The Energy and Water bill only funds the Civil Works missions 

of the Corps of Engineers. Approximately 23,000 civilians and 

about 190 military officers are responsible for this nationwide mission. 

From our hundreds of rivers, lakes and wetlands to our thousands of miles of coastal shoreline, we are fortunate in America to 

enjoy an abundance of water resources. As a Nation, we value 

these resources for their natural beauty; for the many ways they 

help meet human needs; and for the fact that they provide habitat 

for thousands of species of plants, fish and wildlife. 

The Congress has given the Corps of Engineers the responsibility 

of helping to care for these important aquatic resources. 

Through its Civil Works program the Corps carries out a wide 

array of projects that provide: 

—Coastal storm damage reduction 

—Disaster preparedness and response 

—Environmental protection and restoration 

—Flood damage reduction 

—Hydropower 

—Navigable waters 

—Recreational opportunities 
6 

—Regulatory oversight 

—Water supply 

One of the biggest challenges the Corps and other Government 

agencies face is finding the right balance among the often conflicting concerns our society has related to our water resources. Society wants these resources to help fuel economic growth (navigation, hydropower). Society wants them to provide social benefits 

(recreation). And finally society wants to be sure that they are 

available for future generations (environmental protection and restoration). 

The Corps is charged with seeking to achieve the best possible 

balance among these competing demands through an integrated approach to water resources management that focuses on regional solutions, involving an array of stakeholders (that is other Government agencies, environmental groups, businesses and private organizations). In recent years, the Corps has implemented this approach largely by concentrating on watersheds. 

OVERVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2009 BUDGET REQUEST

The fiscal year 2009 budget request for the Corps of Engineers 

is composed of $4,741,000,000 in new budget authority. This is a 

decrease of $130,000,000 from the fiscal year 2008 request. The 

President’s overall budget priorities are stated to be to (1) continue 

long-term economic growth, (2) win the global war on terror, and 

(3) secure the homeland. The Committee fails to understand how 

this budget proposal for the Corps complies with either goal 1 or 

goal 3. How can one be taken seriously about providing for long 

term economic growth when one is proposing less funding for national infrastructure that contributes to economic growth than had 

been proposed in the previous year. It is certainly not because a 

large number of projects were completed in fiscal year 2008 or that 

a considerable amount of backlogged maintenance work was done. 

It appears to once again be a short-sighted budgetary decision. The 

Committee finds it remarkable that the administration can request 

and receive billions of dollars for infrastructure improvements in 

other countries and yet continues to shortchange our own. This 

budget request is more than $846,000,000 less than the fiscal year 

2008 enacted budget for the Corps. The fiscal year 2008 enacted 

amount was contained in a bill the President signed that comported to his top-line budget numbers. However, once again, it appears that the baseline for the Corps budget is not the enacted 

amount but the amount the President proposes. If the administration would accept the reality of the Nation’s infrastructure needs 

and budget accordingly, the gulf between the budget request and 

the enacted amount might not be as large. At a time when this existing infrastructure, the foundation of our economic security and 

quality of life, is depreciating much faster than it is being recapitalized, when our increasing population is placing much greater 

stress on the Nation’s vital water resources, when shifts in population centers mean new and different problems and when a growing environmental awareness requires new solutions to persistent 

problems, this underfunding is unacceptable and threatens our continued well-being. 
7 

The Nation has been struck by a number of natural disasters 

over the last several years ranging from hurricanes, tornados, 

nor’easters and river flooding. This Committee has appropriated 

more than $14,000,000,000 to the Corps of Engineers to cope with 

the effects of these disasters on Federal facilities or facilities that 

are part of the Federal protection systems. This is more than six 

times the annual construction budget of the Corps. Some of these 

damages may not have been incurred had more robust infrastructure budgets been proposed by this and prior administrations. Yet 

no lesson seems to be learned from these disasters. The current 

flooding in the Midwest is in many ways a predictable repeat of the 

1993 flood. Few of the recommendations made after that event 

were implemented. If they had, much of the damage and suffering 

currently occurring might have been avoided. Congress has successfully increased investments in our Nation’s infrastructure over 

the last 8 years however these increases have most often been accomplished without the active support of the administration. 

The administration budget continues the trend of underfunding 

the General Investigations [GI] account thereby depriving us of the 

Nation’s primary tool to identify future challenges and develop innovative solutions to water resources challenges and needs. The fiscal year 2002 GI request was $130,000,000. This has declined to 

$91,000,000 in fiscal year 2009. Compare this to the fiscal year 

2008 enacted amount of $167,000,000. This decline is not due to a 

reduction in water resources needs, rather, it appears to be a deliberate attempt to choke off the Corps planning program. Of the 

$91,000,000 recommended in the budget request less than 50 percent is for actual studies that might eventually become projects. 

Nearly half of these study funds are dedicated to a single study. 

Therefore, the rest of the Nation has to share a little over 

$21,000,000 for all of the rest of the studies in the Nation. This 

budget request greatly inhibits the Corps ability to do proper planning or to address workforce considerations. Budgets such as these, 

if enacted, will erode the Corps technical competency in the planning area. 

Planning in the Corps is a specialized skillset and once that ability is lost, it is difficult to reestablish. Most of the criticisms of the 

Corps project development process in recent years have centered on 

the planning process. The administration is providing funding for 

some improvements to the Planning program such as funding the 

Planning Associates Program and Planning Centers of Expertise. 

However, planning studies have to be undertaken to utilize these 

improvements. The Committee believes that the Corps should have 

a robust planning program to not only address new water resource 

needs but to evaluate changes throughout the project development 

process. Continued budgets like this will lead to a complete loss of 

this vital Corps of Engineers’ competency. The administration 

should seriously revise their priorities for this account in the fiscal 

year 2010 budget. 

The Construction, General [CG] and Operation and Maintenance 

[O&M] accounts have to be discussed jointly due to the way the 

budget request blurs the line between the traditional project split 

between the two accounts. 
8 

Priorities for the CG account are based on six criteria for fiscal 

year 2009. The primary criterion again is the project’s benefit to 

cost ratio [BCR]. Projects with high risk to human safety and a 

BCR greater than 1.5 or are significant or cost effective aquatic 

ecosystem restoration projects are given funding for current contract needs. No new construction starts met the administration’s 

new start criteria for fiscal year 2009. Projects complying with 

treaties and biological opinions and/or meeting mitigation requirements as well as dam safety, seepage control and static instability 

correction were given the maximum funding for efficient and effective execution. 

Once again, the O&M account appears to have been increased by more than $231,000,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted 

amount. However the administration has again proposed shifting 

major project rehabilitations and environmental compliance activities associated with completed projects from CG to O&M. Also 

shifted to O&M are dredged material disposal projects, beach erosion restoration due to completed navigation projects and initial 

nourishment of beach projects. This shifting of projects was allegedly done in the name of budget transparency—trying to show the 

true costs of project operations. This seems to be a very weak justification in that the Bureau of Reclamation which has similar 

projects in their construction accounts still has not received similar 

guidance in their budget preparation. By shifting some of these 

projects such as major rehabs and beach nourishments to O&M the 

administration was able to circumvent their own new start criteria. 

Further, by funding environmental compliance activities in the individual O&M projects seems to make the budget process less 

transparent by hiding how much these activities are costing the 

Nation by distributing these costs across multiple projects as opposed to a single line item in previous budgets. Finally, the administration’s budget proposal limits coastal storm damage reduction 

projects that require periodic sand renourishments to those where 

the erosion is due to navigation projects. It also proposes to limit 

Federal participation to initial beach nourishment. 

Shifting of projects from the two accounts totals almost 

$265,000,000. This corresponds to a similar decrease in CG funding 

for fiscal year 2009. If the projects are shifted back to their traditional accounts, the O&M budget is $2,210,225,000. That is over 

$33,000,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 enacted amount. Further 

the administration proposed spreading the O&M funding over 28 

additional individual projects than what they had proposed in fiscal 

year 2008. This is the ultimate example of doing more with less. 

Prices for labor, fuel and materials have all increased over the previous year, not decreased and yet the Corps is expected to do more 

with less. The Committee notes that the Corps maintenance backlog is more than $1,000,000,000 and increases by about 

$100,000,000 annually as the inventory of projects ages. 

After criticism from this Committee concerning the presentation 

of O&M as 21 separate regions based on watersheds, the administration modified their proposal for fiscal year 2009. The O&M 

budget is now proposed as 54 separate regions based on sub watersheds as opposed to discrete projects. The discrete projects are still 

listed for each region, it is just that the administration has not at-
9 

tached any funding levels to any of the projects so this Committee 

nor any one else would know how much funding might be provided 

for individual projects. The lack of specificity and detail in a nearly 

$2,500,000,000 request is appalling and will be discussed in more 

detail later. The Committee continues to believe this so called ‘‘regional budget’ is no more than an aggregation of the projects within a specific watershed not the development of a regional budget. 

The Committee believes that the Corps should budget regionally 

and take advantage of whatever efficiencies can be gained by budgeting in this manner. However, it should also be noted that projects 

are individually analyzed and authorized. Estimates of O&M costs 

are established as a part of the project development process. If individual O&M estimates are not displayed, there is no way to know 

if the projects are costing more or less than was anticipated and 

no way to learn from past errors in developing O&M costs or procedures. 

The regulatory budget is $180,000,000 for fiscal year 2009. This 

is the same as in fiscal year 2008. 

The Committee is disappointed that funding for the Formerly 

Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program [FUSRAP] was cut by 

$10,000,000 from the fiscal year 2008 amount of $140,000,000. This 

program was transferred to the Corps from the Department of Energy, because the Committee was concerned with management and 

cost issues of the program within the Energy Department. This is 

a program that is being well managed by the Corps and should 

have stable, adequate budget resources to continue these radiological clean-up activities. 

The Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies account is funded at $40,000,000 for fiscal year 2009. The Committee supports this 

funding for disaster readiness and preparedness activities of the 

Corps of Engineers. 

The budget request separates the budget request for the Office 

of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) from the General Expenses [GE] account. The Committee continues to believe 

that the Assistant Secretary’s office should be funded in the Defense Appropriations bill. However, until such time as that can be 

reintegrated into that bill, the Committee is grateful to see that the 

budget request proposes it as a separate account. The Assistant 

Secretary’s duties encompass much more than the civil works functions of the Corps of Engineers and the budget needs of the office 

should be addressed separately. 

The Committee is pleased to see an increase in the GE budget 

for fiscal year 2009. With the increases in responsibilities for the 

headquarters of the Corps in overseeing larger budgets as well as 

the massive rebuilding of the flood and storm damage reduction 

measures in the New Orleans area, it is appropriate that this account should be increased. The Committee notes that the Corps operates one of the most efficient headquarters staffs in the National 

Capital region. Only about 3.5 percent of their staffing is at their 

headquarters level as opposed to 10 percent or more for comparable 

agencies in the National Capital region. 

The administration has proposed legislation and funding to complete the 100-year protection for the greater New Orleans Hurricane Protection System as a part of the fiscal year 2009 budget re-
10 

quest. The administration has proposed to authorize a single hurricane protection project to encompass the Lake Ponchartrain and 

Vicinity and the West Bank and Vicinity projects along with the 

other improvements that were authorized and funded in Public 

Law 109–148 and Public Law 109–234. The Southeast Louisiana 

projects that provide interior drainage to this system are also proposed to be included. The Budget proposes $5,671,000,000 in emergency funding as a part of the fiscal year 2009 request. The budget 

proposal also provides legislation to modify the cost sharing for the 

remaining uncompleted cost shared project features to 65 percent 

Federal and 35 percent non-Federal. This change results in an increase to the non-Federal interests of $213,000,000 for a total nonFederal share that exceeds $1,500,000,000. The administration 

says that the Federal funds are needed no later than October 1, 

2008 in order to have all of this work completed by the beginning 

of hurricane season in June 2011. 

The Congress provided these emergency funds in the Supplemental Appropriations Act, (Public Law 110–252) signed by the 

President on June 30, 2008. 

PERFORMANCE BASED BUDGETING

The Committee has watched with interest over the last 5 years 

as the Corps has moved to a ‘‘performance based budget’’ model. 

Unfortunately, the Committee does not see improvement in the 

budgeting of the Nation’s Civil Works infrastructure program as a 

result of this new model. In fact, the Committee believes quite the 

opposite is true. Rather than an integrated program, the budget for 

the Civil Works program seems to continue to degenerate toward 

a yearly collection of interchangeable projects dependent only on 

the budgetary whims and criteria in use in that particular year. 

The current method of performance based budgeting utilized in this 

budget preparation turns the Nation away from infrastructure investments that return two and even three times their cost. 

In fiscal year 2005, more than 130 projects were budgeted by the 

administration for construction; this year there are only about 82. 

However, Congress funded more than 300 projects in fiscal year 

2008 and has averaged about 315 annually since fiscal year 2000. 

Unfortunately, the budget request pretends that these on-going 

projects which have been funded annually for many years in enacted legislation do not exist. Further the budget assumes it costs 

nothing to ignore these projects. If Congress funded only the budget request for Construction, General, the administration would 

quickly discover that termination costs for unfunded ongoing 

projects could easily exceed the request. This is irresponsible budgeting on the part of the administration. 

From the Committee’s perspective, the Corps’ budget seems to be 

developed exactly in the opposite manner that it should be. It appears that overall spending targets are set by the administration 

and then their priority projects are inserted within these targets. 

Criteria are then established to justify funding the lower priority 

projects within the remaining funding targets. The problem with 

budgeting in this manner is evident in the construction account for 

fiscal year 2009. Six priority projects consume 32 percent of the requested dollars in this account. Another 11 projects related to dam 
11 

safety consume another 27 percent. That means that some 65 

projects have to split the remaining 41 percent of the budgeted construction dollars. 

The logic behind this budgeting rational appears to be that concentrating scarce resources on finishing a few higher performing 

projects will allow the Nation to reap the benefits of these projects 

sooner. The trouble with this is that these are long-term projects 

that take many years to complete. At the rate the budget is headed, we will only be funding the administration’s six priority projects 

and the dam safety repairs in another couple of years with little 

else in the pipeline. The Committee questions this rationale when 

benefits of flood control projects can be accrued incrementally as 

project elements are completed. Even navigation projects can accrue benefits for a partially completed project. For instance, the administration claims to be providing completion funds for the Columbia River Channel Deepening project. However, the Committee 

understands that there is a 1 mile segment where additional work 

will be required once the dredging work is completed to provide full 

project depth and dimension. The cost of this 1 mile reach has not 

yet been determined. However, ports and terminals downstream of 

this reach will benefit from the deeper channel and those national 

benefits will accrue to the economy. Even the Port of Portland, 

which is above this reach, believes that with proper tidal conditions, they can reap some benefit from the deeper project until this 

remaining reach is completed. These are net positive benefits to the 

national economy compared to the value of the benefits that are deferred by suspending or terminating these other projects in order 

to concentrate resources on such a few projects. 

In some cases these deferred benefits may never be realized due 

to these terminations. Local sponsors who share in these projects’ 

cost may lose their ability to share these costs or may lose public 

support for finishing these projects. Once these priority projects are 

completed, one has to wonder whether there will be any projects 

or sponsors interested in resuming construction in an infrastructure program that suspends projects based on changeable annual 

criteria. 

In the past, Corps budgets were developed from the bottom up, 

District to Division to Headquarters to ASA to OMB. District commanders were responsible for developing and managing a program 

within their geographic area. Division Commanders were responsible for integrating the District office programs into a single Division-wide program. The Headquarters office integrated the Division 

Programs into a single national program. The OASA assured that 

the program complied with administration policy and budgetary 

guidance and OMB developed the budgetary guidance and provided 

funding levels. Decisions for budgeting were made within the 

framework of administration policy by those who knew the projects 

and programs best, not Washington level bureaucrats. 

Another benefit of budgeting in this manner is that it allows the 

Corps to undertake workforce planning to distribute their work 

across the Nation. When one chooses to concentrate nearly 60 percent of the construction budget in a handful of projects, there is no 

way the workload can be balanced across the remainder of the Nation with what is left. Unlike other Federal agencies that have a 
12 

salaries and expense component to their budget, the Corps does 

not, at least not at the District office level. Virtually all costs at 

District offices (rent, utilities, labor, materials, et cetera) are 

charged to projects and studies as directed by Congress. This enables the public to be informed of the true cost of all projects. Accordingly, it is necessary that the budget process be consistent with 

the accounting practice. When dealing with such large differences 

in workload from fiscal year to fiscal year it is clear that the administration gave little thought to how this budget would impact 

the Corps’ organizational structure or ability to maintain a technically competent workforce. Congress has repeatedly demonstrated that it desires to keep the structure of the Corps of Engineers as it is currently configured. Yet, if the budget were enacted, 

there would be no way to maintain this workforce, due to how 

budgetary criteria skewed the projects to certain areas of the country. Neither a pure ‘‘bottom up’’ budget process, nor a performancebased budget process is perfect. Experienced decision makers are 

expected to exercise informed judgment to achieve a balanced program considering all factors. Once more, the administration appears to have submitted a very unbalanced program using oversimplified decision metrics to consider only a few objectives (for example BCR and efficient completion of a few projects) that do not take 

into account the long-term needs of the Nation or the organization 

expected to manage the program. 

The recently enacted WRDA bill made numerous reforms to 

Corps of Engineers procedures. However, one change that Congress 

did not include was changing the BCR necessary for a project to 

be authorized for construction from the current 1.0 to 1. The budgetary criterion mentioned above requires a BCR to be 3.0 to 1 for 

full budgeting or a 1.5 to 1 for partial budgeting. This performance 

based budgeting criteria furthers the divide between what is required for authorization and what is required to be budgeted. 

These criteria used to be one and the same. Many of the projects 

in the recently enacted water resources development act do not 

meet this criteria, increasing the backlog of authorized but 

unconstructed projects. These new projects, along with the ongoing 

projects not funded in the budget and the increasing number of 

major rehabilitations needed for aging infrastructure, are affecting 

and will continue to affect the national economy. Existing water resources infrastructure is wearing out. The Nation needs to recapitalize if we are to remain competitive in a global marketplace. Infrastructure budgets, starting from the administration level, have 

got to be increased. If not, the Nation will continue to face unscheduled outages, damaged incomplete infrastructure and other emergency situations that must be dealt with through ever increasing 

emergency appropriations. 

FISCAL YEAR 2009 BUDGET INITIATIVES

The administration has proposed the same changes to how the 

civil works program is appropriated for fiscal year 2009 that have 

been proposed in fiscal year 2008 and fiscal year 2007. These include the regionalization of operations and maintenance funding 

and migrating four categories of projects from the Construction, 
13 

General account to the Operations and Maintenance account. The 

Committee has rejected all of these initiatives. 

Regionalized operations and maintenance funding segregates 

funding for projects into 54 watershed regions around the country 

as opposed to displaying operations and maintenance costs by 

project as has been the tradition. As projects, not regions, are authorized and funded by Congress, the Committee must reject this 

proposal. Operation and Maintenance budgets are developed on a 

project by project basis. For large river basins such as the Ohio or 

the Missouri, budgeting for the individual projects, as authorized, 

involve multiple Districts and Divisions. As the proposals in the 

budget are not developed as a systemized budget, aggregating them 

in the fashion proposed does not lead to the ‘‘true costs’’ of operating the system, it just adds up the various parts. The Committee 

does not believe that this proposal advances the budgeting for operations and maintenance. 

The Committee is not opposed to a systemized budget for 

projects. In fact, in the fiscal year 2008 Energy and Water joint explanatory statement the Congress directed the Corps to prepare 

systemized, integrated budgets for four regions of the country to 

demonstrate the value of this approach to the Committee. The 

budget request did not include these regional budgets. Until the 

value of a regional budget is demonstrated to the Committee, regional budgeting will not be considered. 

The Committee rejects the initiative to move Endangered Species 

Act [ESA] compliance activities from Construction, General to Operations and Maintenance. The stated reason for this change was 

budget transparency or to more appropriately show the true costs 

of operating these projects. The Committee has two issues with this 

logic. Budget transparency fades when the costs are rolled into the 

regionalized budgets. However, even if they were budgeted on a 

project by project basis, the casual observer would have no notion 

of how much of the operational costs of these projects is related to 

ESA compliance. Second, these are only being considered as operational costs because mitigation for these projects was not undertaken when the projects were constructed as is now required by 

subsequent laws. Were these projects constructed today, formulation of the projects would have required avoidance and minimization measures for the endangered species as project construction 

costs. 

If one wanted to take this argument to the extreme, all of the 

Everglades Restoration should be budgeted under the Central and 

South Florida O&M project since construction of this project resulted in the environmental restorations that are now being implemented. However, the costs for this work would not be transparent 

in the budget. By retaining the ESA compliance measures as separate line items in the CG account, it is much more transparent as 

to how much is being funded for these activities. 

The budget has proposed moving major rehabilitation for locks 

and dams from the Construction, General account to the Operations and Maintenance account. Corresponding to this is a legislative proposal to allow the proceeds from the Inland Waterway 

Trust Fund to be utilized in the Operations and Maintenance account. Current law only allows these funds to be utilized in the 
14 

Construction, General account. The Congress moved major rehabilitation from the Construction, General account to the Operation and 

Maintenance account in fiscal year 1985. Subsequently as the backlog increased, it was returned to the Construction, General account 

in the fiscal year 1993 budget. The stipulations involved in moving 

it back to the Construction account included that these major rehabilitations would involve more than a simple restoration of 

project function. Operational improvements were considered as a 

part of the rehab. As such, the rehabilitated, or recapitalized, 

projects were considered new investment opportunities for the 

country, the same as other new projects, and had to compete as 

new starts in the Construction, General program. This is entirely 

appropriate as these recapitalized projects provide increased levels 

of service and performance not envisioned in their original construction. If they didn’t, under existing administration policy, the 

repairs would be considered major maintenance and would be funded under the Operation and Maintenance account. To help fund 

these major rehabs, legislation allowed half the costs of the major 

rehab to be borne by the Inland Waterway Trust Fund with the 

other half to come from the General Treasury. The Committee does 

not believe moving these projects back to the Operations and Maintenance account will solve the backlog of major rehabs and rejects 

this proposal. The Committee believes that the real intent of this 

proposal is to skirt the new start issue in the CG account. The 

Corps has proposed initiating a major rehab report for the Lower 

Monumental Lock and Dam. By including this in O&M they don’t 

have to consider this as a new start under their own budgeting criterion. 

The Committee is disappointed that the administration has recycled their beach policy from the fiscal year 2008 budget. This proposal was rejected by the Congress. The authorizing committees 

that prepared the recently enacted Water Resources Development 

Act chose to reject this policy as well. The Committee rejects the 

policy again this year. The Committee notes that beaches are the 

leading tourist destination in the United States and that about 50 

percent of our population lives near our Nation’s coasts. Typically 

shore protection projects are justified on storm damages prevented 

alone, and the recreation benefits only enhance the benefit to cost 

ratio. Shore protection projects should be viewed in the same manner as levees along our rivers. These projects mitigate storm damage in the same fashion that levees mitigate riverine flooding. 

The maximum Federal Government contribution to Federal shore 

protection projects is 65 percent of the total project cost but the 

Government receives all the benefits in reducing Federal disaster 

assistance payments. Like much of our other infrastructure, by 

paying for Federal shore protection projects now, we can avoid 

many of the catastrophic losses and disaster assistance payments 

associated with hurricanes and coastal storms. Simply stated, the 

Nation can pay now to avoid losses or pay more later to recover 

from severe impacts. It truly makes sense to be proactive and not 

reactive in this environment. 

The Committee believes that this budget proposal is no way to 

run a robust national infrastructure program. The Committee recommended that the Corps include additional criteria into the 
15 

project prioritization process and commends the administration for 

having done so for the fiscal year 2009 budget request. However, 

the net result is that the mix of projects is substantially unchanged. The Committee does not believe that this prioritization 

method can be salvaged into a useable system. Further, the Committee has seen no evidence that it has improved the budget process. 

Rather than trying new budget models and new prioritization criteria, the country needs to invest more heavily in its water resources. Water resource projects are some of the only Federal expenditures that go through a rigorous benefit to cost process to determine benefits to the national economy. The standard of living 

that we currently enjoy is due to the excess capacity that was built 

into our water resources infrastructure by previous generations. By 

failing to make new investments and recapitalizing aging infrastructure, the Nation is not only falling behind our competition 

around the world, but is jeopardizing our future economic growth. 

BUDGET JUSTIFICATIONS

The Committee commends the Corps for the layout of the budget 

justifications for fiscal year 2009. Grouping projects by the Division 

office rather than according to business lines makes the justifications much more useful to the Committee and provides more easily 

accessible information to the public. The Committee expects that 

this method of displaying the budget justifications will be continued for the fiscal year 2010 budget. 

The Committee finds the justifications for O&M projects to be totally inadequate. Inadequate is an understatement, there were no 

justifications provided for O&M. The only information provided was 

the business line totals for each region. How the information was 

established to justify these totals is a mystery in the justification 

statements. When the Committee staff initially inquired about information for the individual projects that made up the funded regions, they were told that OMB had directed that information concerning individual projects was not to be released. Fortunately 

OMB relented on this point and allowed the Corps to provide this 

information. For a $2,500,000,000 account this is an unacceptable 

manner to justify a budget. More information was provided for the 

$40,000,000 in studies in the GI account than was provided for all 

of O&M. 

The Committee is also disappointed in the justifications for the 

Continuing Authorities Program and the Dam Safety/Seepage Stability Correction Program. The justifications for these items showed 

a total dollar value and listed projects, but give the Committee no 

idea how the program totals were arrived at. There is no way to 

know whether the administration proposal underfunds or 

overfunds these programs. 

The Committee believes that budget justifications serve to justify 

the administration’s request. The budget justifications could be improved by providing more relevant budget and project information. 

For fiscal year 2010 the Corps is directed to provide, at a minimum, detailed project information for each O&M project justifying 

the needs for each project. If the administration chooses to continue 
16 

to provide the business line information, it may be provided as a 

separate appendix to the justifications. 

INLAND WATERWAY TRUST FUND

When the fiscal year 2008 budget was presented to Congress, the 

Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) notified the committee of a looming deficit in the Inland Waterway Trust Fund 

[IWTF] due to the amount of work that was being funded on the 

inland waterway system. He stated that legislation would be forthcoming from the administration to address this expected shortfall. 

The Congress never received a proposal in calendar year 2007. 

Even though the Environment and Public Works Committee was 

working on a WRDA bill, and the WRDA could have been the appropriate vehicle for the legislation, no legislation was forthcoming. 

When the fiscal year 2009 budget was presented to Congress, the 

budget announced a proposal to phase out the existing fuel tax that 

funds the IWTF and phase in a lockage fee. It also announced that 

a legislative proposal would be forthcoming. The legislative proposal was finally submitted to Congress on April 4, 2008. Six 

months before the beginning of the new fiscal year. The administration’s budget for fiscal year 2009 was predicated on this significant change in law being enacted by October 1, 2008. More funding 

was proposed to be utilized from the IWTF than was estimated to 

be available utilizing the current revenue source. The only way to 

fund the administration’s budget request for IWTF projects, as they 

had been cost shared, was through a change in law. 

The Committee has supported and continues to support sharing 

the cost of construction and major rehabilitations between the 

IWTF and the General Treasury in the Construction, General account. The Committee believes that this arrangement makes the 

users active partners in the overall inland waterway system and 

provides for a better more efficient system. As the Congress already pays 100 percent of the O&M costs of the inland waterway 

system, the Committee would not support a change in cost sharing 

for the IWTF. Even if it did support a cost share change, this 

would only prolong the inevitable bankrupting of the IWTF. The current fuel tax generates about $90,000,000 annually. Currently awarded continuing contracts for IWTF projects will require 

approximately $60,000,000 of this amount for the next 4 years. The 

administration has proposed and the Committee has been appropriating considerably more than that amount from the fund over 

the last several years. Therefore, the Committee believes that the 

only way to solve the problem is to generate additional revenues 

in the fund. The current fuel tax is spread relatively equitably 

across all commercial users of the inland waterway system. However, the fuel tax has remained at $0.20 per gallon of diesel fuel 

since 1996. Inflation and increased efficiency in tow boats has eroded the value of the fuel tax. One potential solution is to index the 

fuel tax to inflation. Another solution would be to keep the current 

fuel tax in place but to add a lock user fee to the revenue stream. 

This way, all users would pay something and those that use the 

locks would pay more. A wholesale change from a fuel tax to a user 

fee as proposed by the administration appears to be unacceptable 

to Congress or the inland waterway industry. However, the Com-
17 

mittee only proffers these as discussion topics. The one problem the 

Committee sees with a user fee is that it could deter use of waterways. As waterways are the most efficient mode of transport any 

solution to the funding shortfall should not provide disincentives 

for using the inland waterways. 

To fund the administration request for fiscal year 2009 would re- quire approximately $117,000,000 in IWTF revenues. The Corps 

has informed the Committee that there will not be that much available in fiscal year 2009. The Corps has also informed the Committee that in order to keep from exceeding available revenues that 

they have not awarded a planned contract in fiscal year 2008 that 

would have requirements in fiscal year 2009 for the Lock and 

Dams 2, 3, and 4 on the Monongahela River. To address the funding shortfall in the IWTF the Committee is taking the unusual step 

of directing in legislative text that only nine inland waterway 

projects will have access to IWTF revenues in fiscal year 2009 in 

order to assure that planned work does not exceed revenues. The 

Corps is directed in fiscal year 2009 to utilize the general fund of 

the U.S. Treasury to fund inland waterway projects without specific statutory requirements to be funded from the IWTF. The Committee intends this to be a single year change. Fiscal year 2009 inland waterway projects funded entirely with General Fund revenues should be brought to a logical stopping point and deferred 

until such time as the IWTF revenue stream is enhanced and these 

projects can again be cost shared with the IWTF. 

Legislative text is also being included to prohibit the Corps from 

entering into any new continuing contracts for any inland waterway project until the revenue stream for the IWTF is enhanced. 

The administration should submit the fiscal year 2010 budget 

based on expected revenues in the IWTF not based on projections 

based on legislation that may or may not happen. If the budget is 

submitted utilizing the same assumptions on the IWTF that the 

administration made this year, the Committee will have no choice 

but to curtail spending on all inland waterway projects in fiscal 

year 2010 to a level that fits within the IWTF estimated revenues. 

No change in law has been made nor will this Committee propose 

any to alleviate the funding problem that will occur in fiscal year 

2009. That means the Committee cannot fund the administration’s 

request as proposed. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

The budget for the Corps of Engineers consists of individual line 

items of projects. As presented by the President, the budget contains 151 specific line item requests for funding. As was previously 

discussed the O&M request proposed expending funds in an additional 54 line items listed as watershed basins or subbasins. However, once the detail was received from the administration concerning O&M, the O&M funding was spread across 820 specific line 

items. This totals 971 specific line item requests for directed spending by the administration. Additional funding is requested by the 

administration for nationwide line items. The administration does 

not consider anything that the administration requests as an earmark. Yet all of these line items were specific requests by the administration of the Congress to be funded in fiscal year 2009. They 
18 

did not request these funds programmatically, they requested them 

for a specific project in a specific location for a specific purpose. 

The President published an Executive Order [EO] on January 29, 

2008, that directs his agency heads to ignore congressionally directed spending items that are contained in the explanatory reports 

that accompany legislative text and states that an ‘‘earmark’’ is any 

funding requested by Congress that circumvents a merit based or 

competitive allocation process. The EO does not define what a 

merit based or competitive allocation process is, but one can assume that it will be how the administration chooses to define it 

and projects added by Congress will not be considered. 

The Committee has traditionally included funding for the Corps 

of Engineers by account in legislative text and provided the details 

for each account within the report that accompanies the legislation. 

This was primarily done to provide the agency some flexibility in 

how funds were expended and to allow the Corps to effectively 

manage their program while honoring the intent of Congress. The 

primary intent of Congress has always been that once the Congress 

funded a study, it intended for the study phase to be completed to 

determine if Federal investment is warranted. By the same token, 

once the Congress committed to initiation of construction of a 

project, it intended for the project to be completed and the national 

economy to accrue the project benefits. With this Executive Order 

in place, the Committee is concerned that this intent might not be 

followed. There appears to be little desire for discussion of what exactly is meant in this Executive Order, so the Committee has executed its constitutional prerogatives by including statutory language to incorporate by reference all of the details of each account 

from the report that accompanies the legislative text, into the actual legislative text. This will ensure that the intent of Congress 

is fully complied with. 

CONTINUING CONTRACTS AND REPROGRAMMING

The Committee expects the Chief of Engineers to execute the 

Civil Works program generally in accordance with congressional direction. This includes moving individual projects forward in accordance with the funds annually appropriated. However, the Committee realizes that many factors outside the Corps’ control may 

dictate the progress of any given project or study. Because the individual projects are being incorporated into the legislative text the 

Corps is cautioned that while the Committee is firmly in favor of 

utilizing continuing contracts for the Civil Works program, it may 

be difficult to award this type of contract under these constraints. 

Because of the Committee’s concern that congressional intent be 

followed, reprogramming authority has been withdrawn from all 

but the O&M account and the O&M portion of the Mississippi 

River and Tributaries project. 

Reprogramming authority is as follows: 

Operations and Maintenance.—Unlimited reprogramming authority is granted in order for the Corps to be able to respond to emergency situations. The Chief of Engineers must notify the House and 

Senate Appropriations Committees of these emergency actions as 

soon thereafter as practicable. For all other situations, for a base 

less than $1,000,000, the reprogramming limit is $150,000. For a 
19 

base over $1,000,000, 15 percent up to a limit of $5,000,000 per 

project or activity. Amounts over this limit require approval of the 

House and Senate Appropriations Committees. The Committee 

does not object reprogramming up to $150,000 to any continuing 

project or program that did not receive an appropriation in the current year. 

Mississippi River and Tributaries.—The Corps should follow the 

same reprogramming guidelines for the Operation and Maintenance portions of the Mississippi River and Tributaries account as 

listed above. 

5-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE BUDGET PLANNING

While the Committee appreciates the Corps’ attempts to provide 

a meaningful 5-year budget plan, it recognizes the inherent difficulties between the legislative and executive branches in preparing a 

useful plan. The executive branch is unwilling to project a 5-year 

horizon for projects for which they do not budget leaving a sizeable 

percentage of the Corps annual appropriations with a year to year 

event horizon for planning purposes. The fact that a sizeable portion of the annual appropriations are dedicated to congressional 

priorities is not a new phenomenon. Many major public works 

projects over the last two centuries have been funded on an annual 

basis without a clear budget strategy. The Committee would welcome the ideas and the opportunity to work with the executive 

branch to determine a mutually agreeable way to develop an integrated 5-year comprehensive budget that displays true funding 

needs for congressional as well as administration priorities. Anything less will only give a partial view of the investments needed 

in water resources infrastructure. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommendation includes a total of 

$5,300,000,000. This is $559,000,000 over the administration’s 

budget request and $287,087,000 less than the fiscal year 2008 enacted amount. This table excludes the request for emergency appropriations for the New Orleans hurricane protection system as requested in the budget since it has been funded through an emergency supplemental appropriations act. Funding is displayed in the 

following tables in the accounts where projects have been traditionally located and comparisons to the budget request are made as if 

the request was presented in the traditional manner. Funding by 

account is as follows: 

Fiscal year 2009 

request 

Commettee 

recommendation 

Request vs. 

recommendation 

General Investigations ................................................................... $91,000 $166,000 ∂$75,000 

Construction, General .................................................................... 1,666,775 2,004,500 ∂337,225 

Mississippi River and Tributaries .................................................. 240,000 365,000 ∂125,000 

Operation and Maintenance .......................................................... 2,210,225 2,220,000 ∂9,775 

Regulatory ...................................................................................... 180,000 183,000 ∂3,000 

Flood Control and Coastal Emergencies ....................................... 40,000 40,000 ............................

Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program ......................... 130,000 140,000 ∂10,000 

Office of the Assistant Secretary of the ....................................... ............................ ............................ ............................

Army (Civil Works) ......................................................................... 6,000 4,500 ¥1,500 

General Expenses ........................................................................... 177,000 177,000 ............................
20 

Fiscal year 2009 

request 

Commettee 

recommendation 

Request vs. 

recommendation 

Total .................................................................................. 4,741,000 5,300,000 ∂559,000 

NEW STARTS

The passage of the WRDA bill in 2007 presented the Committee 

with the challenge of 7 years of pent up demand for new studies 

and projects. The Committee had to balance the funding needs of 

ongoing work with the future ability to fund potential new start 

studies and projects. Ultimately the Committee decided to fund a 

very limited number of new studies and projects. The Committee’s 

essential criterion for deciding new starts was to ensure that the 

projects or studies were only for traditional Corps missions. Therefore the Committee excluded from consideration: 

(1) New environmental infrastructure authorizations; 

(2) Non traditional project authorizations; 

(3) Authorizations that have not been through the traditional two 

phase planning process; 

(4) New projects under section 206 and section 1135 of the Continuing Authorities Program as these program sections are oversubscribed; 

(5) Projects that included demonstration features; 

(6) New projects that would require funds from the Inland Waterway Trust Fund because of lack of funding in the IWTF. 

DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS

The Committee received more than 3,000 requests for projects, 

programs, studies or activities for the Corps of Engineers for fiscal 

year 2009. These requests included the budget request as well as 

requests by Members. The Committee obviously was unable to accommodate all of these requests. 

In the interest of providing full disclosure of funding provided in 

the Energy and Water bill, all disclosures are made in the report 

accompanying the bill. 

All of the projects funded in this report have gone through the 

same rigorous public review and approval process as those proposed for funding by the President. The difference in these projects, 

of course, is that the congressionally directed projects are not subject to the artificial budgetary prioritization criteria that the administration utilizes to decide what not to fund. 

For those programs, projects, or studies that were included in the 

budgetary documents provided in the budget request, the words 

‘‘The President’’ has been added to denote this administration request. The level of funding provided for each of these programs, 

projects or studies should not be construed as what was requested. 

Rather, the only intent is to disclose the requestor. 

It should be noted that many line items only have the President 

listed as the requestor. It should not be inferred that the affected 

Members are not interested in these projects studies or activities. 

Rather this is due to Committee direction that it is unnecessary to 

request the President’s budget as the individual administration requests are the basis of the Senate bill. 
21 

The purposes for the funding provided in the various accounts is 

described in the paragraphs associated with each account. The location of the programs, projects or studies are denoted in the account 

tables. 

GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $167,261,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 91,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 166,000,000 

This appropriation funds studies to determine the need, engineering feasibility, economic justification, and the environmental 

and social suitability of solutions to water and related land resource problems; and for preconstruction engineering and design 

work, data collection, and interagency coordination and research 

activities. 

The planning program is the entry point for Federal involvement 

in solutions to the Nation’s water resource problems and needs. 

Unfortunately, the General Investigations [GI] account is eviscerated in the budget request. Nationwide studies and programs 

consume over half of the administration’s GI request. This budget 

is saying that the Nation should concentrate scarce resources on 

completing studies but not carrying forward ongoing studies or allowing new starts. The Committee continues to believe this argument is remarkably shortsighted. It assumes that the country will 

stop growing and that new investment opportunities will not be 

present. 

In truth, as the country grows, new investment opportunities will 

be presented and some previously authorized projects may no 

longer make sense or may be less competitive. The Corps should 

keep presenting the administration and Congress with new investment opportunities in order for the Nation to remain competitive 

in a global economy. The only conclusion one can draw from the administration’s GI proposal is that they are determined to redirect 

the Corps toward construction, operation and maintenance by 

strangling their ability to evaluate water resource problems and 

needs. 

The Committee has provided for a robust and balanced planning 

program for fiscal year 2009. The Committee has used the traditional view within the Corps planning program that only considers 

new starts as those that have never received GI funds before. The 

Committee believes that to maintain a robust planning program, a 

mix of new reconnaissance studies must be included with the existing feasibility and PED studies. As such the Committee has included a few new reconnaissance studies in this account. To provide additional transparency in the budget process, the Committee 

has segregated the budget into three columns in the following 

table. 

The first column represents the reconnaissance phase of the 

planning process. These studies determine if there is a Federal interest in a water resource problem or need and if there is a cost 

sharing sponsor willing to move forward with the study. The next 

column represents the feasibility phase of the study. These detailed 

cost shared studies determine the selected alternative to be recommended to the Congress for construction. The third column rep-
22 

resents the Preconstruction engineering and design phase. These 

detailed cost shared designs are prepared while the project recommended to Congress is awaiting authorization for construction. 

The Committee believes that by segregating the table in this 

manner that more attention will be focused on the various study 

phases, and a more balanced planning program will be developed 

by the administration. As the last two columns are generally cost 

shared, they demonstrate the commitment by cost sharing sponsors 

to be a part of the Federal planning process. By the same token, 

it also shows the level of commitment of the Federal Government 

to these cost sharing sponsors. The Committee directs that the fiscal year 2010 planning budget be presented to the Committee in 

this fashion. 

The budget request and the recommended Committee allowance 

are shown on the following table: 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

ALASKA 

ANCHORAGE HARBOR DEEPENING, AK .................................. 100 ................ ................ 100 400 

BARROW COASTAL STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION, AK ............ 400 ................ ................ 400 ................

HOMER HARBOR MODIFICATION, AK ...................................... ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

KENAI RIVER BLUFF EROSION, AK ......................................... ................ ................ ................ 500 ................

MATANUSKA RIVER WATERSHED, AK ..................................... ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

VALDEZ HARBOR EXPANSION, AK .......................................... ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

YAKUTAT HARBOR, AK ............................................................ 700 ................ ................ 700 ................

ARIZONA 

AGUA FRIA RIVER TRILBY WASH, AZ ..................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

LITTLE COLORADO RIVER WATERSHED, AZ ............................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

PIMA COUNTY, AZ .................................................................. 275 ................ ................ 275 ................

VA SHLY-AY AKIMEL SALT RIVER RESTORATION, AZ ............. ................ 658 ................ .................. 658 

ARKANSAS 

LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESOURCE STUDY, AR ............... ................ ................ 254 .................. ................

MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, AR ............................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 

PINE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR ..................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 

SOUTHWEST, ARKANSAS, AR .................................................. ................ ................ ................ 327 ................

WHITE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, AR & MO ................. ................ ................ ................ 500 ................

WHITE RIVER NAVIGATION TO BATESVILLE, AR ..................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 325 

CALIFORNIA 

BOLINAS LAGOON ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA ................ ................ ................ ................ 350 ................

CALIFORNIA COASTAL SEDIMENT MASTER PLAN, CA ............. 900 ................ ................ 900 ................

CARPINTERIA SHORELINE STUDY ........................................... ................ ................ ................ 443 ................

COYOTE & BERRYESSA CREEKS, CA ..................................... ................ 950 ................ .................. 950 

COYOTE DAM, CA ................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

GOLETA BEACH, CA ................................................................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

HAMILTON CITY, CA ............................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 

HEACOCK AND CACTUS CHANNELS, CA ................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 

HUMBOLDT BAY LONG TERM SHOAL MGMT, CA .................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

LOWER CACHE CREEK, YOLO COUNTY, WOODLAND AND VICINITY ................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

LOS ANGELES RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA ........... ................ ................ ................ 590 ................

LOWER MISSION CREEK, CA .................................................. ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

MALIBU CREEK WATERSHED, CA ........................................... ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

MATILIJA DAM, CA .................................................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 1,000 

MIDDLE CREEK, CA ................................................................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 
23 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

PAJARO RIVER, CA ................................................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 1,000 

REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA ................................................. ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAMP, CA ............................................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

ROCK CREEK, KEEFER SLOUGH, CA ...................................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN COMP, CA ................................. ................ ................ ................ 1,000 ................

SAC—SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ISLANDS AND LEVEES, CA ......... 468 ................ ................ 2,000 ................

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAMP, CA .............................................. ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHORELINE, CA ..................................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), FRAZIER CREEK/ 

STRATHMO ......................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, WEST STANISLAUS, ORESTIMBA 

CR ...................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN, LOWER SAN JAOQUIN RIVER, 

CA ...................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 600 ................

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), WHITE RIVER/DRY 

CREEK ................................................................................ ................ ................ ................ 125 ................

SAN PABLO BAY WATERSHED, CA ......................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

SOLANA-ENCINITAS SHORELINE, CA ...................................... 171 ................ ................ 171 ................

SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SHORELINE, CA ............................... ................ ................ ................ 1,400 ................

SUTTER COUNTY, CA .............................................................. 339 ................ ................ 339 ................

TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING, CA AND NV ............................. ................ ................ ................ 125 ................

UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK, CA ............................................. 191 ................ ................ 191 ................

COLORADO 

BASALT, CO ............................................................................ ................ ................ 50 .................. ................

CACHE LA POUDRE, CO ......................................................... ................ ................ ................ 5 125 

CHATFIELD, CHERRY AND BEAR CREEK, RESERVOIRS, CO ... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

SOUTH BOULDER CREEK, CO ................................................. ................ ................ 2 250 ................

CONNECTICUT 

CONNECTICUT RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CT, MA, 

NH & VT ............................................................................ ................ ................ ................ 450 ................

DELAWARE 

RED CLAY CREEK, CHRISTINA RIVER WATERSHED, DE ......... ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

FLORIDA 

FLAGER COUNTY, FL .............................................................. ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

LAKE WORTH INLET, FL .......................................................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

MILE POINT, FL ...................................................................... 50 ................ ................ 50 ................

PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL ............................................ 550 ................ ................ 550 ................

SARASOTA, LIDO KEY, FL ....................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 158 

ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FL .......................................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

WALTON COUNTY, FL .............................................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 591 

GEORGIA 

AUGUSTA, GA ......................................................................... ................ 278 ................ .................. 278 

LONG ISLAND, MARSH AND JOHNS CREEKS, GA ................... 150 ................ ................ 150 ................

SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA ..................................... ................ 700 ................ .................. 700 

TYBEE ISLAND, GA ................................................................. 250 ................ ................ 250 ................

GUAM 

HAGATNA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL, GUAM ............................. 350 ................ ................ 350 ................

HAWAII 

ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI ..................................................... 300 ................ ................ 300 ................

HILO HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, HI ......................................... ................ ................ 100 .................. ................

HYDROELECTRIC POWER ASSESSMENT, HI ............................ ................ ................ 300 .................. ................

KAHUKU, HI ............................................................................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 344 

KALAELOA BARBERS POINT HARBOR MODIFICATION, HI ....... ................ ................ ................ 350 ................
24 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

MAALAEA HARBOR, MAUI, HI ................................................. ................ 200 ................ 200 ................

WAILUPE STREAM, OAHU, HI .................................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 300 

ILLINOIS 

DES PLAINES RIVER, IL (PHASE II) ........................................ 500 ................ ................ 500 ................

ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL ............................... 400 ................ ................ 400 ................

INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES—MISSISSIPPI 

RIVER AQ NUISANCE SPECIES, IL, IN, OH, WI .................. ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

KEITH CREEK, ROCKFORD, IL ................................................. ................ ................ ................ 548 ................

PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, IL ................................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 50 

PRAIRIE DUPONT LEVEE, IL ................................................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

S. FORK, SOUTH BRANCH, CHICAGO RIVER, (BUBBLY 

CREEK) .............................................................................. ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

UPPER MISS—ILLINOIS WW SYSTEM, IL, IA, MN, MO & 

WI ...................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 10,000 ................

UPPER MISS RVR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IL, IA, MO, MN & 

WI ...................................................................................... ................ ................ 220 .................. ................

INDIANA 

INDIANA HARBOR, IN ............................................................. 300 ................ ................ 300 ................

IOWA 

CEDAR RIVER TIME CHECK AREA, IA .................................... ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

HUMBOLT, IA .......................................................................... ................ ................ 2 150 ................

KANSAS 

MANHATTAN, KS ..................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

TOPEKA, KS ............................................................................ ................ 100 ................ .................. 100 

UPPER TURKEY CREEK, KS .................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 150 

LOUISIANA 

AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, 

LA ...................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LA ...................................................... ................ 1,599 ................ .................. 1,599 

BOSSIER PARISH, LA .............................................................. ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

CALCASIEU LOCK, LA ............................................................. 53 ................ ................ 600 ................

CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA .......................................... ................ ................ ................ 162 ................

CALCASIEU RIVER BASIN, LA ................................................. 67 ................ ................ 67 ................

CROSS LAKE, LA .................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM REST, LA (SCIENCE 

PRO .................................................................................... 10,000 ................ ................ .................. ................

LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ... 10,000 ................ ................ 10,000 ................

PORT OF IBERIA, LA ............................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 1,000 

ST. CHARLES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA .............. 500 ................ ................ 500 ................

ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA ............ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

SOUTHWEST COASTAL LOUISIANA HURRICANE PROTECTION, 

LA ...................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 1,500 ................

WEST SHORE, LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA .............................. ................ ................ ................ 900 ................

MAINE 

SEARSPORT HARBOR, ME ...................................................... ................ ................ ................ 157 ................

MARYLAND 

ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES COMP PLAN, MD ........ ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

BALTIMORE METRO WATER RESOURCES—PATAPSCO 

URBAN RIVER .................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

CHESAPEAKE BAY MARSHLANDS, MD .................................... ................ ................ ................ 1,000 ................

CHESAPEAKE BAY SHORELINE, MARYLAND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ........................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................
25 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

CHESAPEAKE BAY SUSQUEHANNA RESERVOIR SEDIMENT 

MANAGEMENT .................................................................... ................ ................ 100 100 ................

EASTERN SHORE, MID-CHESAPEAKE BAY ISLAND, MD .......... ................ ................ ................ .................. 983 

LOWER POTOMAC ESTUARY WATERSHED, ST. MARY’S, MD .. ................ ................ ................ .................. 150 

MIDDLE POTOMAC COMP PLAN, MD, VA, PA, WV, DC ........... ................ ................ ................ 175 ................

MIDDLE POTOMAC WATERSHED, GREAT SENECA CREEK, 

AND MUDDY ....................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN LOW FLOW MANAGEMENT AND 

ENVIRO .............................................................................. ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

MASSACHUSETTS 

BOSTON HARBOR (45-FOOT CHANNEL), MA .......................... ................ 2,300 ................ .................. 2,300 

PILGRIM LAKE, TRURO & PROVINCETOWN, MA ..................... 96 ................ ................ 96 ................

MICHIGAN 

GREAT LAKES NAV SYST STUDY, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, 

PA ...................................................................................... 200 ................ 200 .................. ................

GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS (RAP), MI ............... ................ ................ ................ 1,000 ................

LANSING, GRAND RIVER WATERFRONT RESTORATION, MI ..... ................ ................ 50 .................. ................

ST. CLAIR RIVER, MI .............................................................. ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

MINNESOTA 

MARSH LAKE, MN (MN RIVER AUTHORITY) ............................ ................ ................ ................ 227 ................

MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED, MN .................................... ................ ................ ................ 350 ................

MINNESOTA RIVER BASIN, MN & SD ..................................... ................ ................ ................ 350 ................

WILD RICE RIVER, RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN ... 271 ................ ................ 271 ................

MISSISSIPPI 

PEARL RIVER WATERSHED, MS .............................................. ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

MISSOURI 

BRUSH CREEK BASIN, KS & MO ............................................ ................ ................ ................ 274 ................

KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS ....................................................... 262 ................ ................ 315 ................

MISSOURI RIVER DEGRADATION, MO ..................................... 88 ................ ................ 588 ................

MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, UNITS L45 & R460–471, 

MO ..................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 300 

RIVER DES PERES, MO .......................................................... ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

SWOPE PARK, KANSAS CITY, MO ........................................... ................ 138 ................ .................. ................

MONTANA 

YELLOWSTONE RIVER CORRIDOR, MT .................................... 200 ................ ................ 500 ................

NEBRASKA 

LOWER PLATTE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NE ....................... ................ ................ ................ 177 ................

NEW HAMPSHIRE 

MERRIMACK RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, NH & MA ............... 200 ................ ................ 200 ................

PORTSMOUTH HARBOR AND PISCATAQUA RIVER, HN & 

ME ..................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 82 ................

NEW JERSEY 

DELAWARE RIVER COMPREHENSIVE, NJ ................................ 290 ................ ................ 290 ................

HUDSON—RARITAN ESTUARY, HACKENSACK 

MEADOWLANDS, NJ ............................................................ 204 ................ ................ 204 ................

HUDSON—RARITAN ESTUARY, LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ .. 200 ................ ................ 500 ................

LOWER SADDLE RIVER, BERGEN COUNTY, NJ ....................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 375 

NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION, HEREFORD TO CAPE MAY 

INLET ................................................................................. ................ ................ ................ 4 150 

NEW JERSEY SHORELINE ALTERNATIVE LONG-TERM NOURISHMENT ............................................................................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................
26 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

PASSAIC RIVER MAIN STEM, NJ ............................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 

PASSAIC RIVER, HARRISON, NJ .............................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 297 

PECKMAN RIVER BASIN, NJ ................................................... ................ ................ ................ 375 ................

RAHWAY RIVER BASIN, NJ ..................................................... ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, HIGHLANDS, NJ ......... ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, LEONARDO, NJ .......... ................ ................ ................ .................. 100 

RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION BEACH, NJ ..... ................ ................ ................ .................. 100 

SHREWSBURY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES ................................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 

SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NJ ............................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 375 

STONY BROOK, MILLSTONE RIVER BASIN, NJ ........................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

NEW MEXICO 

ESPANOLA VALLEY RIO GRANDE AND TRIBS, NM .................. ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

RIO GRANDE BASIN, NM, CO & TX ........................................ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................

SANTA FE, NM ........................................................................ ................ ................ ................ 28 ................

NEW YORK 

BUFFALO RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, NY ................. 100 ................ ................ 100 ................

FORGE RIVER WATERSHED, LONG ISLAND, NY ...................... ................ ................ ................ 125 ................

HASHAMOMUCK COVE, SOUTHOLD, NY .................................. ................ ................ ................ 125 ................

HUDSON—RARITAN ESTUARY, NY & NJ ................................ 200 ................ ................ 200 ................

LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY ................................................. ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

MONTAUK POINT, NY .............................................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 375 

NORTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, ASHAROKEN, NY ............... ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

NORTH SHORE LONG ISLAND, BAYVILLE, NY ......................... ................ ................ ................ 175 ................

SAW MILL RIVER WATERSHED, NY ......................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 250 

SOUTH SHORE OF STATEN ISLAND, NY .................................. ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

TEN MILE RIVER WATERSHED, DUTCHESS CTY, NY & 

LITCHFIEL ........................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 125 ................

WESTCHESTER COUNTY STREAMS, NY .................................. ................ ................ ................ 175 ................

UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, NY ........................... ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

NEVADA 

TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV ........................................................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 5,000 

NORTH CAROLINA 

BOGUE BANKS, NC ................................................................. ................ ................ ................ 132 ................

CURRITUCK SOUND, NC ......................................................... 150 ................ ................ 150 ................

NEUSE RIVER BASIN, NC ....................................................... ................ 200 ................ .................. 200 

NORTH CAROLINA INTERNATIONAL PORT, NC ........................ ................ ................ 100 .................. ................

SURF CITY AND NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH, NC ........................ ................ ................ ................ 386 ................

NORTH DAKOTA 

MISSOURI RIVER, ND, MT, SD, NE, IA, KS, MO ..................... ................ ................ ................ 3,000 ................

RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN, ND, SD & MANITOBA, CANADA ................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 500 ................

OHIO 

BELPRE, OH ........................................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 150 

CUYAHOGA RIVER BULKHEAD STUDY, OH ............................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 126 

HOCKING RIVER BASIN, MONDAY CREEK, OH ....................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 300 

MAHONING RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OH .............. ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 

WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, BLANCHARD RIVER WATERSHED, OH ........................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, OH, IN, & MI ............................ ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

OKLAHOMA 

GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN WATERSHED, OK, MO, KS & 

AR ...................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 60 ................

GRAND LAKE COMPREHENSIVE, OK ....................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................
27 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCE STUDY, OK ........ ................ ................ ................ 500 ................

WASHITA RIVER BASIN, OK .................................................... ................ ................ ................ 250 ................

OREGON 

AMAZON CREEK, OR .............................................................. ................ ................ ................ 350 ................

WALLA WALLA RIVER WATERSHED, OR & WA ........................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 

WILLAMETTE RIVER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, OR ............. 240 ................ ................ 240 ................

PENNSYLVANIA 

BLOOMSBURG, PA .................................................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 700 

DELAWARE RIVER DREDGED MATERIAL UTILIZATION, PA, DE, 

& ........................................................................................ ................ ................ 125 .................. ................

UPPER OHIO NAVIGATION STUDY, PA .................................... ................ ................ ................ 4,200 ................

SOUTH CAROLINA 

EDISTO ISLAND, SC ................................................................ 218 ................ ................ 218 ................

SOUTH DAKOTA 

JAMES RIVER, SD & ND ......................................................... ................ ................ ................ 350 ................

WATERTOWN AND VICINITY, SD ............................................. ................ ................ ................ .................. 450 

TENNESSE 

MILL CREEK WATERSHED, DAVIDSON COUNTY, TN ............... 100 ................ ................ 100 ................

TEXAS 

ABILENE, TX ........................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, BROWNSVILLE CHANNEL, TX ....... 400 ................ ................ 400 ................

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX .................................... ................ 150 ................ .................. ................

DALLAS FLOODWAY, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX .......... ................ 207 ................ .................. 1,000 

FREEPORT HARBOR, TX ......................................................... 400 ................ ................ 400 ................

GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER REALIGNMENTS, 

TX ...................................................................................... 200 ................ ................ 200 ................

GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER, TX .......................... ................ 150 ................ .................. 150 

GIWW, PORT OCONNOR TO CORPUS CHRISTI BAY, TX .......... 350 ................ ................ 350 ................

GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASINS, TX ............... 223 ................ ................ 223 ................

LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, TX ..................................... 425 ................ ................ 425 ................

NUECES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX ................................... 250 ................ ................ 650 ................

RAYMONDVILLE DRAIN, TX ..................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 350 

RIO GRANDE BASIN, TX ......................................................... 100 ................ ................ 100 ................

SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ............................................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 

SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX .................................. ................ ................ ................ 400 ................

SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX ................ ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

VERMONT 

MONTPELIER, VT ................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 750 ................

VIRGINIA 

AIWW BRIDGE AT DEEP CREEK, VA ....................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 500 

CLINCH RIVER WATERSHED, VA ............................................. ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

DISMAL SWAMP AND DISMAL SWAMP CANAL, VA ................. ................ ................ ................ 262 ................

ELIZABETH RIVER, HAMPTON ROADS, VA .............................. ................ 97 ................ .................. 97 

FOUR MILE RUN, VA .............................................................. ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

JOHN H. KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC (SECTION 

216) ................................................................................... 300 ................ ................ 300 ................

LYNNHAVEN RIVER BASIN, VA ............................................... 175 ................ ................ 175 ................

NEW RIVER, CLAYTOR LAKE, VA ............................................ ................ ................ ................ .................. 150 

UPPER RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER, VA (PHASE II) ...................... ................ ................ ................ 200 ................

VICINITY AND WILLOUGHBY SPIT, VA ..................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 200 
28 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

WASHINGTON 

CENTRALIA, WA ...................................................................... ................ ................ ................ .................. 1,200 

CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WA .................................................. ................ ................ ................ 1,000 ................

ELLIOTT BAY SEAWALL, WA .................................................... ................ ................ ................ 750 ................

LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA & 

OR ...................................................................................... 100 ................ ................ 100 ................

PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT RESTORATION, 

WA ..................................................................................... 400 ................ ................ 1,500 ................

PUYALLUP RIVER, WA ............................................................ ................ ................ 57 .................. ................

SKAGIT RIVER, WA ................................................................. ................ ................ ................ 505 ................

SKOKOMISH RIVER BASIN, WA ............................................... ................ ................ ................ 375 ................

WEST VIRGINIA 

CHERRY RIVER BASIN, WV .................................................... ................ ................ ................ 150 ................

LITTLE KANAWHA RIVER, WV .................................................. ................ ................ ................ 300 ................

OHIO RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE STUDY, WV, KY, OH, 

PA ...................................................................................... ................ ................ ................ 600 ................

WISCONSIN 

WAUWATOSA, WI ..................................................................... ................ ................ 200 .................. ................

SUBTOTAL FOR PROJECTS ........................................ 33,356 7,727 1,760 83,207 30,306 

NATIONAL PROGRAMS 

AUTOMATED INFORMATION SYSTEMS SUPPORT TRI-CADD .... 350 ................ ................ 350 ................

ACTIONS FOR CHANGE TO IMPROVE INVESTIGATIONS ........... 2,000 ................ ................ .................. ................

COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION ........................................ 1,400 ................ ................ 5,600 ................

Coastal Data Information Program .............................. ................ ................ ................ (1,000 ) ................

Pacific Island Land Ocean Typhoon Experiment, HI .... ................ ................ ................ (1,000 ) ................

Surge and Wave Island Modeling Studies, HI ............. ................ ................ ................ (1,200 ) ................

Wave Data Study .......................................................... ................ ................ ................ (1,000 ) ................

COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ........... 100 ................ ................ 100 ................

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES ............................................ 75 ................ ................ 75 ................

FEMA/MAP MOD COORDINATION ............................................ 1,500 ................ ................ 1,500 ................

FLOOD DAMAGE DATA ............................................................ 220 ................ ................ 220 ................

FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES ................................. 8,000 ................ ................ 11,000 ................

White Clay Creek, New Castle, Delaware ..................... ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................

Hurricane Evacuation Studies, Hawaii ......................... ................ ................ ................ (1,000 ) ................

Kekaha Flood Study, HI ................................................ ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................

Iowa Multi-State Dam Safety Analyses, Iowa .............. ................ ................ ................ (37 ) ................

Little Sioux Watershed, IA ............................................ ................ ................ ................ (30 ) ................

Mon—Maq Dam Removal Study & Local Floodplain 

Mas ........................................................................... ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................

City of Gretna GIS, Louisiana ....................................... ................ ................ ................ (254 ) ................

East Baton Rouge Parish, LA [GIS] .............................. ................ ................ ................ (400 ) ................

Livingston Parish, LA (GIS) .......................................... ................ ................ ................ (735 ) ................

Papillion Creek Watershed, Flood Plain Mapping, ....... ................ ................ ................ (500 ) ................

Southeastern, PA .......................................................... ................ ................ ................ (300 ) ................

HYDROLOGIC STUDIES ........................................................... 250 ................ ................ 250 ................

INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW ................................................. 1,000 ................ ................ 1,000 ................

INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES ........................................... 200 ................ ................ 200 ................

NATIONAL SHORELINE STUDY ................................................ 375 ................ ................ 375 ................

OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS ........................................ 4,080 ................ ................ 4,580 ................

Lake Tahoe Coordination ....................................................... ................ ................ ................ (500 ) ................

PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES ........................................ 7,000 ................ ................ 8,750 ................

Delaware Estuary Salinity Monitoring Study, Delaware .......................................................................... ................ ................ ................ (200 ) ................

Bacon Creek, Sioux City, IA .......................................... ................ ................ ................ (50 ) ................

Boyer River, Missouri Valley, IA .................................... ................ ................ ................ (13 ) ................

Little Sioux Watershed, IA ............................................ ................ ................ ................ (30 ) ................
29 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—GENERAL INVESTIGATIONS—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Investigations Planning RECON FEAS PED 

Kansas River Basin Technical Assistance, Kansas ..... ................ ................ ................ (400 ) ................

Fife Lake Aquatic Weed Control, MI ............................. ................ ................ ................ (300 ) ................

Choctaw County Reservoir, MS ..................................... ................ ................ ................ (100 ) ................

Jones County Water Supply, MS ................................... ................ ................ ................ (50 ) ................

Mississippi Band of Choctaws, MS .............................. ................ ................ ................ (50 ) ................

Assessment of Bridges and Impacts on Flows and 

F ............................................................................... ................ ................ ................ (150 ) ................

Asheville, NC ................................................................. ................ ................ ................ (50 ) ................

PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM .............................................. 2,100 ................ ................ 3,100 ................

PRECIPITATION STUDIES (NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE) ...... 225 ................ ................ 225 ................

REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT .................................................................................. 150 ................ ................ 150 ................

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ............................................. 16,892 ................ ................ 28,000 ................

Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, Maryland ................... ................ ................ ................ (1,000 ) ................

SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTERS ........... 50 ................ ................ 50 ................

STREAM GAGING (U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY) ....................... 600 ................ ................ 600 ................

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ................................................... 350 ................ ................ 350 ................

TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM ........................................... 1,000 ................ ................ 1,000 ................

WATER RESOURCES PRIORITIES STUDY ................................ 2,000 ................ ................ .................. ................

SUBTOTAL, NATIONAL PROGRAMS ............................ 49,917 ................ ................ 67,375 ................

SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE ......................................................... ................ ................ ................ ¥16,648 ................

TOTAL ........................................................................ 83,273 7,727 1,760 133,934 30,306 

GRAND TOTAL ........................................................... 91,000 91,000 ................ 166,000 ................

Anchorage Harbor Deepening, Alaska.—The Committee recommended $500,000 to complete the feasibility study and to initiate preconstruction engineering and design. Anchorage harbor 

provides services to approximately 90 percent of the total population of Alaska, including two military bases. 

Valdez Harbor Expansion, Alaska.—The Committee recommends 

$150,000 to complete the feasibility phase of the study. The demand for moorage space in the harbor far exceeds the existing capacity of 510 vessels. Rafting during the commercial fishing season 

has been reported up to eight boats deep on a regular basis. 

May Branch, Fort Smith, Arkansas.—$500,000 is recommended 

to continue preconstruction engineering and design for this flood 

control project. 

Bolinas Lagoon, California.—The Committee recommends 

$350,000 to continue feasibility studies of providing solutions that 

would restore and maintain a natural tidal prism configuration and 

tidal circulation in the lagoon. 

Los Angeles River Ecosystem Restoration, California.—$590,000 

is recommended to continue the feasibility studies for environmental and historic riparian habitat restoration. Potential projects 

may provide opportunities to restore environmental conditions, improve water quality, public access, open space and recreation. The 

potential projects will maintain or improve the current level of 

flood damage reduction benefits. 

Malibu Creek Watershed, California.—The Committee recommendation includes $150,000 to complete the draft feasibility re-
30 

port of methods to manage the sediment to facilitate ongoing efforts to improve the ecosystem in Malibu Creek and lagoon. 

Rock Creek and Keefer Slough, California.—$200,000 is recommended to continue the feasibility phase of the study. The primary project purposes include flood control with the use of setback 

levees and floodwalls, and ecosystem restoration and minimum 

maintenance. The flood control facilities are to be designed with additional capacity to allow for the natural development of habitat. 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Comprehensive Study, California.—The 

Committee recommended $1,000,000 for the feasibility study. The 

study provides a long-range management program for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins with the objective of improving the flood carrying capacity of the system while restoring 

and protecting environmental features including wetlands as well 

as fish and wildlife habitat. 

Chatfield, Cheery Creek and Bear Creek, Reservoirs.—The recommendation includes $200,000 for feasibility studies to convert 

flood control storage to water supply storage. 

Basalt, Colorado.—The Committee recommended $50,000 to review planning studies that were initiated under section 206 of the 

Continuing Authorities Program to determine if there is a Federal 

interest in this ecosystem restoration project. 

Flagler County, Florida.—$250,000 is recommended to continue 

feasibility studies for shore damage reduction. The Committee 

notes that recent storms have begun to threaten the county’s major 

evacuation route to State Road A1A. 

Walton County, Florida.—$591,000 is recommended to continue 

the preconstruction, engineering and design phase. This study is a 

test bed for the Institute of Water Resources Hurricane and Storm 

Damage Reduction model. 

Hilo Harbor Modifications, Hawaii.—The Committee recommends $100,000 to initiate the reconnaissance study to address 

the Federal interest in modifying the 1930s era designed harbor to 

accommodate large modern cargo vessels and improve safety in the 

harbor. 

Interbasin Control of Great Lakes—Mississippi Aquatic Nuisance 

Species, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin.—The Committee 

recommends $300,000 to initiate studies of the range of options and 

technologies available to prevent the spread of aquatic nuisance 

species between the Great lakes and the Mississippi River Basins 

through various aquatic pathways. 

Upper Mississippi River—Illinois Waterway Navigation System, 

Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin.—The Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 for continuation of 

preconstruction engineering and design studies. The Committee 

recognizes the need to modernize this more than 60-year-old navigation system and has provided continued funding for both structural design and environmental restoration work. 

Humbolt, Iowa.—The Committee recommends $152,000 to initiate a cost-shared feasibility study that would investigate ecosystem restoration on the West Fork of the Des Moines River (fish 

passage, dam removal, dredging, tributary and floodplain restoration) and ancillary recreational features. 
31 

Cross Lake, Louisiana.—$250,000 is recommended for investigations of improvements to Cross Lake and alternative sources of 

fresh water for Shreveport and Caddo Parish. 

Louisiana Coastal Area Ecosystem Restoration, Louisiana.—The 

Committee recommends $10,000,000 for these important studies. 

The Committee has again elected not to fund a separate Science 

and Technology line item under this study and directs the Corps 

not to include this line item in the fiscal year 2010 budget. As has 

been previously stated by this Committee worthwhile science work 

should be budgeted within the study line item as is done for all 

other studies and projects. A separate line item is superfluous. 

The reduction made to these studies should not be viewed as any 

diminution of support for these efforts, rather it is an attempt to 

balance out the Corps of Engineers nationwide program among the 

various missions of the Corps. 

To the extent practicable, the Committee directs the Corps to expedite preconstruction engineering and design studies of a sediment diversion at Myrtle Grove. The work should focus on project 

performance using capacity to take sufficient advantage of large 

pulsed flows during these less-than-annual high-flow periods, and 

during river flood events, when a large amount of sediment is freely available in the river water column. The Committee further 

notes that the success of ongoing efforts to bolster structural hurricane protection and rebuilding hurricane damaged communities depends on arrest and reversal of the coastal land lost problems in 

the near term, that resolution of the land loss issue will require 

construction of sediment reintroduction projects, such as the Myrtle 

Grove diversion. 

Chesapeake Bay, Susquehanna Reservoir Sediment Management, 

Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia.—It has been estimated that 

280 million tons of sediment originating from the Susquehanna 

River watershed are trapped behind the four hydroelectric dams located on the Lower Susquehanna River between Havre de Grace, 

Maryland, and Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Three of the four dams 

Holtwood, Safe Harbor, and York Haven have reached steady state. 

It is estimated that the Conowingo Dam will cease to have trapping 

capacity in 15 to 20 years. Once this last reservoir reaches steady 

state, the sediment input to the bay may increase dramatically. 

The Committee recommendation includes $200,000 for to examine 

the impact of the Lower Susquehanna River Dams on sediment 

transport into the Bay. 

Minnesota River Basin, Minnesota.—The Committee recommendation includes $350,000 for continuation of the feasibility 

study. This study will evaluate projects/methods to reduce flood 

damages, restore aquatic ecosystems, create wildlife habitat, reduce 

erosion and sediment, and improve water quality in the Minnesota 

River Basin and upper Mississippi River. 

Missouri River Degradation, Mile 340 to 400, Missouri and Kansas.—The Committee recommended $588,000 to initiate feasibility 

studies. The Missouri River in this reach has experienced significant degradation or downcutting of the river bed. There is a strong 

indication that this degradation could impact navigation, flood control and other infrastructure in the area. 
32 

Yellowstone River Corridor, Montana.—The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 to continue feasibility studies. 

Delaware Basin Comprehensive, New Jersey.—The Committee 

recommended $290,000 to continue evaluation of alternative solutions to the region’s problems regarding flooding and environmental restoration along the New Jersey portion of the Delaware 

River and tributaries. 

Western Lake Erie Basin Study, Ohio, Indiana and Michigan.— $250,000 is recommended to continue the Comprehensive investigation of measures to improve fish and wildlife habitat, navigation, 

flood damage reduction, recreation, and water quality in the 

Maumee, Ottawa and Portage River watersheds. 

Walla Walla River Basin, Oregon and Washington.—$500,000 is 

recommended to continue preconstruction, engineering and design 

studies for environmental restoration of the watershed; focusing 

primarily on establishing year round instream flows. 

Neches River Basin, Texas.—$100,000 is recommended to initiate 

reconnaissance studies for flood damage reduction, ecosystem restoration, water supply, and recreation possibilities within the watershed. 

Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway Bridge Replacement at Deep 

Creek, Chesapeake, Virginia.—The Committee recommendation includes $500,000 to continue preconstruction engineering and design 

phase of the replacement bridge. 

Montpelier, Vermont.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$750,000 to initiate feasibility studies of flood damage reduction on 

the Winooski River. 

Vicinity of Willoughby Spit, Norfolk, Virginia.—The Committee 

recommendation includes $200,000 to continue the general reevaluation study of the shore protection project that was severely damaged by Hurricane Isabel. 

Actions for Change to Improve Investigations.—The Committee 

did not recommend funding for this item. The Committee believes 

that the activities proposed in the budget request for this line item 

should be incorporated into the various funded planning activities 

that the Corps has underway. 

Planning Support Program.—The Committee has recommended 

an additional $1,000,000 above the budget request to support the 

Planning Centers of Expertise. A portion of these funds should be 

provided to the National Planning Center of Expertise for Coastal 

Storm Damage Reduction to develop a process for managing shore 

protection projects as part of a systems approach to coastal protection for the purpose of achieving improved project performance, increased cost effectiveness, and enhanced benefits. 

Other Coordination Programs.—$500,000 is recommended for 

Lake Tahoe coordination activities. 

Planning Assistance to States.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $9,000,000 for this nationwide cost-shared program. The 

Committee recognizes that there are hundreds of these studies ongoing at any given time. The Committee has provided a listing in 

the table of projects that should be given priority if cost sharing 

funds are available from the local sponsors. 

Coastal Field Data Collection.—The Committee has recommended $5,600,000 for this nationwide program. In addition to 
33 

budgeted funds, $4,200,000 has been recommended to continue the 

Coastal Data Information Program; Surge and Wave Island Modeling Studies, Hawaii; the Pacific Island Land Ocean Typhoon Experiment Program and the Wave Data Study. The California Beach 

Processes Study has been incorporated into the Coastal Data Information Program. These are all studies that have been underway 

for a number of years and the Committee supports their continuation. 

Flood Plain Management Services Program.—The Committee recommendation includes $11,000,000. The Committee has recommended a listing in the table of projects that should be given 

priority if cost sharing funds are available from the local sponsors. 

Research and Development.—The Committee has included 

$28,000,000 for the Corps nationwide research and development 

programs. The Committee believes that this is an important area 

of the Corps’ program that should be supported and has recommended $11,108,000 above the budget request. Within the funds 

recommended, the Corps should continue submerged aquatic vegetation research in the Chesapeake Bay. 

CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $2,294,029,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 1 ......................................................................... 1,402,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,004,500,000 

1 Excludes emergency appropriations of $5,761,000,000. 

This appropriation includes funds for construction, major rehabilitation and related activities for water resources development 

projects having navigation, flood and storm damage reduction, 

water supply, hydroelectric, environmental restoration, and other 

attendant benefits to the Nation. The construction and major rehabilitation for designated projects for inland and costal waterways 

will derive one-half of the funding from the Inland Waterway Trust 

Fund. Funds to be derived from the Harbor Maintenance Trust 

Fund will be applied to cover the Federal share of the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities Program. 

The Committee has previously stated its rejection of the administration’s proposal to move projects from this account to the Operations and Maintenance account. 

Consequently, the Committee has elected to display the President’s budget request as if these projects had been requested in the 

CG account rather than the O&M account. This makes the actual 

budget request for CG, $1,666,775,000 rather than $1,402,000,000 

as requested in the budget. The projects moved from the O&M request include: 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project Name Amount 

Columbia River Fish Recovery OR & WA ......................................................................................................... $95,700 

Missouri River Fish and Wildlife Recovery, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE, ND, SD ....................................................... 85,000 

Chief Joseph Dam Gas Abatement, WA ........................................................................................................... 6,500 

Howard Hanson Dam Ecosystem Restoration, WA ........................................................................................... 15,000 

Williamette River Temperature Control, OR ..................................................................................................... 3,331 

Lower Snake River, WA & OR .......................................................................................................................... 1,500 

Assategue, MD ................................................................................................................................................. 500 

Lower Cape May Meadows, Cape May Point, NJ ............................................................................................. 150 
34 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project Name Amount 

Folly Beach, SC ................................................................................................................................................ 35 

Fire Island Inlet to Jones Inlet, NY .................................................................................................................. 500 

Cape May Inlet to Lower Township, NJ ............................................................................................................ 2,500 

Delaware Bay Coastline, Roosevelt Inlet to Lewes Beach, DE ........................................................................ 350 

Houston Ship Channel, TX ............................................................................................................................... 500 

Section 111 Program ....................................................................................................................................... 5,325 

Poplar Island, MD ............................................................................................................................................ 9,185 

Dredged Material Disposal Facilities ............................................................................................................... 8,965 

Indiana Harbor (Confined Disposal Facility), IN .............................................................................................. 8,385 

Section 204/145 ............................................................................................................................................... 2,278 

Lower Monumental Lock and Dam, OR and WA .............................................................................................. 3,123 

Markland Locks & Dam, KY & IL ..................................................................................................................... 10,600 

Locks No. 27, Mississippi River, IL ................................................................................................................. 2,598 

Lock and Dam 11, Mississippi River, IA ......................................................................................................... 2,750 

TOTAL Projects Migrating from Construction to O&M ........................................................................ 264,775 

The projects that included in the line item above for Dredged 

Material Disposal Facilities are listed in the Construction, General 

table. 

Due to constrained funding, the Committee reduced the requested amounts for some administration projects. This should not 

be perceived as a lack of support for any of these projects, rather 

it is an attempt by the Committee to balance out the program 

across the Nation and fund most of the projects or studies that 

were funded in fiscal year 2008 but were not addressed by the administration proposal. Even with a $559,000,000 increase to the Corps’ accounts, the 

Committee is unable to address all of the needs. By the Committee’s estimate, less than 60 percent of the needed funding is available for this account. Construction schedules will slip due to this 

constrained funding. This will result in deferred benefits to the national economy. The Committee does not believe that there is any 

way to prioritize our way out of this problem without serious unintended consequences. Adequate resources have been denied for too 

long. Only providing adequate resources for these national investments will resolve this situation. 

The Committee has included a limited number of new construction starts as well as provided completion funding for a number of 

projects. As in the General Investigations account, the Committee 

has embraced the traditional view of new starts. New starts are 

generally defined as those projects that have not received Construction, General funding in the past or those that required new authorization to undertake the work. The Committee has not included 

the administration’s proposed new construction starts for the lower 

Monumental Lock and Dam, Washington, major rehabilitation 

study that was proposed for funding in the Operations and Maintenance account because it would be cost-shared with the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. 

The appropriation provides funds for the Continuing Authorities 

Program (projects which do not require specific authorizing legislation), which includes projects for flood control (section 205), emergency streambank and shoreline protection (section 14), beach erosion control (section 103), mitigation of shore damages (section 

111), navigation projects (section 107), snagging and clearing (sec-
35 

tion 208), aquatic ecosystem restoration (section 206), beneficial 

uses of dredged material (section 204), and project modifications for 

improvement of the environment (section 1135). 

The budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 

shown on the following table: 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee 

recommendation 

ALABAMA 

MOBILE HARBOR TURNING BASIN, AL ................................................................................ .......................... 3,400 

PINHOOK CREEK, HUNTSVILLE, AL ...................................................................................... .......................... 1,400 

TUSCALOOSA, AL ................................................................................................................. .......................... 7,500 

ALASKA 

AKUTAN HARBOR, AK .......................................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

ALASKA COASTAL EROSION, AK ........................................................................................... .......................... 4,500 

HAINES BOAT HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................. .......................... 1,000 

SEWARD HARBOR BREAKWATER EXTENSION ...................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

ST. PAUL HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................ .......................... 2,000 

UNALASKA, AK ..................................................................................................................... .......................... 6,000 

ARIZONA 

NOGALES WASH, AZ ............................................................................................................. .......................... 3,000 

RIO DE FLAG FLAGSTAFF, AZ .............................................................................................. .......................... 3,000 

TRES RIOS, AZ ..................................................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

ARKANSAS 

OZARK—JETA TAYLOR POWERHOUSE, AR (MAJOR REHAB) ............................................... 17,300 17,300 

RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAN, LA, AR & TX ................................................................ .......................... 2,500 

RED RIVER EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION, AR & LA ...................................................... .......................... 4,000 

WHITE RIVER MINIMUM FLOW, AR ...................................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

CALIFORNIA 

AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (COMMON FEATURES) , CA ............................................... 13,000 13,000 

AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM MODIFICATIONS), CA .................................. 9,000 9,000 

AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM RAISE), CA ................................................. .......................... 2,000

CALFED LEVEE STABILITY PROGRAM, CA ............................................................................ .......................... 5,000 

GUADALUPE RIVER, CA ....................................................................................................... .......................... 5,000 

HAMILTON AIRFIELD WETLANDS RESTORATION, CA ............................................................ 4,900 4,900 

HARBOR/SOUTH BAY WATER RECYCLING PROJECT, CA ..................................................... .......................... 3,000 

KAWEAH RIVER, CA ............................................................................................................. 1,000 1,000 

LLAGAS CREEK, CA ............................................................................................................. .......................... 400 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA ...................................................................... 5,700 5,700 

MID VALLEY AREA LEVEE, CA ............................................................................................. .......................... 1,500 

MURRIETA CREEK, CA ......................................................................................................... .......................... 5,000 

NAPA RIVER, CA .................................................................................................................. 7,395 11,000 

OAKLAND HARBOR (50-FOOT PROJECT), CA ....................................................................... 25,092 24,000 

PETALUMA RIVER, CA .......................................................................................................... .......................... 350 

PORT LOS ANGELES HARBOR MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING, CA .......................................... .......................... 885 

SACRAMENTO DEEPWATER SHIP CHANNEL, CA .................................................................. 900 900 

SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA ...................................................... 23,968 23,968 

SACRAMENTO RIVER FLOOD CONTROL, GRR, CA ............................................................... .......................... 500 

SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA IRRIGATION, CA ...................................................... .......................... 500 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON, CA ............................................................................ .......................... 1,000 

SAN LUIS REY RIVER, CA .................................................................................................... .......................... 750 

SAN RAMON VALLEY RECYCLED WATER, CA ...................................................................... .......................... 3,500 

SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA ...................................................................................... 8,100 14,000 

SANTA MARIA RIVER LEVEES, CA ....................................................................................... .......................... 6,000 

SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, CA ..................................................................... 12,000 12,000 

SUCCESS DAM, TULE RIVER, CA (DAM SAFETY) ................................................................. 8,000 8,000 

SUCCESS DAM, TULE RIVER (ENLARGEMENT), CA ............................................................. .......................... 500 

TAHOE BASIN RESTORATION, CA ......................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 
36 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CA ........................................................................................... .......................... 5,000 

UPPER NEWPORT BAY, CA .................................................................................................. .......................... 3,000 

WEST SACRAMENTO, CA ...................................................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA ....................................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, CT ................................ .......................... 500 

DELAWARE 

DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWES BEACH .................................... .......................... 350 

DELAWARE COAST PROTECTION, DE ................................................................................... .......................... 390 

FLORIDA 

BREVARD COUNTY, FL ......................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

CEDAR HAMMOCK, WARES CREEK, FL ................................................................................ 2,773 2,773 

FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS, FL .......................................................... .......................... 2,200 

HERBERT HOOVER DIKE, FL (SEEPAGE CONTROL) ............................................................. 77,400 77,400 

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................. .......................... 3,500 

LAKE WORTH SAND TRANSFER PLANT, FL .......................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

MIAMI HARBOR, FL .............................................................................................................. .......................... 500 

PANAMA CITY BEACHES, FL ................................................................................................ .......................... 1,000 

SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL ........................................... 185,000 130,000 

Central and Southern Florida, FL .............................................................................. (100,188 ) (95,188 ) 

Everglades and S. Florida Ecosystem Restoration .................................................... (3,797 ) (3,797 ) 

Kissimmee River, FL .................................................................................................. (31,015 ) (31,015 ) 

Modified Water Deliveries, FL .................................................................................... (50,000 ) ..........................

ST. LUCIE INLET, FL ............................................................................................................ 4,000 4,000 

TAMPA HARBOR, FL ............................................................................................................. .......................... 500 

GEORGIA 

ATLANTA, EI, GA .................................................................................................................. .......................... 2,000 

RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC ................................................................ 1,450 1,450 

HAWAII IAO STREAMS, HI .................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

IDAHO 

RURAL IDAHO ...................................................................................................................... .......................... 4,000 

ILLINOIS 

CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (DEF CORR) ........................................... 2,500 2,500 

CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL ......................................... 5,750 5,750 

CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL, SECOND BARRIER, IL ............................................ 500 500 

CHICAGO SHORELINE, IL ..................................................................................................... 1,000 4,000 

DES PLAINES RIVER, IL ....................................................................................................... 5,620 8,000 

EAST ST. LOUIS, IL .............................................................................................................. 200 1,207 

EAST ST. LOUIS AND VICINITY, IL ....................................................................................... .......................... 375 

ILLINOIS WATERWAY, LOCKPORT LOCK AND DAM, IL (REPLACEM ...................................... 28,600 28,600 

LOCK AND DAM 27, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IL (MAJOR REHAB) ............................................. .......................... 2,598 

MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL ......................................................................... 34,000 34,000 

NUTWOOD DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, IL .................................................................. .......................... 300 

OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY ............................................................. 114,000 114,000 

UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN, MO & ............................................. 20,000 18,000 

WOOD RIVER LEVEE, IL ....................................................................................................... 684 3,700 

INDIANA 

NDIANA HARBOR CONFIND DISPOSAL FACILITY, IN 1 .......................................................... .......................... 8,385 

LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, IN ................................................................................................. 8,000 8,000 

IOWA 

DAVENPORT, IA .................................................................................................................... .......................... 4,850 

DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, IA ............................................................................ .......................... 5,000 

DES MOINES RECREATIONAL RIVER AND GREENBELT, IA .................................................. .......................... 3,900 

LOCK AND DAM 11, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, IA (MAJOR REHAB) ............................................. .......................... 2,750 

MISSOURI RIVER FISH MITIGATION, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE 1 ................................................ .......................... 70,000 
37 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

PERRY CREEK, IA ................................................................................................................ .......................... 3,800 

KANSAS 

TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KS & MO ........................................................................................ 10,000 10,000 

TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS (DAM SAFETY) ............................................................................. 23,800 23,800 

KENTUCKY 

KENTUCKY LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE RIVER, KY ........................................................... 22,330 22,330 

MARKLAND LOCKS AND DAM, KY, IL (MAJOR REHAB) 1 ...................................................... .......................... 10,600 

MCALPINE LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, KY & IN ........................................................... 6,270 6,270 

WOLF CREEK, KY (SEEPAGE CONTROL) .............................................................................. 57,000 57,000 

LOUISIANA 

COMITE RIVER DIVERSION CANAL, LA ................................................................................ .......................... 10,000 

EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA (FC) ................................................................................ .......................... 2,000 

INNER HARBOR NAVIGATION CANAL LOCK REPLACEMENT, LA ........................................... .......................... 2,000 

J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA ................................................................................ 1,500 8,500 

LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA (CG) .............................................................................. .......................... 2,500 

OUACHITA RIVER LEVEES, LA .............................................................................................. .......................... 1,600 

MARYLAND 

ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, MD & DC ................................................................ .......................... 30 

ASSATEAGUE ISLAND, MD 1 ................................................................................................. .......................... 1,900 

ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND, MD .................................................................................. .......................... 200 

BALTIMORE METRO RESOURCES, GWYNNS FALLS, MD ...................................................... .......................... 500 

CHARLESTOWN, MD ............................................................................................................. .......................... 50 

CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION ............................... .......................... 2,500 

CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD & VA .............................................................. .......................... 2,000 

CUMBERLAND, MD .............................................................................................................. .......................... 200 

POPLAR ISLAND, MD 1 ......................................................................................................... .......................... 12,000 

MASSASSACHUSETTS 

MUDDY RIVER, MA .............................................................................................................. 4,000 5,000 

MICHIGAN 

GENESEE COUNTY, MI ......................................................................................................... .......................... 600 

GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, MI .............................................. .......................... 2,500 

NEGAUNEE, MI ..................................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

SAULT STE. MARIE, MI ........................................................................................................ .......................... 2,000 

MINNESOTA 

BRECKENRIDGE, MN ............................................................................................................ .......................... 2,877 

CROOKSTON, MN ................................................................................................................. 300 300 

LOCK AND DAM 3, MISSISSIPPI RIVER (MAJOR REHAB), MN ............................................. .......................... 2,000

MISSISSIPPI 

DESOTO COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM, MS .................................................... .......................... 4,860

MISSISSIPPI ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, MS ........................................................ .......................... 18,000 

MISSOURI 

BLUE RIVER BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MO ............................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

BLUE RIVER CHANNEL, KANSAS CITY, MO .......................................................................... 1,700 1,700 

CHESTERFIELD, MO ............................................................................................................. .......................... 3,000 

CLEARWATER LAKE, MO (SEEPAGE CONTROL) .................................................................... 25,000 25,000 

MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO .................................... 5,011 5,011 

MISSOURI & MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT, MO ......................................... .......................... 1,500 

MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM (L–385), MO, IA, NE & KS ............................................. .......................... 2,600 

ST. LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO .................................................................................... 2,000 3,750 

SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, KANSAS CITY, MO ........................................................... .......................... 2,000 

MONTANA 

FORT PECK CABIN CONVEYANCE, MT ................................................................................. .......................... 1,500 
38 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

RURAL MONTANA, MT .......................................................................................................... .......................... 5,000 

NEBRASKA 

ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NE ......................................................................................... 4,828 4,828

MISSOURI NATIONAL RECREATIONAL RIVER, NE & SD ....................................................... .......................... 1,000 

SAND CREEK, SAUNDERS COUNTY, NE ............................................................................... .......................... 2,400 

WESTERN SARPY COUNTY AND CLEAR CREEK, NE ............................................................ .......................... 3,000 

NEVADA 

RURAL, NV (EI) .................................................................................................................... .......................... 18,000 

NEW JERSEY 

BARNEGAT INLET TO LITTLE EGG HARBOR, NJ (NJ SHORE PROT ....................................... 11,700 11,700 

BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET (ABSECON IS ...................................... .......................... 3,000 

BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET, BRIGANTINE ....................................... .......................... 80 

CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ 1 ..................................................................... .......................... 2,500 

DELAWARE RIVER MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING, NJ, PA & DE ............................................ .......................... 5,000 

GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET & PECK BEACH, NJ ................................................................. .......................... 3,000 

GREAT EGG HARBOR TO TOWNSENDS INLET, NJ ................................................................ .......................... 250 

HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ ....................................................................................... .......................... 100 

JOSEPH G. MINISH WATERFRONT, NJ .................................................................................. .......................... 4,000 

LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NJ 1 ....................................................... .......................... 150 

PASSAIC RIVER PRESERVATION OF NATURAL STORAGE AREAS, NJ ................................... .......................... 1,500 

RAMAPO RIVER AT MAHWAH AND SUFFERN, NJ ................................................................. .......................... 500 

RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, PORT MONMOUTH, NJ ............................................ .......................... 2,000 

RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ ...................................................... 10,000 10,000 

SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ ............................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

TOWNSENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ ...................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

NEW MEXICO 

ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NM ................................................................................... .......................... 2,400 

ALAMOGORDO, NM .............................................................................................................. 4,200 4,200 

CENTRAL NEW MEXICO, NM ................................................................................................ .......................... 5,000 

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE FLOOD PROTECTION, BERNALILLO TO BELE ..................................... .......................... 800 

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE RESTORATION, NM ............................................................................ .......................... 24,016 

NEW MEXICO (Environmental Infrastructure), NM .............................................................. .......................... 7,000 

RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, SAN ACACIA TO BOSQUE DEL APACHE, NM ............................... 800 800 

SOUTHWEST VALLEY ALBUQUERQUE, NM ........................................................................... .......................... 8,000 

NEW YORK 

ATLANTIC COAST OF LONG ISLAND, LONG BEACH ISLAND, NY .......................................... .......................... 100 

ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, ...................................... 3,800 3,800 

EAST ROCKAWAY INLET TO ROCKAWAY INLET & JAMAICA BAY, NY ................................... .......................... 750 

FIRE ISAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY 1 ............................................................................ .......................... 500 

FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY ...................................................................... 2,150 2,150 

NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ ............................................................... 90,000 85,000 

NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED, NY ....................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

NORTH CAROLINA 

BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES, NC ................................................................................... .......................... 250 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC .................................................................................................. .......................... 2,000 

WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC .................................................................................................. .......................... 300 

NORTH DAKOTA 

GARRISON DAM AND POWER PLANT, ND (REPLACEMENT) ................................................. 3,500 3,500 

LAKE SAKAKAWEA PROJECT, ND .......................................................................................... .......................... 17,048 

MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, ND ................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

NORTH DAKOTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, ND ................................................... .......................... 10,000 

OHIO 

METROPOLITAN REGION OF CINCINNATI, DUCK CREEK, OH ............................................... 4,000 4,000 
39 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

OKLAHOMA 

CANTON LAKE, OK (DAM SAFETY) ....................................................................................... 21,200 21,200 

OREGON 

COLUMBIA RIVER CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS, OR & WA .................................................... 36,000 36,000 

COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS SITES, OR & WA ............................................ 2,455 2,455 

ELK CREEK LAKE, OR .......................................................................................................... 3,120 3,120 

WILLAMETTE TEMPERATURE CONTROL, OR 1 ...................................................................... .......................... 3,331 

PENNSYLVANIA 

EMSWORTH L&D, OHIO RIVER, PA (STATIC INSTABILITY CORRE ........................................ 25,800 25,800 

GRAYS LANDING LOCK AND DAM, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ............................................ 600 600 

LACKAWANNA RIVER, SCRANTON, PA .................................................................................. .......................... 4,782 

LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3, AND 4, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ............................................... 40,806 19,050 

POINT MARION, LOCK AND DAM 8, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA & ...................................... 150 150 

PRESQUE ISLE, PA ............................................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

WYOMING VALLEY (LEVEE RAISING), PA ............................................................................. .......................... 3,000 

PUERTO RICO 

PORTUGUES AND BUCANA RIVERS, PR ............................................................................... 45,000 43,000 

RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR ..................................................................................................... 12,000 12,000 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

FOLLY BEACH, SC 1 ............................................................................................................. .......................... 35 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

BIG SIOUX RIVER, SIOUX FALLS, SD ................................................................................... .......................... 4,000 

CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX, SD ............................................... .......................... 4,000

TENNESSEE 

CENTER HILL DAM, TN (SEEPAGE CONTROL) ...................................................................... 53,400 53,400 

CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ..................................................................... 42,000 42,000 

TEXAS 

BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX ............................................................................................. 5,382 5,382 

CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH, UPPER TRINITY RIVER, TX .................................................. .......................... 500 

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX .................................................................................. .......................... 2,000 

DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TRINITY RIVER, TX ........................................................... .......................... 13,000 

HOUSTON-GALVESTON NAVIGATION CHANNELS, TX ............................................................ 21,700 19,700 

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX 1 ........................................................................................... .......................... 500 

JOHNSON CREEK, UPPER TRINITY BASIN, ARLINGTON, TX ................................................. .......................... 2,000 

RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE CONTROL, TX & OK .............................................................. .......................... 1,500 

SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TX ....................................................................... .......................... 10,000 

SIMS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX ................................................................................................ 23,465 21,465 

TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX ................................................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

UTAH 

RURAL UTAH, UT (EI) .......................................................................................................... .......................... 12,000 

VERMONT 

BURLINGTON HARBOR, VT ................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED INITIATE, VT ....................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

VIRGINIA 

JAMES RIVER DEEPWATER TURNING BASIN, VA ................................................................. .......................... 1,763 

JOHN H KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC (REPLACEMENT) ....................................... 14,000 14,000 

LYNCHBURG CSO, VA .......................................................................................................... .......................... 300 

NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS (DEEPENING), VA ........................................................ .......................... 1,000 

RICHMOND CSO, VA ............................................................................................................ .......................... 300 

ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, HEADWATERS AREA, VA ................................................... 1,075 1,075 

VIRGINIA BEACH (HURRICANE PROTECTION), VA ................................................................ .......................... 3,000 
40 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

WASHINGTON 

CHIEF JOSEPH GAS ABATEMENT, WA 1 ................................................................................ .......................... 2,500 

COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, OR & WA 1 ................................................................. .......................... 92,000 

DUWAMISH AND GREEN RIVER BASIN, WA ......................................................................... .......................... 3,000 

HOWARD HANSEN DAM, WA 1 .............................................................................................. .......................... 15,000 

LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR & WA ....................................... 1,500 1,500 

LOWER MONUMENT LOCK & DAM, WA 1 ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE COMP, WA, OR, ID 1 ......................................... .......................... 1,500 

MOUNT ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA .................................................................... 1,410 4,410 

MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA (FISH PASSAGE) ........................................................................ 1,000 1,000 

PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS RESTORATION, WA ............................................... .......................... 621 

SHOALWATER BAY SHORELINE, WA ..................................................................................... .......................... 2,000 

WEST VIRGINIA 

BLUESTONE LAKE, WV (DAM SAFETY ASSURANCE) ............................................................ 12,000 12,000 

GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WV .......................................................................................... .......................... 1,500 

ISLAND CREEK BASIN IN AND AROUND LOGAN, WV ........................................................... .......................... 200 

LEVISA AND TUG FORKS AND UPPER CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV, VA: 

Virgina ........................................................................................................................ .......................... 8,000 

West Virginia .............................................................................................................. .......................... 8,500 

LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WV ........................................................................................ .......................... 1,050 

MARMET LOCK, KANAWHA RIVER, WV ................................................................................. 9,000 9,000 

ROBERT C. BYRD LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, WV & OH ............................................. 1,000 1,000 

STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV ......................................................................................... 900 900 

WISCONSIN 

MILWAUKEE HARBOR CDF EXPANSION, WI ......................................................................... .......................... 1,600 

SUBTOTAL FOR PROJECTS ..................................................................................... 1,296,684 1,897,220 

NATIONAL PROGRAMS 

ABANDONED MINE RESTORATION ........................................................................................ .......................... 1,000 

ACTIONS FOR CHANGE TO IMPROVE CONSTRUCTION ......................................................... 4,600 ..........................

AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL PROGRAM .................................................................................. 3,500 4,550 

CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM: 

AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206) ................................................. 10,295 25,000 

Chattahoochee Fall Line Ecosystem, AL & GA ................................................. .......................... ..........................

Brownsville Branch, AR .................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

St. Helena—Napa River Project, CA ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Sweetwater Reservoir Ecosystem Restoration, CA ............................................ .......................... ..........................

Upper York Creek Dam Removal, CA ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Arkansas River Habitat Restoration Project, CO .............................................. .......................... ..........................

Blue River, CO .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Goose Creek, CO ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Lower Boulder Creek, CO .................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

North Fork Gunnison River, CO ......................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Tamarisk Eradication, CO ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Rose Bay, Voluisia Co, FL ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Jackson Creek, GA ............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Mokuhinia/Mokuula Restoration, HI .................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Emiquon Preserve, IL ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Eugene Field, IL ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Hofmann Dam, IL .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Orland Park, IL .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Squaw Creek, (Round Lake Drain), IL .............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Chariton River/Rathbun Lake, IA ...................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Duck Creek, Davenport, IA ................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Whitebreast Creek Watershed, IA ..................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Storm Lake, IA .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Ventura Marsh Habitat, Clear Lake, IA ............................................................ .......................... ..........................

Buras Marina, LA .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................
41 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Lake Killarney, Louisiana State Penitentiary, LA .............................................. .......................... ..........................

Lake Verret, Assumption Parish, LA ................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Mandeville Ecosystem Restoration, LA ............................................................. .......................... ..........................

University Lakes, Baton Rouge, LA ................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Vermillion River Ecosystem Restoration, LA ..................................................... .......................... ..........................

Zemurray Park Lake Restoration, Tangipahoa Paris ........................................ .......................... ..........................

Milford Pond Restoration, Milford, MA ............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Deep Run/Tiber Hudson, Howard County, MD .................................................. .......................... ..........................

Dog Island Shoals, MD ..................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Greenbury Point, MD ......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

North Beach, MD ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Northwest Branch, Anacostia River, MD .......................................................... .......................... ..........................

Pleasure Island, MD .......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Urieville Lake, MD ............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Western Branch, Patuxent River, MD ............................................................... .......................... ..........................

Wright’s Creek, Dorchester Creek, MD .............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Marion Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, MI ...................................................... .......................... ..........................

Painter Creek, MN ............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Musconetcong River Dam Removals, NJ .......................................................... .......................... ..........................

Pennsville, Salem County, NJ ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Rancocas Creek Fish Passage, NJ .................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Kings Park, NY .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Lower Hempstead Harbor, NY ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Soundview Park, Bronx, NY ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Asheville, Buncombe County, NC ...................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Concord Streams Restoration, NC .................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Heron Haven, NE ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Wilson Bay Restoration, NC .............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Drayton Dam, ND .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Christine/Hickson Dams, ND ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Incline and Third Creeks, NV ............................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Blue Hole Lake State Park, NM ........................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Bottomless Lakes State Park, NM .................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Janes-Wallace Memorial Dam, Santa Rosa, NM .............................................. .......................... ..........................

Olentangy 5th Avenue Dam, OH ....................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Arrowhead Creek, OR ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Beaver Creek, OR .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Eugene Delta Ponds, OR ................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Camp Creek—Zumwalt Prairie, OR ................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Springfield Millrace, OR .................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Codorus Creek Watershed Restoration, PA ....................................................... .......................... ..........................

Winneapaug Pond Restoration, RI .................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Spring Lake, San Marcos, TX ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Stephenville, WWTP, TX ..................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Tangier Island, Accomack County, VA .............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Carpenter Creek, WA ......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204, ....................................... .......................... 7,187 

Isle Aux Herbes, AL ........................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Blackhawk Bottoms, IA ..................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Atchafalaya River, Shell Island, St. Mary Parish ............................................. .......................... ..........................

Barataria Bay Waterway, LA ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Calc Rv, Mi 5–14 Ks, LA .................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Shell Island Pass, LA ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Newburyport Harbor, MA ................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

21st Avenue West Channel, Duluth, MN .......................................................... .......................... ..........................

Wanchese Marsh Creation, NC ......................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Maumee Bay Restoration, OH ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Wynn Road CDF, OH ......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Restoration of Cat Islands, WI ......................................................................... .......................... ..........................

EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (SEC ............................... 2,301 10,000 

FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205) .............................................................. 2,617 43,123 
42 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Wynne, AR ......................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Cosgrove Creek, Calaveras County, CA ............................................................ .......................... ..........................

Las Gallinas Creek/Santa Venetia Levee, CA ................................................... .......................... ..........................

White Slough, CA .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Oak Creek, Florence, Colorado .......................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Little Mill Creek, New Castle County, DE ......................................................... .......................... ..........................

Pennsylvania Avenue Improvement Project, Bethany ....................................... .......................... ..........................

Turkey Creek, Ben Hill County, GA ................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Keopu-Hienaloli Stream, HI ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Kuliouou Stream, Oahu, HI ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Wailele Stream, Oahu, HI ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Indian/Dry Creek Cedar Rapids, IA ................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Mad Creek, Muscatine, IA ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Red Oak Creek, Red Oak, IA ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Winnebago River, Mason City, IA ..................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Crosscreek, Rossville, KS .................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Concordia, KS .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Eureka Creek, Manhattan, KS ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Hopkinsville Dry-Dam, KY ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Bayou Choupique, St. Mary Parish, LA ............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Bayou Queue de Tortue, Vermillion Parish, LA ................................................. .......................... ..........................

Town of Carencro, Lafayette Parish, LA ........................................................... .......................... ..........................

Elkton, MD ......................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

North River, Peabody, MA ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Salisbury RIver, Brockton, MA .......................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Ada, MN ............................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Montevideo, MN ................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Granite Falls, MN .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

McKinney Bayou, Tunica County, MS ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Blacksnake Creek, St. Joseph, MO ................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Livingston, MT ................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Little River Diversion, Dutchtown, MO .............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Platte River, Fremont, NE ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Platte River, Schuyler, NE ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Randolph, NE (Middle Logan Creek) ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Jewett Brook, Laconia, NH ................................................................................ .......................... (100 ) 

Hatch, NM ......................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Assunpink Creek, Hamilton Township, Mercer County, NJ ............................... .......................... ..........................

Jackson Brook, NJ ............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Mill Brook, Highland Park, NJ ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Pennsville, NJ .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Poplar Brook, Deal and Ocean Township, NJ ................................................... .......................... ..........................

Upper Passaic River and Tributaries, Long Hill Township, NJ ........................ .......................... ..........................

Port Jervis, NY ................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Pigeon River Watershed, NC ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Swannanoa River Watershed, NC ..................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Wahpeton, ND ................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Rio Descalabrado, PR ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Rio Guamani-Guaya, PR ................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Blanchard River, Ottawa, OH ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Duck Creek Flood Warning System, OH ............................................................ .......................... ..........................

Findley, OH ........................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Independence, OH ............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Philadelphia Shipyard Sea Wall, Philadelphia, PA ........................................... .......................... ..........................

Beaver Creek & Tribs, Bristol, TN .................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Farmers Branch, Tarrant County, TX ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Pecan Creek, Gainesville, TX ............................................................................ .......................... ..........................

WV Statewide Flood Warning System, WV ........................................................ .......................... ..........................

NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107) ...................................................................... 559 8,000 

Savoonga Harbor, AK ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Kahoolawe Harbor, Kahoolawe, HI .................................................................... .......................... ..........................
43 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

North Kohala Navigation Improvements, HI ..................................................... .......................... ..........................

Port Fourchon Extension, Lafourche Parish, LA ................................................ .......................... ..........................

Shortcut Canal, Terrebonne Parish, LA ............................................................ .......................... ..........................

Bass Harbor, ME ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Round Pond, Bristol, ME ................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

St. Jerome’s Creek, St. Mary County, MD ......................................................... .......................... ..........................

Mackinac Isle, Harbor Breakwall, MI ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Northwestern Michigan, Traverse City, MI ........................................................ .......................... ..........................

Ontonagon Channel Extension, MI .................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Grand Marais Harbor of Refuge, MN ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

McQuade Road Harbor of Refuge, Duluth, MN ................................................ .......................... ..........................

Hampton Harbor, NH ......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Ottawa River Navigation, Toledo, OH ............................................................... .......................... ..........................

Delaware River, Fairless Turning Basin, PA ..................................................... .......................... ..........................

Charlestown Breachway and Inlet, RI .............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Northwest Tennessee Harbor, TN ...................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Nassawadox Creek, VA ...................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION 111) 1 ................................................... .......................... 10,000 

Mobile Pass, AL ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Camp Ellis, Saco, ME ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Vermillion, OH ................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Fairport Harbor, OH ........................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Mattituck Harbor, NY ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Tybee Island Channel Impacts, GA .................................................................. .......................... ..........................

PROJECT MODS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (SECTION 1135) .......... 6,544 25,000 

Lower Cache Restoration, AR ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Millwood Lake, Grassy Lake, AR ....................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Rock Creek @ Boyle Park, Little Rock, AR ....................................................... .......................... ..........................

Tujunga Wash Environmental Restoration, CA ................................................. .......................... ..........................

Lower Kingman Island, DC ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Kanaha Pond, Maui, HI ..................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Kaunakakai Str, Molokai, HI ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Rathbun Lake Habitat Restoration, IA ............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Indian Ridge Marsh, Chicago, IL ...................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Green River Dam, Mod, KY ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Bayou Desiard, Monroe, LA ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Frazier/Whitehorse Oxbow Lake Weir, LA .......................................................... .......................... ..........................

Lake Fausse Pointe, Iberia Parish, LA .............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Lake St. Joseph, Tensas Parish, LA .................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Morganza Fore-Bay Restoration, LA .................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Sea Lamprey Barrier Program, MI .................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Lake Whittington Weir, MS & AR ...................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Sand Hill River, MN .......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Duck Creek, MO ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Bloomington State Park, MO ............................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Blue Valley Wetlands, Jackson, MO .................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Prison Farm, ND ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Assunpink Creek, Trenton, NJ ........................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Lincoln Park West, Ecosystem Restoration Study, ........................................... .......................... ..........................

Pine Mount Creek, NJ ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Pond Creek Salt Marsh Restoration, Cape May County, NJ ............................. .......................... ..........................

Las Cruces Dam Environmental Restoration, Don ̃ a Ana County, NM .............. .......................... ..........................

Pueblo of Santa Ana Aquatic Restoration, NM ................................................ .......................... ..........................

Route 66 Environmental Restoration, Albuquerque, NM .................................. .......................... ..........................

Spring Creek, NY ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Belhaven Harbor, NC ........................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Tappan Lake, OH .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Lower Columbia Slough, OR ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Eagleland Ecosystem, TX .................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Lake Champlain Lamprey Barriers, VT ............................................................. .......................... ..........................

Village of Oyster, Northampton County, VA ...................................................... .......................... ..........................
44 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CONSTRUCTION, GENERAL—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Braided Reach, WA ........................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Shorty’s Island, WA ........................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103) .......................................................................... .......................... 7,500 

Athol Springs, Lake Erie, NY ............................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Lasalle Park, Buffalo, NY ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Old Lakeshore Road, NY ................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Lake Erie At Painesville, OH ............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Philadelphia Shipyard, PA ................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Ft. San Geronimo, PR ....................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Veteren’s Drive Shoreline, St. Thomas, VI ........................................................ .......................... ..........................

Chesapeake Bay Shoreline, Hampton, VA ........................................................ .......................... ..........................

Lincoln Park Beach Seattle, WA ....................................................................... .......................... ..........................

SNAGGING AND CLEARING (SECTION 208) ................................................................ .......................... 500 

Muscatatuck River Log Jam, Scott County, IN ................................................. .......................... ..........................

Oran, MO ........................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Blackwell Lake, Blackwell, OK .......................................................................... .......................... ..........................

DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION PROGRAM ........................................ 48,600 48,650 

Dam Safety Assurance Studies: 

Isabella Dam, CA .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Martis Creek Dam, CA & NV ............................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Cherry Creek Dam, CO ...................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Dworshak Dam, ID ............................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Mississippi Lock and Dam 25, MO .................................................................. .......................... ..........................

John Day Lock and Dam, OR & WA .................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Seepage/Stability Correction Major Rehabilitation Study: 

Hidden Dam, CA ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Whittier Narrows Dam, CA ................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Hop Brook Dam, CT .......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Mansfield Hollow Dam, CT ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Lake Shelbyville Dam, IL .................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Green River Lake Dam, KY ............................................................................... .......................... ..........................

J. Edward Roush Dam, KY ................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Nolin Lake dam, KY .......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Rough River Lake Dam, KY .............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Salamonie Lake Dam, KY ................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Beach City Dam, OH ......................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Bolivar Dam, OH ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Mohawk Dam, OH ............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

Zoar Levee (Dover Dam), OH ............................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Keystone lake Dam, OK ..................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

East Branch Dam, Clarion River, PA ................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Montgomery Locks and Dam, PA ...................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Addicks Dam, Buffalo Bayou, TX ...................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Lewisville Dam, TX ............................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Ball Mountain Dam, VT .................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROGRAM (DMDF) ........................................... .......................... 8,965 

Savannah Harbor, GA ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

Rogue River, MI ......................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Charleston Harbor, SC ............................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

Green Bay Harbor, WI ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION ............................................................................................... 21,000 21,000 

ESTUARY RESTORATION PROGRAM (PUBLIC LAW 106–457) .............................................. 5,000 1,000 

INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD—BOARD EXPENSE .................................................... 50 50 

INLAND WATERWAYS USERS BOARD—CORPS EXPENSE .................................................... 250 250 

SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT & DEMONSTRATION .................................. .......................... 875 

SUBTOTAL FOR NATIONAL PROGRAMS ................................................................... 105,316 222,650 

SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE ...................................................................................................... .......................... ¥115,370 

TOTAL ..................................................................................................................... 1,402,000 2,004,500 

1 ITEMS REQUESTED BY THE ADMINISTRATION IN OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE. 
45 

Tuscaloosa, Alabama.—The Committee recommends $7,500,000 

for the relocation project at Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 

Akutan Harbor, Alaska.—The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 to continue construction of this project. 

Alaska Coastal Erosion, Alaska.—The Committee recommendation provides $4,500,000 for Alaska Coastal Erosion. The following 

communities are eligible recipients of these funds: Kivalina, 

Newtok, Shishmaref, Koyukuk, Barrow, Kaktovik, Point Hope, 

Unalakleet, and Bethel. 

Nogales Wash, Arizona.—The Committee recommends $3,000,000 

for continuation of this flood control project. 

Red River Below Denison Dam, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma 

and Texas.—The Committee recommends $2,500,000 to continue 

levee rehabilitation work in Arkansas and Louisiana to protect the 

1.7 million acre flood plain from crop damage; loss of livestock; 

damage to levees, railroads, highways, industries, and other river 

and urban developments. 

Red River Emergency Bank Protection, Arkansas and Louisiana.—The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for protection of 

critical infrastructure and land along the Red River below Index, 

Arkansas. The project plan provides for revetment, dikes, or cutoffs 

that can be accomplished in advance of developing the design for 

the entire project. 

American River Watershed (Folsom Dam Miniraise), California.— The Committee recommends $2,000,000. Within the funds recommended, $1,000,000 is for the replacement bridge. 

Mid Valley Area Levee Reconstruction, California.—-The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 reconstruction of this 

flood control project. The project includes levee reconstruction 

through installing landside berms with toe drains, ditch relocation, 

embankment modification, slurry cut-off walls, and developing land 

for fish and wildlife mitigation. 

Oakland Harbor, California.—The Committee recommends 

$24,000,000 to continue construction of this project. The reduction 

made to this project should not be viewed as any diminution of support for this project, rather an attempt to balance out the Corps of 

Engineers nationwide program among the various missions of the 

Corps. 

Santa Ana River, California.—The Committee recommends 

$14,000,000 to continue construction of this flood control project. 

West Sacramento, California.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $2,000,000 for a general reevaluation of the flood control 

project and other project needs. 

Delaware Coast Protection, Delaware.—The Committee recommendation includes $350,000 to reimburse the state for the Federal share of the annual operation and maintenance of the sand bypass facilities. 

Everglades and South Florida Ecosystem Restoration, Florida.— 

The Committee has chosen to display the various, separately authorized components of the project in the table in addition to a single line item as was proposed in the budget. The Committee believes that it is prudent to maintain visibility of the various project 

elements in the budget process. The reduction made under this 

heading should not be viewed as any diminution of support for this 
46 

project, rather an attempt to balance out the Corps of Engineers 

nationwide program among the various missions of the Corps. 

The Committee has provided no funding for the Modified Waters 

Delivery Plan as proposed in the budget. The Committee has chosen to fund this project in the Department of the Interior and related agencies bill. The Committee directs the administration to include the Modified Waters Delivery Plan funding in the Interior 

budget in future budget submissions. 

Central and South Florida, Florida.—Within the funds recommended, the Corps shall continue work on the Upper St. Johns 

River project. 

Florida Keys Water Quality Improvements, Florida.—The Committee recommendation includes $2,200,000 for continued implementation of this project. The Committee urges the administration 

to budget for this project due to the interrelationship of this work 

to the Everglades Restoration project, Biscayne Bay and southern 

Florida’s nearshore waters. 

Jacksonville Harbor, Florida.—The Committee has recommended 

$3,500,000 to continue work on the channel deepening project as 

well as for a second general reevaluation report. 

Tampa Harbor, Florida.—$500,000 is provided for 

preconstruction engineering and design of navigation improvements and channel deepening. 

Atlanta, Georgia.—The Committee recommendation includes 

$2,000,000 to continue this project. 

Rural Idaho Environmental Infrastructure, Idaho.—The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for this project. Within the funds 

provided the Corps should give consideration to projects at Aamon 

(Eastern Idaho Regional Project), Bellevue, Buhl, Burley, Greenleaf, Hazelton, Lava Hot Springs, Pocatello, Rexburg, Rigby, Rupert, Sandpoint, Shelley (Eastern Idaho Regional Project), Soda 

Springs, St. Anthony, Twin Falls (Auger Hills), and Wendell. Other 

communities that meet the program criteria should be considered 

as funding allows. 

Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal, Illinois.—The Committee has 

recommended $6,250,000 for construction on aquatic nuisance species Barriers I and II. 

McCook and Thornton Reservoirs, Illinois.—The Committee recommends $34,000,000 for continued construction of this project. 

Olmsted Locks and Dam, Ohio River, Illinois and Kentucky.—The 

Committee recommends $114,000,000 to continue construction of 

this project. None of the funds provided for the Olmsted Locks and 

Dam Project or any other construction funds are to be used to reimburse the Claims and Judgment Fund. 

Indiana Harbor (Confined Disposal Facility), Indiana.—The 

Committee has retained funding for this project in the Construction, General account rather than moving it to the Operations and 

Maintenance account as proposed in the budget. 

Des Moines and Raccoon Rivers, Iowa.—The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 to complete preconstruction engineering and design and initiate construction of this flood control 

project. The plan includes reconstructing 13,600 feet of levees and 

associated facilities to provide improved flood protection to the 

Birdland Park and Central Place neighborhoods and modifications 
47 

to 19 closure structures in the existing downtown Des Moines Federal levee system. 

Missouri Fish and Wildlife Recovery, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, 

Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota.—The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for this project. Within the recommended funds, $15,000,000 is to be used for modifications to the 

Intake Dam to provide additional habitat for the pallid sturgeon. 

To ensure that independent science guides Missouri River Recovery 

and its applications of adaptive Management and to ensure that 

the success of the recovery efforts are adequately measured and 

money wisely spent, the Committee directs that funds provided 

through Missouri River Recovery to the U.S. Geological Survey for 

science and monitoring should not be reduced below fiscal year 

2007 levels. 

Turkey Creek, Kansas and Missouri.—The Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 to continue construction of this 

project. 

Kentucky Lock and Dam, Tennessee River, Kentucky.—The Committee recommends $22,330,000 for continuation of the highway 

and railroad bridges superstructure contract. Funding deficits in 

the Inland Waterway Trust Fund prohibit the Committee from providing additional funds for the upstream lock excavation contract. 

The Committee recognizes that this is a critical path contract for 

the overall schedule. However, until the revenue stream for the Inland Waterway Trust Fund is enhanced, the Committee actions 

will be limited by available Trust Fund revenues. 

Markland Locks and Dam, Kentucky and Illinois.—The Committee has provided $10,600,000 for construction on this major rehabilitation requested by the administration. The Committee has 

provided these funds here rather than in O&M as proposed in the 

budget request. 

J. Bennett Johnston Waterway, Louisiana.—The Committee has 

recommended $8,500,000 for navigation channel refinement features, land purchases and development for mitigation of project impacts, and construction of project recreation and appurtenant features. 

Larose to Golden Meadow, Louisiana.—The Committee has recommended $2,500,000 to continue efforts to provide 100-year flood 

protection for this project. Surveys show the levee grade is deficient 

by 12–18 inches. 

Louisiana Hurricane Protection System.—It is the Committee’s 

understanding that the Corps has sufficient legal authority to afford credit for the lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and 

disposal areas provided by the non-Federal sponsor for the Lake 

Ponchartrain and Vicinity, West Bank and Vicinity, and Southeast 

Louisiana projects that the Corps determines are necessary for 

such projects. 

Chesapeake Bay Environmental Program, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia.—The Committee has recommended $2,500,000 

for continuation of this project. Within the funds recommended, 

$328,000 is included to complete the environmental studies concerning non-native oysters. 
48 

Chesapeake Bay Oyster Recovery, Maryland and Virginia.—The 

Committee recommends $2,000,000 to continue oyster recovery efforts. 

Fort Peck Dam and Lake, Montana.—The Committee recommendation includes $1,500,000 for continuation of the disposition of Fort Peck cabins. 

Rural Montana, Montana.—The Committee recommends 

$5,000,000 for this project. Within the funds provided the Corps 

should give consideration to the following projects: County Water 

District of Billings Heights, Phase II Upgrade; Seeley Lake Water 

System Upgrade; Gildford Wastewater System Improvements; Daly 

Ditches Water; City of Shelby, Wastewater System Improvements; 

Muddy Cluster Water Line; Manhattan Water Project; Ten Mile 

Estates/Pleasant Valley Wastewater Improvements; Town of Stevensville, Water Improvement Project; Eureka Water Expansion; 

City of Troy, Water Project Phase II; Fort Belknap Water Treatment Plant; Crow Agency Wastewater Collection System Improvement Project; Columbia Falls Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements; City of Hamilton, Wastewater Facility Critical Upgrades; Bigfork County Water and Sewer District Wastewater 

Treatment Facilities Improvements; Bozeman Water Reclamation 

Facility Reconstruction; City of Helena, Missouri River Water 

Treatment Plant Reconstruction; City of Butte, Big Hole Drinking 

Water Supply Diversion Dam Replacement; City of Billings, Water 

Treatment Plant Improvements; Greater Woods Bay Wastewater 

Collection System; Homestead Acres Water and Sewer Well Acquisition; Manhattan Water improvements; Great Falls Upper/Lower 

River Road Water and Sewer District Improvements; Judith Gap 

Wastewater Improvements; Loma County Water Improvement 

Project; and Carter Water Improvement Project, Phase II. 

Sand Creek, Nebraska.—The Committee recommends $2,400,000 

to complete construction of this project. 

Rural Nevada, Nevada.—The Committee recommendation provides $18,000,000 for this project. Within the funds provided the 

Corps should give consideration to projects at North Lemmon Valley; Spanish Springs Valley Phase II; Huffaker Hills Water Conservation; Lawton-Verdi; Boulder City; Lyon County; Gerlach; 

Searchlight; Incline Village; Esmeralda County; Cold Springs; 

Fallon; Goldfield; Churchill County; West Wendover; Yearington; 

Virgin Valley Water District; Lovelock; Truckee Meadows Water 

Authority; McGill-Ruth Consolidated Sewer and Water District; 

Carlin; Moapa; Indian Springs; Eldorado Valley; Ely and Carson 

City. Other communities that meet the program criteria should be 

considered as funding allows. 

Raritan River Basin, Green Brook Sub-basin, New Jersey.—The 

Committee recommends $10,000,000 to continue construction of 

this project. The Committee notes that this area has been subject 

to frequent flooding with the latest flood occurring in 2007. The 

Committee urges the Corps to utilize available funds to expedite 

completion of this project. 

Barnegat Inlet to Little Egg Harbor, New Jersey.—The Committee recommends $11,700,000 for this shore protection project. 

Funds should be utilized for continuation of the beach fill project. 
49 

Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey.—The Committee recommends $2,000,000 to continue construction of this project. 

Acequias Irrigation System, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $2,400,000 to continue restoration of these historic irrigation distribution systems. 

Middle Rio Grande Restoration, New Mexico.—The Committee 

recommendation includes $24,016,000 to continue environmental 

restoration efforts along the Rio Grande River within Bernalillo 

County. 

Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota.—The original health care facility for the Three Affiliated Tribes was permanently inundated due 

to the impoundment of Lake Sakakawea. A replacement healthcare 

facility was promised but never constructed. The Committee recommendation includes $17,048,000 for construction of the replacement health care facility. The Corps should work closely with the 

Indian Health Service and the Three Affiliated Tribes on the design and construction of this facility. The Committee suggests that 

the Corps utilize the expertise in their military programs office for 

this project. 

North Dakota [EI], North Dakota.—The Committee has recommended $10,000,000 for this program. $1,600,000 is for work related to the replacement of the Devils Lake Water supply pipeline 

and $8,400,000 is for the Parshall water project. 

Locks and Dams 2, 3, and 4, Monongahela River, Pennsylvania.—The Committee recommendation includes $19,050,000 to 

continue construction of this project. The reduction made to this 

project is a result of a continuing contract that the Corps chose not 

to award in fiscal year 2008 due to insufficient funds within the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. Not awarding the contract in fiscal 

year 2008, obviated the need for follow-on funding in fiscal year 

2009 thus lowering the amount needed for this project in fiscal 

year 2009. 

Presque Isle, Pennsylvania.—The Committee recommends 

$1,000,000 to continue this project. 

Big Sioux River, South Dakota.—The Committee recommends 

$4,000,000 to continue construction of this project. 

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux, South Dakota.— 

The Committee notes that title IV of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999, Public Law 106–53 as amended, authorizes funding to pay administrative expenses, implementation of terrestrial 

wildlife restoration plans, activities associated with land transferred or to be transferred, and annual expenses for operating recreational areas. The Committee recommends $4,000,000 for this effort. Within the funds recommended, the Committee directs that 

not more than $1,000,000 shall be provided for administrative expenses, and that the Corps is to distribute the remaining funds as 

directed by title IV to the State of South Dakota, the Cheyenne 

River Sioux Tribe and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe. 

Chickamauga Lock, Tennessee.—The Committee recommends 

$42,000,000 to continue construction of this project. 

Central City, Fort Worth, Upper Trinity River Basin, Texas.—The 

Committee recommendation includes $500,000 for the Central City, 

Fort Worth, Texas, project. 
50 

Red River Basin Chloride Control, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas 

and Louisiana.—The Committee recommends $1,500,000 to continue construction. 

San Antonio Channel Improvement, Texas.—The Committee recommendation includes $10,000,000 to continue this flood control 

project. 

Sims Bayou, Houston, Texas.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $21,465,000 for this project. The reduction made to this 

project should not be viewed as any diminution of support for this 

project, rather an attempt to balance out the Corps of Engineers 

nationwide program among the various missions of the Corps. 

Rural Utah, [EI], Utah.—The Committee recommendation includes $12,000,000 to continue construction of eligible projects. 

Burlington Harbor, Vermont.—The Committee recommends 

$500,000 to continue work on removal of oil bollards in the harbor. 

Lake Champlain Watershed Initiative.—The Committee recommendation includes $2,000,000 for continuation of this project. 

Columbia River Fish Mitigation, Washington, Oregon, and 

Idaho.—The Committee has chosen not to follow the budget proposal to include this work within the various O&M items in the 

system. The Committee believes that it is prudent to maintain visibility of the costs of environmental compliance activities for this 

project and have included funding in this account in this line item. 

$92,000,000 is recommended for this project. 

Lower Monumental Lock and Dam, Washington and Oregon.— 

The Committee recommends no funding for this new start recommended by the administration in the O&M account. The Committee believes it to be imprudent to initiate the major rehabilitation report that would be cost shared in the Inland Waterway 

Trust Fund when construction work has to be curtailed due to the 

funding shortfalls in the Inland Harbor Trust Fund. The Committee believes this project should not be initiated until the revenues have been enhanced for the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. 

Mud Mountain, Washington.—The Corps has recommended 

$1,000,000 for fish passage at this project. 

Levisa and Tug Forks of the Big Sandy River and Cumberland 

River, West Virginia, Kentucky and Virginia.—The Committee recommends $16,500,000 for the continuation of the project. Within 

the funds recommended, the Committee recommendation includes 

$8,000,000 for the Buchanan County, Dickenson County, and 

Grundy, Virginia elements. Further, the recommendation includes 

$8,500,000 for Kermit, Lower Mingo County, McDowell County, 

Upper Mingo and Wayne County, West Virginia. 

Aquatic Plant Control Program.—The Committee recommendation includes $4,550,000 for this program. Funds above the budget 

request are included for cost-shared programs for Lake Gaston, 

North Carolina; Lake Champlain, Vermont; and Lake Chautauqua, 

New York. 

Actions for Change to Improve Construction.—The Committee did 

not recommend funding for this item. The Committee believes that 

the activities proposed in the budget request for this line item 

should be incorporated into the various funded construction activities that the Corps has underway. 
51 

Dredged Material Disposal Facilities Program.—The Committee 

has retained this program in the Construction, General account 

rather than the Operations and Maintenance account as proposed 

by the budget. 

Shore Line Erosion Control Development and Demonstration Program.—The Committee has recommended $875,000 to be used 

along with prior year funds for an innovative approach to storm 

damage reduction at Sacred Falls Beach Park, Hawaii, by restoring 

and maintaining a pocket beach with an innovative sediment retaining structure. 

Ability to Pay.—Section 103(m) of the Water Resources Development Act of 1986 Public Law 99–662, as amended, requires that all 

project cooperation agreements for flood damage reduction projects, 

to which non-Federal cost sharing applies, will be subject to the 

ability of non-Federal sponsors to pay their shares. Congress included this section in the landmark 1986 act to ensure that as 

many communities as possible would qualify for Federal flood damage reduction projects, based more on needs and less on financial 

capabilities. The Secretary published eligibility criteria in 33 CFR 

241, which requires a non-Federal sponsor to meet an ability-to-pay 

test. However, the Committee believes that the Secretary’s test is 

too restrictive and operates to exclude most communities from 

qualifying for relief under the ability-to-pay provision. For example, 

33 CFR 241.4(f) specifies that the test should be structured so that 

reductions in the level of cost sharing will be granted in ‘‘only a 

limited number of cases of severe economic hardship,’’ and should 

depend not only on the economic circumstances within a project 

area, but also on the conditions of the State in which the project 

area is located. 

CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM

When Congress authorized the initial Continuing Authorities in 

the 1940s and 1950s, they were envisioned to provide a small pool 

of money available to the Corps of Engineers to solve very small 

localized problems without being encumbered by the longer study 

and project authorization process. As more programs were added to 

the Continuing Authorities Program [CAP] they became increasingly popular with congressional Members and the public. More 

and more congressionally directed projects began to appear in the 

annual appropriations bills. At first these congressionally directed 

projects were added to the base program. As more and more of 

these congressionally directed projects came into the program it became difficult for these congressionally directed projects to be 

added to the base, and as such, the base program began to shrink. 

Congressionally directed projects now dominate all sections of the 

CAP Program. Congressionally directed projects have proliferated 

to such an extent that several of the sections are over-subscribed. 

The table below shows the Federal obligations, the allocations 

through fiscal year 2008, the balance to complete, and the annual 

statutory limit for each section of the program. With roughly a 

$1,000,000,000 backlog and appropriations averaging $120,000,000, 

depending on the section of the program it could be from two to ten 

years before all of the current projects in the program are completed. 
52 

CAP section Federal obligation Allocations through 

fiscal year 2008 

Planned fiscal year 

2008 allocations Balance to complete Statutory limit 

14 ................................. $69,548,012 $38,328,057 $9,707,357 $21,512,598 $15,000 

103 ............................... 48,386,819 15,522,875 4,451,555 28,322,389 30,000 

107 ............................... 118,598,140 38,181,184 7,232,400 73,184,556 35,000 

111 ............................... 50,283,000 3,574,645 1,919,000 44,789,355 (1) 

204 ............................... 35,317,018 7,398,318 1,373,000 26,545,700 15,000 

205 ............................... 548,772,450 162,448,027 42,370,804 343,953,619 55,000 

206 ............................... 457,038,102 120,987,115 29,149,778 306,901,210 50,000 

208 ............................... 1,349,900 713,899 ............................ 636,001 7,500 

1135 ............................. 267,193,752 117,611,141 29,174,000 120,408,611 40,000 

Totals .............. 1,596,487,193 504,765,261 125,467,894 966,254,038 ............................

1 Not Applicable 

The budget justifications for the CAP program do not provide 

much useful information as to how the administration developed its 

program for fiscal year 2009. There is a dollar value associated 

with each section and a listing of projects in priority order that corresponds to the amount. However, the Committee has no way of 

knowing whether the amount shown is adequate. The Corps is directed to provide more information to justify the amount shown on 

the justification sheets for fiscal year 2010. 

Starting in fiscal year 2008 the Committee no longer provided 

any congressional earmarks for the section 14, Emergency Bank 

Stabilization authority. The Committee has not provided either the 

administration’s earmark requests for this section or requests by 

Members for fiscal year 2009. By definition these are projects that 

are estimated to fail within 9–12 months. As an emergency situation the Chief of Engineers should have the responsibility for determining how these funds are expended in the most efficient and effective manner. Budget justifications for this section should display 

the anticipated projects and associated costs to be undertaken in 

the budget year as well as the anticipated resources necessary to 

address emergencies that arise in the budget year. 

CAP projects and studies are listed in the Construction, General 

table immediately preceding this section. This listing includes the 

priority projects listed in the President’s budget request as well as 

those that were requested by Members. With one exception, the 

Committee has not provided dollar amounts for the named projects 

in the report. This lack of specificity in project amounts is intended 

to give the Chief of Engineers flexibility within the various sections 

of the CAP program in order to address the backlog. The Committee has repeated the guidance below from the fiscal year 2008 

statement of the managers that accompanied Public Law 110–161 

detailing how the Corps should prioritize work in the CAP program. 

Priorities for Design and Implementation [D&I] Phase: 

1. D&I work for continuing projects that have executed PCAs. 

2. D&I funding for projects approved by Corps Headquarters to 

execute a PCA. 

3. D&I work which does not require executed agreements (for example continuing or pre-PCA design) for ongoing projects. 

4. D&I funding for projects with approved Feasibility Reports 

moving into D&I. 

Priorities for Feasibility Phase: 

1. Feasibility phase funding for projects with executed FCSAs. 
53 

2. Feasibility phase funding for projects approved by Corps Headquarters to execute a FCSA. 

3. Feasibility phase work which does not require a FCSA for ongoing projects. 

4. Feasibility phase funding for initiations or restarts. 

Within the last-funded priority level within the D&I and Feasibility phases, if the projects qualifying for funding exceed the available funding, funds shall be allocated based on project outputs and 

the non-Federal sponsor’s ability to meet local obligations. 

Remaining funds, if any, may be allocated to additional projects 

in accordance with the aforementioned priorities, except that remaining funds for section 14 projects shall be allocated to the most 

urgently needed projects. 

The Committee is concerned that if the Corps adhered strictly to 

the priorities above, that all funding would be exhausted for construction. Therefore, in order to provide a mix of studies, design 

and construction within each CAP section the Committee directs 

that funding be generally divided 80/20 between the D&I phase 

and the Feasibility phase within each authority. 

The Chief of Engineers should provide a report to the House and 

Senate Appropriations Committees within 30 days of enactment of 

this bill detailing how funds will be distributed to the individual 

items in the various CAP sections for the fiscal year. The Chief 

should also provide an annual report at the end of each fiscal year 

detailing the progress made on the backlog of projects. The report 

should include the completions and terminations as well as 

progress of ongoing work. 

Even though the Committee is providing a listing of projects that 

are of interest, the Corps should develop the program based on all 

of the projects in each section whether named in this report or not. 

Priorities should be based on the factors outlined above. The Corps 

is directed not to initiate any new continuing authorities projects 

in sections 205, 206 or section 1135 without explicit congressional 

direction. New projects may be initiated in the remaining sections 

after an assessment is made that such projects can be funded over 

time based on historical averages of the appropriation for that section and approval by the House and Senate Committees on Appropriation. 

FLOOD CONTROL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, ARKANSAS, ILLINOIS, KENTUCKY, LOUISIANA, MISSISSIPPI, MISSOURI, AND TENNESSEE

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $387,402,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 240,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 365,000,000 

This appropriation funds planning, construction, and operation 

and maintenance activities associated with water resource projects 

located in the lower Mississippi River Valley from Cape Girardeau, 

Missouri to the Gulf of Mexico. The Committee wishes to reiterate 

that MR&T project is a good model for the Corps to examine for 

moving towards a watershed approach. 

The budget request and the approved Committee allowance are 

shown on the following table: 
54 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Fiscal year 2009 

budget request 

Fiscal year 2009 

recommendation 

IINVESTIGATIONS 

BAYOU METO BASIN, AR ......................................................................................................... ........................ 43 

SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, AR ..................................................................................................... ........................ 400 

ALEXANDRIA TO THE GULF, LA ................................................................................................ 790 790 

MORGANZA TO THE GULF, LA ................................................................................................. ........................ 6,000 

SPRING BAYOU, LA .................................................................................................................. ........................ 300 

COLDWATER RIVER BASIN BELOW ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS ...................................................... 125 130 

QUIVER RIVER, MS .................................................................................................................. ........................ 250 

MEMPHIS METRO AREA, STORM WATER MGMT STUDY, TN .................................................... 34 34 

COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA ............................................................................... 400 1,430 

CONSTRUCTION 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ........................................................ ........................ 50,200 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, DIKES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ............................................ 12,134 ........................

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, REVETMENT OPERATIONS, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ............. 33,089 ........................

GRAND PRAIRIE REGION, AR ................................................................................................... ........................ 9,000 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .................................................... 20,000 63,823 

ST. FRANCIS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, AR & MO .................................................................. ........................ 5,700 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ....................................................................... 2,025 2,025 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ......................................................................................................... 6,300 15,500 

MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA .............................................................................................. 2,259 3,933 

YAZOO BASIN—BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS ......................................................................... ........................ 2,275 

YAZOO BASIN—DELTA HEADWATERS PROJECT, MS ............................................................... ........................ 18,000 

YAZOO BASIN—MAIN STEM, MS ............................................................................................. ........................ 25 

YAZOO BASIN—REFORMULATION UNIT, MS ........................................................................... ........................ 2,800 

YAZOO BASIN—UPPER YAZOO PROJECTS, MS ....................................................................... ........................ 14,000 

YAZOO BASIN, BACKWATER LESS ROCKY BAYOU ................................................................... ........................ 50 

YAZOO BASIN—YAZOO BACKWATER, MS ............................................................................... ........................ 5,000 

ST. JOHNS BAYOU AND NEW MADRID FLOODWAY, MO ........................................................... ........................ 200 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ........................................................ 65,211 70,000 

HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR ................................................................................ 128 128 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR ................................................................................ 249 249 

LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR .......................................................................... 256 256 

LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR .......................................................................... 161 161 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .................................................... 15,873 16,368 

ST. FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO ................................................................................................ 4,445 8,200 

TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA ......................................................... 1,880 1,880 

WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR ................................................................................................ 1,039 1,000 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL ................................................................................. 135 135 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY ................................................................................ 93 93 

HICKMAN/MAGNOLIA BLUFF, KY .............................................................................................. ........................ 60 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ....................................................................... 2,117 2,117 

ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ......................................................................................................... 8,619 8,619 

BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA ........................................................................... 162 162 

BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA ............................................................................... 42 42 

BONNET CARRE, LA ................................................................................................................. 2,346 2,346 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ................................................................................ 1,727 1,927 

LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA ....................................................................... 53 53 

MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA .............................................................................................. 578 578 

OLD RIVER, LA ......................................................................................................................... 13,882 13,882 

TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA .......................................................................... 2,501 2,501 

GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS ....................................................................................................... 436 436 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS ............................................................................... 101 101 

VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS ........................................................................................................ 424 424 

YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS ..................................................................................... 6,228 6,673

YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS ........................................................................... 171 1,500 

YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS ................................................................................................ 6,388 7,417 

YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS ............................................................................................ 1,650 1,650 

YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS ......................................................................................... 6,201 7,166 
55 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Fiscal year 2009 

budget request 

Fiscal year 2009 

recommendation 

YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS ............................................................................................... 1,128 2,237 

YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS ............................................................................................ 6,971 8,916 

YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS ............................................................................................ 694 925

YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS ............................................................ 272 285 

YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS ........................................................................ 393 442 

YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS .............................................................................................. 634 534 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ............................................................................... 185 185 

WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO ........................................................................................................... 4,567 4,567 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN ................................................................................ 81 81 

MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN ............................................................................... 3,283 3,283 

MAPPING .................................................................................................................................. 1,488 1,488 

ANTICIPATED REDUCTION FOR SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE ......................................................... ........................ (15,975) 

ADJUSTMENTS .......................................................................................................................... 52 ........................

TOTAL ......................................................................................................................... 240,000 365,000 

General Investigations 

Morganza to the Gulf, Louisiana.—The Committee has recommended $6,000,000 to continue Preconstruction Engineering and 

Design for this project. The Committee has included legislative language which allows the local interest to construct the Houma Navigation Canal Lock with non-Federal funds. This shall not be considered initiation of the Federal project. The Committee is aware 

that substantial environmental analysis has been conducted on the 

Houma Navigation Canal Lock as well as the other portions of the 

Morganza alignment. Furthermore, the Committee is aware of significant engineering work that is underway using both Federal and 

non-Federal funding. Accordingly, the Committee urges the Corps 

to resolve any permitting issues that may develop as a result of 

non-Federal spending, as expeditiously as possible. Finally, the 

Committee remains sensitive to the critical need for hurricane and 

flood protection in the Terrebonne and Lafourche Parish area of 

Louisiana, and is providing this flexibility to allow the local sponsors to move forward on components while further reviews are taking place on the larger project. 

Quiver River, Mississippi.—The Committee has recommended 

$250,000 to initiate studies to identify options for improving water 

quality while addressing other needs 

Collection and Study of Basic Data.—The Committee recommends an additional $1,000,000 for Lidar mapping in the Yazoo 

River Basin. 

Construction 

Grand Prairie, Arkansas.—The Committee has recommended 

$9,000,000 for continued construction of the project. 

Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee.—Additional funds above the 

budget request could be used for the following activities: relief 

wells (parcel 1) at Delta, Mississippi; relief wells at Wilson, Arkansas; relief wells at Barfield, Arkansas; relief wells at Tunica, Mississippi; relief wells (parcel 2) at Delta, Mississippi; engineering 

and design work for levee construction work at three sites in Mis-
56 

souri; engineering and design work for levee construction work at 

two sites in Arkansas; engineering and design for construction 

work near Cairo, Illinois; acquisition of mitigation lands; to continue construction on the MRL features of the St. Johns BayouNew Madrid Floodway; fund Magna Vista-Brunswick, Mississippi, 

Item 468–L; Bayou Vidal-Elkridge, Louisiana, Item 419–R; Bayou 

Vidal-Elkridge, Louisiana, Item 416–R; Magna Vista-Brunswick, 

Mississippi, Item 465–L; advance completion of levee enlargement; 

concrete slope paving contract; slope stability contract; and complete the LMRMRIS. 

Yazoo Basin, Backwater Pumping Plant, Mississippi.—The Committee has recommended $5,000,000 to fully fund pump and motor 

contracts and initiate purchase of conservation easements. Funds 

are also provided for the center associated with the Theodore Roosevelt National Wildlife Refuge. 

Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower Basin, Mississippi.—The Committee 

recognizes the need for control of bank erosion along the Big Sunflower River and has recommended $2,275,000 for the continued 

construction of the Yazoo Basin, Big Sunflower River Project. 

$1,500,000 is recommended to continue bank stabilization erosion 

repairs at selected sites in the Sunflower Basin. 

Yazoo Basin, Delta Headwaters Project, Mississippi.—The Committee has recommended $18,000,000 to continue construction of 

this erosion protection projects in the Yazoo Basin. 

Yazoo Basin, Upper Yazoo Project, Mississippi.—The Committee 

has recommended $14,000,000 to continue construction of this flood 

control project. The Committee regrets that budgetary constraints 

do not allow funding at a more optimal level. Additional non-defense discretionary budgetary resources will be needed in future 

years if the project is to proceed at or near the Corps’ schedule. 

Maintenance 

Hickman/Magnolia Bluff, Kentucky.—The Committee recommends $60,000 to prepare plans and specifications and to repair 

damage to the maintenance access road and a concrete-lined drainage ditch caused by a September 2006 flood. 

Mississippi River Levees, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, 

Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee.—Funds provided above the 

budget request are to provide gravel surfacing to selected locations 

along roads on top of levees in Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana to ensure all weather access for flood fights and for other 

backlog maintenance. 

Mississippi Lakes.—The Committee has recommended additional 

funding to address the maintenance backlog at Arkabutla, Sardis, 

Enid and Grenada Lakes in Mississippi. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, GENERAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $2,243,637,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 2,475,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,220,000,000 

This appropriation funds operation, maintenance, and related activities at the water resources projects that the Corps operates and 

maintains. Work to be accomplished consists of dredging, repair, 

and operation of structures and other facilities, as authorized in 
57 

the various River and Harbor, Flood Control, and Water Resources 

Development Acts. Related activities include aquatic plant control, 

monitoring of completed projects where appropriate, removal of 

sunken vessels, and the collection of domestic waterborne commerce statistics. 

The Committee continues to believe that it is essential to provide 

adequate resources and attention to operation and maintenance requirements in order to protect the large Federal investment. In 

order to cope with the current fiscal situation, the Corps has had 

to defer or delay scheduled maintenance activities. 

The O&M budget request appears to have been increased by nearly $231,363,000 above the fiscal year 2008 enacted amount. 

However this is very misleading. Shifting of projects from the CG 

account to the O&M account totals $264,775,000. Once these 

projects are shifted back to CG, that leaves a decrease of 

$33,412,000 when compared to fiscal year 2008. The Committee 

notes that the Corps maintenance backlog is more than 

$1,000,000,000 and increases by about $100,000,000 annually as 

the inventory of projects ages. 

The Committee has chosen to display the budget request as the 

discrete projects that are the tradition as opposed to the regional 

budget proposed by the administration. Also the Committee has 

chosen to migrate the projects that the administration proposed in 

O&M back to their traditional location in the CG account. This 

makes the actual budget request for O&M $2,210,225,000 rather 

than $2,475,000,000 as presented in the budget. A list of these migrated projects is displayed under the CG heading earlier in this 

report. 

Maintenance of our aging water infrastructure inventory gets 

more expensive every year, however, it is consistently underfunded. 

If this trend continues, the Corps will not be able to maintain expected levels of service at all of its projects. The Committee has 

maintained its tradition of supporting what the budget request 

terms as ‘‘low use harbors and waterways’’. The Committee recognizes the importance of these facilities and will continue to provide 

funding for them. Unfortunately due to budget constraints the 

Committee was not able to provide nearly enough funding as is 

needed for our aging infrastructure. 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee 

recommendation 

ALABAMA 

ALABAMA—COOSA COMPREHENSIVE WATER STUDY, AL ................................................... 375 375 

ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL ................................................................................................. 15,672 15,672 

BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL .................................................................. 22,191 22,191 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL .................................................................................. 5,230 5,230 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AL ............................................................................ 60 60 

MOBILE HARBOR, AL ........................................................................................................... 21,562 21,562 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL ..................................................................................... 100 100 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AL ......................................................................... 94 94 

TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL ......................................... 2,350 2,350 

TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS .................................................................. 22,009 22,009 

WALTER F GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA ................................................................... 8,417 8,417 
58 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, AL ...................................................................... 120 120 

ALASKA 

ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................... 17,601 17,601 

CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK ..................................................................................................... 2,225 2,225 

DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................... 840 840

HOMER HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................... 620 620 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK ............................................................................ 1,058 1,058 

LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, AK ............................................................................................... .......................... 500 

NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK ....................................................................................................... 350 350 

NOME HARBOR, AK ............................................................................................................. 780 780 

PETERSBERG NORTH HARBOR PROJECT, AK ...................................................................... .......................... 500 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK ..................................................................................... 550 550 

ARIZONA 

ALAMO LAKE, AZ ................................................................................................................. 1,585 1,585 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ ............................................................................ 98 98 

PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ ..................................................................................................... 1,206 1,206 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ ........................................................................ 39 39 

WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ .................................................................................................. 171 171 

ARKANSAS 

BEAVER LAKE, AR ................................................................................................................ 5,270 5,270 

BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR ............................................................................. 8,384 8,384 

BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR .................................................................................................. 1,427 1,427 

BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR ...................................................................................................... 7,367 7,367 

DARDANELLE LOCK AND DAM, AR ...................................................................................... 8,491 8,491 

DEGRAY LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................... 6,317 6,317 

DEQUEEN LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................. 1,286 1,286 

DIERKS LAKE, AR ................................................................................................................. 1,354 1,354 

GILLHAM LAKE, AR .............................................................................................................. 1,156 1,156 

GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR ................................................................................................... 6,861 6,861 

HELENA HARBOR, AR .......................................................................................................... 90 400 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR ............................................................................ 508 508 

MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR ......................................... 28,395 28,395 

MILLWOOD LAKE, AR ........................................................................................................... 2,074 2,074 

NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR .................................................................................. 4,591 4,591 

NIMROD LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................... 1,609 1,609 

NORFORK LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................. 3,920 3,920 

OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR ........................................................................................................ 14 500 

OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA ........................................................................... 8,509 8,509 

OZARK-JETA TAYLOR LOCK AND DAM, AR .......................................................................... 5,287 5,287 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AR ..................................................................................... 8 8 

WHITE RIVER, AR ................................................................................................................ 52 52 

YELLOW BEND PORT, AR ..................................................................................................... 3 160 

CALIFORNIA 

BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA ...................................................................................................... 1,954 1,954 

BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA ........................................................................... 1,820 1,820 

CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA ......................................................................................... 5,360 5,360 

COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA .................................................................... 3,384 3,384 

DANA POINT HARBOR, CA ................................................................................................... .......................... 700 

DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE AND CHANNEL, CA .................................................... 5,067 5,067 

FARMINGTON DAM, CA ........................................................................................................ 443 443 

HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA ....................................................................................... 1,786 1,786 

HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA ..................................................................................... 5,144 5,144 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA ............................................................................ 3,822 3,822 

ISABELLA LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................. 1,404 1,404 

LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA ...................................................................... 3,996 3,996 

MARINA DEL REY, CA .......................................................................................................... 2,499 2,499 

MARTIS CREEK LAKE, CA & NV .......................................................................................... 737 737 
59 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA ......................................................................................... 239 239 

MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA ..................................................................................................... 285 285 

MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA ................................................................................................... 1,630 1,630 

NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA ........................................................................................................ 2,115 2,115 

NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA ........................................................... 1,730 1,730 

NOYO HARBOR, CA .............................................................................................................. .......................... 750 

OAKLAND HARBOR, CA ........................................................................................................ 7,445 7,445 

OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA .................................................................................................... 1,620 1,620 

PINE FLAT LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................ 2,854 2,854 

PINOLE SHOAL MANAGEMENT STUDY, CA ........................................................................... .......................... 500 

PORT HUENEME, CA ............................................................................................................ 4,029 4,029 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA ..................................................................................... 2,422 2,422 

RICHMOND HARBOR, CA ..................................................................................................... 6,950 6,950 

SACRAMENTO RIVER (30-FOOT PROJECT), CA .................................................................... 5,582 5,582 

SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA ....................................... 1,566 1,566 

SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA ......................................................... 175 175 

SAN FRANCISCO BAY, DELTA MODEL STRUCTURE, CA ....................................................... 1,106 1,106 

SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY, CA (DRIFT REMOVAL) ............................................... 2,805 2,805 

SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................. 2,514 2,514 

SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA ................................................................... 5,411 5,411 

SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA ................................................................ 1,140 1,140 

SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA ............................................................................................. 3,148 3,148 

SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................ 2,090 2,090

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA ........................................................................ 1,639 1,639 

SUCCESS LAKE, CA ............................................................................................................. 1,791 1,791 

SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA ................................................................................................. 2,982 2,982 

TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA .................................................................................... 1,912 1,912 

VENTURA HARBOR, CA ........................................................................................................ 3,095 3,095 

YUBA RIVER, CA .................................................................................................................. 129 129 

COLORADO 

BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO ....................................................................................................... 332 332 

CHATFIELD LAKE, CO ........................................................................................................... 1,176 1,509 

CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO ................................................................................................... 870 1,203 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO ........................................................................... 457 457 

JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO ............................................................................................ 2,418 2,418 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO ........................................................................ 720 720 

TRINIDAD LAKE, CO ............................................................................................................. 956 1,290 

CONNECTICUT 

BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT ........................................................................................................ 416 416 

BRIDGEPORT HARBOR DREDGING, CT ................................................................................ .......................... 2,000 

COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT .............................................................................................. 547 547 

HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT ................................................................................................ 338 338 

HOP BROOK LAKE, CT ......................................................................................................... 919 919 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT ............................................................................ 316 316 

LONG ISLAND SOUND DMMP, CT ........................................................................................ 1,000 1,000 

MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT ............................................................................................ 493 493 

NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT ............................................................................................ 385 385 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT ..................................................................................... 1,100 1,100 

STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT ................................................................................. 374 374 

THOMASTON DAM, CT .......................................................................................................... 615 615 

WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT ................................................................................................. 568 568 

DELAWARE 

DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWES 1 .............................................. 350 ..........................

HARBOR OF REFUGE, LEWES, DE ....................................................................................... .......................... 500 

INDIAN RIVER INLET AND BAY, SUSSEX COUNTY, DE ........................................................ .......................... 500 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE R TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE ................................ 14,065 14,065 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY TO DELAWARE BAY, DE ................................ 40 40 

MISPILLION RIVER, DE ........................................................................................................ 30 500 
60 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

MURDERKILL RIVER, DE ...................................................................................................... 30 30

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE ..................................................................................... 147 147 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE .................................................................................................. 2,750 3,750 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC ........................................................................... 62 62 

POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS, DC (DRIFT REMOVAL) ................................................ 805 805 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC .................................................................................... 28 28 

WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC ................................................................................................. 25 25 

FLORIDA 

CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL ..................................................................................................... 4,404 4,404 

CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL .............................................................................. 13,234 13,234 

ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FL ................................................................................ 25 25 

EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL ................................... 400 400 

FERNANDINA HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................... 2,025 2,025 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL ............................................................................ 300 300 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, CALOOSAHATCHEE R TO ANCLOTE R, .................................... .......................... 1,000 

INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL .................................................. 325 2,500 

JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................. 6,000 6,000 

JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA ........................................ 9,165 9,165 

MANATEE HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................................ 2,675 2,675 

MIAMI RIVER, FL ................................................................................................................. 10,820 10,820 

OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL .............................................................................................. 4,530 4,530 

PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL .................................................................................................. 2,385 2,385 

PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL .................................................................................................. 55 55 

PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL ..................................................................................................... 67 67 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL ..................................................................................... 1,265 1,265 

REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL ................................................................................... 4,420 4,420 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, FL ......................................................................... 30 30 

SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL ........................................... 357 357 

TAMPA HARBOR, FL ............................................................................................................. 4,550 4,550 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL ...................................................................... 405 405 

GEORGIA 

ALLATOONA LAKE, GA .......................................................................................................... 6,016 6,016 

APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & ....................................... 3,418 3,418 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA ........................................................................... 257 1,000 

BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA ................................................................................................... 5,545 5,545 

BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA ..................................................................... 7,946 7,946 

CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA ............................................................................................. 7,703 7,703 

HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC .................................................................................................. 12,188 12,188 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, GA ........................................... 63 63 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA ............................................................................ 142 142 

J. STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC ................................................................................ 11,066 11,066 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA ..................................................................................... 162 162 

RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC ................................................................ 8,386 8,386 

SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA 1 ................................................................................................... 19,170 13,895 

SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA ............................................................................. 183 183 

WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL ............................................................................... 7,446 7,446 

HAWAII 

BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI .............................................................................................. 200 548 

HALEIWA HARBOR, OAHU, HI .............................................................................................. .......................... 1,000 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI ............................................................................. 659 659 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI ...................................................................................... 537 537 

WAIANAE HARBOR, HI ......................................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 

IDAHO 

ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID ........................................................................................................ 1,539 1,539 

DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID ................................................................................ 2,404 2,404 
61 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID ............................................................................. 354 334 

LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID ......................................................................................................... 1,801 1,801 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID ......................................................................... 469 469 

ILLINOIS 

CHICAGO HARBOR, IL .......................................................................................................... 2,015 2,015 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL ............................................................................. 44 ..........................

CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN ............................................................................. 4,780 4,780 

CARLYLE LAKE, IL ................................................................................................................ 4,155 4,155 

CHICAGO RIVER, IL ............................................................................................................. 475 475 

FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL ............................................................................................ 203 203 

ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVR PORTION), IL & IN .................................................................... 38,121 36,287 

GRAFTON, IL TO LAGRANGE LOCK & DAM ................................................................. (1,834 ) ..........................

ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVS PORTION), IL & IN .................................................................... .......................... 1,834 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL ............................................. 65 65 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL ............................................................................. 2,298 2,342 

KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL ...................................................................................... 1,903 1,903

LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL ........................................................................................... 860 860 

LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL ......................................................................................................... 4,761 4,761 

LOCK AND DAM 27, MISSISSIPPI RVR, IL (MAJOR REHAB) 1 .............................................. 2,598 ..........................

MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR PORTION) .................................... 63,207 63,207 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL ...................................................................................... 111 111 

REND LAKE, IL ..................................................................................................................... 4,570 4,570 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL ...................................................... 565 565 

WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL ...................................................................................................... 1,099 1,099 

MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS PORTION) .................................... 20,004 20,004 

INDIANA 

BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN ......................................................................................................... 1,649 1,649 

BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN ......................................................................................... 160 160 

CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN ........................................................................................................ 2,053 2,053 

CECIL M HARDEN LAKE, IN ................................................................................................. 1,226 1,226 

INDIANA HARBOR, CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITY, IN 1 ...................................................... 8,385 ..........................

INDIANA HARBOR, IN ........................................................................................................... 3,138 3,138 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN ............................................................................. 635 635 

J. EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN ............................................................................................... 2,842 2,842 

MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN ...................................................................................................... 1,051 1,051 

MONROE LAKE, IN ............................................................................................................... 1,326 1,326 

PATOKA LAKE, IN ................................................................................................................. 1,150 1,150 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN ...................................................................................... 185 185 

ROUSH RIVER MAJOR REHAB PROJECT, IN ......................................................................... 300 300 

SALAMONIE LAKE, IN ........................................................................................................... 1,226 1,226 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN ..................................................... 91 91 

IOWA 

CORALVILLE LAKE, IA .......................................................................................................... 2,887 2,887 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA ............................................................................. 466 ..........................

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA ............................................................................. 717 1,183 

LOCK AND DAM 11, MISSISSIPPI RVR, IA (MAJOR REHAB) 1 .............................................. 2,750 ..........................

MISSOURI RIVER—KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SIOUX CITY, IA ............................................. 166 166 

MISSOURI RIVER—RULO TO MOUTH, IA, KS, MO & NE ..................................................... 5,106 5,106 

MISSOURI RIVER—SIOUX CITY TO THE MOUTH, IA, KS, MO & NE .................................... 2,560 2,560 

MISSOURI RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA, KS, MO 1 ......................................... 85,000 ..........................

RATHBUN LAKE, IA .............................................................................................................. 2,214 2,277 

RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, IA .......................................................................... 3,278 3,278 

SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA ......................................................................................................... 3,908 3,908 

KANSAS 

CLINTON LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................... 1,975 2,042 

COUNCIL GRAVE LAKE, KS .................................................................................................. 1,328 1,328 

EL DORADO LAKE, KS .......................................................................................................... 569 569 
62 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

ELK CITY LAKE, KS .............................................................................................................. 734 734 

FALL RIVER LAKE, KS .......................................................................................................... 1,284 1,284 

HILLSDALE LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................ 722 764 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS ............................................................................ 177 177 

JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS ........................................................................ 1,042 1,042 

KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................... 1,330 1,418 

MARION LAKE, KS ................................................................................................................ 1,504 1,504 

MELVERN LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................. 2,035 2,111 

MILFORD LAKE, KS .............................................................................................................. 2,076 2,133 

PEARSON-SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS ............................................................................... 1,048 1,048 

PERRY LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................. 2,452 2,516 

POMONA LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................... 1,914 1,969 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS ........................................................................ 30 30 

TORONTO LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................. 535 535 

TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS ..................................................................................................... 2,060 2,135 

WILSON LAKE, KS ................................................................................................................ 1,577 1,977 

KENTUCKY 

BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE BARKLEY, KY & TN .................................................................... 10,255 10,255 

BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY .................................................................................................... 3,969 5,969 

BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY ..................................................................................................... 1,250 1,250 

BUCKHORN LAKE, KY .......................................................................................................... 2,433 2,433 

CARR CREEK LAKE, KY ....................................................................................................... 1,797 1,797 

CAVE RUN LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................ 1,098 1,098 

DEWEY LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................. 1,768 1,768 

ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY ................................................................................ 25 25 

FISHTRAP LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................. 1,830 1,830 

GRAYSON LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................. 1,445 1,445 

GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY ....................................................................................... 2,698 3,698 

GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY ...................................................................................................... 4,942 4,942 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY ............................................................................ 554 554 

KENTUCKY RIVER, KY .......................................................................................................... 10 10 

LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY ..................................................................................................... 1,748 1,748 

MARKLAND LOCKS AND DAM, KY & IN (MAJOR REHAB) 1 ................................................. 10,600 ..........................

MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY .................................................................................................... 1,062 1,062 

MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY ................................................................. 102 102 

NOLIN LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................... 3,337 3,337 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN & OH ............................................................... 39,419 39,419 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN & OH ......................................................... 4,485 4,485 

PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY ......................................................................................................... 954 954 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, KY ..................................................................................... 7 7 

ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY ...................................................................................................... 2,832 2,832 

TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY ...................................................................................................... 1,312 1,312 

WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY ....................................................................... 7,834 7,834 

YATESVILLE LAKE, KY .......................................................................................................... 1,180 1,180 

LOUISIANA 

ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF AND BLACK, L .................................... 8,993 8,993 

BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA ......................................................................................... 926 926 

BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA ......................................................................................... 809 809 

BAYOU LACOMBE, LA .......................................................................................................... .......................... 450 

BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP WATERWAY, LA .............................................. 724 724 

BAYOU PIERRE, LA .............................................................................................................. 18 18 

BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA ...................................................................................... 321 321 

BAYOU TECHE AND VERMILION RIVER, LA ......................................................................... 14 14 

BAYOU TECHE, LA ............................................................................................................... 209 209 

CADDO LAKE, LA ................................................................................................................. 181 181 

CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA ........................................................................................ 14,968 14,968 

FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA .................................................................................................... 1,848 1,848 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA .................................................................................. 17,769 17,769 

HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA .......................................................................................... 662 1,000 
63 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee 

recommendation 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ............................................................................ 1,814 1,814 

J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA ............................................................................... 10,555 10,555 

LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA ......................................................................................... 17 440 

MADISON PARISH PORT, LA ................................................................................................ 5 85 

MERMENTAU RIVER, LA ....................................................................................................... 1,969 1,969 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA ...................................................................... 3,136 3,136 

MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, .......................................... 55,325 55,325 

REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA ................................................................................... 1,500 1,500 

TANGIPAHOA RIVER, LA ....................................................................................................... .......................... 321 

TCHEFUNCTE RIVER & BOGUE FALIA, LA ............................................................................ .......................... 400 

WALLACE LAKE, LA .............................................................................................................. 200 200 

WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA ...................................................................... 32 500 

WATERWAY FROM INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY TO BAYOU DULAC, LA ................................ 239 500 

MAINE 

DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME ...................................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME ........................................................................... 29 29 

NARRAGUAGUS RIVER, ME .................................................................................................. .......................... 600 

PORTLAND HARBOR, ME ..................................................................................................... 100 100

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME .................................................................................... 750 750 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME .................................................... 17 17 

MARYLAND 

ASSATEAGUE, MD 1 .............................................................................................................. 500 ..........................

BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50-FOOT), MD ........................................................ 16,193 16,193 

BALTIMORE HARBOR, MD (DRIFT REMOVAL) ...................................................................... 338 338 

CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV .............................................................................. 98 98 

HERRING BAY AND ROCKHOLD CREEK, MD ........................................................................ .......................... 500 

HONGA RIVER AND TAR BAY, MD ....................................................................................... .......................... 500 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD ........................................................................... 89 89 

JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV ............................................................................... 1,713 1,713 

OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD ........................................... 450 450 

PARISH CREEK, MD ............................................................................................................. .......................... 500 

POPLAR ISLAND, MD 1 ......................................................................................................... 9,185 ..........................

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD .................................................................................... 376 376 

RHODES POINT TO TYLERTON, MD ...................................................................................... .......................... 500 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD ....................................................................... 64 64 

TWITCH COVE AND BIG THOROFARE RIVER, MD ................................................................ 135 135 

WICOMICO RIVER, MD ......................................................................................................... 1,400 1,400 

MASSACHUSETTS 

BARRE FALLS DAM, MA ....................................................................................................... 580 580 

BIRCH HILL DAM, MA .......................................................................................................... 574 574 

BOSTON HARBOR, MA ......................................................................................................... 6,000 6,000 

BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA ...................................................................................................... 515 515 

CAPE COD CANAL, MA ........................................................................................................ 11,546 11,546 

CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA ..................................................... 291 291 

CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA .................................................................................................. 232 232 

EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA ................................................................................................. 398 398

HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA ................................................................................................. 503 503 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA ........................................................................... 381 381 

KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA ........................................................................................................ 526 526 

LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA ......................................................................................................... 489 489 

NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, ................................... 272 372 

NEW BEDFORD AND FAIRHAVEN HARBOR, MA ................................................................... .......................... 250 

NEWBURYPORT HARBOR, MA .............................................................................................. .......................... 400 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA .................................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

TULLY LAKE, MA .................................................................................................................. 543 543 

WEST HILL DAM, MA ........................................................................................................... 674 674 

WESTVILLE LAKE, MA .......................................................................................................... 497 497 
64 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

MICHIGAN 

ALPENA HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

ARCADIA HARBOR, MI ......................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

AU SABLE, MI ...................................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

BAY PORT HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

BIG BAY HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

BLACK RIVER (GOGEBIC), MI .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

CASEVILLE HARBOR, MI ...................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

CHANNELS IN LAKE ST. CLAIR, MI ...................................................................................... 156 156 

CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................... 197 197

CLINTON RIVER, MI ............................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

DETROIT RIVER, MI ............................................................................................................. 5,327 5,327 

FRANKFORT HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ 1,312 1,312 

GRAND MARAIS HARBOR, MI .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

GRAND TRAVERSE BAY HARBOR, MI .................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

GRAYS REEF PASSAGE, MI .................................................................................................. 180 180

HOLLAND HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................................ 588 588 

INLAND ROUTE, MI .............................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI ............................................................................ 230 230 

KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI ................................................................................................. 86 86 

LAC LA BELLE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

LELAND HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

LES CHENEAUX ISLAND CHANNELS, MI .............................................................................. .......................... ..........................

LEXINGTON HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

LITTLE LAKE HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................................... 442 442 

MANISTEE HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

MANISTIQUE HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

MARQUETTE HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

MENOMINEE HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

MICHIGAN HARBOR DREDGING, MI ..................................................................................... .......................... 5,000 

MONROE HARBOR, MI ......................................................................................................... 1,018 1,018 

MUSKEGON HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................................... 350 350

NEW BUFFALO HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................... 655 655 

PENTWATER HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

PETOSKEY HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

POINT LOOKOUT HARBOR, MI .............................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

PORT AUSTIN HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................. .......................... ..........................

PORT SANILAC HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

PORTAGE HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

PRESQUE ISLE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ 312 312 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI ..................................................................................... 276 276 

ROUGE RIVER, MI 1 ............................................................................................................. 1,321 1,161 

SAGINAW RIVER, MI ............................................................................................................. 3,798 3,798 

SAUGATUCK HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

SEBEWAING RIVER, MI ........................................................................................................ 75 75 

SOUTH HAVEN HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................ .......................... ..........................

ST. CLAIR RIVER, MI ........................................................................................................... 1,791 1,791 

ST. JOSEPH HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................................... 595 595 

ST. MARYS RIVER, MI ......................................................................................................... 18,836 18,836 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI ..................................................... 2,444 2,444 

WHITE LAKE HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................... .......................... ..........................

MINNESOTA 

BIGSTONE LAKE—WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD ............................................................... 172 172 

DULUTH-SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI .............................................................................. 4,929 4,929 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN ........................................................................... 623 623 

LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN ................................................................. 431 431 

MINNESOTA RIVER, MN ....................................................................................................... 200 200 
65 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVP PORTION) .................................... 44,904 44,904 

ORWELL LAKE, MN ............................................................................................................... 256 256 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN .................................................................................... 95 95 

RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN ................................................................................................. 84 84 

RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN ................................................ 3,170 3,170 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN ................................................... 323 323 

TWO HARBORS, MN ............................................................................................................. 300 300 

MISSISSIPPI 

CLAIRBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS ........................................................................................ 1 60 

EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS ................................................................................... 135 135 

GULFPORT HARBOR, MS ...................................................................................................... 3,715 10,000 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS ........................................................................... 223 223 

MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS ............................................................................................. 30 160 

OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS .......................................................................................................... 1,517 1,900 

PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS ................................................................................................. 4,130 8,000 

PEARL RIVER, MS & LA ...................................................................................................... 193 193 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS .................................................................................... 82 82 

ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS ..................................................................................................... 11 11 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, MS ..................................................................... 30 30 

YAZOO RIVER, MS ............................................................................................................... 26 26 

MISSOURI 

CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO .......................................................................................... 10 500 

CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO ..................................................... 6,449 6,449 

CLEARWATER LAKE, MO ...................................................................................................... 2,825 2,825 

HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO ................................................................... 8,528 8,863 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ........................................................................... 1,688 1,688 

LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO .......................................................................................... 885 935 

LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO .................................................................................................... 1,057 1,100 

MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO .................................... 25,359 25,359 

NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO ................................................................................................. 152 400 

NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO (MILE 889) .............................................................................. .......................... 300 

POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO .............................................................................................. 2,056 2,108 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MO .................................................................................... 14 14 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO ....................................................................... 327 327 

SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO ......................................................................................................... 1,162 1,203 

SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MO ....................................................... 8 8 

STOCKTON LAKE, MO ........................................................................................................... 3,320 3,828 

TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO & AR ............................................................................................. 6,667 6,667 

UNION LAKE, MO ................................................................................................................. 10 10 

MONTANA 

FT. PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT ............................................................................................. 4,170 4,444 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT ........................................................................... 54 54 

LIBBY DAM, MT ................................................................................................................... 1,712 1,712 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT ........................................................................ 88 88 

NEBRASKA 

GAVINS POINT DAM, LEWIS AND CLARK LAKE, NE & SD .................................................... 5,935 6,518 

HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE ................................................................................................. 1,721 1,786 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE ............................................................................ 508 508 

PAPILLION CREEK, NE ......................................................................................................... 531 531 

SALT CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, NE .................................................................................... 702 702 

NEVADA 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV ............................................................................ 127 127 

PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV ......................................................................... 204 204 

NEW HAMPSHIRE 

BLACKWATER DAM, NH ....................................................................................................... 567 567 
66 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH ......................................................................................... 514 514 

FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH .................................................................................................. 619 619

HOPKINTON-EVERETT LAKES, NH ........................................................................................ 1,081 1,081 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH ........................................................................... 37 37 

OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH ..................................................................................................... 598 598 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH .................................................................................... 300 300 

SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH ............................................................................................... 596 596 

NEW JERSEY 

ABSECON INLET, NJ ............................................................................................................. .......................... 265 

BARNEGAT INLET, NJ ........................................................................................................... 225 225 

CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ 1 ..................................................................... 2,500 ..........................

COLD SPRING INLET, NJ ...................................................................................................... 243 243 

DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ ...................................................................................... 15 15 

DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE ............................................ 18,778 18,778 

DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ ..................................................... 750 750 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ ............................................................................ 253 253 

LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NJ 1 ....................................................... 150 ..........................

MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ ....................................................................................................... 160 160 

NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ ...................................................................... 250 250 

NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ ...................................................... 300 300 

PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEM, NJ .................................................................... 254 254 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ ..................................................................................... 1,363 1,363 

RARITAN AND SANDY HOOKS BAYS, LEONARDO, NJ ........................................................... 40 40 

RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ ................................................................... 200 200 

RARITAN RIVER, NJ ............................................................................................................. 220 220 

SALEM RIVER, NJ ................................................................................................................ 70 70 

SHARK RIVER, NJ ................................................................................................................ 775 775 

SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ ........................................................................ 300 300 

SHREWSBURY RIVER, MAIN CHANNEL, NJ .......................................................................... 120 120 

NEW MEXICO 

ABIQUIU DAM, NM ............................................................................................................... 2,220 2,220 

COCHITI LAKE, NM ............................................................................................................... 2,392 2,392 

CONCHAS LAKE, NM ............................................................................................................ 1,121 1,121 

GALISTEO DAM, NM ............................................................................................................. 423 423 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM ........................................................................... 811 811 

JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM ................................................................................................... 684 684 

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PRO .................................. .......................... 200 

RIO GRANDE BOSQUE REHABILITATION, NM ....................................................................... .......................... 4,000 

SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM ....................................................................................... 940 940 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM ....................................................................... 502 502 

TWO RIVERS DAM, NM ........................................................................................................ 452 452 

UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, NM ........................................... 1,201 1,201 

NEW YORK 

ALMOND LAKE, NY ............................................................................................................... 424 424 

ARKPORT DAM, NY .............................................................................................................. 225 225 

BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY ..................................................... 1,235 1,235 

BRONX RIVER, NY ............................................................................................................... 250 250 

BUFFALO HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................................ 50 50

BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY ................................................................................................. 220 220 

EAST RIVER, NY ................................................................................................................... 500 500 

EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY ................................................................................................ 4,220 4,220 

EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY ....................................................................................................... 473 473 

EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY ................................................................................................... 180 180

FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY 1 .......................................................................... 500 ..........................

FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY .......................................................................................... 380 380 

GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY ....................................................................................................... 80 80

HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY ............................................................................................. 500 500 

HUDSON RIVER, NY (MAINT) ............................................................................................... 1,125 1,125 
67 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

HUDSON RIVER, NY (O&C) .................................................................................................. 1,525 1,525 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY ............................................................................ 1,031 1,031 

JAMAICA BAY, NY ................................................................................................................ 250 250 

JONES INLET, NY ................................................................................................................. 350 350 

LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY .............................................................................................. 700 700 

LITTLE SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................ 10 10 

LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY .................................................................... 200 200 

MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY ..................................................................................................... 20 20 

MORICHES INLET, NY .......................................................................................................... 2,050 2,050 

MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY ................................................................................................... 4,839 4,839 

NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY .................................................................... 6,750 6,750 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY ..................................................................................................... 4,000 4,000 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY & NJ (DRIFT REMOVAL) ............................................................... 6,300 6,300 

NEW YORK HARBOR, NY (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSIT ................................... 950 950 

NEWTOWN CREEK, NY ......................................................................................................... 220 220 

PORTCHESTER HARBOR, NY ................................................................................................ 150 150 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY ..................................................................................... 1,830 1,830 

ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY ................................................................................................... 1,605 1,605 

SHINNECOCK INLET, NY ...................................................................................................... 200 200 

SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY .................................................... 839 839 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY .................................................... 551 551 

WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY .................................................................................................. 250 250 

WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY ................................................................................................... 553 553 

NORTH CAROLINA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC .......................................................................... 900 2,000 

B. EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC ........................................................................... 1,633 1,633 

BOGUE INLET, NC ................................................................................................................ .......................... 400 

CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC ....................................................................... 718 718 

CAROLINA BEACH INLET, NC ............................................................................................... .......................... 600 

FALLS LAKE, NC ................................................................................................................... 1,683 1,683 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC ........................................................................... 250 250 

LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER, NC ........................................................................................... .......................... 200 

MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC ....................................................................................... 4,100 4,100 

MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC ...................................................... 365 365 

MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC ............................................................................................ 5,000 5,000

NEW RIVER INLET, NC ......................................................................................................... 800 800 

NEW TOPSAIL INLET, NC ..................................................................................................... .......................... 400 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC .................................................................................... 675 675 

ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC ................................................................................................... 150 300

SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC .................................................................................................. 400 400

W KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC ......................................................................... 2,977 2,977 

WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC .................................................................................................. 13,000 13,000 

NORTH DAKOTA 

BOWMAN-HALEY LAKE, ND .................................................................................................. 153 153 

GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND .............................................................................. 9,435 11,789 

HOMME LAKE, ND ................................................................................................................ 151 293 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND ........................................................................... 360 360 

LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND ........................................................................ 1,017 1,742 

PIPESTEM LAKE, ND ............................................................................................................ 572 572 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND ........................................................................ 119 119 

SOURIS RIVER, ND .............................................................................................................. 280 280 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATER, ND ...................................................... 24 24 

OHIO 

ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,439 1,439 

ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH .................................................................................................... 1,850 1,850 

BERLIN LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................ 4,867 4,867 

CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH ................................................................................................... 2,149 2,149 

CLARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH ............................................................................................ 2,520 2,520
68 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH .................................................................................................... 6,710 6,710 

CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH ..................................................................................................... 350 350

DEER CREEK LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,359 1,359 

DELAWARE LAKE, OH ........................................................................................................... 1,445 1,445 

DILLON LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................ 1,454 1,454 

FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH ....................................................................................................... 2,026 2,026 

HURON HARBOR, OH ........................................................................................................... 1,530 1,530 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH ........................................................................... 452 452 

LORAIN HARBOR, OH ........................................................................................................... 2,423 2,423 

MASSILLON LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH ................................................................... 24 24 

MICHAEL J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH .................................................................. 2,023 2,023 

MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH ............................................................................................... 1,383 1,383 

MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH ........................................................................................... 8,275 8,275

NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH ...................................................................... 593 593 

OHIO—MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH .......................................................................... 1,089 1,089 

PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,307 1,307 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH .................................................................................... 295 295 

ROSEVILLE LOCAL PROTECTION PROJECT, OH .................................................................... 35 35 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH .................................................... 223 223 

TOLEDO HARBOR, OH .......................................................................................................... 4,701 4,701 

TOM JENKINS DAM, OH ....................................................................................................... 791 791 

WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH ............................................................................... 865 865 

WILLIAM H. HARSHA LAKE, OH ............................................................................................ 1,837 1,837 

OKLAHOMA 

ARCADIA LAKE, OK .............................................................................................................. 472 472 

BIRCH LAKE, OK .................................................................................................................. 648 648 

BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................... 1,903 1,903 

CANTON LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................... 1,707 1,707 

COPAN LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................. 937 937 

EUFAULA LAKE, OK .............................................................................................................. 5,348 5,348 

FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................... 10,218 10,218 

FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................... 742 742 

GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK ............................................................................................ 256 256 

HEYBURN LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. 555 555 

HUGO LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................... 1,493 1,493 

HULAH LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................. 476 476 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK ............................................................................ 177 177 

KAW LAKE, OK ..................................................................................................................... 2,574 2,574 

KEYSTONE LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................ 6,073 6,073 

MCCLELLAN—KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK ...................................... 5,819 5,819 

OOLOGAH LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. 1,923 1,923 

OPTIMA LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................ 164 164 

PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK ................................................... 119 119 

PINE CREEK LAKE, OK ......................................................................................................... 1,099 1,099 

ROBERT S KERR LOCK AND DAM AND RESERVOIR, OK ..................................................... 6,599 6,599 

SARDIS LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................. 912 912 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK ........................................................................ 520 520 

SKIATOOK LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................. 1,318 1,318 

TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK ............................................................................................... 3,794 3,794 

WAURIKA LAKE, OK .............................................................................................................. 1,093 1,093 

WEBBERS FALLS LOCK AND DAM, OK ................................................................................. 4,695 4,695 

WISTER LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................ 678 678 

OREGON 

APPLEGATE LAKE, OR .......................................................................................................... 904 904 

BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 427 427 

BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA ............................................................................. 11,701 9,691 

CHETCO RIVER, OR ............................................................................................................. 574 574 

COLUMBIA & LWR WILLAMETTE R BLW VANCOUVER, WA & PORTLA ................................. 24,973 18,052 

COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA ...................................................................... 15,125 15,125 
69 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA AND THE DALLES, OR ................................ 640 640 

COOS BAY, OR .................................................................................................................... 4,769 4,769 

COQUILLE RIVER, OR .......................................................................................................... 307 307 

COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR ................................................................................................. 991 991 

COUGAR LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... 1,549 5,380 

DEPOE BAY, OR ................................................................................................................... 3 124 

DETROIT LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... 2,064 2,564 

DORENA LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................... 831 831 

FALL CREEK LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 918 1,418 

FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 1,433 1,433 

GREEN PETER-FOSTER LAKES, OR ...................................................................................... 1,823 2,323 

HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR ....................................................................................................... 792 1,292 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR ........................................... 33 33 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR ........................................................................... 413 413 

JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA ................................................................................. 7,049 7,049 

LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR .................................................................................................. 2,261 2,761 

LOST CREEK LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................ 3,560 3,560 

MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA ................................................................................... 5,183 5,183 

PORT ORFORD, OR .............................................................................................................. 7 7 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR .................................................................................... 220 220 

ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR ................................................................................... 587 587 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR ........................................................................ 82 82 

SIUSLAW RIVER, OR ............................................................................................................ 583 583 

SKIPANON CHANNEL, OR ..................................................................................................... 5 5 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA .................................................... 10,400 10,400 

TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR, OR ............................................................................................ 35 2,200 

UMPQUA RIVER, OR ............................................................................................................ 635 635 

WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR ................................................................. 210 210 

WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR ....................................................................... 62 62 

WILLAMETTE RIVER TEMPERATURE CONTROL, OR 1 ........................................................... 3,331 ..........................

WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR ................................................................................................... 610 610

YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR ......................................................................................... 1,482 1,482 

YAQUINA RIVER, OR ............................................................................................................ .......................... 300 

PENNSYLVANIA 

ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA ........................................................................................................ 6,578 6,578 

ALVIN R BUSH DAM, PA ...................................................................................................... 591 591 

AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA ........................................................................................... 215 215 

BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA .......................................................................................................... 1,311 1,311 

BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA ....................................................................................................... 2,736 2,736 

CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA ............................................................................................. 1,734 1,734 

COWANESQUE LAKE, PA ...................................................................................................... 1,847 1,847 

CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA ................................................................................................. 2,530 2,530 

CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA .................................................................................................... 625 625 

EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA ........................................................................... 2,179 2,179 

FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA ...................................................................................... 633 633 

FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA .............................................................................................. 774 774 

GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA .......................................................... 228 228 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA ............................................................................ 592 592 

JOHNSTOWN, PA ................................................................................................................... 2,255 2,255 

KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA .................................................................. 2,493 2,493 

LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................ 2,880 2,880 

MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA ............................................................................................... 1,823 1,823 

MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA .................................................................................................. 12,392 12,392 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV ................................................................... 24,796 24,796 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV ............................................................ 509 509 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA ..................................................................................... 70 70 

PROMPTON LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................... 505 505 

PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA ............................................................................................................ 20 20 

RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................... 3,312 3,312 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA ........................................................................ 46 46 
70 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA ....................................................................................................... 2,000 3,000 

SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA ................................................................................................ 2,366 2,366 

STILLWATER LAKE, PA ......................................................................................................... 331 331 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA .................................................... 93 93 

TIOGA-HAMMOND LAKES, PA ............................................................................................... 2,213 2,213 

TIONESTA LAKE, PA ............................................................................................................. 3,115 3,115 

UNION CITY LAKE, PA .......................................................................................................... 1,017 1,017 

WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA .............................................................................................. 1,033 1,033 

YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA .............................................................................................. 471 471 

YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD .............................................................................. 2,908 2,908 

PUERTO RICO 

ARECIBO HARBOR, PR ........................................................................................................ 100 100 

RHODE ISLAND 

GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI (new Harbor) ......................................................... .......................... 250 

BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR, RI ................................................................................................ 360 500 

FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, RI .................................................................................. .......................... 500 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI ............................................................................. 43 43 

POINT JUDITH HARBOR OF REUGE, RI ................................................................................ 1,250 1,250 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI ...................................................................................... 400 400 

PROVIDENCE HARBOR SHIPPING CHANNEL, RI ................................................................... .......................... 300 

WOONSOCKET, RI ................................................................................................................ .......................... 300 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC ........................................................................... 724 1,500 

CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC 1 ............................................................................................... 12,527 9,947 

COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC ....................................................................... 4,685 4,685 

FOLLY RIVER, SC 1 .............................................................................................................. 35 ..........................

GEORGETOWN HARBOR, SC ................................................................................................ 690 690 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC ............................................................................ 65 65 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC ..................................................................................... 624 624 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD ..................................................................................... 6,799 6,799 

CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX, SD ............................................... .......................... 3,000

COLD BROOK LAKE, SD ....................................................................................................... 303 303 

COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD ....................................................................................... 223 223 

FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD .................................................................. 7,328 7,328 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD ............................................................................ 49 49 

LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN ................................................................................................. 403 403 

OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND ...................................................................................... 8,977 9,277 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD ........................................................................ 52 52 

TENNESSEE 

CENTER HILL LAKE, TN ....................................................................................................... 7,021 7,021 

CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN .......................................................................................... 6,829 6,829 

CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ..................................................................... 1,200 1,200 

CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ......................................................................... 6,386 6,386 

DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN ...................................................................................................... 6,262 6,262 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN ............................................................................ 85 85 

J. PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ....................................................................... 4,602 4,602 

OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN ..................................................................................... 9,845 9,845 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TN ..................................................................................... 9 9 

TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ........................................................................................................ 20,219 20,219 

WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN ................................................................................................... 107 107

TEXAS 

AQUILLA LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................ 1,354 1,354 

ARKANSAS—RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL—AREA VI ..................................... 1,415 1,415 

BARBOUR TERMINAL CHANNEL, TX ..................................................................................... 1,417 1,417 
71 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

BARDWELL LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................ 2,162 2,162 

BAYPORT SHIP CHANNEL, TX .............................................................................................. 3,122 3,122 

BELTON LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................ 3,567 3,567 

BENBROOK LAKE, TX ........................................................................................................... 2,302 2,302 

BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX ............................................................................................. 3,259 3,259 

BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX ............................................................................. 1,723 1,723 

CANYON LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................ 3,686 3,686 

CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX ......................................................................................... 348 348 

CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX .................................................................................. 3,398 3,398 

DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX ....................................................................................... 6,393 6,393 

ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX ............................................................. 38 38 

FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O’ THE PINES, TX ............................................................... 4,179 4,179 

FREEPORT HARBOR, TX ....................................................................................................... 7,020 7,020 

GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX ............................................................................ 6,022 6,022 

GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX ...................................................................................... 2,706 2,706 

GIWW, CHOCOLATE BAYOU, TX ........................................................................................... 2,926 2,926

GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX ............................................................................................. 2,225 2,225 

GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX ........................................................................................................... 2,900 2,900 

GREENS BAYOU, TX ............................................................................................................. 850 850 

GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX .................................................................................. 31,874 31,874 

HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX ..................................................................................................... 1,479 1,479 

HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX .............................................................................................. 15,354 14,854 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX ............................................................................ 1,936 1,936 

JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX ...................................................................................................... 2,001 2,001 

JOE POOL LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................. 1,771 1,771 

LAKE KEMP, TX .................................................................................................................... 214 214 

LAVON LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................. 3,065 3,065 

LEWISVILLE DAM, TX ........................................................................................................... 4,110 4,110 

MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX ......................................................................................... 6,173 6,173 

NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX ................................................................................................... 3,542 3,542 

NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX ................................................... 2,066 2,066 

O.C. FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX ......................................................................................... 907 907 

PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX .......................................................................................................... 1,005 1,005 

PROCTOR LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................. 2,155 2,155 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX ..................................................................................... 304 304 

RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX ...................................................................................................... 1,456 1,456 

SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ......................................................................................... 8,822 8,822 

SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX .......................................................................... 5,820 5,820 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX ......................................................................... 101 101 

SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................... 3,157 3,157 

STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX ............................................................................................ 2,210 2,210 

TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX .......................................................................................... 1,482 1,482 

TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ASSESSMENT, TX ..................................................................... 100 1,000 

TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX .................................................................. 2,735 2,735 

WACO LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................... 3,090 3,090 

WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................... 1,747 1,747 

WHITNEY LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................... 8,559 8,559 

WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX ................................................................................. 4,532 4,532 

UTAH 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT ............................................................................ 75 75 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT ........................................................................ 598 598 

VERMONT 

BALL MOUNTAIN LAKE, VT ................................................................................................... 719 719 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT ............................................................................ 70 70 

NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT & NY .......................................................................... 80 80 

NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT ................................................................................................ 635 635 

NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT ............................................................................................ 747 747 

TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT ......................................................................................................... 681 681 

UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT ..................................................................................................... 578 578 
72 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

VIRGINIA 

APPOMATTOX RIVER, VA ...................................................................................................... .......................... 500 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—ACC, VA ................................................................ 1,823 1,823 

ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—DSC, VA ................................................................ 967 967 

CHINCOTEAGUE HARBOR OF REFUGE, VA ........................................................................... 266 266 

CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA ................................................................................................... 207 207 

GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA .......................................................................... 2,022 2,022 

HAMPTON RDS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HBR, VA (DRIFT REM ................................. 1,108 1,108 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA ............................................................................ 226 226 

JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA ................................................................................................ 3,667 3,667 

JOHN H KERR LAKE, VA & NC ............................................................................................ 11,571 11,571 

JOHN W FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA ................................................................. 1,938 1,938 

LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA ........................................................................................................ 1,058 1,058 

NORFOLK HARBOR, VA ........................................................................................................ 10,072 10,072 

NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA ........................................................................... 656 656 

PHILPOTT LAKE, VA ............................................................................................................. 6,961 6,961 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA ..................................................................................... 870 870 

RUDEE INLET, VA ................................................................................................................ 370 370 

WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, VA ...................................................................... 54 54 

WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA ...................................................................... 260 260 

YORK RIVER, VA .................................................................................................................. 250 250 

WASHINGTON 

CHIEF JOSEPH DAM GAS ABATEMENT, WA 1 ....................................................................... 6,500 ..........................

CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA ...................................................................................................... 785 785 

COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR ...................................................................... 3 500 

COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CHINOOK AND SAND ISLAND, WA .......................................... 6 500 

COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID 1 ........................................................... 95,700 ..........................

EDIZ HOOK, WA ................................................................................................................... 63 63 

EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA ................................................................. 1,293 1,293 

GRAYS HARBOR AND CHEHALIS RIVER, WA ....................................................................... 9,180 9,180 

HOWARD HANSON DAM ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA 1 .................................................. 15,000 ..........................

HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA ................................................................................................ 2,627 2,627 

ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, WA ...................................................................................... 4,982 4,982 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA ........................................... 70 70 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA ........................................................................... 623 623 

LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA .................................................................................. 7,554 7,554 

LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, WA .................................................................................... 2,360 2,360 

LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, WA ................................................................................ 6,874 6,874 

LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA ........................................................................ 7,787 4,664 

LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH AND WILDLIFE COMPENSATION, 1 ............................................ 1,500 ..........................

MILL CREEK LAKE, WA ........................................................................................................ 2,437 2,437 

MOUNT ST. HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA .................................................................... 257 257 

MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA ................................................................................................... 3,271 3,271 

NEAH BAY, WA ..................................................................................................................... 308 308 

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA .................................................................................... 338 338 

PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA ..................................................................... 997 997 

QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA ....................................................................................................... 1,572 1,572 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA ........................................................................ 506 506 

SEATTLE HARBOR, WA ......................................................................................................... 913 913 

STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA ................................................................................................. 248 248

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA .................................................... 53 53 

SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA .................................................................................................. .......................... 400 

TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA .......................................................................................... 120 120 

THE DALLES LOCK AND DAM, WA & OR ............................................................................. 7,696 7,696 

WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA ...................................................................................... 34 34 

WEST VIRGINIA 

BEECH FORK LAKE, WV ....................................................................................................... 1,473 2,500 

BLUESTONE LAKE, WV ......................................................................................................... 1,508 1,508 

BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV ........................................................................................................ 1,973 1,973 
73 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee 

recommendation 

EAST LYNN LAKE, WV .......................................................................................................... 2,044 2,044 

ELKINS, WV .......................................................................................................................... 14 14 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV ........................................................................... 255 255 

KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV ............................................................................ 9,380 9,380 

OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH ................................................................... 30,292 30,292 

OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH ............................................................ 2,700 2,700 

R D BAILEY LAKE, WV ......................................................................................................... 2,836 2,836 

STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV ......................................................................................... 1,039 1,039 

SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV ................................................................................................... 2,044 2,044 

SUTTON LAKE, WV ............................................................................................................... 2,210 2,210 

TYGART LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................ 1,521 1,521 

WISCONSIN 

EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI ................................................................................................ 611 611

FOX RIVER, WI ..................................................................................................................... 1,775 3,775 

GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI 1 .................................................................................................. 4,344 5,394 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI ............................................................................ 125 125 

MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI .................................................................................................... 650 650

PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI ..................................................................................... 160 160 

STURGEON BAY HARBOR AND LAKE MICHIGAN SHIP CANAL, WI ....................................... 16 16 

SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI ..................................................... 498 498 

TWO RIVER HARBOR, WI ..................................................................................................... .......................... 400 

WYOMING 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY ........................................................................... 34 34 

JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY ................................................................................................ 326 326 

SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY ........................................................................ 87 87 

TOTALLING ADJUSTMENTS ................................................................................................... ¥20 ..........................

SUBTOTAL, PROJECTS LISTED UNDER STATES ...................................................... 2,348,593 2,161,160 

REMAINING ITEMS 

AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH .......................................................................... 690 690 

ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ..................................... 4,750 4,750 

BUDGET/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M BUSINESS LINES ........................................... 5,865 5,865 

ACTIONS FOR CHANGE TO IMPROVE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ................................ 7,737 4,000 

COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM ................................................................................ 2,475 2,475 

CONTINUING AUTHORITY PROJECTS NOT REQUIRING SPECIFIC LEGISLATION BENEFICIAL 

USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204/207/933) ................................................ 2,278 ..........................

NATIONAL MITIGATION PROJECTS (SECTION 111) ...................................................... 5,325 ..........................

CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/CURATION) ..................................................................... 1,500 1,500 

DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE .................................................................................. 12,000 12,000 

DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM ................................... 1,062 1,062 

DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION (DOE .................................. 6,080 6,080 

DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM (DOTS) ...................................... 1,391 1,391 

EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM .................................................................. 270 270 

FACILITY PROTECTION ......................................................................................................... 12,000 12,000 

GREAT LAKES SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL .................................................................... 900 900 

INDEPENDENT (PART) ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENT—STEWARDSHIP ........................... 500 500 

INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS ........................................................................... 3,708 3,708 

INLAND NAVIGATION SAFETY INITIATIVE .............................................................................. 3,000 3,000 

INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS .................................................................................. 1,780 1,780 

MONITORING OF COASTAL NAVIGATION PROJECTS ............................................................. 1,575 1,575 

NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING PROGRAM ............................................................................ 7,000 13,900 

NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM ...................................................................................... 15,000 15,000 

NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS (NEPP) ................................................................. 6,000 6,000 

NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY ................................................................................ 10,000 10,000 

NATIONAL NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES .............................................. 3,326 3,326 

NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR REALLOCATION ................................................... 300 300 

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL SUPPORT (ABS–P2, WINABS) ................................. 300 300 
74 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION: 

REMOVAL OF SUNKEN VESSELS ................................................................................. 500 500 

PROTECT, CLEAR AND STRAIGHTEN CHANNELS (SEC 3) ........................................... 50 50 

WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS ...................................................................... 4,271 4,271 

HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION ........................................................ 725 725 

RECREATION ONE STOP (R1S) NATIONAL RECREATION RESERVAT .................................... 1,130 1,130 

REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM ...................................... 1,391 4,500 

Southeast Oahu Regional Sediment Management, HI .............................................. .......................... (500 ) 

North Carolina RSM, NC ............................................................................................ .......................... (600 ) 

Delaware Estuary RSM, NJ ......................................................................................... .......................... (300 ) 

South Jetty and Clatsop Spit, OR .............................................................................. .......................... (500 ) 

South Coastal Rhode Island Regional Sediment Management ................................ .......................... (750 ) 

Long Island Coastal Planning, NY ............................................................................ .......................... (500 ) 

RELIABILITY MODELS PROGRAM FOR MAJOR REHAB ......................................................... 608 608 

WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (WOTS) ............................................................ 653 653 

SUBTOTAL FOR ITEMS NOT LISTED UNDER STATES .............................................. 126,140 124,809 

TOTALLING ADJUSTMENTS ................................................................................................... 267 ..........................

ANTICIPATED SAVINGS AND SLIPPAGE ................................................................................ .......................... ¥65,969 

TOTAL, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ................................................................. 2,475,000 2,220,000 

1 ITEMS FUNDED IN CONSTRUCTION. 

Lowell Creek Tunnel, Alaska.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $500,000 for studies to divert tunnel flood flows away from 

the city of Seward. 

Petersberg Harbor, Alaska.—$500,000 is recommended to obtain 

environmental clearances in advance of a planned dredging of the 

harbor in 2010. 

Helena Harbor, Arkansas.—The Committee recommends 

$400,000 for maintenance dredging of this harbor. 

Osceola Harbor, Arkansas.—The Committee recommends 

$500,000 for maintenance dredging of this harbor. 

Dana Point Harbor, California.—The Committee has recommended $700,000 for surveys and dredging. 

Noyo Harbor, California.—$750,000 is recommended for dredging. 

Cherry Creek, Chatfield, and Trinidad Lakes, Colorado.—The 

Committee has recommended an additional $1,000,000 for continued repairs at these three lakes. This action in no way is intended 

to alter the Corps of Engineers’ lease and property accountability 

policies. It is the Committee’s understanding that the State of Colorado has agreed to cost share this project on a 50–50 basis. It is 

also the understanding of the Committee that the Secretary is not 

to assume, nor share in the future of the operation and maintenance of these recreation facilities. 

Harbor of Refuge, Lewes, Delaware.—The Committee recommends $500,000 to perform a stability analysis, as well as, surveys and design work on the historic breakwater in this harbor. 

Small Harbors, Delaware.—The Committee recommendation includes funds to dredge a number of small harbors in Delaware. 

With the limited funding available to the Committee, the Committee has attempted to provide for some of the dredging needs of 

the State. However, recognizing that conditions on these small har-
75 

bors is constantly changing the Committee is directing the Corps 

to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 2009 that would most 

effectively utilize the scarce funds available for these harbor 

projects. 

Wilmington Harbor, Delaware.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $3,750,000 for this project. Additional funds recommended 

above the budget request are for maintenance of disposal areas and 

additional dredging. 

Intracoastal Waterway, Caloosahatchee to Anclote, Florida.—The 

Committee recommends $1,000,000 for maintenance dredging. 

Intracoastal Waterway, Jacksonville to Miami, Florida.—The 

Committee recommendation includes $2,500,000 for maintenance 

dredging. 

Miami River, Florida.—The Committee recommends $10,820,000 

for completion of the dredging of the Miami River Channel. This 

project provides the first maintenance dredging of the Miami River 

since its original authorization in 1930. 

Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, Georgia.—$1,000,000 is recommended for dredging critical areas of this waterway as well as 

for work related to new upland disposal sites. 

Savannah Harbor, Georgia.—The Committee recommendation for 

Savannah Harbor includes the funds recommended for O&M in 

this account and $5,275,000 in the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities program in the Construction, General account. The administration proposed these two funding amounts as a single line item 

in O&M. 

Barbers Point, Hawaii.—The Committee recommends an additional $348,000 above the budget request for daily operation and 

maintenance and facility upgrades to public use facilities. 

Northwestern Division Projects, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, 

Montana, Nebraska, and Oregon.—Small changes were recommended to the budget request by the Corps. The Senate request 

shown for these projects represents the revised budget amount not 

an increase or decrease taken by the Committee. 

Chicago Harbor, Illinois.—The Committee is aware of the City of 

Chicago’s interest in modifying the existing Chicago Lakefront 

Inner Breakwater consistent with the City of Chicago’s 2016 Olympic Master Plan for Chicago Harbor. The Committee encourages 

the Chicago District of the Army Corps of Engineers to work with 

the City of Chicago on preliminary design concepts, cost estimates 

and other aspects of the project to determine what environmental, 

recreational and economic development benefits might be achieved 

by the City’s proposal. 

Green and Barren Rivers, Kentucky.—The Committee recommends an additional $1,000,000 for the Green River Lock and 

Dam number 3 (Rochester Lock) detailed engineering analysis for 

stabilizing the existing lock structure and further the evaluation of 

the stability of the dam structure. 

Barren River Lake, Kentucky.—The Committee recommends an 

additional $2,000,000 for the Port Oliver Public Use Facility. 

Small Waterway Dredging on the Louisiana Coast, Louisiana.— 

The Committee has included additional funds for a number of the 

smaller waterways on the Louisiana gulf coast that were not funded in the administration’s budget request. With the limited funding 
76 

available to the Committee, the Committee has attempted to provide for some of the dredging needs of the State. However, recognizing that conditions on these small waterways is constantly 

changing the Committee is directing the Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 2009 that would most effectively utilize 

the scarce funds available for these harbor projects. 

Small Harbors, Maryland.—The Committee recommendation includes funds to dredge a number of small harbors used by waterman on the Chesapeake Bay. With the limited funding available to 

the Committee, the Committee has attempted to provide for some 

of the dredging needs of the State. However, recognizing that conditions on these small waterways is constantly changing the Committee is directing the Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 2009 that would most effectively utilize the scarce funds 

available for these harbor projects 

New Bedford, Fairhaven, and Acushnet, Massachusetts.—The 

Committee has recommended an additional $100,000 to evaluate 

improvements to the barrier in cooperation with the city to improve 

pedestrian access to the waterfront. 

Michigan Harbor Dredging, Michigan.—The Committee notes 

that there are some 50 federally maintained harbors and waterways in Michigan. However, the Committee also notes that fewer 

than 20 are budgeted. With the limited funding available to the 

Committee, the Committee has recommended $5,000,000 under 

this line item to provide for some of the dredging needs of the State 

rather than trying to fund small amounts for each project. The 

Committee has listed all of the harbors and waterways in the table 

that are eligible for this funding. However, recognizing that conditions on these small waterways is constantly changing and the 

Great Lakes are suffering from near historic low water levels, the 

Committee is directing the Corps to propose a dredging program 

for fiscal year 2009 that would most effectively utilize the scarce 

funds available for these harbor and waterway projects. 

Rouge River, Michigan.—The Committee recommendation for 

Rouge River includes the funds recommended for O&M in this account and $160,000 in the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities 

program in the Construction, General account. The administration 

proposed these two funding amounts as a single line item in O&M. 

Mouth of the Yazoo River, Mississippi.—-The Committee includes 

additional funds for the maintenance dredging of the entrance to 

the Vicksburg Harbor. 

Pascagoula Harbor, Mississippi.—The Committee has recommended $7,500,000 for this project. Additional funds above the 

budget request are to perform maintenance dredging of the Bar 

Channel, the Pascagoula River, and Bayou Casotte channels. 

Rosedale Harbor, Mississippi.—The Committee recommendation 

includes $500,000 for maintenance dredging of the harbor. 

Absecon Inlet, New Jersey.—The Committee recommends 

$250,000 for dredging of the inlet. 

Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Collaborative Program, 

New Mexico.—The Committee has included $200,000 for the Corps 

to participate with the Bureau of Reclamation, the State and other 

agencies in the Rio Grande Collaborative Program. 
77 

Rio Grande Bosque Rehabilitation, New Mexico.—The Committee 

includes $4,000,000 to continue fire reduction work and general 

Bosque rehabilitation in order to complete repairs and fire protection resulting from 2003 and 2004 fires in the urban interface. 

Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, North Carolina.—The Committee 

recommends $2,000,000 for dredging of the project. 

Coastal Inlets, North Carolina.—The Committee has included additional funds for the coastal inlets on the North Carolina coast 

that were not funded in the administration’s budget request. With 

the limited funding available to the Committee, the Committee has 

attempted to provide for some of the dredging needs of the State. 

However, recognizing that conditions on these inlets are constantly 

changing the Committee is directing the Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 2009 that would most effectively utilize 

the scarce funds available for these inlets. 

Garrison Dam and Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota.—The Committee recommends $1,700,000 for the Williston Pumping Plant 

feature of the project; $100,000 for mosquito control; and $500,000 

for the Corps to work in cooperation with the Friends of Lake 

Sakakawea to ensure the recreation sites around the lake can be 

utilized. 

Homme Lake, North Dakota.—Additional funds are recommended 

for dam safety activities and non-routine maintenance activities. 

Lake Ashtabula and Baldhill Dam, North Dakota.—Additional 

funds are recommended to ensure basic levels of service, and for 

non-routine maintenance and dam safety activities. 

Oregon Coastal Ports, Oregon.—The Committee has included additional funds for a number of the coastal harbors on the Oregon 

coast that were either not funded or underfunded in the administration’s budget request. With the limited funding available to the 

Committee, the Committee has attempted to provide for some of 

the dredging needs of the State. However, recognizing that conditions on these inlets are constantly changing the Committee is directing the Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 

2009 that would most effectively utilize the scarce funds available 

for these harbors. 

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, Lower Brule Sioux, South Dakota.— 

The Committee notes that title VI of the Water Resources Development Act of 1999, as amended, requires that funding to inventory 

and stabilize cultural and historic sites along the Missouri River in 

South Dakota, and to carry out the terrestrial wildlife habitat programs, shall be provided from the Operation and Maintenance account. The Committee provides $3,000,000 to protect cultural resource sites and provide funding to the State and tribes for approved restoration and stewardship plans and in compliance with 

the requirements of title VI, directs the Corps to contract with or 

reimburse the State of South Dakota and affected tribes to carry 

out these duties. 

Rhode Island Harbors, Rhode Island.—The Committee has included additional funds for a number of the harbors in Rhode Island that were either not funded or underfunded in the administration’s budget request. With the limited funding available to the 

Committee, the Committee has attempted to provide for some of 

the dredging needs of the State. However, recognizing that condi-
78 

tions on these inlets are constantly changing the Committee is directing the Corps to propose a dredging program for fiscal year 

2009 that would most effectively utilize the scarce funds available 

for these harbors. 

Fox Point Hurricane Barrier, Rhode Island.—$500,000 is recommended for the transfer of the project and routine O&M of the 

project. 

Woonsocket, Rhode Island.—$300,000 is recommended for the 

transfer of the project and routine O&M of the project. 

Cooper River, Charleston Harbor, South Carolina.—The Committee recommendation for Charleston Harbor includes the funds 

recommended for O&M in this account and $2,580,000 in the 

Dredged Material Disposal Facilities program in the Construction, 

General account. The administration proposed these two funding 

amounts as a single line item in O&M. 

Oahe Dam, Lake Oahe, South Dakota, and North Dakota.—The 

Committee has recommended $300,000 to allow the Corps to modify public facilities so that they can be utilized with the extreme 

low water levels currently being experienced on the lake. 

Houston Ship Channel, Texas.—The Committee recommendation 

for the Houston Ship Channel includes the funds recommended for 

O&M in this account and $500,000 in the Construction, General account for beneficial use of dredged material. The administration 

proposed these two funding amounts as a single line item in O&M. 

Texas Water Allocation Study, Texas.—The Committee recommends $1,000,000 for this ongoing study. 

Chinook, Head of Sand Island, and Baker Bay, Washington.— The Committee notes the proximity of Corps navigation facilities 

on the Columbia River between Chinook and the Head of Sand Island, Washington, and at Baker Bay, Washington, and encourage 

the Corps of Engineers to seek ways to achieve cost savings and 

efficiency, such as by utilizing appropriate contracting methods 

while having these two projects be considered together when seeking bids and awarding contracts. 

Mud Mountain Dam, Washington.—Within the funds recommended, the Corps is directed to continue to satisfy Federal fish 

passage obligations for the term of the cooperative agreement with 

Puget Sound Energy. 

Beech Fork Lake, West Virginia.—Additional funds recommended 

above the budget request are for repairs of public use facilities. 

Fox River, Wisconsin.—Additional funds recommended above the 

budget request are to reimburse Wisconsin, in accordance with the 

agreement, for the costs of repairs and rehabilitation of the transferred locks and for the Corps of Engineers to undertake major repairs for the dams and associated infrastructure. 

Green Bay Harbor, Wisconsin.—The Committee recommendation 

for Green Bay Harbor includes the funds recommended for O&M 

in this account and $950,000 in the Dredged Material Disposal Facilities program in the Construction, General account. The administration proposed these two funding amounts as a single line item 

in O&M. The Committee has also recommended an additional 

$1,050,000 for backlog maintenance dredging. 

Actions for Change to Improve Operation and Maintenance.—The 

Committee has recommended $4,000,000 for this item. The Com-
79 

mittee believes that these funds can serve to make significant improvements to the way the Corps administers completed projects to 

account for changed conditions since construction. 

National Coastal Mapping.—$13,900,000 is recommended for 

this program. Additional funds recommended above the budget request are for LIDAR bathymetry for use in regional sediment management and for Coastal Zone Mapping and Imaging LIDAR/ 

LASER to be conducted with the University of Southern Mississippi. 

Regional Sediment Management Demonstration Program.—The 

Committee has recommended $4,500,000 for this program, 

$3,000,000 above the budget request. Within the funds recommended, the Corps is directed to undertake studies for the 

Southeast Coast of Oahu, Hawaii; the State of North Carolina; 

South Coastal Rhode Island; Delaware Estuary, New Jersey; and 

for Long Island, New York coastal planning. 

FLOOD CONTROL AND COASTAL EMERGENCIES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... $40,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 40,000,000 

The Committee has recommended $40,000,000 for the FCCE account. This account provides funds for preparedness activities for 

natural and other disasters, response, and emergency flood fighting 

and rescue operations, hurricane response, and emergency shore 

protection work. It also provides for emergency supplies of clean 

water where the source has been contaminated or where adequate 

supplies of water are needed for consumption. 

REGULATORY PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $180,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 180,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 183,000,000 

An appropriation of $183,000,000 is recommended for the regulatory program of the Corps of Engineers. 

This appropriation provides for salaries and costs incurred administering regulation of activities affecting U.S. waters, including 

wetlands, in accordance with the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 

33 U.S.C. section 401, the Clean Water Act of 1977 Public Law 95– 

217, and the Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act of 

1972 Public Law 92–532. 

The appropriation helps maintain program performance, protects 

important aquatic resources, and supports partnerships with States 

and local communities through watershed planning efforts. 

The Committee is aware that the Corps of Engineers has begun 

a pilot program aimed at streamlining decisions for certain complex, high impact permit applications which have national or large 

regional implications. Specifically, we understand this program is 

focusing on projects related to rail capacity expansion, highway 

construction and pipelines where knowledge and experience gained 

in one district can be shared with other districts facing similar 

challenges, thus promoting efficiencies, the development and sharing of ‘‘best practices,’’ and use of virtual or dedicated teams to expedite broad-impact permit applications. Since the Committee con-
80 

tinues to be concerned about the permit application backlog and 

delays in making permit decisions, it fully supports this effort and 

encourages the Corps to dedicate even more attention and expand 

its efforts to an even greater extent in developing and using this 

pilot program to minimize negative impacts of the backlog and resulting delays, especially where there are significant impacts to the 

nation’s economy and environmental health. The Committee further supports the three emphasis areas selected for the pilot program as it believes them to be critical elements of a healthy, expanding economy which must be vigorously developed, but in an 

environmentally sound manner. 

The Committee is keenly aware that U.S. economic health and 

national security depends on the continued availability of reliable 

and affordable energy. The Committee is also aware that the Army 

Corps of Engineers (Corps) Regulatory Branch plays a key role by 

authorizing much of the 1.13 billion tons of coal production expected this year through its regulatory program. 

Therefore, the Committee directs the Corps to work with the Office of Surface Mining [OSM] to develop a more efficient process for 

issuing permits associated with surface coal mining operations. To 

avoid unnecessary time delays and duplication of agency resources, 

the Corps shall maintain the availability of a meaningful general 

permit for surface coal mining that may be issued in coordination 

with and for the term of the permit already required pursuant to 

the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act [SMCRA]. The 

Corps should also dedicate sufficient personnel and financial resources to support a consistent program for permit review and 

issuance. 

The Committee has included legislative text directing the Corps 

to reimburse the Port of Arlington, Oregon, up to $3,200,000 of the 

funds recommended for direct construction costs determined by the 

secretary to have been incurred by the port as a result of the 

issuance of a permit to construct a commercial dock and offload facility. Due to not scrupulously following established permit procedures the Corps was forced to withdraw the permit after the port 

had invested some $2,500,000. The port is now required to 

deconstruct these facilities. Reimbursement for the costs for removal of these facilities shall also be provided within this amount. 

FORMERLY UTILIZED SITES REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRAM

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $140,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 130,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 140,000,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $140,000,000 to 

continue activities related to the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial 

Action Program [FUSRAP] in fiscal year 2005. 

The responsibility for the cleanup of contaminated sites under 

the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program was transferred to the Army Corps of Engineers in the fiscal year 1998 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, Public Law 105– 

62. 

FUSRAP is not specifically defined by statute. The program was 

established in 1974 under the broad authority of the Atomic Energy Act and, until fiscal year 1998, funds for the cleanup of con-
81 

taminated defense sites had been appropriated to the Department 

of Energy through existing appropriation accounts. In appropriating FUSRAP funds to the Corps of Engineers, the Committee 

intended to transfer only the responsibility for administration and 

execution of cleanup activities at eligible sites where remediation 

had not been completed. It did not intend to transfer ownership of 

and accountability for real property interests that remain with the 

Department of Energy. 

The Corps of Engineers has extensive experience in the cleanup 

of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive wastes through its work for the 

Department of Defense and other Federal agencies. The Committee 

always intended for the Corps’ expertise be used in the same manner for the cleanup of contaminated sites under FUSRAP. The 

Committee expects the Corps to continue programming and budgeting for FUSRAP as part of the Corps of Engineers—Civil program. The Committee directs the Corps to prioritize sites that are 

nearing completion during fiscal year 2008. 

The Corps is directed to prioritize sites that are nearing completion and initiate cleanup expeditiously for the former Sylvania nuclear fuel site in Hicksville, New York. 

GENERAL EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $175,046,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 177,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 177,000,000 

This appropriation finances the expenses of the Office, Chief of 

Engineers, the Division Offices, and certain research and statistical 

functions of the Corps of Engineers. The Committee recommendation is $177,000,000. 

Executive Direction and Management.—The Office of the Chief of 

Engineers and 8 division offices supervise work in 38 district offices. 

Humphreys Engineer Center Support Activity.—This support center provides administrative services (such as personnel, logistics, 

information management, and finance and accounting) for the Office of the Chief of Engineers and other separate field operating activities. 

Institute for Water Resources.—This institute performs studies, 

analyses, and develops planning techniques for the management 

and development of the Nation’s water resources. 

United States Army Corps of Engineers Finance Center.—This 

center provides centralized support for all Corps finance and accounting. 

Office of Congressional Affairs.—The Committee has included 

statutory language for the past several years prohibiting any funds 

from being used to fund an Office of Congressional Affairs within 

the executive office of the Chief of Engineers. The Committee believes that an Office of Congressional Affairs for the Civil Works 

Program would hamper the efficient and effective coordination of 

issues with the Committee staff and Members of Congress. The 

Committee believes that the technical knowledge and managerial 

expertise needed for the Corps headquarters to effectively address 

Civil Works authorization, appropriation, and headquarters policy 

matters resides in the Civil Works organization. Therefore, the 
82 

Committee strongly recommends that the Office of Congressional 

Affairs not be a part of the process by which information on Civil 

Works projects, programs, and activities is provided to Congress. 

The Committee reminds the Corps that the General Expenses account is to be used exclusively for executive oversight and management of the Civil Works Program. 

In 1998, The Chief of Engineers issued a Command Directive 

transferring the oversight and management of the General Expenses account, as well as the manpower associated with this function, from the Civil Works Directorate to the Resource Management Office. The Corps is reminded that General Expense funds 

are appropriated solely for the executive management and oversight of the Civil Works Program under the direction of the Director of Civil Works. 

The Committee is pleased with the efforts of the Corps to restructure the management of general expense funds. It continues 

to believe that the general expense dollars are ultimately at the 

discretion of the Chief of Engineers and are intended to be utilized 

in his effort to carry out the Corps’ civil works mission. The new 

controls put in place to manage the general expense dollars and 

evaluate the needs of the Corps address the Committee’s previous 

concerns. The Committee requests the Corps continue to provide biannual written notification of the dispersal of general expense 

funds. 

Millions of dollars have been spent over the last several years on 

an initiative to contract out Government jobs in order to make the 

Government more efficient. However, in more than 70 percent of 

the cases Government employees win the competition for their jobs. 

The Committee fails to see any evidence of cost savings or increased efficiency by undergoing these expensive competitions. 

Therefore, the Committee directs that no funds provided in this account or otherwise available for expenditure shall be used to comply with the competitive sourcing initiative. 

OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY (CIVIL WORKS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,500,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 6,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,500,000 

The Committee has recommended $4,500,000 for the Office of the 

Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) [OASA(CW)]. As has 

been previously stated, the Committee believes that this office 

should be funded through the Defense appropriations bill and directs the administration to budget for this office under the Department of Defense, Operation and Maintenance—Army account in future budget submissions. The Committee continues to believe that 

the ASA(CW) has neither the time nor should he be involved in the 

day-to-day operational matters of the civil works program. It is the 

Committee’s opinion that the traditional role of the ASA(CW) is to 

provide the Chief of Engineers advice about policy matters and 

generally be the political spokesperson for the administration’s 

policies; however, the Chief of Engineers is responsible for carrying 

out the program. This is underscored by the administration’s budget documents that state that the OASA(CW) provides policy direction and oversight for the civil works program and the Head-
83 

quarters of the Corps provides executive direction and management 

of the civil works program. 

The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works advises the 

Secretary of the Army on a variety of matters, including the Civil 

Works program of the Corps of Engineers. The Assistant Secretary 

is a member of the Army Secretariat with responsibilities, such as 

participating in Continuity of Government exercises that extend 

well beyond Civil Works. The Assistant Secretary also oversees the 

administration, operation and maintenance, and capital development of Arlington National Cemetery and the Soldiers’ and Airmen’s Home National Cemetery. Congressional oversight of the 

Army Cemetery program lies not with the Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittee, but rather with the Appropriations 

Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and 

with the Committee on Veterans Affairs. 

The Army’s accounting system does not track OMA funding of 

overhead or Army-wide support offices on the basis of which office 

receives support, nor would it be efficient or effective to do so for 

a 20-person office. Instead, expenses such as legal support, personnel services, finance and accounting services, the executive 

motor pool, travel on military aircraft, and other support services 

are centrally funded and managed on a department-wide basis. 

Transferring the funding for the expenses of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Works to a separate account has greatly complicated the Army’s accounting for such indirect and overhead expenses with no commensurate benefit to justify the change. The 

Committee does not agree that these costs should be funded in this 

bill and therefore has only provided funding for salaries and expenses as in previous years. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

Section 101. The bill includes language concerning reprogramming guidelines. 

Section 102. The bill includes language prohibiting implementation of competitive sourcing or HPO. 

Section 103. The bill includes language prohibiting the divesting 

or transferring Civil Works functions. 

Section 104. The bill includes language concerning report notifications. 

Section 105. The bill includes language concerning reallocations 

in Lake Cumberland, Kentucky. 

Section 106. The bill includes language regarding the Middle Rio 

Grande Collaborative Program, New Mexico. 

Section 107. The bill includes language regarding congressional 

budget justifications. 

Section 108. The bill includes language authorizing a study of the 

Missouri River. 

Section 109. The bill includes language increasing the cost ceiling 

for the Folsom, California, Bridge. 

Section 110. The bill includes language regarding crediting of 

non-Federal expenditures on the San Lorenzo River, California 

project. 

Section 111. The bill includes language concerning the Missouri 

River Levee System. 
84 

Section 112. The bill includes language concerning Corps of Engineers Senior Executive Service positions. 

Section 113. The bill includes language regarding a replacement 

health care facility at Lake Sakakawea, North Dakota. 

Section 114. The bill includes language concerning continuing 

contracts and the Inland Waterway Trust Fund. 

Section 115. The bill includes language increasing the cost ceiling 

on the LMRMRIS. 

Section 116. The bill includes language modifying the Middle Rio 

Grande Bosque project. 

Section 117. The bill includes language modifying the San Antonio, Texas, project. 

Section 118. The bill includes language concerning the Morganza 

to the Gulf, Louisiana project. 

Section 119. The bill includes language concerning Chatfield 

Lake, Colorado. 

Section 120. The bill includes language increasing the cost ceiling 

for the Big Sioux River, South Dakota project. 
(85) 

TITLE II 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

CENTRAL UTAH PROJECT COMPLETION ACCOUNT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $43,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 42,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 42,000,000 

The Committee recommendation for fiscal year 2009 to carry out 

the provisions of the Central Utah Project Completion Act totals 

$42,000,000. An appropriation of $39,373,000 has been provided for 

Central Utah project construction; $987,000 for fish, wildlife, and 

recreation, mitigation and conservation. The Committee recommendation provides $1,640,000 for program administration and 

oversight. 

Legislative language is included which allows up to $1,500,000 of 

the funds provided to be used for administrative costs. 

The Central Utah Project Completion Act (titles II–VI of Public 

Law 102–575) provides for the completion of the central Utah 

project by the Central Utah Water Conservancy District. The Act 

also authorizes the appropriation of funds for fish, wildlife, recreation, mitigation, and conservation; establishes an account in the 

Treasury for the deposit of these funds and of other contributions 

for mitigation and conservation activities; and establishes a Utah 

Reclamation Mitigation and Conservation Commission to administer funds in that account. The act further assigns responsibilities 

for carrying out the act to the Secretary of the Interior and prohibits delegation of those responsibilities to the Bureau of Reclamation. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION

WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $949,882,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 1 ......................................................................... 779,320,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 927,320,000 

1 Includes rescission of $175,000,000. 

An appropriation of $927,320,000 is recommended by the Committee for general investigations of the Bureau of Reclamation. The 

water and related resources account supports the development, 

management, and restoration of water and related natural resources in the 17 Western States. The account includes funds for 

operating and maintaining existing facilities to obtain the greatest 

overall level of benefits, to protect public safety, and to conduct 

studies on ways to improve the use of water and related natural 

resources. Work will be done in partnership and cooperation with 

non-Federal entities and other Federal agencies. 
86 

The Committee has divided underfinancing between the Resources Management Subaccount and the Facilities Operation and 

Maintenance subaccount. The Committee directs that the underfinancing amount in each subaccount initially be applied uniformly 

across all projects within the subaccounts. Upon applying the 

underfinanced amounts, normal reprogramming procedures should 

be undertaken to account for schedule slippages, accelerations or 

other unforeseen conditions. 

DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS

The Committee received more than 130 requests for projects, programs, studies or activities for the Bureau of Reclamation for fiscal 

year 2009. These were items that were additions to the budget request as well as those included in the budget request. The Committee obviously was unable to accommodate all of these requests. 

In the interest of providing full disclosure of funding provided in 

the Energy and Water bill, all disclosures are made in this report 

accompanying the bill. 

All of the projects funded in this report have gone through the 

same rigorous public review and approval process as those proposed for funding by the President. The difference in these projects, 

of course, is that the congressionally directed projects are not subject to the artificial budgetary prioritization criteria that the administration utilizes to decide what not to fund. 

A new table has been added to the end of this report to show the 

requestors of the various projects. For those programs, projects, or 

studies that were included in the budgetary documents provided in 

the budget request, the words ‘‘the President’’ has been added to 

denote this administration request. The level of funding provided 

for each of these programs projects or studies should not be construed as what was requested. Rather, the only intent is to disclose 

the requestor. 

It should be noted that many line items only have the President 

listed as the requestor. It should not be inferred that the affected 

members are not interested in these projects studies or activities. 

Rather this is due to Committee direction that the President’s 

budget requests are the basis for the Committee bill and a requests 

by the affected Members is unnecessary unless a Member wishes 

to request a different amount than the budget request. 

The purposes for the funding provided in the various accounts is 

described in the paragraphs associated with each account. The location of the programs, projects or studies are denoted in the account 

tables. 

The amounts recommended by the Committee are shown on the 

following table along with the budget request. 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION—WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

ARIZONA 

AK CHIN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT ......................... .................... 9,900 .................. 9,900 
87 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION—WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

ARIZONA WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT ........................................ .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

COLORADO RIVER BASIN, CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT ..................... 26,528 322 28,028 322 

COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM ........................ 2,350 .................. 2,350 ..................

NORTHERN ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ............................... 320 .................. 320 ..................

PHOENIX METROPOLITAN WATER REUSE PROJECT ............................. 200 .................. 200 ..................

SALT RIVER PROJECT .......................................................................... 469 131 469 131 

SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE WATER SETTLEMENT ACT ..................... 325 .................. 325 ..................

SOUTH/CENTRAL ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ...................... 718 .................. 718 ..................

SOUTHERN ARIZONA WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT ...... 2,969 .................. 2,969 ..................

YUMA AREA PROJECTS ........................................................................ 1,658 20,205 1,658 20,205 

YUMA EAST WETLANDS ....................................................................... .................... .................. 1,500 ..................

CALIFORNIA 

CACHUMA PROJECT ............................................................................. 1,016 702 1,016 1,102 

CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ............................................. 352 .................. 352 ..................

CALLEGUAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT RECYCLING PLANT ............ 800 .................. 1,500 ..................

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECTS: 

AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION ........................................................ 1,708 7,772 1,708 7,772 

AUBURN—FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT ............................................... 2,088 .................. 2,088 ..................

DELTA DIVISION .......................................................................... 15,138 5,599 15,138 5,599 

EAST SIDE DIVISION ................................................................... 1,591 2,943 1,591 2,943 

FRIANT DIVISION ........................................................................ 1,988 3,733 3,988 3,733 

MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS ...................................... 12,006 1,145 16,006 1,145 

REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY 

MAINTAINANCE ....................................................................... .................... 24,091 .................. 24,091 

SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION ................................................... 931 1,497 7,931 1,497 

SAN FELIPE DIVISION ................................................................. 675 100 675 100 

SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION .............................................................. 391 .................. 391 ..................

SHASTA DIVISION ....................................................................... 150 7,764 150 7,764 

TRINITY RIVER DIVISION ............................................................ 7,215 3,102 7,815 3,102 

WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS .............................................. 1,117 8,334 1,117 8,334 

WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT .......................... 3,497 5,422 3,497 5,422 

YIELD FEASIBILITY INVESTIGATION ............................................. 303 .................. 303 ..................

INLAND EMPIRE REGIONAL WATER RECYCLING PROJECT .................. .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

IRVINE BASIN GROUND AND SURFACE WATER ................................... .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL WETLANDS ..................................................... 100 .................. 100 ..................

LONG BEACH AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECT ...... 692 .................. 692 ..................

LONG BEACH DESALINATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJ ... .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

MOKELUMNE RIVER REGIONAL WATER STORAGE & CONJUNCTIVE 

USE STUDY ..................................................................................... .................... .................. .................. ..................

ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT ............ 558 .................. 558 ..................

ORLAND PROJECT ................................................................................ .................... 703 .................. 703 

SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT ...................................................... 700 .................. 700 ..................

SAN DIEGO AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM ....... 3,000 .................. 3,000 ..................

SAN GABRIEL BASIN PROJECT ............................................................ 700 .................. 700 ..................

SAN JOSE AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM ......... 250 .................. 250 ..................

SOLANO PROJECT ................................................................................ 1,626 2,863 1,626 2,863 

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .......................... 260 .................. 260 ..................

VENTURA RIVER PROJECT ................................................................... 389 31 389 31 

COLORADO 

ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT, CRSP ..................................................... 49,743 257 49,743 257 

COLLBRAN PROJECT ............................................................................ 166 1,390 166 1,390 

COLORADO—BIG THOMPSON PROJECT .............................................. 450 12,842 450 12,842 

COLORADO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .............................................. 204 .................. 204 ..................

FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT ........................................................... 75 154 75 154 

FRYINGPAN—ARKANSAS PROJECT ...................................................... 172 8,123 172 8,123 

GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II ............................................. 164 1,281 164 1,281 

LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY ............................................ 36 3,059 36 3,059 

MANCOS PROJECT ............................................................................... 42 104 42 104 
88 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION—WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II ......................................... 50 2,366 50 2,366 

PINE RIVER PROJECT .......................................................................... 184 151 184 151 

SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT ................................................................. 292 4,345 292 4,345 

UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT .................................................................... 128 136 128 136 

UPPER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS .............................................. 250 .................. 250 ..................

IDAHO 

BOISE AREA PROJECTS ....................................................................... 2,769 2,515 2,769 2,515 

COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT ............ 18,000 .................. 18,000 ..................

IDAHO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ...................................................... 179 .................. 179 ..................

LEWISTON ORCHARDS PROJECTS ........................................................ 548 30 548 30 

MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS ................................................................. 2,768 2,790 2,768 2,790 

KANSAS 

KANSAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ................................................... 73 .................. 73 ..................

WICHITA-CHENEY PROJECT ................................................................. 10 375 10 375 

WICHITA PROJECT—EQUUS BEDS DIVISION ....................................... 50 .................. 1,050 ..................

MONTANA 

FORT PECK RESERVATION/DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM ....... .................... .................. 15,000 ..................

HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT ................................................................... .................... 653 .................. 653 

HUNTLEY PROJECT .............................................................................. 52 108 52 108 

LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT ......................................................... 31 15 31 15 

MILK RIVER PROJECT .......................................................................... 308 1,340 308 1,340 

MONTANA INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................. 134 .................. 134 ..................

ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MONTANA REGIONAL WATER ............. .................... .................. 10,000 ..................

SUN RIVER PROJECT ........................................................................... 75 275 75 275 

NEBRASKA 

MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT ..................................................................... 12 158 12 158 

NEBRASKA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ............................................... 64 .................. 64 ..................

NEVADA 

HALFWAY WASH PROJECT STUDY ........................................................ 200 .................. 200 ..................

LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT ................................................................. 5,021 2,684 7,521 2,684 

LAKE MEAD/LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM ........................................... 900 .................. 2,725 ..................

NORTH LAS VEGAS, WATER REUSE ..................................................... .................... .................. 3,000 ..................

NEW MEXICO 

ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA WATER RECYCLING AND REUSE .......... .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

CARLSBAD PROJECT ............................................................................ 2,657 1,127 2,657 1,127 

EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY ................................. .................... .................. 500 ..................

JICARILLA APACHE RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM ................. .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT ........................................................... 13,047 9,653 16,047 9,653 

NAVAJO-GALLUP WATER SUPPLY, NM, UT, CO .................................... .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

NAVAJO NATION INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ....................................... 77 .................. 77 ..................

PECOS RIVER BASIN WATER SALVAGE PROJECT ................................ .................... 203 .................. 203 

RIO GRANDE PROJECT ........................................................................ 590 3,752 590 3,752 

SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .......................... 59 .................. 59 ..................

SOUTHERN NEW MEXICO/WEST TEXAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ... 57 .................. 57 ..................

TUCUMCARI PROJECT .......................................................................... 23 35 23 35 

UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN INVESTIGATIONS ...................................... 29 .................. 29 ..................

NORTH DAKOTA 

PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN—GARRISON DIVERSION UNIT ............. 16,495 5,611 64,375 5,611 

OKLAHOMA 

ARBUCKLE PROJECT ............................................................................ 48 241 48 241 

CENTRAL OKLAHOMA MASTER CONSERVATORY DISTRICT FEASIBILITY STUDY .................................................................................. .................... .................. 250 ..................
89 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION—WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

MCGEE CREEK PROJECT ..................................................................... 25 651 25 651 

MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT .................................................................. .................... 523 .................. 523 

NORMAN PROJECT ............................................................................... 26 447 26 447 

OKLAHOMA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .............................................. 128 .................. 128 ..................

WASHITA BASIN PROJECT .................................................................... 30 1,396 30 1,396 

W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT ......................................................................... 65 416 65 416 

OREGON 

BURNT, MALHEUR, OWYHEE, AND POWER RIVER BASIN WATER OPTIMIZATION FEASIBILITY STUDY ...................................................... .................... .................. 300 ..................

CROOKED RIVER PROJECT .................................................................. 407 444 407 444 

DESCHUTUS ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT .............................. .................... .................. 300 ..................

DESCHUTES PROJECT .......................................................................... 238 178 988 178 

EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS ............................................................. 542 286 542 286 

KLAMATH PROJECT .............................................................................. 23,388 1,612 23,388 1,612 

OREGON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .................................................. 294 .................. 444 ..................

ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION .............................. 577 325 577 325 

SAVAGE RAPIDS DAM REMOVAL ......................................................... 3,000 .................. 3,000 ..................

TUALATIN BASIN WATER SUPPLY PROJECT ......................................... .................... .................. 400 ..................

TUALATIN PROJECT TITLE TRANSFER AND FACILITY ASSESSMENT 

STUDY ............................................................................................. .................... .................. 106 ..................

TUALATIN PROJECT .............................................................................. 111 270 111 270 

UMATILLA PROJECT ............................................................................. 954 2,978 954 2,978 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM ........................................ .................... .................. 30,000 ..................

MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT ................................................ .................... 15 .................. 15 

MNI WICONI PROJECT ......................................................................... 16,240 10,000 27,000 10,182 

PERKINS COUNTY RURAL WATER SYSTEM .......................................... .................... .................. 2,000 ..................

RAPID VALLEY PROJECT, DEERFIELD DAM .......................................... .................... 86 .................. 86 

TEXAS 

BALMORHEA PROJECT ......................................................................... 41 17 41 17 

CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT ................................................................. 59 86 59 86 

LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCES ............................. 50 .................. 4,050 ..................

NUECES RIVER PROJECT ..................................................................... 25 533 25 533 

SAN ANGELO PROJECT ........................................................................ 35 367 35 367 

TEXAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ...................................................... 146 .................. 146 ..................

UTAH 

HYRUM PROJECT ................................................................................. 146 32 146 32 

MOON LAKE PROJECT .......................................................................... 3 73 3 73 

NEWTON PROJECT ............................................................................... 4 38 4 38 

NORTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .................................... 156 .................. 456 ..................

OGDEN RIVER PROJECT ...................................................................... 196 172 196 172 

PARK CITY FEASIBILLTY STUDY .......................................................... .................... .................. 500 ..................

PROVO RIVER PROJECT ....................................................................... 951 415 951 415 

SCOFIELD PROJECT ............................................................................. 55 78 55 78 

STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT .......................................................... 203 20 203 20 

SOUTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ..................................... 121 .................. 121 ..................

WEBER BASIN PROJECT ...................................................................... 1,028 720 1,028 720 

WEBER RIVER PROJECT ...................................................................... 30 107 30 107 

WASHINGTON 

COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT ................................................................. 3,737 6,811 6,737 6,811 

ODESSA SUBAREA SPECIAL STUDY ..................................................... 600 .................. 1,000 ..................

WASHINGTON AREA PROJECTS ............................................................ 85 10 85 10 

WASHINGTON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ........................................... 57 .................. 145 ..................

YAKIMA PROJECT ................................................................................. 1,201 6,565 1,701 6,799 

YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT ..................... 8,503 .................. 8,503 ..................
90 

BUREAU OF RECLAMATION—WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Project title 

Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

Resources 

management 

Facilities 

OM&R 

YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER STORAGE .............................................. .................... .................. 500 ..................

WYOMING 

KENDRICK PROJECT ............................................................................ 91 3,242 91 3,242 

NORTH PLATTE PROJECT ..................................................................... 302 1,578 302 1,578 

SHOSHONE PROJECT ........................................................................... 84 665 84 665 

WYOMING INVESTIGATIONS ................................................................. 26 .................. 26 ..................

SUBTOTAL FOR PROJECTS ..................................................... 274,970 213,288 438,679 213,704 

REGIONAL PROGRAMS 

COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL, TITLE I ........................ .................... 9,444 .................. 9,444 

COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL, TITLE II ....................... 5,850 .................. 5,850 ..................

COLORADO RIVER STORAGE, SECTION 5 ............................................ 1,918 3,995 1,918 3,995 

COLORADO RIVER STORAGE, SECTION 8 ............................................ 710 .................. 710 ..................

COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ........... 265 .................. 265 ..................

DAM SAFETY PROGRAM: 

DEPARTMENT DAM SAFETY PROGRAM ....................................... .................... 1,250 .................. 1,250 

INITIATE SOD CORRECTIVE ACTION ........................................... .................... 71,500 .................. 71,500 

SAFETY OF EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS ............................. .................... 18,500 .................. 18,500 

DROUGHT EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ................................. 500 .................. 500 ..................

EMERGENCY PLANNING & DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM .............. .................... 1,422 .................. 1,422 

ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION ........................ 21,939 .................. 21,939 ..................

ENVIRONMENTAL & INTERAGENCY COORDINATION ACTIVITIES .......... 1,739 .................. 1,739 ..................

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION .................................... 973 .................. 973 ..................

EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES ........................................... .................... 6,254 .................. 6,254 

FEDERAL BUILDING SEISMIC SAFETY PROGRAM ................................ .................... 1,384 .................. 1,384 

GENERAL PLANNING STUDIES ............................................................. 2,163 .................. 2,163 ..................

LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ...................................... 7,481 .................. 7,481 ..................

LOWER COLORADO RIVER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAMS ..................... 243 .................. 243 ..................

LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM ............................ 16,400 .................. 16,400 ..................

MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS ................................ .................... 714 .................. 714 

NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM ............................................... 7,020 .................. 7,020 ..................

NEGOTIATION & ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING ................. 1,658 .................. 1,658 ..................

OPERATIONS AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ....................................... 684 522 684 522 

PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN—OTHER PICK-SLOAN ......................... 3,687 37,053 3,687 37,053 

POWER PROGRAM SERVICES .............................................................. 847 250 847 250 

PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM ............................................ 641 155 641 155 

RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION ................................................. 2,132 .................. 2,132 ..................

RECLAMATION RECREATION MANAGEMENT (TITLE XXVII) ................... .................... .................. 1,000 ..................

RECREATION & FISH & WILDLIFE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION .......... 951 .................. 951 ..................

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT: 

DESALINATION AND WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM ............... 375 1,600 2,375 1,600 

SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM ..................................... 9,000 .................. 9,000 ..................

RURAL WATER LEGISLATION, TITLE I .................................................. 1,000 .................. 1,000 ..................

SITE SECURITY .................................................................................... .................... 28,950 .................. 28,950 

TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM .................... 800 .................. 3,300 ..................

UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES—TECHNICAL SUPPORT .... 93 .................. 93 ..................

WATER FOR AMERICA INITIATIVE ........................................................ 19,000 .................. 19,000 ..................

SUBTOTAL, REGIONAL PROGRAMS ......................................... 108,069 182,993 113,169 183,393 

UNDER FINANCING .............................................................................. .................... .................. ¥18,183 ¥3,442 

TOTAL WATER AND RELATED RESOURCES ............................ 383,039 396,281 533,665 393,655 

GRAND TOTAL ........................................................................ 779,320 779,320 927,320 927,320 

Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act, Arizona.—Funds are recommended for advance planning and environmental compliance ac-
91 

tivities for rehabilitation of the San Carlos Irrigation Project in cooperation with the San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District. 

Central Arizona Project, Colorado River Basin.—The Committee 

recommendation includes additional funds for activities related to 

the Gila River Settlement in New Mexico and Arizona. 

Central Valley Project—Friant Division.—The Committee recommendation includes an additional $1,000,000 for the Friant-Kern 

and Madera canals capacity improvements and an additional 

$1,000,000 for the Semi Tropic Phase II groundwater banking. 

Miscellaneous Project Programs.—An additional $4,000,000 above 

the budget request is provided for anadromous fish screen projects. 

Central Valley Project-Sacramento River Division.—Within the 

funds recommended, $2,000,000 is recommended for the Sacramento Valley Integrated Plan and $5,000,000 is recommended for 

the Red Bluff Diversion Dam. 

Central Valley Project-Trinity River Division.—The Committee 

has recommended $600,000 above the budget request to accelerate 

implementation of the Trinity River Restoration Program. 

Mokelumne River Regional Water Storage, California.—The Committee directs the Secretary of the Department of the Interior to 

initiate a feasibility study authorized in title V of Public Law 109– 

338. In carrying out this study, the Secretary of the Interior shall 

include the entire Mokelumne River drainage as the study area 

and shall also consider regional projects that include recommendations for expansion of reservoir storage capacities. This study shall 

include in the feasibility study analysis the project currently under 

consideration by the Mokelumne River Forum and described in 

both the Northeastern San Joaquin County Groundwater Banking 

Authority and the Mokelumne-Amador-Calaveras Integrated Regional Water Management Plans. 

As authorized, this study is intended to be regional in scope and 

shall examine the feasibility of providing additional water supply 

and improved water management reliability to Mokelumne River 

Forum member agencies through the development of new storage 

and conjunctive use programs and projects, including, but not limited to, the Eastern San Joaquin Ground Water Basin, Pardee Reservoir, Lower Bear Reservoir, and Duck Creek. 

Fort Peck, Dry Prairie Rural Water System, Montana.—The Committee has recommended $15,000,000 for continued construction of 

this rural water project. 

Middle Rio Grande Project, New Mexico.—The Committee recommendation includes an additional $3,000,000 for additional 

needs in the Middle Rio Grande Collaborative Program. 

Truckee Canal Reconstruction, Nevada.—The canal breached in 

January 2008, flooding Fernley, Nevada. The Committee recommendation includes $2,500,000 under the Lahontan Basin 

project for Reclamation to perform an exploration/risk analysis of 

the canal to determine the full extent of rehabilitation needed for 

the canal to resume flows above 350 cubic feet per second. 

Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin, Garrison Diversion Unit, North Dakota.—Within the Committee recommendation, $52,000,000 is recommended for rural water projects. Of this amount, $26,000,000 

shall be expended for the following projects: $8,000,000 for the 

Northwest Area Water Supply; $6,000,000 for the South Central 
92 

Regional Water District; $4,000,000 for the North Central Rural 

Water System; $8,000,000 for the Southwest Pipeline. Additionally 

the Committee recommends $1,880,000 for the Standing Rock 

Sioux Tribe Irrigation Project. 

Deschutes Project, Oregon.—Within the funds provided, $750,000 

is recommended for water conservation measures. 

Oregon Investigations Program, Oregon.—$150,000 above the 

budget request is recommended for developing appraisal-level designs and cost estimates for on-reservation distribution systems. 

Northern Utah Investigations Program, Utah.—The Committee 

has recommended an additional $300,000 for the Rural Water 

Technology Alliance. 

Columbia Basin Project, Washington.—The Committee recommends an additional $3,000,000 above the budget request for 

the Potholes Reservoir Supplemental Feed Route Implementation. 

Odessa Subarea Special Study, Washington.—The Committee 

has provided $1,000,000 for this study. 

Yakima Project, Washington.—$500,000 of the funds recommended under this heading are for the Storage Dam Fish Passage Feasibility Study. 

Salt Cedar/Russian Olive Control.—The Committee has recommended no funding under the 2006 Salt Cedar/Russian Olive 

Control Act. Studies have shown that there is no water salvage 

gained by eradication of these invasive nuisance species. Without 

the water salvage component, there is no real nexus to Reclamation’s mission of providing water and power to the West. The Committee agrees that these invasive species need to be controlled and 

eradicated, where possible, due to their ability to outcompete native 

vegetation. However, this mission is much more suited to other 

Federal agencies than the Bureau of Reclamation. 

Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Project, Title I.—In fiscal 

years 2006 and 2008, the conferees expressed their concern that 

the Bureau of Reclamation was making excess releases of approximately 100,000 acre feet of water per year from storage in Colorado 

River reservoirs to help meet the United States’ Colorado River 

water quality obligations to Mexico. The excess releases are being 

made because Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation and Drainage District’s 

agricultural return flows—that bypass the Colorado River and are 

discharged to the Cienega de Santa Clara in Mexico (bypass 

flows)—are not counted as part of the 1.5 million acre-feet of water 

that the United States is required to deliver annually to Mexico. 

Because the bypass flows are not counted, system storage from the 

Colorado River has been used to make up for the bypass flows. The 

Yuma Desalting Plant was originally constructed to treat the flows 

and return a portion of them to the river, thus reducing excess releases from Colorado River reservoirs. 

The current drought and projected long-term water demands 

have heightened concern about this demand on the river system. 

Consequently, in fiscal years 2006 and 2008, the conferees also directed the Bureau of Reclamation to dedicate sufficient resources to 

the Yuma Desalting Plant so that one-third operational capacity 

may be achieved by the end of calendar years 2006 and 2008, respectively. To date, the plant is not one-third operational, although 

Reclamation did conduct a demonstration run at one-tenth capacity 
93 

for 90 days in 2007. The Committee, once again, directs the Bureau 

of Reclamation, within the funds provided for the Colorado River 

Basin Salinity Control Project, title I, to dedicate sufficient funds 

to the Yuma Desalting Plant so that one-third operational capacity 

may be achieved by the end of calendar year 2008. The Bureau of 

Reclamation is also directed to provide the Committee with a status report of the plant’s operational status by no later than March 

1, 2009. If the plant is not one-third operational by the end of calendar year 2008, the report shall include an explanation as to why 

the Bureau of Reclamation has failed to comply with the Committee’s directive. 

Drought Emergency Assistance.—The Committee has provided 

the budget request for this program. Within the funds provided, 

the Committee urges the Bureau of Reclamation to provide full and 

fair consideration for drought assistance from the State of Hawaii. 

Research and Development, Desalination Research and Development Program.—The Committee recommends $2,000,000 above the 

budget request to be provided to New Mexico State University for 

research activities undertaken at or associated with the National 

Inland Desalination Research Facility. 

Title XVI, Water Reclamation, and Reuse.—The Committee has 

provided $3,300,000 for this program. Within the funds provided, 

the Committee has included $2,500,000 for the WateReuse Foundation. These funds are available to support the Foundation’s research priorities. 

Water for America Initiative.—A critical component of reducing 

tension among multiple water users is collaborative planning and 

joint operations. Within the funds provided, funds are provided for 

the Desert Research Institute to address water quality and environmental issues in ways that will bring industry and regulators 

to mutually acceptable answers. Within the amounts provided, Reclamation is urged to continue urban water conservation projects 

identified through the Metropolitan Water District of Southern 

California Innovative Conservation Program; industrial water efficiency surveys to assess opportunities to conserve water in industrial water use; and for weather based irrigation controller activities to pilot ways to speed distribution and acceptance of these 

landscape water efficiency devices. 

CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT RESTORATION FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $59,122,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1 56,079,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 56,079,000 

1 Includes $7,500,000 legislative proposal on which Congress has not acted. 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $56,079,000 for 

the Central Valley Project Restoration Fund. The Committee is 

aware that the legislation to effect a transfer of $7,500,000 in 

Friant surcharges to a new San Joaquin River Restoration Fund 

has not been enacted. However, the Committee has provided the 

administration’s full request and included legislative text that 

would allow these funds to be utilized in the Central Valley Project 

Restoration Fund. It is the Committees’ understanding that even 

if the legislation establishing the new fund is not established, inclusion of the Committee’s legislative text would allow Reclamation 
94 

to undertake San Joaquin River Settlement Act activities within 

existing authorities. 

The Central Valley Project Restoration Fund was authorized in 

the Central Valley Project Improvement Act, title 34 of Public Law 

102–575. This fund was established to provide funding from project 

beneficiaries for habitat restoration, improvement and acquisition, 

and other fish and wildlife restoration activities in the Central Valley project area of California. Revenues are derived from payments 

by project beneficiaries and from donations. Payments from project 

beneficiaries include several required by the act (Friant Division 

surcharges, higher charges on water transferred to non-CVP users, 

and tiered water prices) and, to the extent required in appropriations acts, additional annual mitigation and restoration payments. 

CALIFORNIA BAY-DELTA RESTORATION

(INCLUDING TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $40,098,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 32,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 42,000,000 

This account funds activities that are consistent with the 

CALFED Bay-Delta Program, a collaborative effort involving 18 

State and Federal agencies and representatives of California’s 

urban, agricultural, and environmental communities. The goals of 

the program are to improve fish and wildlife habitat, water supply 

reliability, and water quality in the San Francisco Bay-San Joaquin River Delta, the principle hub of California’s water distribution system. 

POLICY AND ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $58,811,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 59,400,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 59,400,000 

The Committee recommendation for general administrative expenses is $59,400,000. This is the same as the budget request. 

The policy and administrative expenses program provides for the 

executive direction and management of all reclamation activities, 

as performed by the Commissioner’s offices in Washington, DC, 

Denver, Colorado, and five regional offices. The Denver office and 

regional offices charge individual projects or activities for direct 

beneficial services and related administrative and technical costs. 

These charges are covered under other appropriations. 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Section 201. The bill includes language regarding the San Luis 

Unit and the Kesterson Reservoir in California. 

Section 202. The bill includes language that states requirements 

for purchase or lease of water from the Middle Rio Grande or 

Carlsbad Projects in New Mexico. 

Section 203. The bill includes language regarding Drought Emergency Assistance. 

Section 204. The bill includes language concerning the Water for 

America Initiative. 
95 

Section 205. The bill includes language regarding the Rio Grande 

Collaborative water operations team. 

Section 206. The bill includes language concerning expending 

funds from the Desert Terminus Lakes program for the Truckee 

River Settlement Act. 

Section 207. The bill includes language concerning expending 

funds from the Desert Terminus Lakes program. 
(96) 

TITLE III 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

LABORATORY DIRECTED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT [LDRD] 

The Committee recognizes the invaluable role the Laboratory Directed Research and Development [LDRD] program provides to the 

Federal Government and the Nation in general. Discretionary 

LDRD investments have been and will continue to be responsive to 

the energy needs of the Nation, as evidenced by recent R&D 

projects in materials science, optoelectronics, computer science, and 

high energy density physics. Cutting-edge LDRD research provides 

the science base for energy-specific applications such as fuel cells, 

hydrogen technologies, carbon management, nuclear energy and 

solid state lighting. In addition, LDRD is the national labs’ most 

important tool for maintaining the vitality of the national labs in 

support of other national security missions. LDRD enables the labs 

to hire the ‘‘best and brightest’’ young scientists and engineers and 

allows them to seek innovative science and technology solutions for 

current or emerging national security issues, including those of energy security. LDRD investments have been effective in providing 

solutions for today’s energy problems and demonstrate the inherent 

flexibility of the program to provide national security mission support on a very timely basis. Energy climate research needs can best 

be addressed by continuing a vibrant LDRD program at the national laboratories. 

REPROGRAMMING GUIDELINES

The Committee requires the Department to promptly and fully 

inform the Committee when a change in program execution or 

funding is required during the fiscal year. A reprogramming includes the reallocation of funds from one activity to another within 

an appropriation, or any significant departure from a program, 

project, or activity described in the agency’s budget justification, as 

presented to and approved or modified by Congress in an appropriations act or the accompanying statement of managers or report. 

For construction projects, a reprogramming constitutes the reallocation of funds from one construction project identified in the 

justifications to another or a significant change in the scope of an 

approved project. 

Reprogrammings should not be employed to initiate new programs or to change program, project, or activity allocations specifically denied, limited, or increased by Congress in the act or report. 

In cases where unforeseen events or conditions are deemed to require such changes, proposals shall be submitted in advance to the 

Committee and be fully explained and justified. 
97 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $1,722,407,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,255,393,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,928,259,000 

The Committee recommendation is $1,928,259,000 for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, $672,866,000 above the President’s 

request. The Department’s request for the Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy program is $467,014,000 less than the fiscal 

year 2008 appropriation. The reduction is driven by the complete 

elimination of the Weatherization Assistance Program 

(¥$227,222,000), but also reflects large cuts to Hydrogen R&D 

(¥$64,849,000) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratories 

Facilities and Infrastructure (¥$62,194,000) subprograms. This 

Committee continues to support a broad and ambitious research, 

development and deployment program that covers a variety of technological approaches to solve this Nation’s energy problems. Our 

recommendation, therefore, restores most of the administration’s 

reductions and increases some areas beyond the request. In addition, this Committee recognizes that the Department may carry out 

international cooperative agreements, including the U.S.-Israeli energy cooperation agreement as described in the Energy Independence and Security Act, section 917, as long as these agreements are 

consistent with activities described in the congressional budget justification. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 to support the 

U.S.-Israeli energy cooperation agreement. 

Local Government and Tribal Technology Demonstrations.—The 

Committee provides $50,000,000 and recommends establishment of 

a new, competitive grant program that funds city government-led, 

county government-led, and/or tribal nations-led demonstration 

projects capable of reducing electricity demand involving public and 

private partnerships. The Department shall prioritize projects that 

have substantial local cost-share match, that are replicable in the 

future under market conditions after demonstration of cost/benefit 

advantages, and that meet goals of greenhouse gas and/or water 

use reductions. The Committee recommends that each project 

achieve at least a 50 percent reduction in energy usage. The Committee recommends each grant not exceed $5,000,000 per project 

and the total Federal share of each project be capped at 50 percent. 

Hydrogen Technology.—The Committee recommends 

$175,000,000, a total of $28,787,000 above the request. The Committee agrees with the Department’s proposal to transfer several 

subprograms from the Hydrogen budget to the Vehicles Technology 

budget in fiscal year 2009. With this increase, the Committee’s recommendation for all hydrogen programs in the Department’s fiscal 

year 2009 budget amounts to $296,500,000. 

Of the increased funding, $22,000,000 is applied to Hydrogen 

Production and Delivery R&D, which supports development of hydrogen fuel from various sources such as wind, solar, or biomass. 

While the program has used natural gas to meet the 2015 production-cost goal, clearly that is not enough. Renewable hydrogen remains a critical element of our future energy system and our Nation’s security. A total of $11,500,000 is provided for Systems Analysis, $3,787,000 above the request, so that model validation refine-
98 

ment and analysis of selected cross-cutting issues for multiple production pathways is not deferred, as proposed by the administration. Finally, $3,000,000 is provided for Manufacturing R&D, which 

is $3,000,000 above the request. Manufacturing R&D must be conducted in parallel with technology development to commercialize 

new technologies through a domestic supplier base as expeditiously 

as possible. 

Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D.—The Committee recommends $235,000,000, an increase of $10,000,000 above the request. With the additional funds, the Department should pursue 

development of biofuels from non-food sources, especially those 

with the largest potential to sequester industrial carbon-dioxide, 

such as algae, that are also compatible with gasoline and diesel 

fuels. These biofuels will be developed from a variety of renewable 

feedstocks, including algae, that exhibit greater than 50 percent 

greenhouse gas benefits compared to conventional hydrocarbon 

fuels. This research should include demonstrations using brackish 

water. 

The Committee also recommends that the Department expand its 

Thermochemical Platform research and development to focus on 

conversion of biomass to bio-crude, particularly upgrading these 

bio-crudes to refinery grade feedstocks that compliment the existing petroleum refining and fuel distribution infrastructure. This expanded research and development program is an important part of 

expanding research collaboration between the Pacific Northwest 

National Laboratory and Washington State University, in a new 

Bioproducts, Sciences and Engineering Laboratory in Richland, 

Washington. 

Solar Energy.—The Committee recommends $229,000,000, an increase of $72,880,000 over the President’s request. A total of 

$59,495,000 of this increase is transferred from the Office of 

Science, Basic Energy Sciences program. The distribution of the 

$229,000,000 for Solar Energy is as follows: $156,833,000 for Photovoltaic Energy Systems; $50,000,000 for Concentrating Solar 

Power; and $22,167,000 for Solar Heating and Lighting. 

Wind Energy.—The recommendation is $62,500,000, an increase 

of $10,000,000 over the request. With the increase, this office 

should work with the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability to develop better models and transmission interconnection 

systems with the purpose of increasing the ease of adding electricity from wind to the grid. The Committee has provided a budget 

increase in the Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability program 

to assist the Wind Energy program by providing support for the 

key area of transmission, which is needed to take electricity generated by wind power to the marketplace. 

Within available funds, the program shall establish a manufacturing initiative jointly with the Industrial Technologies Program 

focusing on manufacturing issues for the rapidly growing wind energy industry. 

Geothermal Technology.—The recommendation for Geothermal 

Technology is $30,000,000, the same as the administration’s request, which is already $10,182,000 above fiscal year 2008. The 

Committee understands that workforce and educational activities 

are critical to the future of the geothermal industry, and the De-
99 

partment’s future budget requests should include funding for these 

needs. 

The Committee encourages the Department to focus its efforts on 

research and development of Enhanced Geothermal Systems. However, we recognize that there is significant near term crossover 

benefit for both the enhanced and existing hydrothermal systems— 

for example, through pursuit of geothermal mapping, existing hydrothermal systems marketers may find new areas to place capacity. 

Water Power Energy R&D.—The Committee recommends 

$30,000,000, a total of $27,000,000 above the request. With the additional funding, this Committee directs the Department to accelerate the comprehensive resource assessment of water power in the 

United States and accelerate the technology characterizations, with 

the goal of completing them in fiscal year 2009, 1 year sooner than 

projected in the budget. The Department should also carry out the 

establishment of one National Marine Renewable Energy Research, 

Development, and Demonstration Center as described in the Energy Independence and Security Act [EISA], section 634. The Committee recognizes ocean and tidal power research efforts as identified in the EISA and directs the Department, working with the Department of Commerce, as indicated in EISA section 633, to utilize 

the DOE’s only marine sciences laboratory to undertake a research 

and development program to expand marine and hydrokinetic renewable energy programs. 

Vehicle Technologies.—The Committee provides $293,000,000, an increase of $71,914,000 over the request. Consistent with the EISA 

section 641(g), the Committee provides an additional $50,543,000, 

for a new total of $100,000,000, for vehicle energy storage systems 

demonstrations aimed at developing novel, high capacity energy 

storage, onboard management, integration into electric drive vehicle platforms and the grid, and new technologies and processes that 

reduce manufacturing costs. These cost-shared demonstrations are 

to be conducted through consortia. Another $15,000,000 of the increase is provided to Fuels Technology subprogram, bringing its 

total to $31,122,000. These funds will expand and accelerate testing of intermediate fuel blends (15 percent-20 percent ethanol 

mixed with 80 percent-85 percent gasoline) on vehicles, other engines, and infrastructure components to provide data on how these 

blends may affect materials, durability, performance, and emissions 

and alleviate supply/demand imbalances. Work should be done in 

coordination with the Biomass Program. The remaining $6,371,000 

of the increase is provided to the Safety Codes and Standards subprogram to facilitate efforts in quantitative risk assessment, component and system level testing, leak detection technologies, and 

fuel quality R&D, for a variety of fuels and technologies. Finally, 

the Department is directed to continue research efforts in the area 

of computational predictive engineering of lightweight thermoplastic polymer composites. 

Building Technologies.—The Committee provides $176,481,000, 

an increase of $52,716,000 over the request. Commercial Buildings 

Integration is increased $27,000,000 to a total of $40,000,000, for 

expansion of partnerships with leading laboratories, universities, 

and DOE selected consortia, consistent with EISA section 422. 
100 

Emerging Technologies is provided an increase of $10,000,000, for a new total of $49,465,000. The entire $10,000,000 is for solid 

state lighting research and development. Residential Buildings Integration is provided a $5,000,000 increase, for a new total of 

$31,900,000. The increased funding will enable the program to 

move more quickly into testing strategies that achieve a 50 percent 

reduction in the energy used in a home. Technology Validation and 

Market Introduction is increased $9,716,000, for a new total of 

$34,116,000. Of this increase, $8,000,000 is for building energy 

codes for continued assistance to States and the balance of 

$1,716,000 is for expansion of the Energy Star labeling for energy 

efficient and renewable technologies that deliver energy savings 

and reduced emissions. The remaining $1,000,000 of the increase 

is provided to evaluate models for accelerating and advancing appliance standards and test procedures, specifically evaluating international regulatory models that can be considered for adoption in 

the United States. 

Industrial Technologies.—The Committee provides $65,119,000, an increase of $3,000,000 over the request. The increase provides 

for organizing a cross-cutting manufacturing initiative for clean energy technologies developed in other Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy programs, including wind turbine gearboxes, carbon 

fiber and other lightweight materials for automotive applications, 

sensors and controls, and other technologies that benefit from improved manufacturing techniques. 

Federal Energy Management Program.—The Committee recommends $22,000,000, the same as the request. 

Facilities and Infrastructure.—The Committee recommends 

$36,982,000, an increase of $23,000,000 above the budget request. 

The Department is directed to use $12,000,000 of the increase to 

execute an existing memorandum of agreement with Sandia National Laboratories for supercomputing equipment and capacity to 

support the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy-based mission needs. Numerical simulation on high performance computers enables the study of complex engineering systems and natural phenomena that would be 

too expensive, or even impossible, to study by direct experimentation. This resource will be located at Sandia to take advantage 

of the more than 20 years of experience with high performance 

computing hardware and software development. The Committee expects both laboratories to contribute in their respective areas of scientific and engineering excellence. The remaining $11,000,000 is 

provided for continuing two construction projects at the National 

Renewable Energy Laboratory—$4,000,000 is provided for the Energy Systems Integration Facility, bringing the total funding for 

the project to $8,000,000; $7,000,000 is provided for the South 

Table Mountain Infrastructure project, which is $7,000,000 above 

the request. 

Weatherization Assistance Program.—The Committee provides 

$201,181,000, a total of $201,181,000 above the request. Of that 

amount, $200,000,000 is for weatherization grants and $1,181,000 

is for training and technical assistance. 

Intergovernmental Activities.—The Committee provides 

$50,000,000 for the State Energy Program Grants, $6,000,000 for 
101 

Tribal Energy Activities and $5,000,000 for Renewable Energy Production Incentives. 

Program Direction.—The Committee recommends $121,846,000, 

the same as the budget request, which will assist the Office by providing 30 new hires to fill critical skill gaps commensurate with the 

technical workload increases to programs. 

Program Support.—The Committee recommends $15,000,000, 

which is $5,000,000 less than the request, but still $4,199,000 

above the fiscal year 2008 enacted appropriation. The Committee 

supports the program’s efforts to enhance its Planning, Analysis, 

and Evaluation subprogram and especially its efforts to improve its 

Technology Advancement and Outreach subprogram, but because 

of overall budget constraints cannot fully support the request. 

Use of Prior Year Balances.—The Committee does not accept the proposal to reduce this request by using $738,000 of prior year 

uncosted balances. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee includes 

$124,150,000 for the following list of projects that provide for research, development, and demonstration of energy efficiency or renewable energy technologies or programs. The Committee reminds 

recipients that statutory cost sharing requirements may apply to 

these projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS 

Project Committee 

recommendation 

Algal-Base Renewable Energy for Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Reno, NV for the development of 

algal-based energy system ............................................................................................................................. 750,000 

Alternative Energy for Higher Education, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, for a solar energy project ........... $1,200,000 

Alternative Energy School of the Future, Clark County, Andre Agassi Charitable Foundation, Las Vegas, NV, 

for a solar fuel cell system ............................................................................................................................. 1,250,000 

Alternative Fuel Cell Membranes for National Energy Independence, University of Southern Mississippi, 

USM, MS, for advanced fuel cell membrane research ................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Anaerobic Digester and Combined Heat Power Project, Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties, MD, for a study on anaerobic power generation ............................. 600,000 

Bioenergy and Bioproducts Laboratory, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, to conduct research on biofuel conversion, biofuel testing, and certification ....................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Bioenergy Demonstration Project: Value-Added Products from Renewable Fuels, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE, for research on the byproducts of biofuel production .................................................................... 2,000,000 

Biogas Center of Excellence, Michigan Economic Development Corporation, Flint, MI, for a center for the 

production of biogas ....................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Biomass Energy Resources Center, Biomass Energy Resource Center, Montpelier, VT, for the installation of 

new small scale technology ............................................................................................................................ 1,500,000 

Biomass Gasification Research and Development Project, Port of Benton, Richland, WA, for the gasification 

and research of biomass ................................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 

Biorefinery for Ethanol, Chemicals, Animal Feed and Biomaterials from Sugarcane Bagasse, Louisiana 

State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA, for a biomass conversion project ........................... 1,000,000 

Bipolar Wafer Cell NiMH Lithium Ion Battery, Electro Energy, Danbury, CT, to advance wafer cell battery 

technology ........................................................................................................................................................ 2,000,000 

Carbon Neutral Green Campus, Nevada State College, Clark County, NV for environmental sustainability .... 250,000 

Center for Biomass Utilization, University of North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research Center, 

Grand Forks, ND, for research on biomass production and its byproducts ................................................... 2,000,000 

Center for Nanoscale Energy, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, for nanomaterials research ............. 5,000,000 

Central Vermont Recovered Biomass Facility, Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund, Montpelier, VT, for a digester 

system .............................................................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 

Chariton Valley Densification—Phase II, Chariton Valley RC&D, Inc, Centerville, IA, for research on 

switchgrass ...................................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Christmas Valley Renewable Energy Development, Oregon Department of Energy, Salem, OR, for the development of a renewable energy-producing facility .......................................................................................... 400,000 

City of Miami Green Initiative, City of Miami, Miami, FL, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption in the city ........................................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 
102 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS— 

Continued 

Project Committee recommendation 

Clean Power Energy Research Consortium, Nicholls State University, Louisiana State University, University 

of New Orleans, Tulane University, Southern University, University of Louisiana, Thibodeaux, LA, for a 

joint venture of Louisiana universities to promote alternative fuels ............................................................. 2,000,000 

Clean Technology Commercialization Initiative, Ben Franklin Technology Partners, Harrisburg, PA, to support 

clean and alternative energy technologies ..................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Coastal Ohio Wind Project, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, for wind energy research .... 1,000,000 

Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research, The Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research, Inc., St. 

Simons Island, N/A, to support university-industry research and technology transfer projects ................... 1,000,000 

Cooling Heating and Power and Bio-Fuel Application Center, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, 

MS, to conduct research on increased energy efficiency through the use of electric and thermal delivery 

systems ............................................................................................................................................................ 2,000,000 

Development of Biofuels Using Ionic Transfer Membranes, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark County, 

NV for biofuels research .................................................................................................................................. 600,000 

Development of High Yield Tropical Feedstocks, University of Hawaii, College of Tropical Agriculture and 

Human Resources, Honolulu, HI, for a tropical bioenergy project ................................................................. 1,500,000 

Dueco Plug-In Hybrid Engines, Dueco Inc., Waukesha, WI, for new plug-in hybrid electric propulsion technology ............................................................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 

Energy Production Through Anaerobic Digestion, New Jersey Department of Agriculture, Trenton, NJ, for anaerobic digester technology ............................................................................................................................. 500,000 

Fluid Flow Optimization of Aerogel Blanket Manufacturing Process, Aspen Aerogels, Northborough, MA, for 

energy-efficient insulation research ................................................................................................................ 1,500,000 

Forestry biofuel statewide Collaboration Center, Michigan Economic Development Corporation, Upper Peninsula, MI, to improve the supply chain for woody biomass ............................................................................ 1,500,000 

Genetic Improvements of Switchgrass, University of Rhode Island at Kingston, Kingston, RI, to improve 

switchgrass for use as a biofuel .................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Geothermal Power Generation Plant, Oregon Institute of Technology (OIT), Klamath Falls, OR, for a geothermal power plant ........................................................................................................................................ 1,600,000 

Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, to continue and expand the 

Center’s activities in promoting geothermal power ........................................................................................ 650,000 

Great Plains Wind Power Test Facility, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, for the testing, characterization, 

and improvement of grid-connected wind turbines and wind-driven water desalination systems .............. 2,000,000 

Hawaii-New Mexico Sustainable Energy Security Partnership, Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, Honolulu,, HI, 

to continue the analysis and technology efforts of the Partnership ............................................................. 3,000,000 

Hollow Glass Microspheres, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark County, NV for hydrogen storage methods research .................................................................................................................................................... 550,000 

Hydroelectric Power Generation, Quincy, City of Quincy, Quincy, IL, for Quincy’s efforts to install hydroelectric plants at locks and dams .................................................................................................................. 500,000 

Hydrogen Storage System for Vehicular Propulsion, Delaware State U., Dover, Delaware State University, 

Dover, DE, to develop a hydrogen storage system ......................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Integrated Solar Energy Windows, PPG Industries, Pittsburgh, PA, for the development of next generation, 

transparent photovoltaic (PV) solar cells ....................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Integrated Sustainability Initiative, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, to promote campus sustainability ......... 1,000,000 

Kansas Biofuels Certification Laboratory, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, for analysis of biofuels, 

measuring emissions of biofuels, and research of biofuel cells ................................................................... 1,000,000 

La Samilla Solar Trough Storage Project, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, for solar trough 

storage advancement ...................................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 

Landfill Gas Utilization Plant, County of Chautauqua, Chautauqua County, NY, for landfill-gas power generation .............................................................................................................................................................. 2,000,000 

Lightweight Composites for Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Hydrogen Storage, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, to advance the use of lightweight composite materials for vehicles .......................................... 500,000 

Maine Tidal Power Initiative, University of Maine, Orono, ME, to develop protocols that allow locations in 

northern New England to be prioritized for tidal energy development .......................................................... 1,000,000 

MidSouth/Southeast Bioenergy Consortium, MidSouth/Southeast Bioenergy Consortium, Fayetteville, AR, for 

research on the byproducts of biofuel production .......................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Multifunctional Solar Energy Systems Research, Utah State University, Logan, UT, for research and development of multifunctional electricity-producing systems .............................................................................. 1,000,000 

National Agriculture-Based Industrial Lubricants (NABL), Biomass (IA), University of Northern Iowa, Cedar 

Falls, IA, for the advancement of biobased industrial and automotive lubricants and for biofuels services .................................................................................................................................................................. 600,000 

National Center for Commercialization of Bioenergy, Kansas State University, Olathe, KS, for the commercialization of near market bioenergy technologies to meet national renewable fuel mandates ................... 750,000 
103 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS— 

Continued 

Project Committee recommendation 

National Wind Energy Center, University of Houston, Houston, TX, to focus on developing advanced offshore 

wind technology for cost-effective, renewable clean energy production ........................................................ 2,000,000 

Nevada Institute for Renewable Energy Commercialization, Incline Village, NV, for the promotion of renewable energy in business .................................................................................................................................. 500,000 

New School Green Building, The New School, New York, NY, for an environmentally friendly school facility .. 2,000,000 

North Carolina Center for Automotive Research, North Carolina Center for Automotive Research, Jackson, 

NC, to equip the Chassis Dynamics Laboratory ............................................................................................. 1,000,000 

Offshore Renewable Energy, Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, Wakefield, RI, to develop an Ocean Special Area Management Plan ............................................................................................ 700,000 

Ohio Advanced Energy Manufacturing Center (OAEMC), Edison Welding Institute, Columbus, OH, for an advanced energy manufacturing program .......................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Oregon Solar Highway, Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem, OR, to demonstrate the feasibility of 

large-scale deployment of solar photovoltaic technology ............................................................................... 1,000,000 

Pecos Valley Biomass Energy Project, NM, Clark County School District, Roswell, NM, for a bio-methane gas 

system .............................................................................................................................................................. 2,500,000 

Placer County Biomass Utilization Pilot Project, Placer County, Auburn, CA, for a biomass facility ................ 1,500,000 

Pope/Douglas Third Combuster Expansion, Pope/Douglas Solid Waste Management, Alexandria, MN, to increase waste to energy capacity ..................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Power Grid Reliability and Security, Washington State University, Washington State University, Pullman, 

WA, to create solutions for grid reliability and security enhancements ........................................................ 1,000,000 

Renewable Energy Clean Air Project, County of Koochiching, International Falls, MN, for syn-gas energy 

production ........................................................................................................................................................ 700,000 

Renewable Energy Development Venture, Pacific International Center for High Technology Research, Honolulu, HI, to expand potential energy resources in the State of Hawaii ......................................................... 2,500,000 

Renewable Energy Feasibility Study, City of Trenton, Trenton, NJ, to examine possible renewable energy 

sources ............................................................................................................................................................. 500,000 

Renewable Energy Integration and Development, Clark and Washoe Counties, Nevada System of Higher 

Education (NSHE), Las Vegas, NV, for a renewable energy center ................................................................ 2,000,000 

Renewable/Sustainable Biomass Project, Alaska Village Initiatives, Alaska, AK, for use of biomass for energy generation in rural Alaska villages ......................................................................................................... 500,000 

Sandia National Lab Concentrating Solar, Sandia National Lab, Albuquerque, NM, for concentrating solar 

activities .......................................................................................................................................................... 3,000,000 

Solar Panels and Environmental Education, County of Essex, Newark, NJ, for the installation of solar panels to further environmental education .......................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Solar Park Pilot Project, City of St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, FL, to develop a renewable energy plan for 

the City’s parks ............................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Solar Power Generation, Township of Cherry Hill, Cherry Hill, NJ, for solar technology .................................... 300,000 

Solar Thermal Demonstration Project, Clark County School District, Clark County, NV, for solar technology 

for schools ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,250,000 

Southern Regional Center for Lightweight Innovative Design, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, 

MS, to reduce emissions and posture the US for less reliance on foreign oil .............................................. 4,000,000 

Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project, Naknek Electrical Association, Naknek, AK, for an 

exploratory well for a 25MW geothermal plant to serve villages in rural Alaska ......................................... 3,000,000 

Stamford Waste-to-Energy Project (CT), City of Stamford, Stamford, CT, to convert dried sludge into clean, 

renewable energy ............................................................................................................................................. 2,000,000 

Strategic Biomass Initiative, Mississippi Technology Alliance, Jackson, MS, to encourage bioenergy industry 

in the southeast .............................................................................................................................................. 500,000 

Sun Grant Initiative, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, for regional biomass feedstock research 

and education .................................................................................................................................................. 4,000,000 

Sustainable Energy for Homes and Businesses, Vermont Department of Public Service, Montpelier, VT, to 

support Vermont’s wind and solar program ................................................................................................... 750,000 

Sustainable Energy for Vermont Schools Competition, Vermont Superintendents Association, Montpelier, VT, 

for school-based projects to highlight sustainable energy technologies ....................................................... 900,000 

Sustainable Energy Research Center, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, to develop new 

engineering and scientific knowledge and serve as a catalyst to create sustainable energy industries in 

the southeastern United States ...................................................................................................................... 10,500,000 

Sustainable Las Vegas, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark County, NV to increase conservation and 

sustainability in Las Vegas ............................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 

The Institute for Energy, Environment and Sustainability, Johnson County Community College, Overland 

Park, KS, to serve as a resource for local education, business and civic entities and would include education and training in renewable energy ........................................................................................................ 750,000 
104 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY PROJECTS— 

Continued 

Project Committee 

recommendation 

Thin Film Photovoltaic Research & Development, Omega Optical, Brattleboro, VT, to research solar panel 

technology ........................................................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 

Tidal Energy Study, Snohomish County PUD No. 1, Everett, WA, for environmental studies of possible tidal 

energy pilot plants .......................................................................................................................................... 500,000 

Transportable Emissions Testing Lab, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, for mobile labs that test 

bus emissions .................................................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 

USD Catalysis Group for Alternative Energy, South Dakota Catalysis Group, Vermilion, SD, for the development of metal oxide and carbon catalyzed reactions technologies ............................................................... 1,100,000 

Vermont Biofuels Initiative, Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund, Montpelier, VT, to test the feasibility of different uses of biodiesel ................................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Wind Turbine Model and Pilot Project for Alternative Energy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, for a 

shore-side wind turbine .................................................................................................................................. 1,500,000 

ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $138,556,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 134,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 166,900,000 

The Committee recommendation for Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability is $166,900,000, an increase of $32,900,000 above 

the request. Of the increase, $10,000,000 is provided for Visualization and Controls, bringing the program total to $35,305,000, to accelerate the development of a resilient power grid through inherently secure control systems and wide-area monitoring tools. Additional funds help implement a national wide-area grid monitoring 

system in support of the independent system operators. Another 

$4,000,000 of the increase is applied to the Energy Storage and 

Power Electronics line, bringing that subprogram total to 

$17,403,000. The increase supports enhanced efforts on power electronic activities. Finally, an additional $6,000,000 is provided for 

Renewable and Distributed Systems Integration subprogram, 

bringing the total to $39,306,000. This funding supports renewable 

energy grid integration activities facilitating increased deployment 

of renewables and other clean energy sources to power our Nation. 

In particular, the Committee encourages continuation of the electricity transmission, distribution, and energy assurance activities 

including the Modern Grid Initiative, and its Phase 2 Development 

Field Tests for the Allegheny Power Initiative, and encourages the 

Department to continue research and development in grid reliability and renewable energy integration at the Electricity Infrastructure Operations Center at the Pacific Northwest National 

Laboratory. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee includes 

$12,900,000 above the request for the following list of projects that 

provide for research, development, and demonstration of electricity 

delivery and energy reliability technologies or programs. The Committee reminds recipients that statutory cost sharing requirements 

may apply to these projects. 
105 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY PROJECTS 

Project Committee recommendation 

Alternate Fuel for Cement Processing, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, to focus on the integration of the 

burning process into existing kiln systems in Lafarge plants, maximization of burn efficiency and minimization of waste/discharge ........................................................................................................................... $1,500,000 

Center of Excellence Lab, Bismarck State College, Bismarck, ND, to develop a state-of-the art lab .............. 1,400,000 

Energy Development and Reliability, Bismarck State College, Bismarck, ND, to promote and advance the 

region’s energy industry .................................................................................................................................. 300,000 

Integrated Distribution Management System, Southern Company, Birmingham, AL, to provide seamlessly integrated set of information systems providing all of the major functionality needed to operate an electric distribution system ................................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Iowa Stored Energy Plant, Iowa Associations of Municipal Utilities, Ankeny, IA, for compressed air energy 

storage project ................................................................................................................................................. 1,500,000 

Navajo Electrification Demonstration Program, Navajo Tribal Utility Authority, Fort Defiance, AZ, to provide 

electric power to homes on the reservation ................................................................................................... 2,000,000 

North Dakota Energy Workforce Development, Bismarck State College, Bismarck, ND, for a workforce development programs ............................................................................................................................................ 1,900,000 

San Mateo County Solar Genesis Project, County of San Mateo, Redwood City, CA, for a solar power electric 

generation facility ............................................................................................................................................ 1,500,000 

SmartGrid Integration Lab, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, CO, to demonstrate core smart grid capabilities .............................................................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 

Technology Development, Red River Valley Research Corridor, Grand Forks, ND, to promote and advance the 

research, development and commercialization activities occurring in North Dakota’s Red River Valley Research Corridor ................................................................................................................................................ 300,000 

NUCLEAR ENERGY

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $961,665,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 853,644,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 803,000,000 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee recommendation for nuclear energy research and 

development includes a total of $803,000,000. 

Integrated University Program.—The Committee provides 

$15,000,000 for a new Integrated University Program. The Committee is concerned about the lack of stable support for the nuclear 

engineering programs across the Nation. The Office of Nuclear Energy’s University Program has been repeatedly restructured and 

elements of this program where moved to the Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission last year. To be the effective source of innovation and 

highly trained engineers and scientists that the Nation needs, our 

nuclear engineering programs must have sustained support for 

multiyear research projects and modern curricula. The needs go beyond nuclear energy with pressing shortfalls in trained professionals capable of supporting crucial nuclear nonproliferation missions such as nuclear forensics and international safeguards. 

The Committee provides the Office of Nuclear Energy [NE], the 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC], and Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation [DNN] $15,000,000 each (for a total of $45,000,000) 

for a new Integrated University Program. Of this amount, 

$10,000,000 shall be used by each organization to support university research and development in areas relevant to the organization’s mission; and $5,000,000 will be used by each organization to 

support a Nuclear Science and Engineering Grant Program. The 

Grant Program will be coordinated and jointly implemented by the 

NE, NRC, and DNN. It will support multiyear research projects 
106 

that do not align with programmatic missions but are critical to 

maintaining the discipline of nuclear science and engineering. The 

Office of Nuclear Energy shall provide a report to the House and 

Senate Appropriations Committees on how the NE, NRC, and DNN 

will coordinate the Integrated University Program and provide a 

stable source of funding for nuclear engineering university programs. 

Nuclear Power 2010.—The Committee recommends $241,600,000 

to support the development of license applications for new nuclear 

power plant designs under the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s 

combined Construction and Operating License process. This is the 

same amount as the budget request. 

Generation IV.—The Committee recommends $70,000,000 for the 

Generation IV nuclear energy systems initiative, the same as the 

request. 

Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative.—The Committee recommends 

$10,000,000 for nuclear hydrogen research and development. 

Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative.—The Committee recommends 

$229,700,000 for the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative to support the 

development of advanced spent fuel separation processes and fuel 

fabrication technologies. The funds should support a balanced portfolio of technologies for managing actinide inventories utilizing 

both fast and thermal reactors. Improving methods and capabilities 

for developing and qualifying recycled fuels should be priority. Advanced materials modeling and simulation capabilities should be 

utilized to aid this effort. No funding is provided for grid appropriate reactors. 

The Committee, consistent with the recommendation in the Fiscal year 2008 Conference report, continues to provide additional investment in laboratory facilities. Within the available funds, 

$15,000,000 is provided to support upgrades to Los Alamos hot 

cells and the materials test station, and $15,000,000 to Oak Ridge 

to upgrade its radiological facilities. 

RADIOLOGICAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

Radiological Facilities.—The Committee recommends 

$41,000,000, an increase of $2,300,000. The additional $2,300,000 

will be added to the ‘‘Research reactor infrastructure’’ program for 

a total of $6,000,000 to support university research reactors, including reactor instrumentation and equipment upgrades. 

IDAHO FACILITIES MANAGEMENT

The Committee recommends $119,700,000, an increase of 

$15,000,000 to support nuclear research and development at the 

Idaho National Laboratory. Funds will be used to support the Advanced Test Reactor National Scientific User Facility program at 

INL. These funds will support university and industry related research programs and allow for capability enhancements to support 

nuclear fuels and materials research. The funds will also be used 

for maintenance and infrastructure investment to support the INL 

mission as a preeminent nuclear energy R&D laboratory. 
107 

PROGRAM DIRECTION

The Committee recommends $73,000,000 for Program Direction, 

a decrease of $7,500,000. The decrease is based upon the Committee’s decision to put the Mixed Oxide Facility under the Nuclear 

Nonproliferation program. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee includes 

$3,000,000 for the following list of projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED NUCLEAR ENERGY PROJECTS 

Project Committee recommendation 

Technologies Ventures Corporation, Technologies Ventures Corporation, Albuquerque, NM, for technology 

transfer activities ............................................................................................................................................ $3,000,000 

CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY

(TRANSFER OF FUNDS)

The Committee recommends the transfer of funds of 

$149,000,000 in the Clean Coal Technology to fossil energy research and development. 

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $742,838,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 754,030,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 876,730,000 

The Committee recommendation for Fossil Energy Research and 

Development is $876,730,000, an increase of $122,700,000 above 

the request. 

The Committee believes that the Department has failed to recognize and stress the importance of restoring a sustained and balanced commitment to fossil energy research and development. The 

Committee feels that the Department has failed to fully recognize 

the significance of the Carbon Sequestration Program as evidenced 

in recent findings of a panel of scientific experts from the International Energy Agency [IEA]. The IEA validated that the Department’s Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships and their 

large-scale CO2 tests are the world’s most ambitious. The Committee has provided additional funding to sustain technology development and to send a clear message that the Congress is serious 

about making a long-term investment in fossil energy. 

Clean Coal Power Initiative.—The Committee recommends 

$232,300,000 for the Clean Coal Power Initiative. The Committee 

is disappointed that the Department has underfunded its commitment and thus delayed the current and future rounds of the Clean 

Coal Power Initiative. This lack of commitment leaves an even 

wider gap in the development and demonstration of advanced clean 

coal technologies. These technology advancements are critically important for addressing the existing fleet of coal-fired power plants 

as well as the next generation of fossil-fuel powered facilities. The 

Committee anticipates that more than $600,000,000 will be available for the Round 3 solicitation and encourages the Department 

to proceed with issuing this solicitation for carbon capture and stor-
108 

age and innovative uses of carbon dioxide. The Office of Fossil Energy is required to provide the Committee a status report on all 

nine awarded projects for the Clean Coal Power Initiative’s Round 

1 and 2, including completed and ongoing projects. 

FutureGen.—The Committee recommends no funding for the 

FutureGen account. The Committee has supported the technical 

and scientific efforts behind the FutureGen initiative for the past 

5 years but does not support funding for the ‘‘restructured’’ effort 

this year. The Committee has instead provided funds for the Clean 

Coal Power Initiative at a level of $147,300,000 more than the 

budget request. The Committee has distributed the remaining 

$8,700,000 of the budget request within Fossil Energy Research 

and Development. The Committee understands that $134,000,000 

of unobligated balances remain in this account and are set aside 

for future use with this program but are not available until March 

2009. 

Fuels and Power Systems.—The Committee recommends 

$412,132,000 for fuels and power systems, an increase of 

$29,400,000. The recommendation includes $50,000,000 for Innovations for Existing Plants [IEP]. The IEP program is directed to continue carbon capture research for the existing fleet. Of the IEP 

funds, $12,000,000 is for Federal laboratories, in collaboration with 

research institutions, to continue to conduct research and development on the critical link between water and fossil energy extraction 

and utilization and how different regions of the country can employ 

water efficiency technology. In light of the new Clean Air Mercury 

Rule, the Committee supports $5,000,000 in additional research for 

a broader mercury program. The Committee understands the Department has been moving forward on the Ramgen Compression 

Initiative, and it is the Committee’s expectation that the Department fully complete the development and testing of the Ramgen 

CO2 compressor. The Committee recommends $63,000,000 for the 

Advanced Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle activities and 

$30,000,000 for Advanced Turbines. The Committee recommends 

$149,132,000 for Carbon Sequestration activities. Additional funds 

are needed for the Regional Partnerships to carry out the largescale projects that were awarded in fiscal year 2008 into field activities, in order to accelerate wide-scale deployment of advanced 

clean coal technologies with carbon capture and storage. The Committee encourages the Office of Fossil Energy to continue research 

on the co-sequestration of carbon dioxide and criteria pollutants 

with other offices and agencies. The Office of Fossil Energy shall 

be the lead office for these activities. Within available funds, the 

Department is encouraged to study geologic resources that have the 

potential to be regionally and nationally significant in order to reduce data gaps. Within in available funds for Carbon Sequestration, the Committee encourages the program to continue to study 

carbon dioxide accelerated growth algae technology to recycle carbon and produce fuels. The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for 

Fuels to support both fuels from coal liquids and hydrogen. Within 

available funds for Fuels, the Committee recommendation includes 

adequate funding to continue the integrated coal and biomass research activity to address carbon emissions and technology barrier 

issues. The Committee recommends $60,000,000 for Fuel Cell Re-
109 

search. The Committee recommends $30,000,000 for Advanced Research. Of this funding, $5,000,000 is for computational energy 

sciences. 

Natural Gas Technologies.—The Committee recommendation includes $20,000,000. Of this amount, $15,000,000 is provided for 

methane hydrates, and $5,000,000 is for research to continue to develop technology solutions to minimize the impact, or develop treatment technologies for produced water as a by-product of natural 

gas production. 

Oil Technology.—The Committee recommends $5,000,000 for Oil 

Technology. Of this funding, the Committee recommends 

$1,200,000 to continue support for the Risk Based Management 

System, a nationwide database for oil and gas regulations and technology developments. The Committee recommends the continuation 

of the stripper well program. 

Program Direction.—The Committee recommends $152,804,000 

for Program Direction, of which $122,054,000 is for the National 

Energy Technology Laboratory. 

Other Programs.—The Committee recommends $9,700,000 for 

fossil energy environmental restoration. The Committee recommendation is $656,000 for the special recruitment program. The 

Committee recommendation for plant and capital equipment is 

$17,748,000, of which $9,848,000 is to be directed to the Morgantown site, $6,900,000 to the Pittsburgh site, and $1,000,000 to the 

Albany site. The Committee recommendation for cooperative research and development is $5,000,000. 

The Committee continues to support the Department’s project 

management efforts and the role of the National Energy Technology Laboratory [NETL], with assistance from the Golden field 

office, in setting up a successful Project Management Center 

[PMC]. The Committee encourages the Office of Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy to continue the collaboration and funding of 

the PMC with the NETL. 

Use of Prior Year Balances.—The Committee supports the use of 

prior year balances in the amount of $11,310,000 from completed 

or cancelled construction projects, the same as the budget request. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee recommendation includes $32,700,000 for the following congressionally directed 

projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED FOSSIL ENERGY PROJECTS 

Project Committee 

recommendation 

Arctic Energy Office, Arctic Energy Office, Fairbanks, AK, for research in fossil energy, natural gas technologies, and oil technologies ......................................................................................................................... $6,000,000 

Center for Zero Emissions Research and Technology, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, for research 

related to carbon sequestration, greenhouse gas emissions, and clean power generation ......................... 4,500,000 

CO2 Capture/Sequestration Research, Pennsylvania State University, Centre County, PA, to study carbon 

capture and sequestration .............................................................................................................................. 500,000 

Fossil Fuel Research & Development, University of North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research Center, Grand Forks, ND, to address strategic national energy issues ............................................................... 4,000,000 

Gulf Of Mexico Hydrates Research Consortium, University of Mississippi, University of Mississippi, MS, to 

develop and deploy an integrated multi-sensor station on the seafloor in the Gulf of Mexico ................... 1,200,000 

Long Term Environmental and Economic Impacts of the Development of a Coal Liquefaction Sector in 

China, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, for the study of the development of commercial liquefaction plants .................................................................................................................................................. 500,000 
110 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED FOSSIL ENERGY PROJECTS—Continued 

Project Committee 

recommendation 

Multi-Year Demonstration of Carbon Sequestration in a Deep Saline Reservoir, Xcel Energy, Denver, CO, to 

determine the feasibility of geologic CO2 sequestration in a deep saline reservoir ..................................... 1,500,000 

National Center for Hydrogen Technology, University of North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research 

Center, Grand Forks, ND, for the development of hydrogen technologies ..................................................... 3,000,000 

Shale Oil Upgrading Utilizing Ionic Conductive Membranes, Ceramatec, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, to develop 

processes for upgrading oil shale, making oil extract high quality and affordable ..................................... 1,000,000

Solid Oxide Fuel Cells, Siemens Power Generation, Pittsburgh, PA, to support development, construction, 

and testing of the fuel processing systems ................................................................................................... 2,000,000 

The Center for Advanced Separation Technology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, to support efforts to 

develop new technologies that reduce the cost of separations in coal, metals, and industrial mining operations ............................................................................................................................................................ 3,000,000 

University of Kentucky Coal-Derived Low Energy Materials for Sustainable Construction Project, University 

of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, to research alternative uses for coal combustion byproducts .......................... 1,000,000 

Refining Capacity Study, North Dakota Association of Rural Electric Cooperatives, Mandan, ND, to study refining capacity ................................................................................................................................................. 500,000 

Utah Center for Ultra Clean Coal Utilization & Heavy Oil Research, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, 

to continue research on the commercial viability and validity of unconventional and clean energy technologies ............................................................................................................................................................ 4,000,000 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $20,272,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 19,099,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 19,099,000 

The Committee recommends $19,099,000 for fiscal year 2009, the 

same as the budget request for the operation of the naval petroleum and oil shale reserves. The Department is directed to operate 

the field as close to maximum efficiency as possible, given available 

funds. 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $186,757,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 344,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 205,000,000 

The Committee recommends $205,000,000 for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Of these funds, the Committee directs the Department use $31,507,000 to initiate new site expansion activities and 

support beyond land acquisition, consistent with the budget request. While the Committee has provided for the operation of the 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve, it does not support any other expansion activities at this time. 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $12,335,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 9,800,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,800,000 

The Committee recommends $9,800,000, the same as the budget 

request. 

ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $95,460,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 110,595,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 110,595,000 
111 

The Committee recommends $110,595,000 for the Energy Information Administration. 

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $182,263,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 213,411,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 269,411,000 

For the Non-Defense Environmental Cleanup program, the Com- mittee recommends $269,411,000, an increase of $56,000,000 above 

the President’s request. The fiscal year 2009 program is underfunded to the point even this administration has admitted that, for 

the first time in its 20-year history, the cleanup budget request is 

insufficient to meet its existing regulatory compliance milestones. 

The result is non-compliance with regulatory agreements and layoffs around the cleanup complex. Thus, the Committee has had to 

significantly increase our mark in the hope of avoiding those consequences. 

Internal Reprogramming Authority.—In fiscal year 2009, Envi- ronmental Management may transfer up to $2,000,000, one time, 

between accounts listed below to reduce health and safety risks, 

gain cost savings, or complete projects, as long as a program or 

project is not increased or decreased by more than $2,000,000 in 

total during the fiscal year. This reprogramming authority may not 

be used to initiate new programs or to change funding levels for 

programs specifically denied, limited, or increased by Congress in 

the act or report. The Committee on Appropriations in the House 

of Representatives and the Senate must be notified within 30 days 

after the use of this internal reprogramming authority. 

The following is a list of account control points for internal reprogramming purposes: West Valley Demonstration Project; Gaseous Diffusion Plants; Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning; Small Sites; and transfers between construction line item(s) and the operating budget within the 

same site, as applicable. 

West Valley Demonstration Project.—The Committee includes 

$72,900,000 for West Valley, $15,300,000 above the budget request. 

The Committee provides the additional funding for decontamination and decommissioning of facilities to reduce the surveillance 

and maintenance costs at the site. 

Gaseous Diffusion Plants.—The Committee recommends 

$92,696,000, a net increase of $11,400,000 at Paducah for completion of the Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride Conversion [DUF6] facility. Within the funds provided, the Committee recommends 

$34,959,000 for Paducah for operations and $15,400,000 to complete construction of the Depleted Uranium Facility at Paducah, for 

which the administration did not request any funding. The Committee shifted $4,000,000 from operations to construction activities 

and provided an additional $11,400,000 to complete construction in 

fiscal year 2009. The Committee recommends the budget request of 

$42,337,000 for the Portsmouth facility. 

The Committee remains deeply concerned by the Department’s 

inadequate management of the DUF6 conversion facilities in Paducah, Kentucky and Portsmouth, Ohio. Shortly after the Committee 

authorized these projects, the Department estimated that construc-
112 

tion would be completed in 2006 and operations would commence 

shortly thereafter. Despite the Committee’s action to provide the 

Department all the funds requested, these facilities remain incomplete and behind schedule for startup. The Committee is concerned 

that continued mismanagement will significantly increase costs 

and needlessly delay the disposal of this hazardous material. Within 60 days of this report, the Department of Energy shall provide 

this Committee with a final cost and schedule estimate, a description of how it plans to meet that schedule, and how it plans to prevent similar problems in future contracts. 

Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility Decontamination and Decommissioning Project.—The Committee recommends $10,755,000, the 

same as the budget request. 

Small Sites.—The Committee includes $90,060,000 for fiscal year 2009, a total of $25,647,000 above the request. Within this account, 

the Brookhaven National Laboratory is provided $29,015,000, 

which is $20,582,000 above the request, to continue decontamination and decommissioning of the Graphite Research Reactor and 

the High Flux Beam Reactor. The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center is provided $7,883,000, which is $3,000,000 above the request, 

to meet a fiscal year 2009 milestone at risk due to the lack of funding in the request. Moab is provided $32,578,000, an increase of 

$2,065,000 above the request. The Committee provides $459,000 to Argonne, $187,000 for the California sites, $12,533,000 for the Energy Technology Engineering Center, $4,400,000 for the Idaho National Laboratory, 

$1,905,000 for the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and $1,100,000 

for Completed Sites/Program Support, all the same as requested. 

The Committee has again included bill language regarding the 

Department’s activities at the Energy Technology and Engineering 

Center, Santa Susana Field Laboratory, in Simi Valley, California. 

The Committee understands that the Department is working toward, but has not finalized the interagency agreement with the 

EPA as required in H.R. 2764. It is the expectation of the Committee that this agreement would provide EPA with all the funding 

necessary to begin the radiological site characterization survey in 

fiscal year 2008, and that DOE would continue its funding of the 

survey to its completion, as determined by EPA. The bill language 

requires the Department to provide EPA with the funding it requires in fiscal year 2009 for ongoing work on the survey. 

Uncosted Offset.—The Committee does not accept the proposal to reduce this request by using $653,000 of prior year uncosted balances. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee recommendation includes $3,000,000 for the following congressionally directed 

projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP PROJECTS 

Project Committee recommendation 

Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Initiative, The University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, to provide 

data management support for research in genomics and metabolomic programs ...................................... 1,000,000 

Southwest Experimental Fast Oxide Reactor Decommissioning [SEFOR], University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, Fayetteville, AR, for the decommissioning of SEFOR in Strickler, AR ................................................... 2,000,000 
113 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING

FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $622,162,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 480,333,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 515,333,000 

Uranium Enrichment D&D Fund.—The Committee provides $515,333,000, a total of $35,000,000 above the budget request. Last 

year’s budget reported that the site closure of the East Tennessee 

Technology Park would be completed in 2010 rather than in 2008, 

a 2-year slip. This budget now states that completion cannot be expected sooner than 2015, a further delay of 5 years. This Committee recognizes that this schedule slip is solely due to lack of 

funding in the request; and has, therefore, provided a total of 

$199,495,000, an increase of $15,265,000, for the decontamination 

and decommissioning of the East Tennessee Technology Park. The Committee recommends $115,614,000 for continued cleanup 

activities at the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Paducah, Kentucky. This amount is the same as appropriated in fiscal year 2008 

and $19,735,000 over the Department’s request. The Committee is 

concerned that the cuts proposed in the Department’s budget will 

harm cleanup efforts of the plant and this report includes additional funds to accelerate the decontamination and decommissioning of the C–410 building and the West End Smelter. In recent 

years, this Committee has provided funds above the requested 

amount, which have been used to accelerate important projects 

such as the removal of 1,900 uranium tetrafluoride drums and the 

disposal of all outdoor Designated Material Storage Areas. From 

the amounts provided, the Committee recommends the Department 

continue to support research activities designed to address pressing 

environmental remediation problems at the Paducah site and provide objective data and analysis to stakeholders such as the Department as well as State and Federal regulators. 

Uranium/Thorium Reimbursement.—The Committee recommends no funding for this activity, the same as the request. 

SCIENCE

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,017,711,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 4,721,969,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,640,469,000 

The Committee recommends $4,640,469,000 for the Office of 

Science. This is $622,758,000 above fiscal year 2008 and represents 

the single largest increase for any program in the bill. From within 

available funds, the Office of Science is directed to retain the Nation’s existing capability to produce a wide range of isotopes including californium-252. Consistent with the cost-sharing requirements 

of Public Law 101–101, the Department is directed to develop a 

cost recovery strategy to ensure the long-term viability of this program. 

HIGH ENERGY PHYSICS

The Committee provides $804,960,000 for High Energy Physics. 

The Committee has long been a strong supporter of the Department’s space-based Joint Dark Energy Mission [JDEM] and is 
114 

pleased that the recent National Academy of Sciences’ Beyond Einstein Program Assessment Committee [BEPAC] judged this mission to be the top priority. The Committee concurs with the view 

of the Particle Physics Project Prioritization Panel that the cost cap 

recently announced may limit the scientific capabilities assumed by 

the BEPAC review, and that an increase in the budget beyond the 

current funding scenarios would be justified. The Committee recommends the full budget request of $10,030,000 for conceptual designs for Joint Dark Energy Mission. The Committee recommends 

full funding of the Non Accelerator Physics, University Research 

programs and includes $3,200,000 for EXO 200, neurtrinoless double beta decay experiments, an increase of $1,000,000 to complete 

construction in 2009. 

NUCLEAR PHYSICS

The Committee provides $510,080,000 for Nuclear Physics, the 

same as the budget request. Within the available funds, the Committee recommends $24,900,000 for the Isotope Production and Applications program. The Committee has been frustrated with the 

lack of cooperation among the various Federal agencies, which has 

resulted in no Federal request to sustain this important responsibility in previous years. The Committee recommends $5,000,000 

within the available funds for the Research Isotope Development 

and Production Subprogram to develop and implement a research 

and production strategy consistent with the National Academy of 

Science study entitled ‘‘State of the Science of Nuclear Medicine.’’ 

In developing this capability, the Department is encouraged to 

work with researchers and commercial customers to develop a predictable and reliable supply of isotopes. 

The Committee directs the Office of Science to complete a study 

on the feasibility of expanding the capability of the University of 

Missouri Research Reactor to supply up to half the United States 

demand for feedstock medical imaging compounds in the form of 

molybdenum-99 and technetium-99. The Committee also requests 

that the Department outline options for preserving U.S. production 

of californium-252. 

BIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH

The Committee provides $598,540,000 for Biological and Envi- ronmental Research, $30,000,000 more than the budget request. 

Biological Research.—The Committee recommends $423,613,000, 

an increase of $10,000,000 to support additional investment in nuclear medicine. The Committee supports the budget request of 

$48,500,000 for the operation and maintenance of the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory. 

Radiochemistry and Instrumentation.—A recent report the National Academy of Sciences, Advancing Nuclear Medicine through 

Innovation, recommended the enhancement of the Federal commitment to nuclear medicine research. The Committee is concerned 

that the Department may be looking to move this research in other 

directions and emphasizes its commitment to nuclear medicine 

medical application research at the Department of Energy. Within 

the funds provided, $23,121,000 is for Radiochemistry and Instrumentation. Of the $23,121,000, $17,500,000 is for nuclear medicine 
115 

medical application research. The Committee emphasizes its commitment to nuclear medicine medical application research at the 

Department of Energy. All of the added funds must be awarded 

competitively in one or more solicitation that includes all sources— 

universities, the private sector, and Government laboratories. 

The Committees support full funding for Testing and Low Dose 

Research. The Committees also notes that diagnostics are currently 

in development between the University of New Mexico [UNM] and 

Los Alamos National Laboratory utilizing the unique capabilities of 

Las Alamos National Laboratory at the IPF and LANSCE and the 

radiopharmaceutical expertise of UNM at the Center for Isotopes 

in Medicine. 

Climate Change Research.—The Committee recommends 

$174,927,000, an increase of $20,000,000 to support improved climate modeling and monitoring within the DOE–NNSA laboratories. 

Climate Change Modeling.—The nexus of climate and energy 

presents enormous challenges to our national security and to our 

economy. It is imperative that the United States continues to provide strong science leadership that guides policy choices and technology investments. The Committee believes the DOE–NNSA Labs 

are best equipped to develop and deploy a national system for 

science-based stewardship that combines advanced modeling, 

multi-scale monitoring, and impact analysis tools. These labs, with 

their experience in nuclear weapons nonproliferation and their 

unique capabilities across a wide range of technical resources are 

best able to develop and implement this comprehensive climate research strategy. The challenge of certifying the nuclear weapons 

stockpile in an era of test-ban treaties has produced one of the 

world’s greatest computational resources through the NNSA’s 

Stockpile Stewardship program. These computational capabilities 

have also been applied to the development of sophisticated global 

climate models that can assess climate changes far into the future. 

However, these models are still too coarse to resolve the details of 

climate change at the scale of watersheds or State boundaries, 

where many public policy decisions are made. In addition, the models do not capture realistically all of the complex physical processes 

and feedbacks between the atmosphere, ocean, and land where natural and man-made carbon fluxes are exchanged. The Committee 

recommends an additional $10,000,000 to support development of 

modeling strategies to support a comprehensive modeling program 

and to focus on scaling global models to regional scale to improve 

the predictive value of these models. Similarly, more formal information science methods must be applied to move from the current 

state, where predictions of climate models developed by different 

groups are averaged over a range of emissions scenarios, to a state 

where uncertainties are systematically reduced for the most important variables through deliberate validation and verification using 

experiments to measure sensitivities and feedbacks. These techniques have been implemented in the nuclear stockpile stewardship 

program to provide much stronger confidence in predictions for 

complex systems. 

The DOE–NNSA Labs can also apply their expertise in developing sensors and measurement systems to provide a comprehen-
116 

sive assessment of global carbon fluxes. Improved measurements 

must feed into models to depict the complex carbon exchanges that 

occur between the atmosphere, oceans, terrestrial ecosystem, and 

human activities at a variety of spatial and temporal scales. A global system will require remote sensing and in situ monitoring of atmospheric greenhouse gases and other chemical indicators to allow 

attribution of sources and sinks. Remote sensing includes satellite 

sensors that can observe modest changes in greenhouse gases 

against a high background signal. Methods to observe plume gas 

signatures associated with carbon fluxes will be necessary to provide source attribution information. The Committee recommends 

an additional $5,000,000 to support research and development of 

ground and space based monitoring. 

In order to make informed policy decision regarding our energy 

and water need in the future, the Committee encouraged the Department to apply Laboratory expertise in consequence analysis 

modeling using complex infrastructure data to assess long-term energy impacts through linkages of climate change with infrastructure. The impacts of energy choices are linked to global markets, 

and to our financial, energy, electrical, and transportation infrastructure. We must understand the sensitivity of this complex system to different policy options for climate change, including linkages that may lead to costly unintended consequences. The Committee recommends an additional $5,000,000 to develop decision 

analysis tools that can describe this system at an appropriate level 

of complexity and integration are required to give rapid insights at 

regional, national, and global scales on long-term consequences of 

investments at the intersection of energy technology and climate 

policy. Because of the inherent sensitivity of the data and potential 

vulnerabilities, this area requires capabilities at the national security science laboratories. 

BASIC ENERGY SCIENCES

The Committee provides $1,415,378,000 for Basic Energy 

Sciences. Of these funds $145,468,000 is provided for construction 

activities as requested in the budget. The remaining $1,269,910,000 

is for research. Within the research funds provided $17,000,000 is 

for the Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research 

[EPSCoR]. Of the decrease, $59,495,000 of basic solar research is 

moved to the EERE solar energy research and development program. 

ADVANCED SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING RESEARCH

The Committee provides $368,820,000 for Advanced Scientific 

Computing Research, the same as the budget request. The Committee is concerned that the Department has limited cooperation 

between the NNSA and DOE laboratories in supporting the advanced computing architecture and algorithm development. The 

Committee expects the Office of Science to continue to support joint 

research through the Institute for Advanced Architecture and Advanced Algorithms. 
117 

FUSION ENERGY SCIENCES

The Committee provides $493,050,000 for Fusion Energy 

Sciences, the same as the budget request. The Committee understands the Department’s difficult decision to close the National 

Compact Stellarator Experiment [NCSX] project. The fiscal year 

2009 budget request included $20,342,000 for the NCSX. The Department is directed to reallocate these funds as proposed by the 

Department to the Committee under Scenario II. The Committee 

understands this means approximately $9,000,000 will be used for 

orderly closeout of NCSX, $9,250,000 will be used to restore run 

times for three facilities and support major upgrade work at NSTX, 

and $2,000,000 will be used to enhance non-NCSX stellarator research. Recent advances in pulse power have renewed interest in 

nuclear energy systems that utilize both fusion and fission. The 

Committee directs the Department to work with laboratories and 

industry to develop a systems concept that identifies the challenges, opportunities and future research path of such a fusion-fission hybrid system. 

SCIENCE LABORATORIES INFRASTRUCTURE

The Committee provides $110,260,000 to support infrastructure 

activities, the same as the budget request. The Committee reiterates its strong support for the construction of the Physical Sciences 

Facility at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory [PNNL]. This 

project is funded through three separate accounts, all of which 

have important national missions at PNNL. Notwithstanding this 

unique funding arrangement, the Committee expects the Under 

Secretary of Science to take the lead in ensuring that the fiscal 

year 2010 budget requests are coordinated among all the parties, 

and will be sufficient to complete the project in that fiscal year. 

SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

The Committee provides $80,603,000 for Safeguards and Security 

activities, the same as the budget request. The program provides 

funding for physical security, information protection, and cyber security for the national laboratories and facilities of the Office of 

Science. 

SCIENCE PROGRAM DIRECTION

The Committee provides $186,695,000 for the Office of Science 

Program Direction. The reduction from the budget request reflects 

the Committee’s disapproval of the proposed increase in funding for 

headquarters and the field offices. The Committee supports the 

$8,916,000 for the Office of Science and Technical Information. 

SCIENCE WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

These initiatives support the mission of the Department’s Workforce Development for Teachers and Scientists program. The Committee provides $13,583,000, the same as the budget request. 
118 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED PROJECTS

The Committee recommendation includes $58,500,000 for the following list of projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SCIENCE PROJECTS 

Project Committee recommendation 

Antibodies Research, University of North Dakota Research Foundation, Grand Forks, ND, to research and 

develop antibodies for disease threats ........................................................................................................... $2,750,000 

Bionanotechnology: Research and Commercialization, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, LA, for 

bionanotechnology and biofuels research ....................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Center for Advanced Energy Studies, Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID, to conduct a pilot program 

to demonstrate the Nuclear Science Talent Expansion program ................................................................... 3,000,000 

Center for Diagnostic Nanosystems, Marshall University, Huntington, WV, for disease detection and diagnosis research ................................................................................................................................................. 2,000,000 

Center for Nanomedicine and Cellular Delivery, School of Pharmacy, University of MD, Baltimore, MD, for 

research ........................................................................................................................................................... 750,000 

Center of Excellence and Hazardous Materials, Carlsbad, NM, for applied research ........................................ 2,000,000 

Climate Change Modeling Capability, Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, for climate change modeling ................................................................................................................................................................. 5,000,000 

Computing Capability, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, to increase supercomputing power ............ 5,000,000 

Contrast Media and Wound Closure Reduction Study, University of Mississippi, University of Mississippi, 

MS, for efficiency in Iodine-based medical imaging for diagnostic procedures ........................................... 650,000 

Facilitating blood-brain barrier research, Seattle Science Foundation, Seattle, WA, for cooperative research .............................................................................................................................................................. 1,500,000 

Former Workers Medical Surveillance Programs, State University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, for medical surveillance, needs assessment and former worker medical screenings ................................................................. 1,000,000 

Functional MRI Research, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, to support MRI research .............................................................................................................................................................. 1,250,000 

Intermountain Center for River Restoration and Rehabilitation, Utah State University, Logan, UT, to continue researching river restoration and environmental management ............................................................ 600,000 

Marine Systems Research, University of Massachusetts at Boston, Boston, MA, for research into aquatic 

ecosystems, marine biology, fisheries and mammal sustainability ............................................................... 500,000 

Materials and Energy Research Development, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, for environmental and 

materials research ........................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

Matter-Radiation Interactions in Extremes, Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, for advanced materials testing ..................................................................................................................................................... 7,000,000 

Mind Institute, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, to advance the understanding of mental illness 

through advanced brain imaging ................................................................................................................... 12,000,000 

Neuroscience research, Dominican University, River Forest, IL, for research in to memory dysfunctions ........ 500,000 

Pioneer Valley Life Sciences Institute Biomedical Research, Pioneer Valley Life Science Institute, Springfield, MA, for research programs .................................................................................................................... 500,000 

Regenerative medicine, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, for regenerative medicine research ............................................................................................................................... 500,000 

Research into Proton Beam Therapy, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, to research new uses for 

proton beam therapy ....................................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Sandia Nanotechnology Engineering Center, Sandia National Lab, Albuquerque, NM, for nanotechnology engineering activities .......................................................................................................................................... 5,000,000 

Supercapacitors, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, for work to be done in Ostego, NY on 

supercapacitors ............................................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, to support research 

efforts in alternative energy technologies ...................................................................................................... 1,500,000 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $187,269,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 247,371,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 195,390,000 

The Committee recommendation for the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management includes $195,390,000 from fees collected by the Secretary which are deposited into the fund established by Public Law 97–425, as amended, and $193,000,000 pro-
119 

vided from the defense appropriation for a total of $388,390,000. 

This total is $106,352,000 below the request. 

The Committee directs the Department to exercise great discretion to ensure that any work undertaken at or near Yucca Mountain is consistent with the requirements contained in section 113(c) 

of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act and elsewhere that no repository 

construction shall be undertaken prior to the issuance of a repository license by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee provides 

$1,950,000 for the following list of projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL PROJECTS 

Project Committee recommendation 

Cooperative agreement between the Department of Energy and Inyo County, Inyo County, Independence, CA, 

to complete studies under the cooperative agreement .................................................................................. $1,600,000 

Inyo County Affected Unit of Local Government, County of Inyo, Inyo County, CA, to conduct scientific oversight responsibilities and participate in licensing activities ......................................................................... 350,000 

INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM

ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $5,459,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 19,880,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 19,880,000 

OFFSETTING RECEIPTS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ¥$1,000,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ¥19,880,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥19,880,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $4,459,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ........................... 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 authorized the Department to issue loan guarantees under title XVII of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 until September 30, 2009. The budget request 

proposes to extend authorization for $20,000,000,000 for eligible 

projects other than nuclear power facilities through fiscal year 2010 

and $18,500,000,000 for eligible nuclear power facilities through 

fiscal year 2011. The Committee recommends a no-year limitation 

on the authorization for the entire $38,500,000,000 for all projects. 

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION

(GROSS)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $309,662,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 272,144,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 272,144,000 
120 

(MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES)

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ¥$161,247,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ¥117,317,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥117,317,000 

The Committee recommends $272,144,000 for Departmental Administration, a net appropriation of $154,827,000. The Departmental Administration account funds eleven Department-wide 

management organizations support administrative functions such 

as human resources, accounting, budgeting, workforce diversity 

and project management activities. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $46,057,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 51,927,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 51,927,000 

For the Office of Inspector General, the Committee recommends $51,927,000 consistent with the budget request. The Office of Inspector General identifies opportunities for cost savings and operational efficiencies and provides the Department of Energy with 

the assurance that those attempting to defraud the Government 

are apprehended. 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $6,297,466,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 6,618,079,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 6,524,579,000 

The Committee recommends $6,524,579,000 for National Nuclear 

Security Administration Weapon Activities. This is $93,500,000 

below the request and $227,113,000 above current year. 

DIRECTED STOCKPILE WORK

Life Extension Programs.—The Committee recommends 

$211,385,000 for the Life Extension Program, the same as the 

budget request. 

Stockpile Systems.—The Committee recommends $338,682,000 

for the Stockpile Systems account, the same as the budget request. 

Reliable Replacement Warhead.—The Committee recommends no 

funds for the Reliable Replacement Warhead. 

Weapons Dismantlement.—The Committee recommends 

$205,712,000, an increase of $22,000,000 above the request and 

$71,037,000 over current year levels. Within the Operations and 

Maintenance Activities, the Committee recommends $138,822,000, 

an increase of $22,000,000. The Committee understands that 

delays with the Pit Disassembly and Conversion Facility [PDCF] 

has created a 4- to 6-year gap between the time when PDCF can 

produce feedstock and when it will be required for the Mixed Oxide 

Fuel Fabrication Facility. Within the available funds, the Committee recommends an additional $22,000,000 toward expanded operations of the AIRES line to ensure there is adequate feedstock 
121 

available when the MOX facility begins operations. In addition, the 

Committee expects the NNSA to undertake efforts to identify ways 

to reduce production of by-product and waste material, lower the 

dose exposure to workers and achieve operational cost savings. The 

Committee recommends $66,890,000 as requested for the construction request 99–D–144, the Pit disassembly and conversion facility, 

SRS. The Committee strongly urges the Department to develop updated cost estimates from the original estimates provided in 2006. 

Further, the NNSA should analyze and report on whether more 

timely and more cost-effective alternatives to the PDCF exist within the existing NNSA complex. 

Stockpile Services.—The Committee recommends $888,376,000 

for Stockpile Services, a decrease of $43,560,000. The Committee 

provides $10,000,000 for Pit Manufacturing Capability, a decrease 

of $43,560,000. The $10,000,000 is to be used to fund mission 

transfers from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory to Los Alamos National Laboratory as proposed in the request. 

CAMPAIGNS

The campaigns provide the foundation for the experimental 

science-based activities that support the NNSA Stockpile Stewardship mission. Research supported by the programs provide data 

that is used with the super computing capabilities at each of the 

laboratories needed to support the life extension program and to 

certify to the President the confidence of the nuclear deterrent. 

Science Campaign.—The Committee recommends $331,070,000 

for the Science Campaign, an increase of $8,000,000. Within these 

funds, $82,413,000 is recommended for Primary Assessment Technologies, an increase of $8,000,000 to be used for to support subcritical experiments and to support fielding and diagnostics of Powder Gun, JASPER gas gun, the Borolo experiment, and the ongoing 

series of Phoenix experiments. The Committee recommends 

$28,734,000, to support the Dynamic Plutonium Experiments an 

increase of $5,000,000 to support additional experiments in order 

to understand the detailed physics of primary boost by 2015. The 

Committee continues to support the Advance Certification program 

to increase the confidence in changes to warhead design to increase 

the safety and reliability margins of the stockpile without underground testing. The Committee recommends $20,000,000 for Advanced Certification activities. The Committee recommends 

$29,418,000 for Advanced Radiography, consistent with the requested level. The Committee is pleased that work on the second 

beam-line at the DARHT facility is completed and it is beginning 

to produce extraordinary experimental hydrodynamic test data. 

The Committee recommends $79,292,000 for Secondary Assessment 

Technologies as requested. Test readiness is decreased to 

$5,408,000. 

Engineering Campaign.—The Committee recommends 

$162,742,000 for the Engineering Campaign, an increase of 

$20,000,000. The Committee believes the Engineering Campaign 

offers the best opportunity to explore, develop and deploy state-ofthe-art use control and surety devices to our stockpile. The Committee has provided the resources to rapidly develop innovative engineering solutions to support advanced use denial as well as weap-
122 

ons surveillance sensors that will allow for more accurate assessment of the safety and reliability of the stockpile. The Committee 

recognizes there are broad applications beyond on-weapons controls 

and encourages the NNSA to look at other applications including 

securing special nuclear material and nonproliferation applications. 

Enhanced Surety is provided $45,641,000, an increase of 

$10,000,000 to support research and development of enhanced surety applications consistent with the 2007 JASON Reliable Replacement Warhead study Recommendation 2(a) to develop a ‘‘physical 

understanding of enhanced surety features.’’ Weapons Systems is 

provided $17,105,000, the same as the request. Nuclear survivability is provided $21,753,000 consistent with the request. Enhanced surveillance is provided $78,243,000, an increase of 

$10,000,000 to support additional research of micro devices that 

will improve the real time surveillance of the existing stockpile, as 

well as other security applications. Within the additional funds, the 

Committee also recommends an increase in the University Robotics 

program of $1,000,000 to be used to enhance the request of 

$2,100,000. 

Inertial Confinement Fusion Ignition and High Yield Campaign.—The Committee recommends $453,242,000 for the ICF 

campaign activities. This is an increase of $32,000,000. 

Ignition.—The Committee recommends $103,644,000, consistent 

with the budget request. 

NIF Diagnostics, Cryogenics and Experimental Support.—The 

Committee provides $68,248,000 as requested. 

Pulsed Power Inertial Confinement Fusion.—The Committee recommends $10,920,000, an increase of 2,000,000 to support for development of the Linear Transformer Driver concept. 

Joint Program in High Energy Density.—The Committee supports the budget request to fund a joint program with the Office 

of Science to support joint research utilizing NNSA facilities. 

Facility Operations and Target Production.—The Committee recommends $210,384,000, an increase of $30,000,000. Of this increase $15,000,000 is for National Ignition Facility operations and 

target production and an increase of $15,000,000 to support single 

shift operations on the Z machine and to explore advanced concepts. 

NIF Assembly and Installation.—$56,899,000 is provided, as requested, to support this budgeted activity. 

Construction.—No funding is provided for NIF construction, consistent with the request. 

Advanced Simulation and Computing.—The Committee is frustrated by the lack of information regarding the computing strategy 

for the NNSA laboratories in this budget. The budget lacks specifics regarding the acquisition priorities and budget to support 

new computing platforms. How computing time will be allocated 

and the existing computing workload divided among the labs remains unclear. The Committee requests that the NNSA provide a 

written report outlining its shared computing strategy to address 

these issues. The Committee expects this strategy to have the benefit of an independent review and be submitted to the Senate Energy and Water Development Subcommittee within 6 months after 

enactment. 
123 

While the Office of Science supports a strategy to expand its 

leadership in computing capabilities and capacity, the Committee 

is concerned about the declining NNSA investment in computing 

platforms needed to sustain the computing capability at each the 

three national security labs. Advanced computing capabilities are 

critical to each of our national laboratories, enabling a wide range 

of programmatic activities. The Committee has recommended new 

climate change modeling responsibilities for the national labs, and 

computational modeling and simulation will play a very big role in 

the success of this program. It is imperative the NNSA labs have 

the capability to support this and other missions. The President 

has requested $171,000,000 for computational systems, which is 

$13,000,000 below current year levels. Even more troubling is the 

out-year funding proposed in this budget which falls to an average 

of $126,000,000 during years 2010 to 2014. This is nearly 

$60,000,000 below current year levels and is insufficient to meet 

our needs in the areas of national security, advanced engineering, 

climate change, nuclear physics and biology, all major scientific priorities for the Department of Energy and NNSA. 

The Committee understands that NNSA is planning to spend $42,000,000 for the Sequoia system, although this figure is not 

identified in the budget request. The total estimated cost of this 

system is $142,000,000 for the base system with an option for 

$35,000,000 for additional memory making it the most expensive 

NNSA computer acquisition to date. The Committee is concerned 

about the cost of this platform in light of the declining budgets for 

the ASC program. The Committee does not believe that the administration has requested sufficient funding to support the Sequoia 

acquisition as well as upgrade computing capacity at each of the 

labs and make the investments in future platforms necessary to 

sustain advanced computing capabilities at each of the three weapons labs. Prior to the release of any funding for the Sequoia system 

in fiscal year 2009, the Committee directs the NNSA to provide a 

report explaining the out year computing acquisition strategy and 

how, within the existing 5-year budget plan, the Department intends to fulfill the proposed capacity systems acquisition, upgrades 

of the Red Storm system and provide for the acquisition of future 

advanced computing systems. The Committee does support the 

budget request of $15,000,000 to develop the new Zia platform 

under the new memorandum of agreement between Los Alamos 

and Sandia National Laboratories. 

The Committee recommends $573,742,000 for the Advanced Simulation and Computing Campaign, an increase of $12,000,000 

above the budget request. Within available funding, the Department is directed to continue to fund the Institute for Advanced Architecture and Algorithms at $7,000,000 and an additional 

$5,000,000 is to provide for operations of the Red Storm system to 

expand it uses for national security problems. The Committee supports the budget request for the Los Alamos Roadrunner Computing platform. 

Readiness Campaign.—The Committee recommends 

$158,037,000 for the Readiness Campaign, a decrease of 

$25,000,000. Within these funds, the Committee recommends the 

tritium readiness activities be funded at $71,265,000, a decrease of 
124 

$11,000,000, due to unobligated balances in this account, stockpile 

readiness be funded at $21,731,000, a decrease of $7,000,000, and 

non-nuclear readiness at $33,165,000, a decrease of $7,000,000. 

The remaining activities are funded at the budget request level. 

READINESS IN TECHNICAL BASE AND FACILITIES

The Committee recommends $1,703,745,000, a reduction of 

$21,778,000. This funding is used to support the operations and 

maintenance of the NNSA laboratories, productions facility, equipment purchases and personnel. Of these funds: 

Operations of Facilities.—The Committee recommends 

$1,193,907,000 for this account. This funding level reflects a reduction of $19,000,000 from the proposed $37,687,000 increase for the 

Kansas City Plant. 

Program Readiness.—The Committee recommends the requested amount of $73,841,000. 

Material Recycle and Recovery.—The Committee recommends the 

requested amount of $72,509,000. 

Containers.—The Committee recommends the requested amount of $23,398,000. 

Storage.—The Committee recommends the requested amount of $29,846,000. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $310,244,000 a reduction of $2,778,000. The Committee has provided this funding increase to make key investments in laboratory infrastructure and 

security needs. 

Project 09–D–007, LANSCE Reinvestment Project [PED], Los Alamos, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $35,000,0000, an 

increase of $30,000,000 to fund the refurbishment designs for this 

user and experimental facility. 

Project 09–D–404, Test Capabilities Revitalization II, Sandia, 

New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $3,200,000 the same as 

the budget request. 

Project 08–D–801, High Pressure Fire Loop, Pantex, Texas.— The 

Committee recommends $2,000,000 the same as the request. —08–D–802, High Explosives Pressing Facility, Pantex, Texas.— The Committee recommends $28,233,000 the same as the request. —08–D–804, TA–55 Reinvestment Project, Los Alamos, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $7,900,000 the same as the 

request. —08–D–804 Ion Beam Laboratory Refurbishment, SNL, Albuquerque, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends 

$10,014,000 the same as the request. —07–D–140 Project Engineering and Design, Various Locations.—The Committee recommends $7,446,000 the same as 

the request. —07–D–220 Radioactive Liquid Waste Treatment Facility Upgrade Project, LANL, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $19,660,000 the same as the request. —06–D–140 Project Engineering and Design, Various Locations.—The Committee recommends $47,083,000 for these 

projects. Of the amount provided, $8,500,000 is for the TA–55 

reinvestment project. For the design of the Uranium Proc-
125 

essing Facility $38,583,000 is provided, the same amount as 

current year funding and a decrease of $57,578,000 below the 

request. The Committee does not believe the Department has 

provided adequate justification to support the Uranium Processing Facility at Y–12 and has reprogrammed funding from 

this activity to other higher priorities in the past. The Committee notes the Cost Analysis Improvement Group has identified potential long-term cost-savings by constructing the UPF 

facility at another existing NNSA complex site. The Committee 

is concerned the NNSA is not giving this issue vigorous consideration. 

—06–D–420 NTS Replace Fire Stations 1 & 2, Nevada Test Site, 

Nevada.—The Committee recommends $9,340,000, the same as 

the request. 

—05–D–402, Beryllium Capability Project, Y–12 Plant, Oak 

Ridge, Tennessee.—The Committee recommends $5,015,000, 

the same as the request. 

—04–D–125, Chemistry and Metallurgy Facility Replacement 

Project, Los Alamos, New Mexico.—The Committee recommends $125,000,000 for this project, an increase of 

$24,800,000. The recommendation provides additional funding 

to make up for funding shortfalls in previous This facility allows for the consolidation of the NNSA’s plutonium analytical 

chemistry and actinide research activities and replaces the 

exiting facility which sits atop an active seismic fault. The 

Committee is sensitive to the fact that the rising cost of materials such as concrete and steel has increased project cost estimates by over 30 percent for this project. The Committee is 

also aware of the fact that changes in the seismic requirements 

have required significant design changes that include 4 foot 

thick walls and doubling the thickness of the concrete slab to 

10 feet. 

—04–D–128, TA–18 Mission Relocation Project, Los Alamos, New 

Mexico.—The Committee recommends $10,353,000, the same 

as the request. 

SECURE TRANSPORTATION ASSET

The Committee recommendation for the Secure Transportation 

Asset program is $221,072,000 as requested. This organization provides an invaluable service is responsible for the safe and secure 

transport of our nuclear weapons, weapons components and special 

nuclear material. 

NUCLEAR WEAPONS INCIDENT RESPONSE

The Committee recommends full funding for the nuclear weapons 

incident response program. The committee provides $221,936,000 

as requested. 

FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE RECAPITALIZATION

The Committee provides $163,549,000 for Facilities and Infrastructure Recapitalization activities, a decrease of $6,000,000 in operations and maintenance. This program was developed to reduce 

the backlog in deferred maintenance of aging infrastructure facili-
126 

ties throughout the complex. The old facilities continue to be a 

drain on resources and should be demolished or disposed of as 

quickly as possible. 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS AND OPERATIONS

The Committee recommends $28,316,000 for environmental 

projects and operations, a decrease of $12,271,000. 

TRANSFORMATION DISPOSITION

The Committee does not provide any of the $77,391,000 requested to initiate the transformation disposition program. The 

Committee agrees with the goals of the new program, but notes 

with significant frustration that while the Department of Energy 

and Office of Management and Budget managed to find 

$77,391,000 for decommissioning and demolition of these non-contaminated buildings under the NNSA’s control, the two agencies at 

the same time proposed hundreds of millions in cuts to ongoing 

D&D work of radiological contaminated buildings under the control 

of the Office of Environmental Management [EM]. The EM controlled buildings are contaminated and present a threat to human 

health and the environment. The administration argues these 

NNSA transformation disposition funds will lead to cost savings by 

decreasing hotel costs. However, the same logic applies to the EM 

program. On balance, the Committee does not see the logic in DOE 

and OMB’s priorities between these two programs D&D activities. 

SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY

The Committee recommendation for the Safeguards and Security 

program is $859,839,000 as requested. 

Defense Nuclear Security.—The Committee recommends 

$690,217,000 as requested. 

Construction.—The Committee recommends $47,111,000 as requested to support the following projects: 

—08–D–701 Nuclear Materials S&S Upgrade Project Los Alamos 

National Laboratory.—The Committee provides $46,000,000 as 

requested. 

—05–D–170 Project Engineering and Design, Various Locations.—The Committee recommends $1,111,000 as requested. 

Cyber Security.—The Committee provides $122,511,000 as requested. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED PROJECTS

The Committee recommends $3,500,000 for the following list of 

projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED WEAPONS ACTIVITIES PROJECTS 

Project Committee 

recommendation 

Arrowhead Center, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, to promote prosperity in New Mexico 

through economic development ....................................................................................................................... $1,000,000 

Electronic Record for Worker Safety and Health, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark County to help the 

Nevada Site Office improve responses to DOE worker claims ....................................................................... 1,500,000 

Renewable Energy Planning, National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Test Site, NV, for planning 

to maximize renewable energy production at the Site ................................................................................... 500,000 
127 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED WEAPONS ACTIVITIES PROJECTS—Continued 

Project Committee 

recommendation 

Restore Manhattan Project Sites, Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, for historic preservation ......... 500,000 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. 1 $1,657,996 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,247,966 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,909,056 

1 Includes $322,000,000 in reallocated prior year balances. 

The Committee recommends $1,909,056,000, an increase of 

$175,000,000 above the request and $251,060,000 above current 

year levels. The Committee has restored funding for the Mixed 

Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility as it continues to serve a significant nonproliferation objective. The Committee recommends a significant upgrade in the Nation’s technical capability to deal with 

proliferation threats by focusing greater investment in laboratory 

capabilities and improving the capabilities available to IAEA inspectors. Significant funding has also been provided to accelerate 

efforts to repatriate nuclear material from around the world and 

provide for its secure storage or elimination. The Committee has 

provided $15,000,000 to Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation to support its participation in an Integrated University Program. The 

Committee recommends $10,000,000 of this amount to be used to 

support university programs in technical areas vital to the nonproliferation mission, including nuclear forensics and international 

nuclear safeguards. In addition, not less than $5,000,000 of this 

amount will be used for grants to support research projects that do 

not align with programmatic missions but are critical to maintaining the discipline of nuclear science and engineering. 

NONPROLIFERATION AND VERIFACTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

The Committee recommends $350,091,000, an increase of 

$75,000,000 above the request. The additional funds will be provided to increase our capabilities in proliferation detection. Of this 

amount, $30,000,000 is provided to support sustained, multi-year 

funding for detection research, including investments in simulation 

and data analysis capabilities relevant to the nonproliferation and 

international safeguards missions. NNSA should take advantage of 

the significant investments in advanced computing and algorithm 

development at the national laboratories for its nonproliferation 

programs. The Committee remains concerned that despite Congressional direction, additional funds have been used to reinforce existing efforts rather than to increase the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation’s role in investing in core capabilities and infrastructure. 

Within the available increase, the Committee recommends 

$20,000,000 for a more effective nuclear forensic and attribution capability. A recent American Association for the Advancement of 

Science report concludes that our technical ability to provide decision makers with critical analyses in a timely manner needs improvement. Both our pre-detonation and post-detonation evaluation 

capabilities must be strengthened. We also have critical shortages 
128 

in personnel with key skills such as radiochemistry. Within the additional funds, $10,000,000 is provided for nuclear explosion monitoring directed at expanding nuclear explosion monitoring for very 

low yield nuclear testing around the world. The Committee directs 

the Department to utilize not less than an additional $5,000,000 to 

competitively fund an integrated suite of research, technology development and demonstration projects including infrasound, 

hydroacoustic, and seismic technologies for nuclear explosion monitoring. An additional $10,000,000 is provided to support the Integrated University Program. The Committee recommendation includes the request of $13,147,000 to continue construction of the 

Physical Sciences Laboratory at the Pacific Northwest National 

Laboratory. 

NONPROLIFERATION AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

The Committee recommends $175,467,000, an increase of 

$35,000,000 above the request and $25,474,000 above current year 

levels. Within the additional funds $20,000,000 is available to support the Next Generation Safeguards Initiative; $10,000,000 to be 

available to support disablement and material removal efforts in 

North Korea or other emerging threats, and $5,000,000 to support 

the Integrated University Program. 

INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR MATERIALS PROTECTION AND COOPERATION

The Committee recommends $429,694,000 consistent with the request. The Committee has provided this office with significant 

funding increases in the past and supports the mission of this office. 

ELIMINATION OF WEAPONS-GRADE PLUTONIUM PRODUCTION

The Committee recommends $141,299,000 consistent with the request. 

FISSILE MATERIALS DISPOSITION

The Committee recommends $528,782,000, consistent with the 

budget request. The Committee believes the nonproliferation mission remains the overall objective of this project and has restored 

the funding to Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation. 

U.S. Surplus Fissile Materials Disposition.—The Committee recommends $40,774,000 consistent with the budget request. Consistent with the budget request, the Committee has included 

$39,274,000 for the research reactor fuel project and the reliable 

fuel supply project. By September 2009, the Department expects to 

have completed the downblending of nearly all of the 17.4 metric 

tons of HEU for the reliable fuel supply program. The Committee 

expects the Department to provide a written report by the end of 

the fiscal year to update the Committee on how the Department intends to utilize the reliable fuel supply and under what terms and 

conditions this material will be made available to other nations. 

Further, the Committee encourages the Department to consider 

possible domestic needs as well consistent with the fiscal year 2008 

conference report. 
129 

Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility.—The Committee recommends $19,200,000 to support operations and maintenance including the development of the feedstock and testing of fuel assemblies as requested and $467,808,000 for construction and other 

project costs, consistent with the budget request. The Committee 

understands that the deep cuts to the program in fiscal year 2008 

will increase the total cost and result in delay in the completion of 

this project but encourages the NNSA do its best to safely accelerate completion of this project. 

GLOBAL THREAT REDUCTION INITIATIVE

The Committee recommends $284,641,000, an increase of 

$65,000,000 above the request and $86,416,000 above current year 

levels. Of the additional funding $20,000,000 is provided to support 

the development of high density fuels to replace HEU cores; and 

an additional $45,000,000 is provided to accelerate the removal of 

proliferation sensitive materials from around the world. The NNSA 

has recovered more than 16,000 radiological sources in an effort to 

reduce the threat of attacks involving radiological dispersion devices. While the recovered sources are no longer needed by their 

previous owners, some may still find useful application and could 

be used to reduce the demand for new source material. We should 

look to maximize the recycling of such material and minimize the 

need for foreign imports. Using available funds a report should be 

produced on the benefits and costs of establishing a process for the 

reuse of recovered radiological sources for industrial or other legitimate purposes. 

NAVAL REACTORS

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $774,686,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 828,054,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 828,054,000 

Through the Naval Reactors program, the National Nuclear Security Administration is working to provide the U.S. Navy with nuclear propulsion plants that are capable of responding to the challenges of 21st century security concerns. The Committee recommends $828,054,000 for the Naval Reactors program. 

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $402,137,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 404,081,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 404,081,000 

The Committee recommends $404,081,000 for the Office of the 

Administrator, the same as the President’s request. 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $5,349,325,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 5,297,256,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 5,771,506,000 

The Committee recommendation for Defense Environmental 

Cleanup is $5,771,506,000, an increase of $474,250,000 above the 
130 

President’s request. The Committee is disappointed with the administration’s fiscal year 2009 budget proposal, which is 

$167,000,000 less than the veto-threat constrained fiscal year 2008 

appropriation. The fiscal year 2009 program is underfunded to the 

point even this administration has admitted that, for the first time 

in its 20-year history, the cleanup budget request is insufficient to 

meet its existing regulatory compliance milestones. In testimony 

presented to the Committee this past April, the Assistant Secretary 

for Environmental Management admitted this budget was as much 

as $900,000,000 short of supporting regulatory compliance milestones. The result is a budget request that, if unchanged, would result immediately in non-compliance with regulatory agreements 

and layoffs around the cleanup complex. Thus, our Committee has 

had to significantly increase, to the tune of $554,250,000, our recommendation for the entire Environmental Cleanup program in the 

hope of avoiding many of those consequences. We warn the Department not to rely on the Congress to solve its legal obligations in 

the future, and we expect a budget submittal that is legally compliant in fiscal year 2010. 

Reprogramming Control Levels.—In fiscal year 2009, the Environmental Management program may transfer funding between 

projects within the controls listed below using guidance contained 

in the Department’s budget execution manual (DOE M 135.1–1A, 

Chapter IV). If the amount of a single transfer, or the cumulative 

amount of multiple transfers, between projects within the control 

level exceeds 25 percent of the fiscal year 2009 appropriated level, 

the Environmental Management program must notify both the 

House and Senate Appropriations Committees within 30 days after 

the transfer. The Committee recommends the following reprogramming control points for fiscal year 2009: 

—Closure sites; 

—Savannah River site, 2012 completion projects; 

—Savannah River site, 2035 completion projects; 

—Savannah River site, tank farm operations projects; 

—Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; 

—Idaho National Laboratory; 

—Oak Ridge Reservation; 

—Hanford site; 2012 completion projects; 

—Hanford site; 2035 completion projects; 

—Office of River Protection, tank farm operations projects; 

—Office of River Protection, Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant; 

—Program Direction; 

—Program Support; 

—Technology Development and Deployment; 

—All construction line items; 

—NNSA sites; and 

—Safeguards and Security. 

Internal Reprogramming Authority.—Since only a few of the sites 

above have multiple control points to which the internal reprogramming statute applies, Environmental Management site 

managers may transfer up to $5,000,000, one time, between accounts listed below to reduce health and safety risks, gain cost savings, or complete projects, as long as a program or project is not 
131 

increased or decreased by more than $5,000,000 in total during the 

fiscal year. This reprogramming authority may not be used to initiate new programs or to change funding levels for programs specifically denied, limited, or increased by Congress in the act or report. The Committee on Appropriations in the House of Representatives and the Senate must be notified within 30 days after the use 

of this internal reprogramming authority. 

The following is a list of account control points for internal reprogramming purposes: 

—Savannah River site, 2012 completion projects; 

—Savannah River site, 2035 completion projects; 

—Savannah River site, tank farm operations projects; 

—Hanford site; 2012 completion projects; 

—Hanford site; 2035 completion projects; and 

—Transfers between construction line item(s) and the operating 

budget within the same site, as applicable. 

Closure Sites.—The Committee includes $59,383,000, an increase 

of $13,500,000 above the request, to assure disposal of the Fernald 

Byproducts Waste. 

Hanford Site.—The Committee includes $1,020,564,000, a total of 

$168,777,000 above the budget request. Of the increase, 

$80,577,000 is directed to the River Corridor Closure Project; 

$9,000,000 is directed to the stabilization and disposition of special 

nuclear material at the Plutonium Finishing Plant; $45,000,000 is 

provided for solid waste operations in the 200 Area; and 

$25,700,000 is for remediation of the groundwater and vadose zone. 

The Committee notes the Department’s continued support for the 

B-Reactor Museum and the Hazardous Materials Management and 

Emergency Response [HAMMER] facility, which are provided for 

within available funds at the site. 

Idaho Cleanup Project.—The Committee recommends 

$465,124,000, which is $33,000,000 over the request. From within 

available funds, $2,000,000 is provided to continue the national 

spent fuel program. An increase of $18,000,000 is provided for increased buried transuranic waste retrieval, characterization, and 

shipping, as required by State agreement. Another $8,000,000 is 

provided to avoid interrupting currently mobilized decontamination 

and decommissioning teams which are reducing Environmental 

Management’s site footprint and cost of operation. Finally, 

$7,000,000 is provided for the exchange of spent nuclear fuel with 

the Savannah River Site, South Carolina. 

NNSA Sites.—The Committee recommendation is $346,084,000, 

a total of $101,000,000 above the request. The Committee recommends $245,467,000 for cleanup at Los Alamos National Laboratory, $83,000,000 above the request. The increase is necessary to 

prevent the site from missing agreed upon cleanup milestones in 

fiscal year 2009. The Committee also provides $75,674,000 for Nevada, $10,000,000 above the request, for characterization and certification of remaining transuranic waste stored at Nevada for disposal at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; $3,000,000 for the Sandia 

National Laboratory, $3,000,000 above the request, for Landfill Remediation activities per the regulatory closure requirement; and 

$5,000,000 above the request for continuing decontamination and 

decommissioning at the Separations Processing Research Unit. 
132 

Oak Ridge Reservation.—The recommendation is $255,000,000, 

an increase of $17,330,000 above the budget request, $13,330,000 

of which will continue decontamination and decommissioning of facilities ‘‘owned’’ by Environmental Management at the Y–12 and 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory complexes. The remaining 

$4,000,000 will be used for TSCA Operations through fiscal year 

2009 to support Paducah and Portsmouth cleanup efforts. 

Office of River Protection.—The Committee provides 

$1,031,443,000, an increase of $53,000,000 above the request. The 

entire increase is for supplemental treatment activities and single 

shell tank retrievals in the tank farms. The Waste Treatment and 

Immobilization Plant is fully supported at $690,000,000. 

Savannah River Site.—The Committee includes $1,264,961,000, 

an increase of $58,536,000 above the budget request. The additional funding will complete Transuranic waste drum shipments to 

the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant; provide for groundwater cleanup 

(∂$11,692,000) and decontamination and decommissioning 

(∂$35,344,000), for packaging special nuclear materials 

(∂$8,000,000) for long term storage; and preparing spent nuclear 

fuel for exchange with Idaho ($3,500,000). 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant [WIPP].—The recommendation is 

$231,661,000 for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. The increase of 

$20,137,000 maintains the fiscal year 2008 level of transuranic 

waste shipments and receipts at this site. 

Program Direction.—The Committee includes $308,765,000, the 

same as the requested amount. 

Program Support.—The Committee includes $33,930,000, the 

same as the request. 

Safeguards and Security.—The Committee recommends 

$260,341,000. The $9,000,000 increase is for security upgrades at 

the Canister Storage Building in Hanford, Washington, for special 

nuclear material that will not be shipped offsite to South Carolina. 

Technology Development and Deployment.—The Committee provides $22,250,000. 

Federal Contribution to Uranium Enrichment Decontamination 

and Decommissioning Fund.—The recommendation is 

$463,000,000, the same as the request. 

Uncosted Offset.—The Committee does not accept the proposal to 

reduce this request by using $1,109,000 of prior year uncosted balances. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committee includes 

$9,000,000 for the following list of projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP PROJECTS 

Project Committee 

recommendation 

Characteristics and Clean-up of U.S. Nuclear Legacy, Institute for Clean Energy Technology, Mississippi 

State, MS, for renewal of the cooperative agreement with the DOE to help expedite the cleanup of the 

nuclear defense sites ...................................................................................................................................... $4,000,000 

Water Resources Data, Modeling, and Visualization Center, Desert Research Institute, Washoe County, NV 

for water research ........................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 

WIPP Records Archive, WIPP, Carlsbad, NM, for records archiving .................................................................... 4,000,000 
133 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $754,359,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,335,996,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 827,503,000 

The Committee recommendation is $827,503,000, for Other Defense Activities, the same as requested, with the exception of the 

MOX construction project, which is funded under the Nuclear Nonproliferation program. This amount is sufficient to provide for the 

Office of Health, Safety and Security ($447,918,000), the Office of 

Legacy Management ($185,981,000), Safeguards and Security for 

Nuclear Energy’s Idaho Site ($78,811,000), Defense Related Administrative Support, which contributes its share toward the Department’s administrative costs ($108,190,000), and the Office of Hearings and Appeals ($6,603,000). 

The Committee concurs with the budgetary change proposed by 

the Office of Legacy Management to consolidate its mission funding 

under a single appropriation. This consolidation leads to efficiencies in managing the approximately 80 former research and 

production sites, and administering the pension and benefit plans 

for retired cold war employees. 

The Committee also concurs with the change in policy for Nuclear Energy’s Safeguards and Security Reimbursable Work, which 

again can lead to efficiencies in managing and executing the program. 

Congressionally Directed Projects.—The Committed recommends 

$1,050,000 for the following list of projects. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES PROJECTS 

Project Committee recommendation 

Medical Monitoring at Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN, Paducah, Portsmouth, and Oak 

Ridge Medical Monitoring, Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN, to provide for continued 

conventional medical work-ups and lung scans and re-scans for current and former workers .................. $1,050,000 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $199,171,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 247,371,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 193,000,000 

The Committee recommendation for Defense Nuclear Waste Disposal under the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management 

is $193,000,000. Along with $195,390,000 from fees collected by the 

Secretary which are deposited into the fund established by Public 

Law 97–425, as amended, the Committee provides a total of 

$388,390,000 for fiscal year 2009. 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS

BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION

The Bonneville Power Administration is the Department of Energy’s marketing agency for electric power in the Pacific Northwest. 

Bonneville provides electricity to a 300,000 square mile service 

area in the Columbia River drainage basin. Bonneville markets the 
134 

power from Federal hydropower projects in the Northwest, as well 

as power from non-Federal generating facilities in the region. Bonneville also exchanges and markets surplus power with Canada 

and California. The Committee recommends no new borrowing authority for BPA during fiscal year 2009. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHEASTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $6,404,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 7,420,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 7,420,000 

For the Southeastern Power Administration, the Committee recommends $7,420,000, the same as the budget request. The Committee provides $63,522,000 for purchase power and wheeling. 

The Southeastern Power Administration markets hydroelectric 

power produced at Corps of Engineers projects in 11 Southeastern 

States. Southeastern does not own or operate any transmission facilities and carries out its marketing program by utilizing the existing transmission systems of the power utilities in the area. This is 

accomplished through transmission arrangements between Southeastern and each of the area utilities with transmission lines connected to the projects. The utility agrees to deliver specified 

amounts of Federal power to customers of the Government, and 

Southeastern agrees to compensate the utility for the wheeling 

service performed. 

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, SOUTHWESTERN POWER

ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $30,165,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 28,414,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 28,414,000 

For the Southwestern Power Administration, the Committee recommends $28,414,000, the same as the budget request. The Committee provides $46,000,000 for purchase power and wheeling. 

The Southwestern Power Administration is the marketing agent 

for the power generated at the Corps of Engineers’ hydroelectric 

plants in the six State area of Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Missouri, 

Arkansas, and Louisiana, with a total installed capacity of 2,158 

megawatts. It operates and maintains some 1,380 miles of transmission lines, 24 generating projects, and 24 substations, and sells 

its power at wholesale, primarily to publicly and cooperativelyowned electric distribution utilities. 

CONSTRUCTION, REHABILITATION, OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE, 

WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $228,907,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 193,346,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 218,346,000 

The Western Power Administration is responsible for marketing 

the electric power generated by the Bureau of Reclamation, the 

Corps of Engineers, and the International Boundary and Water 

Commission. Western also operates and maintains a system of 

transmission lines nearly 17,000 miles long, providing electricity to 
135 

15 Central and Western States over a service area of 1.3 million 

square miles. 

The Committee notes that Western Area Power Administration 

funding for Construction, Rehabilitation, Operations and Maintenance is significantly reduced from prior levels. The budget proposes to offset this reduction by a far greater reliance on use of alternative financing. While direct customer financing is well established there are limits on the availability of this alternative financing mechanism. The Committee is concerned that continued reductions in Western’s construction program could impair the reliability 

of the transmission systems. 

The Committee recommends $218,346,000 for the Western Area 

Power Administration. The total program level for Western in fiscal 

year 2009 is $901,634,000, which includes $74,544,000 for construction and rehabilitation, $52,365,000 for system power operation 

and maintenance, $600,960,000 for purchase power and wheeling, 

and $166,423,000 for program direction. The Committee recommendation includes $7,342,000 for the Utah Mitigation and Conservation Fund. 

Offsetting collections total $406,484,000; with the use of 

$3,366,000 of offsetting collections from the Colorado River Dam 

Fund (as authorized in Public Law 98–381), this requires a net appropriation of $218,346,000. 

An increase in purchase power and wheeling use of receipt authority of $75,000,000, over and above the request of $328,100,000, 

is needed to provide for increases in cost of power, continuing 

drought conditions, and for certain unforeseen charges. 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $2,477,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 2,959,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 2,959,000 

The Falcon Dam and Amistad Dam on the Rio Grande River generate power through hydroelectric facilities and sell this power to 

public utilities through the Western Power Administration. This 

fund, created in the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Years 1994 and 1995, defrays the costs of operation, maintenance, 

and emergency activities and is administered by the Western Area 

Power Administration. For the Falcon and Amistad Operating and 

Maintenance Fund, the Committee recommends $2,959,000 the 

same as the request. 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $260,425,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 273,400,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 273,400,000 

REVENUES APPLIED

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ¥$260,425,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ¥273,400,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥273,400,000 
136 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy RDD&D: 

Local Government and Tribal technology demonstration ........................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 50,000 ∂50,000 ∂50,000 

Hydrogen Technology .......................................................................................................................................... 211,062 146,213 175,000 ¥36,062 ∂28,787 Biomass and Biorefinery Systems R&D ............................................................................................................. 198,180 225,000 235,000 ∂36,820 ∂10,000 Solar energy ........................................................................................................................................................ 168,453 156,120 229,000 ∂60,547 ∂72,880 Wind energy ........................................................................................................................................................ 49,545 52,500 62,500 ∂12,955 ∂10,000 Geothermal technology ....................................................................................................................................... 19,818 30,000 30,000 ∂10,182 ..........................Water Power Energy ............................................................................................................................................ 9,909 3,000 30,000 ∂20,091 ∂27,000 Vehicle technologies ........................................................................................................................................... 213,043 221,086 293,000 ∂79,957 ∂71,914 Building technologies ......................................................................................................................................... 108,999 123,765 176,481 ∂67,482 ∂52,716 Industrial technologies ....................................................................................................................................... 64,408 62,119 65,119 ∂711 ∂3,000 Federal energy management program ............................................................................................................... 19,818 22,000 22,000 ∂2,182 ..........................Facilities and infrastructure: 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory [NREL] ........................................................................................ 6,918 9,982 21,982 ∂15,064 ∂12,000 NREL Solar equipment recapitalization .................................................................................................... 7,927 .......................... .......................... ¥7,927 ..........................Construction: 

08–EE–02 South-table mountain site infrastructure development, National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory, Golden, Co ................................................................................................................. 6,831 .......................... 7,000 ∂169 ∂7,000 

08–EE–01 Energy systems integration facility, National Renewal Energy Laboratory, Golden, 

CO ................................................................................................................................................ 54,500 4,000 8,000 ¥46,500 ∂4,000 

Subtotal, Construction ............................................................................................................. 61,331 4,000 15,000 ¥46,331 ∂11,000 Subtotal, Facilities and infrastructure .................................................................................... 76,176 13,982 36,982 ¥39,194 ∂23,000 

Program direction ............................................................................................................................................... 104,057 121,846 121,846 ∂17,789 ..........................Program support ................................................................................................................................................. 10,801 20,000 15,000 ∂4,199 ¥5,000 

Subtotal, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy RDD&D ......................................................................... 1,254,269 1,197,631 1,541,928 ∂287,659 ∂344,297 
137 

Federal energy assistance: 

Weatherization assistance ........................................................................................................................................... 222,713 .......................... 200,000 ¥22,713 ∂200,000 Training and technical assistance ............................................................................................................................. 4,509 .......................... 1,181 ¥3,328 ∂1,181 

Subtotal, Weatherization ......................................................................................................................................... 227,222 .......................... 201,181 ¥26,041 ∂201,181 

Other: 

State energy program ......................................................................................................................................... 44,095 50,000 50,000 ∂5,905 ..........................International renewable energy program ........................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................Tribal energy activities ....................................................................................................................................... 5,945 1,000 6,000 ∂55 ∂5,000 Renewable energy production incentive ............................................................................................................. 4,955 .......................... 5,000 ∂45 ∂5,000 Asia pacific ........................................................................................................................................................ .......................... 7,500 .......................... .......................... ¥7,500 

Subtotal, Other ............................................................................................................................................... 54,995 58,500 61,000 ∂6,005 ∂2,500 Subtotal, Federal energy assistance ............................................................................................................. 282,217 58,500 262,181 ¥20,036 ∂203,681 

Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥738 .......................... .......................... ∂738 Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 185,921 .......................... 124,150 ¥61,771 ∂124,150 

TOTAL, ENERGY EFFICENCY AND RENEWABLE ENERGY ......................................................................................... 1,722,407 1,255,393 1,928,259 ∂205,852 ∂672,866 

ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY 

Research and development: 

High temperature superconductivity R&D ................................................................................................................... 27,930 28,186 28,186 ∂256 ..........................

Visualization and controls .................................................................................................................................. 25,075 25,305 35,305 ∂10,230 ∂10,000 Energy storage and power electronics ............................................................................................................... 6,741 13,403 17,403 ∂10,662 ∂4,000 Renewable and distributed systems integration ............................................................................................... 25,466 33,306 39,306 ∂13,840 ∂6,000 

Subtotal, Research and development ............................................................................................................ 85,212 100,200 120,200 ∂34,988 ∂20,000 

Operations and analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 11,451 14,122 14,122 ∂2,671 ..........................Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 17,603 19,678 19,678 ∂2,075 ..........................

Congressionally directed projects ............................................................................................................................... 24,290 .......................... 12,900 ¥11,390 ∂12,900 

TOTAL, ELECTRICITY DELIVERY AND ENERGY RELIABILITY ..................................................................................... 138,556 134,000 166,900 ∂28,344 ∂32,900 

NUCLEAR ENERGY 

Research and development: 

Integrated University program .................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 15,000 ∂15,000 ∂15,000 Nuclear power 2010 .................................................................................................................................................... 133,771 241,600 241,600 ∂107,829 ..........................Generation IV nuclear energy systems initiative ........................................................................................................ 114,917 70,000 70,000 ¥44,917 ..........................
138 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

Nuclear hydrogen initiative ......................................................................................................................................... 9,909 16,600 10,000 ∂91 ¥6,600 Advanced fuel cycle initiative ..................................................................................................................................... 179,353 301,500 229,700 ∂50,347 ¥71,800 

Subtotal, Research and development ..................................................................................................................... 437,950 629,700 566,300 ∂128,350 ¥63,400 

Infrastructure: 

Radiological facilities management: 

Space and defense infrastructure ..................................................................................................................... 30,371 35,000 35,000 ∂4,629 ..........................Medical isotopes infrastructure ......................................................................................................................... 14,828 .......................... .......................... ¥14,828 ..........................Research reactor infrastructure ......................................................................................................................... 2,920 3,700 6,000 ∂3,080 ∂2,300 Oak Ridge nuclear infrastructure ...................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, Radiological facilities management .............................................................................................. 48,119 38,700 41,000 ¥7,119 ∂2,300 

INL infrastructure: 

INL Operations and infrastructure ..................................................................................................................... 115,935 104,700 119,700 ∂3,765 ∂15,000 Idaho sitewide safeguards and security ............................................................................................................ 75,261 78,811 78,811 ∂3,550 ..........................

Subtotal, INL Infrastructure ........................................................................................................................... 239,315 222,211 239,511 ∂196 ∂17,300 

Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 80,872 80,544 73,000 ¥7,872 ¥7,544 Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, Nuclear Energy ........................................................................................................................................ 758,137 932,455 878,811 ∂120,674 ¥53,644 

Funding from other defense activities ................................................................................................................................. ¥75,261 ¥78,811 ¥78,811 ¥3,550 ..........................Congressional directed projects ........................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 3,000 ∂3,000 ∂3,000 

TOTAL, NUCLEAR ENERGY ....................................................................................................................................... 682,876 853,644 803,000 ∂120,124 ¥50,644 

OFFICE OF LEGACY MANAGEMENT 

Legacy management ............................................................................................................................................................ 33,872 .......................... .......................... ¥33,872 ..........................
139 

CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY 

Deferral of unobligated balances, fiscal year 2008 ............................................................................................................ 257,000 .......................... .......................... ¥257,000 ..........................Deferral of unobligated balances, fiscal year 2009 ............................................................................................................ ¥149,000 149,000 149,000 ∂298,000 ..........................Transfer to Fossil Energy R&D [CCPI] ................................................................................................................................. ¥69,363 .......................... .......................... ∂69,363 ..........................Transfer to Fossil Energy R&D [CCDI] ................................................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................Transfer to Fossil Energy R&D ............................................................................................................................................. ¥74,317 ¥149,000 ¥149,000 ¥74,683 ..........................Transfer to Fossil Energy R&D (Fuels & Power Systems) ................................................................................................... ¥20,809 .......................... .......................... ∂20,809 ..........................

TOTAL, CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... ¥56,489 .......................... .......................... ∂56,489 ..........................

FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT 

Clean coal power initiative .................................................................................................................................................. 69,363 85,000 232,300 ∂162,937 ∂147,300 FutureGen ............................................................................................................................................................................. 74,317 156,000 .......................... ¥74,317 ¥156,000 Fuels and Power Systems: 

Innovations for existing plants ................................................................................................................................... 36,081 40,000 50,000 ∂13,919 ∂10,000 Advanced integrated gasification combined cycle ..................................................................................................... 53,509 69,000 63,000 ∂9,491 ¥6,000 Advanced turbines ....................................................................................................................................................... 23,782 28,000 30,000 ∂6,218 ∂2,000 Carbon sequestration .................................................................................................................................................. 118,908 149,132 149,132 ∂30,224 ..........................Fuels ............................................................................................................................................................................ 24,773 10,000 30,000 ∂5,227 ∂20,000 Fuel cells ..................................................................................................................................................................... 55,490 60,000 60,000 ∂4,510 ..........................Advanced research ...................................................................................................................................................... 37,159 26,600 30,000 ¥7,159 ∂3,400 

Subtotal, Fuels and power systems ....................................................................................................................... 349,702 382,732 412,132 ∂62,430 ∂29,400 Subtotal, Coal ......................................................................................................................................................... 493,382 623,732 644,432 ∂151,050 ∂20,700 

Natural Gas Technologies .................................................................................................................................................... 19,818 .......................... 20,000 ∂182 ∂20,000 Petroleum—Oil Technologies ............................................................................................................................................... 4,954 .......................... 5,000 ∂46 ∂5,000 Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 148,597 126,252 152,804 ∂4,207 ∂26,552 Plant and Capital Equipment .............................................................................................................................................. 12,882 5,000 17,748 ∂4,866 ∂12,748 Fossil energy environmental restoration .............................................................................................................................. 9,483 9,700 9,700 ∂217 ..........................Special recruitment programs .............................................................................................................................................. 650 656 656 ∂6 ..........................Cooperative research and development ............................................................................................................................... 4,954 .......................... 5,000 ∂46 ∂5,000 Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 48,118 .......................... 32,700 ¥15,418 ∂32,700 Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥11,310 ¥11,310 ¥11,310 ..........................

TOTAL, FOSSIL ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ........................................................................................ 742,838 754,030 876,730 ∂133,892 ∂122,700 

NAVAL PETROLEUM AND OIL SHALE RESERVES ................................................................................................................... 20,272 19,099 19,099 ¥1,173 ..........................
140 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE ........................................................................................................................................ 186,757 346,923 205,000 ∂18,243 ¥141,923 Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥2,923 .......................... .......................... ∂2,923 

TOTAL, STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE .............................................................................................................. 186,757 344,000 205,000 ∂18,243 ¥139,000 

NORTHEAST HOME HEATING OIL RESERVE ........................................................................................................................... 12,335 9,800 9,800 ¥2,535 ..........................ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................................................. 95,460 110,595 110,595 ∂15,135 ..........................

NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 

West Valley Demonstration Project ...................................................................................................................................... 53,900 57,600 72,900 ∂19,000 ∂15,300 Fast Flux Test Reactor Facility (WA) .................................................................................................................................... 10,248 10,755 10,755 ∂507 ..........................Gaseous Diffusion Plants ..................................................................................................................................................... 37,773 81,296 92,696 ∂54,923 ∂11,400 Small Sites ........................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... 64,413 90,060 ∂90,060 ∂25,647 Use of Prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥653 .......................... .......................... ∂653 Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... 3,000 ∂3,000 ∂3,000 

TOTAL, NON-DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP ................................................................................................. 101,921 213,411 269,411 ∂167,490 ∂56,000 

URANIUM ENRICHMENT DECONTAMINATION AND DECOMMISSIONING FUND 

Decontamination and decommissioning .............................................................................................................................. 602,344 480,333 515,333 ¥87,011 ∂35,000 Uranium/thorium reimbursement ......................................................................................................................................... 19,818 .......................... .......................... ¥19,818 ..........................

TOTAL, UED&D FUND/URANIUM INVENTORY CLEANUP ........................................................................................... 622,162 480,333 515,333 ¥106,829 ∂35,000 

SCIENCE 

High energy physics: 

Proton accelerator-based physics ............................................................................................................................... 373,274 419,577 419,577 ∂46,303 ..........................Electron accelerator-based physics ............................................................................................................................ 78,046 48,772 48,772 ¥29,274 ..........................Non-accelerator physics .............................................................................................................................................. 61,238 86,482 86,482 ∂25,244 ..........................Theoretical physics ...................................................................................................................................................... 56,391 63,036 63,036 ∂6,645 ..........................
141 

Advanced technology R&D .......................................................................................................................................... 119,368 187,093 187,093 ∂67,725 ..........................

Total, High energy physics ..................................................................................................................................... 688,317 804,960 804,960 ∂116,643 ..........................

Nuclear physics .................................................................................................................................................................... 415,187 479,019 479,019 ∂63,832 ..........................

Construction: 

07–SC–02 Electron beam ion source Brookhaven National Laboratory, NY ..................................................... 4,162 2,438 2,438 ¥1,724 ..........................06–SC–01 Project engineering and design [PED] 12 GeV continuous electron beam accelerator facility upgrade, Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator facility (was project 07–SC–001), Newport News, VA ....... 13,377 28,623 28,623 ∂15,246 ..........................

Total, Nuclear physics ............................................................................................................................... 432,726 510,080 510,080 ∂77,354 ..........................

Biological and environmental research: 

Biological research ...................................................................................................................................................... 407,530 413,613 423,613 ∂16,083 ∂10,000 Climate change research ............................................................................................................................................ 136,867 154,927 174,927 ∂38,060 ∂20,000 

Total, Biological and environmental research ........................................................................................................ 544,397 568,540 598,540 ∂54,143 ∂30,000 

Basic energy sciences: 

Research: 

Materials sciences and engineering research ................................................................................................... 946,403 1,125,579 1,038,839 ∂92,436 ¥86,740 Chemical sciences, geosciences, and energy biosciences ................................................................................ 230,234 297,113 231,071 ∂837 ¥66,042 

Subtotal, Research ......................................................................................................................................... 1,176,637 1,422,692 1,269,910 ∂93,273 ¥152,782 

Construction: 

08–SC–01 Advanced light source [ALS] user support building, LBNL, CA ...................................................... 4,954 11,500 11,500 ∂6,546 ..........................08–SC–10 Project engineering and design [PED] Photon ultrafast laser science and engineering [PULSE] 

building renovation, SLAC, CA ....................................................................................................................... 941 .......................... .......................... ¥941 ..........................

08–SC–11 Photon ultrafast laser science and engineering [PULSE] building renovation, SLAC, CA ............. 6,391 3,728 3,728 ¥2,663 ..........................07–SC–06 Project engineering and design [PED] National Synchrotron light source II [NSLS–II] .................. 29,727 93,273 93,273 ∂63,546 ..........................05–R–320 LINAC coherent light source [LCLS] ................................................................................................. 50,889 36,967 36,967 ¥13,922 ..........................705–R–321 Center for functional nanomaterials [BNL] ................................................................................... 363 .......................... .......................... ¥363 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ................................................................................................................................... 93,265 145,468 145,468 ∂52,203 ..........................Total, Basic energy sciences ......................................................................................................................... 1,269,902 1,568,160 1,415,378 ∂145,476 ¥152,782 

Advanced scientific computing research ............................................................................................................................. 351,173 368,820 368,820 ∂17,647 ..........................Fusion energy sciences program .......................................................................................................................................... 286,548 493,050 493,050 ∂206,502 ..........................
142 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

Science laboratories infrastructure: 

Laboratories facilities support: 

Infrastructure support: 

Payment in lieu of taxes ........................................................................................................................... 1,506 1,385 1,385 ¥121 ..........................Excess facilities disposal .......................................................................................................................... 8,748 14,844 14,844 ∂6,096 ..........................Oak Ridge landlord ................................................................................................................................... 5,033 5,079 5,079 ∂46 ..........................

Subtotal, Infrastructure support ........................................................................................................... 15,287 21,308 21,308 ∂6,021 ..........................

Construction: 

09–SC–72 Seismic life-safety, modernization and replacement of general purpose buildings Phase 

2, PED/Construction, LBNL ................................................................................................................... .......................... 12,495 12,495 ∂12,495 ..........................

09–SC–73, Interdisciplinary science building Phase 1, PED, BNL .......................................................... .......................... 8,240 8,240 ∂8,240 ..........................09–SC–74, Technology and engineering development facilities PED, TJNAF .......................................... .......................... 3,700 3,700 ∂3,700 ..........................08–SC–71 Modernization of laboratory facilities PED, ORNL .................................................................. .......................... 14,103 14,103 ∂14,103 ..........................07–SC–05 Physical science facilities, PNNL ............................................................................................ .......................... 41,155 41,155 ∂41,155 ..........................03–SC–001 Science laboratories infrastructure MEL–001 Multiprogram energy laboratory infrastructure projects, various locations ............................................................................................................ 49,574 9,259 9,259 ¥40,315 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ...................................................................................................................... 49,574 88,952 88,952 ∂39,378 ..........................Total, Science laboratories infrastructure ........................................................................................ 64,861 110,260 110,260 ∂45,399 ..........................

Safeguards and security ...................................................................................................................................................... 75,946 80,603 80,603 ∂4,657 ..........................Science program direction: 

Headquarters ............................................................................................................................................................... 75,525 82,846 75,525 .......................... ¥7,321 Office of Science and Technical Information ............................................................................................................. .......................... 8,916 8,916 ∂8,916 ..........................Field offices ................................................................................................................................................................. 102,254 112,151 102,254 .......................... ¥9,897 

Total, Science program direction ............................................................................................................................ 177,779 203,913 186,695 ∂8,916 ¥17,218 

Workforce development for teachers and scientists ............................................................................................................ 8,044 13,583 13,583 ∂5,539 ..........................
143 

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 123,623 .......................... 58,500 ¥65,123 ∂58,500 

SUBTOTAL, SCIENCE ................................................................................................................................................ 4,023,316 4,721,969 4,640,469 ∂617,153 ¥81,500 

Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................Less security charge for reimbursable work ........................................................................................................................ ¥5,605 .......................... .......................... ∂5,605 ..........................

TOTAL, SCIENCE ...................................................................................................................................................... 4,017,711 4,721,969 4,640,469 ∂622,758 ¥81,500 

NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL 

Repository program .............................................................................................................................................................. 117,906 172,388 118,457 ∂551 ¥53,931 Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 69,363 74,983 74,983 ∂5,620 ..........................Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... 1,950 ∂1,950 ∂1,950 

TOTAL, NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL ........................................................................................................................ 187,269 247,371 195,390 ∂8,121 ¥51,981 

INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY GUARANTEE PROGRAM 

Administrative operations .................................................................................................................................................... 5,459 19,880 19,880 ∂14,421 ..........................Offsetting collection ............................................................................................................................................................. ¥1,000 ¥19,880 ¥19,880 ¥18,880 ..........................Advance appropriation (Public Law 110–161) .................................................................................................................... 42,000 25,000 25,000 ¥17,000 ..........................Proposed change in subsidy cost ........................................................................................................................................ .......................... 355,000 355,000 ∂355,000 ..........................

TOTAL, INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY GUARANTEE PROGRAM ..................................................................................... 46,459 380,000 380,000 ∂333,541 ..........................

DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION 

Administrative operations: 

Salaries and expenses: 

Office of the Secretary ....................................................................................................................................... 5,751 5,700 5,700 ¥51 ..........................Chief Financial Officer ....................................................................................................................................... 41,998 45,048 45,048 ∂3,050 ..........................Management ....................................................................................................................................................... 65,033 67,000 67,000 ∂1,967 ..........................Human capital management ............................................................................................................................. 27,986 31,436 31,436 ∂3,450 ..........................Chief Information Officer ................................................................................................................................... 47,106 53,738 53,738 ∂6,632 ..........................Congressional and intergovernmental affairs ................................................................................................... 4,733 4,700 4,700 ¥33 ..........................Economic impact and diversity .......................................................................................................................... 5,614 3,545 3,545 ¥2,069 ..........................General Counsel ................................................................................................................................................. 29,889 31,233 31,233 ∂1,344 ..........................Policy and international affairs ......................................................................................................................... 18,831 19,469 19,469 ∂638 ..........................Public affairs ...................................................................................................................................................... 3,339 3,780 3,780 ∂441 ..........................
144 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

Office of Indian Energy Policy and Programs .................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................... 250,280 265,649 265,649 ∂15,369 ..........................

Program support: 

Minority economic impact .................................................................................................................................. 829 855 855 ∂26 ..........................Policy analysis and system studies ................................................................................................................... 621 1,000 1,000 ∂379 ..........................Environmental policy studies ............................................................................................................................. 528 531 531 ∂3 ..........................Climate change technology program (prog. supp) ............................................................................................ 1,059 2,000 2,000 ∂941 ..........................Cybersecurity and secure communications ........................................................................................................ 34,865 34,512 34,512 ¥353 ..........................Corporate management information program ................................................................................................... 28,164 27,250 27,250 ¥914 ..........................

Subtotal, Program support ............................................................................................................................ 66,066 66,148 66,148 ∂82 ..........................Total, Administrative operations .................................................................................................................... 316,346 331,797 331,797 ∂15,451 ..........................

Cost of work for others ............................................................................................................................................... 91,420 48,537 48,537 ¥42,883 ..........................

SUBTOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION ......................................................................................................... 407,766 380,334 380,334 ¥27,432 ..........................

Funding from other defense activities ................................................................................................................................. ¥98,104 ¥108,190 ¥108,190 ¥10,086 ..........................

Total, Departmental administration (gross) ........................................................................................................... 309,662 272,144 272,144 ¥37,518 ..........................

Miscellaneous revenues ........................................................................................................................................................ ¥161,247 ¥117,317 ¥117,317 ∂43,930 ..........................

TOTAL, DEPARTMENTAL ADMINISTRATION (net) ...................................................................................................... 148,415 154,827 154,827 ∂6,412 ..........................

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL .......................................................................................................................................... 46,057 51,927 51,927 ∂5,870 ..........................
145 

ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

WEAPONS ACTIVITIES: 

Life extension program: 

B61 Life extension program ............................................................................................................................... 61,908 2,189 2,189 ¥59,719 ..........................W76 Life extension program .............................................................................................................................. 172,213 209,196 209,196 ∂36,983 ..........................

Total, Life extension program ........................................................................................................................ 234,121 211,385 211,385 ¥22,736 ..........................

Stockpile systems: 

B61 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 73,655 80,434 80,434 ∂6,779 ..........................W62 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 2,112 1,645 1,645 ¥467 ..........................W76 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 67,914 68,418 68,418 ∂504 ..........................W78 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 38,245 43,349 43,349 ∂5,104 ..........................W80 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 31,753 32,034 32,034 ∂281 ..........................B83 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 24,534 25,759 25,759 ∂1,225 ..........................W87 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 56,054 37,189 37,189 ¥18,865 ..........................W88 Stockpile systems ....................................................................................................................................... 45,820 49,854 49,854 ∂4,034 ..........................

Total, Stockpile systems ................................................................................................................................ 340,087 338,682 338,682 ¥1,405 ..........................

Reliable replacement warhead .................................................................................................................................... .......................... 10,000 .......................... .......................... ¥10,000 Weapons dismantlement and disposition: 

Operations and maintenance ............................................................................................................................. 134,675 116,822 138,822 ∂4,147 ∂22,000 Construction: 99–D–141 Pit disassembly and conversion facility, SRS ........................................................... .......................... 66,890 66,890 ∂66,890 ..........................

Total, Weapons dismantlement and disposition ........................................................................................... 134,675 183,712 205,712 ∂71,037 ∂22,000 

Stockpile services: 

Production support ............................................................................................................................................. 279,529 302,126 302,126 ∂22,597 ..........................Research and development support .................................................................................................................. 32,691 36,231 36,231 ∂3,540 ..........................Research and development certification and safety ......................................................................................... 178,504 193,375 193,375 ∂14,871 ..........................Management, technology, and production ......................................................................................................... 201,645 201,375 201,375 ¥270 ..........................Pit manufacturing .............................................................................................................................................. .......................... 145,269 145,269 ∂145,269 ..........................Pit manufacturing capability ............................................................................................................................. .......................... 53,560 10,000 ∂10,000 ¥43,560 

Total, Stockpile services ................................................................................................................................ 692,369 931,936 888,376 ∂196,007 ¥43,560 Total, Directed stockpile work ....................................................................................................................... 1,401,252 1,675,715 1,644,155 ∂242,903 ¥31,560 
146 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

Campaigns: 

Science campaign: 

Advanced certification, non-RRW .............................................................................................................. 14,866 20,000 20,000 ∂5,134 ..........................Primary assessment technologies ............................................................................................................. 62,312 74,413 82,413 ∂20,101 ∂8,000 Dynamic plutonium experiments ............................................................................................................... .......................... 23,734 28,734 ∂28,734 ∂5,000 Dynamic materials properties ................................................................................................................... 96,140 85,805 85,805 ¥10,335 ..........................Advanced radiography ............................................................................................................................... 30,402 29,418 29,418 ¥984 ..........................Secondary assessment technologies ......................................................................................................... 78,999 79,292 79,292 ∂293 ..........................Test readiness ........................................................................................................................................... 4,905 10,408 5,408 ∂503 ¥5,000 

Subtotal, Science campaigns ............................................................................................................... 287,624 323,070 331,070 ∂43,446 ∂8,000 

Engineering campaign: 

Enhanced surety, non-RRW ....................................................................................................................... 34,137 35,641 45,641 ∂11,504 ∂10,000 Weapons system engineering assessment technology ............................................................................. 19,314 17,105 17,105 ¥2,209 ..........................Nuclear survivability .................................................................................................................................. 8,644 21,753 21,753 ∂13,109 ..........................Enhanced surveillance .............................................................................................................................. 79,073 68,243 78,243 ¥830 ∂10,000 Microsystem and engineering science applications [MESA], other project costs .................................... 7,485 .......................... .......................... ¥7,485 ..........................Construction: 

08–D–806 Ion beam laboratory refurbishment, SNL, Albuquerque, NM ......................................... 9,911 .......................... .......................... ¥9,911 ..........................01–D–108 Microsystem and engineering science applications [MESA], SNL, Albuquerque, NM ... 10,984 .......................... .......................... ¥10,984 ..........................

Subtotal, MESA ............................................................................................................................ 28,380 .......................... .......................... ¥28,380 ..........................Subtotal, Engineering campaign ................................................................................................. 169,548 142,742 162,742 ¥6,806 ∂20,000 

Inertial confinement fusion ignition and high yield campaign: 

Ignition ...................................................................................................................................................... 103,029 103,644 103,644 ∂615 ..........................NIF diagnostics, cryogenics and experimental support ............................................................................ 68,107 68,248 68,248 ∂141 ..........................Pulsed power inertial confinement fusion ................................................................................................ 10,241 8,920 10,920 ∂679 ∂2,000 Joint program in high energy density laboratory plasmas ....................................................................... 3,152 3,147 3,147 ¥5 ..........................Facility operations and target production ................................................................................................ 112,012 180,384 210,384 ∂98,372 ∂30,000 Inertial fusion technology .......................................................................................................................... 29,426 .......................... .......................... ¥29,426 ..........................
147 

Naval Research Laboratory ....................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................NIF assembly and installation .................................................................................................................. 134,294 56,899 56,899 ¥77,395 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................. 460,261 421,242 453,242 ¥7,019 ∂32,000 

Construction: 96–D–111 National ignition facility, LLNL ......................................................................... 9,945 .......................... .......................... ¥9,945 ..........................

Subtotal, Inertial confinement fusion ................................................................................................... 470,206 421,242 453,242 ¥16,964 ∂32,000 

Advanced simulation and computing ................................................................................................................ 574,537 561,742 573,742 ¥795 ∂12,000 Pit manufacturing and certification: 

Pit manufacturing ..................................................................................................................................... 137,323 .......................... .......................... ¥137,323 ..........................Pit certification .......................................................................................................................................... 37,273 .......................... .......................... ¥37,273 ..........................Pit manufacturing capability .................................................................................................................... 39,235 .......................... .......................... ¥39,235 ..........................

Subtotal, Pit manufacturing and certification ..................................................................................... 213,831 .......................... .......................... ¥213,831 ..........................

Readiness campaign: 

Stockpile readiness ................................................................................................................................... 18,562 28,731 21,731 ∂3,169 ¥7,000 High explosives and weapon operations ................................................................................................... 9,647 8,927 8,927 ¥720 ..........................Nonnuclear readiness ................................................................................................................................ 25,103 40,165 33,165 ∂8,062 ¥7,000 Tritium readiness ...................................................................................................................................... 71,831 82,265 71,265 ¥566 ¥11,000 Advanced design and production technologies ........................................................................................ 32,945 22,949 22,949 ¥9,996 ..........................

Subtotal, Readiness campaign ............................................................................................................. 158,088 183,037 158,037 ¥51 ¥25,000 Total, Campaigns .................................................................................................................................. 1,873,834 1,631,833 1,678,833 ¥195,001 ∂47,000 

Readiness in technical base and facilities [RTBF]: 

Operations of facilities: 

Kansas City Plant ...................................................................................................................................... 84,702 122,389 103,389 ∂18,687 ¥19,000 Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory .................................................................................................. 89,303 85,160 85,160 ¥4,143 ..........................Los Alamos National Laboratory ............................................................................................................... 285,025 298,112 298,112 ∂13,087 ..........................Nevada Test Site ....................................................................................................................................... 64,863 92,203 92,203 ∂27,340 ..........................Pantex ........................................................................................................................................................ 112,813 104,361 104,361 ¥8,452 ..........................Sandia National Laboratory ....................................................................................................................... 153,873 127,827 127,827 ¥26,046 ..........................Savannah River Site .................................................................................................................................. 85,738 108,114 108,114 ∂22,376 ..........................Y–12 Productions Plant ............................................................................................................................ 224,190 216,904 216,904 ¥7,286 ..........................Institutional Site Support .......................................................................................................................... 53,948 57,837 57,837 ∂3,889 ..........................

Subtotal, operations of facilities .......................................................................................................... 1,154,455 1,212,907 1,193,907 ∂39,452 ¥19,000 

Program readiness ............................................................................................................................................. 70,099 73,841 73,841 ∂3,742 ..........................
148 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

Material recycle and recovery ............................................................................................................................ 71,567 72,509 72,509 ∂942 ..........................Containers .......................................................................................................................................................... 21,760 23,398 23,398 ∂1,638 ..........................Storage ............................................................................................................................................................... 34,462 29,846 29,846 ¥4,616 ..........................

Subtotal, RTBF ............................................................................................................................................... 1,352,343 1,412,501 1,393,501 ∂41,158 ¥19,000 

Construction: 

09–D–007, LANSCE Refurbishment PED Los Alamos National La, Los Alamos, NM .............................. .......................... .......................... 35,000 ∂35,000 ∂35,000 09–D–404, Test capabilities revitalization II, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM ............ .......................... 3,200 3,200 ∂3,200 ..........................08–D–801 High pressure fire loop [HPFL] Pantex Plant, Amerillo, TX .................................................... 6,866 2,000 2,000 ¥4,866 ..........................08–D–802 High explosive pressing facility Pantex Plant, Amerillo, TX ................................................... 15,008 28,233 28,233 ∂13,225 ..........................08–D–804 TA–55 Reinvestment project, Los Alamos National Laboratory [LANL] .................................. 5,885 7,900 7,900 ∂2,015 ..........................08–D–806 Ion beam laboratory refurbishment, SNL Albuquerque, NM ................................................... .......................... 10,014 10,014 ∂10,014 ..........................07–D–140 Project engineering and design [PED], various locations ...................................................... 2,452 7,446 7,446 ∂4,994 ..........................07–D–220 Radioactive liquid waste treatment facility upgrade project, LANL ...................................... 26,162 19,660 19,660 ¥6,502 ..........................06–D–140 Project engineering and design [PED], various locations ...................................................... 41,552 104,661 47,083 ∂5,531 ¥57,578 06–D–402 NTS replace fire stations 1 & 2 Nevada Test Site, NV .......................................................... 6,591 9,340 9,340 ∂2,749 ..........................05–D–140 Project engineering and design [PED], various locations ...................................................... 1,961 .......................... .......................... ¥1,961 ..........................05–D–402 Beryllium capability [BEC] project, Y–12 National security complex, Oak Ridge, TN ........... .......................... 5,015 5,015 ∂5,015 ..........................04–D–125 Chemistry and metallurgy facility replacement project, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 

Los Alamos, NM .................................................................................................................................... 74,141 100,200 125,000 ∂50,859 ∂24,800 

04–D–128 TA–18 mission relocation project, Los Alamos Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM ........................ 28,892 10,353 10,353 ¥18,539 ..........................01–D–124 HEU materials facility, Y–12 plant, Oak Ridge, TN ............................................................... 75,528 .......................... .......................... ¥75,528 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction .......................................................................................................................... 285,038 308,022 310,244 ∂25,206 ∂2,222 Total, Readiness in technical base and facilities ............................................................................... 1,637,381 1,720,523 1,703,745 ∂66,364 ¥16,778 

Facilities and infrastructure recapitalization pgm ..................................................................................................... 118,471 99,550 93,550 ¥24,921 ¥6,000 

Construction: 

08–D–601 Mercury highway, Nevada Test Site, NV ................................................................................. 7,651 11,700 11,700 ∂4,049 ..........................08–D–602 Portable water system upgrades Y–12 Plant, Oak Ridge, TN ............................................... 22,070 27,666 27,666 ∂5,596 ..........................07–D–253 TA 1 heating systems modernization [HSM] Sandia National Laboratory ............................. 12,751 15,755 15,755 ∂3,004 ..........................
149 

06–D–601 Electrical distribution system upgrade, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, TX ...................................... 2,452 4,000 4,000 ∂1,548 ..........................06–D–602 Gas main and distribution system upgrade, Pantex Plant, Amarillo, TX .............................. 1,863 .......................... .......................... ¥1,863 ..........................06–D–603 Steam plant life extension project [SLEP], Y–12 National Security Complex, Oak Ridge, 

TN .......................................................................................................................................................... 14,733 10,878 10,878 ¥3,855 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ...................................................................................................................... 61,520 69,999 69,999 ∂8,479 ..........................Total, Facilities and infrastructure recapitalization program ......................................................... 179,991 169,549 163,549 ¥16,442 ¥6,000 

Transformation disposition .......................................................................................................................................... .......................... 77,391 .......................... .......................... ¥77,391 Safeguards and security: 

Secure transportation asset: 

Operations and equipment ........................................................................................................................ 128,343 131,651 131,651 ∂3,308 ..........................Program direction ...................................................................................................................................... 83,180 89,421 89,421 ∂6,241 ..........................

Subtotal, Secure transportation asset .................................................................................................. 211,523 221,072 221,072 ∂9,549 ..........................

Defense nuclear security .................................................................................................................................... 728,123 690,217 690,217 ¥37,906 ..........................

Construction: 

08–D–701 Nuclear materials S&S upgrade project Los Alamos National Laboratory ................... 48,550 46,000 46,000 ¥2,550 ..........................05–D–170 Project engineering and design [PED], various locations ............................................. 7,847 1,111 1,111 ¥6,736 ..........................08–D–702 Material security consolidation project, Idaho National Lab, ID ................................... 14,713 .......................... .......................... ¥14,713 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ................................................................................................................. 71,110 47,111 47,111 ¥23,999 ..........................Subtotal, Defense nuclear security .............................................................................................. 799,233 737,328 737,328 ¥61,905 ..........................

Cybersecurity ...................................................................................................................................................... 100,287 122,511 122,511 ∂22,224 ..........................

Total, Safeguards and security ..................................................................................................................... 899,520 859,839 859,839 ¥39,681 ..........................

Environmental projects and operations: Long term stewardship ............................................................................... 8,592 40,587 28,316 ∂19,724 ¥12,271 Nuclear weapons incident response ........................................................................................................................... 158,655 221,936 221,936 ∂63,281 ..........................Congressionally directed projects ............................................................................................................................... 47,232 .......................... 3,500 ¥43,732 ∂3,500 Less security charge for reimbursable work ............................................................................................................... ¥34,000 .......................... .......................... ∂34,000 ..........................Use of prior year balances .......................................................................................................................................... ¥86,514 ¥366 ¥366 ∂86,148 ..........................

SUBTOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES ............................................................................................................................ 6,297,466 6,618,079 6,524,579 ∂227,113 ¥93,500 

Rescission of prior year balances ............................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

TOTAL, WEAPONS ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................................................. 6,297,466 6,618,079 6,524,579 ∂227,113 ¥93,500 
150 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION 

Nonproliferation and verification, R&D ................................................................................................................................ 362,424 261,944 336,944 ¥25,480 ∂75,000 

Construction: 

07–SC–05 Physical Science Facility, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA ........................... .......................... 13,147 13,147 ∂13,147 ..........................06–D–180 06–01 Project engineering and design [PED] National Security Laboratory, PNNL ....................... 24,772 .......................... .......................... ¥24,772 ..........................

Subtotal, Nonproliferation & verification R&D .............................................................................................. 387,196 275,091 350,091 ¥37,105 ∂75,000 

Nonproliferation and international security ......................................................................................................................... 149,993 140,467 175,467 ∂25,474 ∂35,000 International nuclear materials protection and cooperation ............................................................................................... 624,482 429,694 429,694 ¥194,788 ..........................Elimination of weapons-grade plutonium production program ........................................................................................... 179,940 141,299 141,299 ¥38,641 ..........................Fissile materials disposition: 

U.S. surplus fissile materials disposition ................................................................................................................... .......................... 40,774 40,774 ∂40,774 ..........................U.S. uranium disposition ............................................................................................................................................. 66,235 .......................... .......................... ¥66,235 ..........................Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility: 

Operations and maintenance ............................................................................................................................. .......................... 19,200 19,200 ∂19,200 ..........................Construction and other project costs: 99–D–143 MOX fuel fabrication facility .............................................. .......................... 467,808 467,808 ∂467,808 ..........................

Subtotal, Mixed oxide fuel fabrication facility .............................................................................................. .......................... 487,008 487,008 ∂487,008 ..........................Subtotal, U.S. surplus fissile materials disp ................................................................................................ 66,235 527,782 527,782 ∂461,547 ..........................

Russian surplus materials disposition ....................................................................................................................... .......................... 1,000 1,000 ∂1,000 ..........................

Total, Fissile materials disposition ........................................................................................................................ 66,235 528,782 528,782 ∂462,547 ..........................

Global threat reduction initiative ......................................................................................................................................... 193,225 219,641 284,641 ∂91,416 ∂65,000 International nuclear fuel bank ........................................................................................................................................... 49,545 .......................... .......................... ¥49,545 ..........................Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 7,380 .......................... .......................... ¥7,380 ..........................

Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ........................................................................................................... 1,657,996 1,734,974 1,909,974 ∂251,978 ∂175,000 
151 

Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥918 ¥918 ¥918 ..........................

Subtotal, Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation ........................................................................................................... 1,657,996 1,734,056 1,909,056 ∂251,060 ∂175,000 

Rescissions: 

Rescission of prior year balances—Russian Surplus Materials Disposition program .............................................. ¥57,000 .......................... .......................... ∂57,000 ..........................Rescission of prior year balances—Fissile materials disposition MOX construction line ........................................ ¥115,000 .......................... .......................... ∂115,000 ..........................Rescission of prior year balances for Emergency Supplemental for fiscal year 1999 (H.R. 4328, Public Law 

102–277) ................................................................................................................................................................ ¥150,000 .......................... .......................... ∂150,000 ..........................

Total, Rescissions ............................................................................................................................................... ¥322,000 .......................... .......................... ∂322,000 ..........................TOTAL, DEFENSE NUCLEAR NONPROLIFERATION ................................................................................................ 1,335,996 1,734,056 1,909,056 ∂573,060 ∂175,000 

NAVAL REACTORS 

Naval reactors development ................................................................................................................................................. 732,374 771,600 771,600 ∂39,226 ..........................Construction: 

09–D–190, PED, Infrastructure upgrades, KAPL ........................................................................................................ .......................... 1,000 1,000 ∂1,000 ..........................09–D–902, NRF Office Building #2, ECC upgrade, Idaho ......................................................................................... .......................... 8,300 8,300 ∂8,300 ..........................08–D–901 Shipping and receiving and warehouse complex [SRWC], BAPL ............................................................. 8,918 .......................... .......................... ¥8,918 ..........................08–D–190 Project engineering and design, Expended Core Facility M–290 recovering discharge station, Naval 

Reactor Facility, ID ................................................................................................................................................. 545 300 300 ¥245 ..........................

07–D–190 Materials research technology complex [MRTC] ....................................................................................... 446 12,400 12,400 ∂11,954 ..........................

Subtotal, Construction ............................................................................................................................................ 9,909 22,000 22,000 ∂12,091 ..........................Total, Naval reactors development ......................................................................................................................... 742,283 793,600 793,600 ∂51,317 ..........................

Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 32,403 34,454 34,454 ∂2,051 ..........................

TOTAL, NAVAL REACTORS ........................................................................................................................................ 774,686 828,054 828,054 ∂53,368 ..........................

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR 

Office of the Administrator .................................................................................................................................................. 379,997 404,081 404,081 ∂24,084 ..........................Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 22,140 .......................... .......................... ¥22,140 ..........................

TOTAL, OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR ................................................................................................................. 402,137 404,081 404,081 ∂1,944 ..........................TOTAL, NATIONAL NUCLEAR SECURITY ADMINISTRATION ....................................................................................... 8,810,285 9,584,270 9,665,770 ∂855,485 ∂81,500 
152 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP 

Closure Sites ........................................................................................................................................................................ 42,050 45,883 59,383 ∂17,333 ∂13,500 Hanford Site: 

Operating projects 2012 accelerated completions ..................................................................................................... 419,189 400,902 490,479 ∂71,290 ∂89,577 Operating projects 2035 accelerated completions ..................................................................................................... 467,309 450,885 530,085 ∂62,776 ∂79,200 

Total, Hanford Site .................................................................................................................................................. 886,498 851,787 1,020,564 ∂134,066 ∂168,777 

Idaho National Laboratory .................................................................................................................................................... 508,358 432,124 465,124 ¥43,234 ∂33,000 NNSA: 

NNSA Service Center/SPRU .......................................................................................................................................... 28,831 16,943 21,943 ¥6,888 ∂5,000 Nevada ......................................................................................................................................................................... 80,368 65,674 75,674 ¥4,694 ∂10,000 California site support ................................................................................................................................................ 367 .......................... .......................... ¥367 ..........................Pantex .......................................................................................................................................................................... 20,027 .......................... .......................... ¥20,027 ..........................Sandia National Laboratories ...................................................................................................................................... .......................... .......................... 3,000 ∂3,000 ∂3,000 Los Alamos National Laboratory ................................................................................................................................. 152,070 162,467 245,467 ∂93,397 ∂83,000 

Total, NNSA sites and Nevada off-sites ................................................................................................................. 281,663 245,084 346,084 ∂64,421 ∂101,000 

Oak Ridge Reservation ......................................................................................................................................................... 190,535 237,670 255,000 ∂64,465 ∂17,330 Office of River Protection: 

Waste treatment & immobilization plant ................................................................................................................... 683,722 690,000 690,000 ∂6,278 ..........................Tank Farm activities: 

Rad liquid tank waste stabil. and disposition .................................................................................................. 285,351 288,443 341,443 ∂56,092 ∂53,000 River protection community and regulatory support ......................................................................................... 467 .......................... .......................... ¥467 ..........................

Subtotal, Tank Farm activities ...................................................................................................................... 285,818 288,443 341,443 ∂55,625 ∂53,000 Total, Office of River Protection .................................................................................................................... 969,540 978,443 1,031,443 ∂61,903 ∂53,000 
153 

Savannah River site: 

04–D–423 Container surveillance capability in 235F ................................................................................................ 10,900 .......................... .......................... ¥10,900 ..........................04–D–414 Project Engineering and Design, 105–K ................................................................................................... .......................... 2,032 2,032 ∂2,032 ..........................

Subtotal, 2012 accelerated completions ................................................................................................................ 10,900 2,032 2,032 ¥8,868 ..........................

Operating projects 2035 accelerated completions .............................................................................................................. 509,394 498,651 557,187 ∂47,793 ∂58,536 

Construction: 08–D–414 Project engineering and design Plutonium Vitrification Facility, VL ................................. 991 .......................... .......................... ¥991 ..........................

Subtotal, 2035 accelerated completions ................................................................................................................ 510,385 498,651 557,187 ∂46,802 ∂58,536 

Tank Farm activities: 

Rad liquid tank waste stabil. and disposition .................................................................................................. 513,799 578,218 578,218 ∂64,419 ..........................05–D–405, Salt waste processing facility ........................................................................................................ 87,199 127,524 127,524 ∂40,325 ..........................03–D–414, Salt waste processing facility PED SR ........................................................................................... 9,910 .......................... .......................... ¥9,910 ..........................

Subtotal, Tank farm activities ....................................................................................................................... 610,908 705,742 705,742 ∂94,834 ..........................Total, Savannah River site ............................................................................................................................ 1,132,193 1,206,425 1,264,961 ∂132,768 ∂58,536 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant ................................................................................................................................................... 234,585 211,524 231,661 ¥2,924 ∂20,137 Program direction ................................................................................................................................................................. 306,941 308,765 308,765 ∂1,824 ..........................Program support ................................................................................................................................................................... 32,844 33,930 33,930 ∂1,086 ..........................Safeguards and Security ...................................................................................................................................................... 259,332 251,341 260,341 ∂1,009 ∂9,000 Technology development ....................................................................................................................................................... 21,194 32,389 22,250 ∂1,056 ¥10,139 Uranium enrichment D&D fund contribution ....................................................................................................................... 458,787 463,000 463,000 ∂4,213 ..........................

SUBTOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN UP .................................................................................................. 5,324,520 5,298,365 5,762,506 ∂437,986 ∂464,141 

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ 17,195 .......................... 9,000 ¥8,195 ∂9,000 Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥1,109 .......................... .......................... ∂1,109 

TOTAL, DEFENSE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN UP ........................................................................................................ 5,341,715 5,297,256 5,771,506 ∂429,791 ∂474,250 

OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES 

Health, safety and security: 

Health, safety and security ......................................................................................................................................... 326,324 347,271 347,271 ∂20,947 ..........................Program direction ........................................................................................................................................................ 99,137 99,597 99,597 ∂460 ..........................

Total, Health, safety and security .......................................................................................................................... 425,461 446,868 446,868 ∂21,407 ..........................
154 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

Office of Legacy Management: 

Legacy management ................................................................................................................................................... 144,060 174,397 174,397 ∂30,337 ..........................Program direction ........................................................................................................................................................ 10,901 11,584 11,584 ∂683 ..........................

Total, Office of Legacy Management ...................................................................................................................... 154,961 185,981 185,981 ∂31,020 ..........................

Nuclear energy: Infrastructure: Idaho sitewide safeguards and security ........................................................................... 75,261 78,811 78,811 ∂3,550 ..........................

Total, Nuclear energy .............................................................................................................................................. 75,261 78,811 78,811 ∂3,550 ..........................

Defense related administrative support .............................................................................................................................. 98,104 108,190 108,190 ∂10,086 ..........................Office of Hearings and Appeals ........................................................................................................................................... 4,565 6,603 6,603 ∂2,038 ..........................

Subtotal, Other Defense Activities .......................................................................................................................... 758,352 826,453 826,453 ∂68,101 ..........................

Congressionally directed projects ........................................................................................................................................ .......................... .......................... 1,050 ∂1,050 ∂1,050 Less security charge for reimbursable work ........................................................................................................................ ¥3,003 .......................... .......................... ∂3,003 ..........................Use of prior year balances ................................................................................................................................................... ¥990 .......................... .......................... ∂990 ..........................

TOTAL, OTHER DEFENSE ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................................... 754,359 826,453 827,503 ∂73,144 ∂1,050 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR WASTE DISPOSAL .................................................................................................................................. 199,171 247,371 193,000 ¥6,171 ¥54,371 

TOTAL, ATOMIC ENERGY DEFENSE ACTIVITIES ........................................................................................................ 15,105,530 15,955,350 16,457,779 ∂1,352,249 ∂502,429 

POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS 

SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION: 

Operation and maintenance: 

Purchase power and wheeling ........................................................................................................................... 62,215 63,522 63,522 ∂1,307 ..........................Program direction ............................................................................................................................................... 6,404 7,420 7,420 ∂1,016 ..........................

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance .......................................................................................................... 68,619 70,942 70,942 ∂2,323 ..........................
155 

Less alternative financing (PPW) ................................................................................................................................ ¥13,802 ¥14,002 ¥14,002 ¥200 ..........................Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. ¥48,413 ¥49,520 ¥49,520 ¥1,107 ..........................

TOTAL, SOUTHEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................. 6,404 7,420 7,420 ∂1,016 ..........................

SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION: 

Operation and maintenance: 

Operating expenses ............................................................................................................................................ 11,892 12,865 12,865 ∂973 ..........................Purchase power and wheeling ........................................................................................................................... 45,000 46,000 46,000 ∂1,000 ..........................Program direction ............................................................................................................................................... 22,054 24,330 24,330 ∂2,276 ..........................Construction ....................................................................................................................................................... 4,269 5,991 5,991 ∂1,722 ..........................

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance .......................................................................................................... 83,215 89,186 89,186 ∂5,971 ..........................

Less alternative financing (for program direction) .................................................................................................... ¥877 ¥2,200 ¥2,200 ¥1,323 ..........................Less alternative financing (for O&M) ......................................................................................................................... ¥6,304 ¥9,381 ¥9,381 ¥3,077 ..........................Less alternative financing (PPW) ................................................................................................................................ ¥10,000 ¥11,000 ¥11,000 ¥1,000 ..........................Less alternative financing (Const.) ............................................................................................................................ ¥869 ¥3,191 ¥3,191 ¥2,322 ..........................Offsetting collections .................................................................................................................................................. ¥35,000 ¥35,000 ¥35,000 .......................... ..........................

TOTAL, SOUTHWESTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................. 30,165 28,414 28,414 ¥1,751 ..........................

WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION: 

Operation and maintenance: 

Construction and rehabilitation ......................................................................................................................... 62,419 74,544 74,544 ∂12,125 ..........................Operation and maintenance ............................................................................................................................... 52,873 52,365 52,365 ¥508 ..........................Purchase power and wheeling ........................................................................................................................... 475,254 525,960 600,960 ∂125,706 ∂75,000 Program direction ............................................................................................................................................... 156,128 166,423 166,423 ∂10,295 ..........................Utah mitigation and conservation ..................................................................................................................... 7,114 7,342 7,342 ∂228 ..........................

Subtotal, Operation and maintenance .......................................................................................................... 753,788 826,634 901,634 ∂147,846 ∂75,000 

Less alternative financing (for O&M) ......................................................................................................................... ¥5,000 ¥15,499 ¥15,499 ¥10,499 ..........................Less alternative financing (for Const.) ....................................................................................................................... ¥30,690 ¥72,663 ¥47,663 ¥16,973 ∂25,000 Less alternative financing (for Program direction) .................................................................................................... ¥10,000 ¥15,800 ¥15,800 ¥5,800 ..........................Less alternative financing (for PPW) .......................................................................................................................... ¥166,552 ¥197,842 ¥197,842 ¥31,290 ..........................Offsetting collections (Public Law 108–477, Public Law 109–103) ......................................................................... ¥308,702 ¥328,118 ¥403,118 ¥94,416 ¥75,000 Offsetting collections (Public Law 98–381) ............................................................................................................... ¥3,937 ¥3,366 ¥3,366 ∂571 ..........................

TOTAL, WESTERN AREA POWER ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................. 228,907 193,346 218,346 ¥10,561 ∂25,000 
156 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Revised enacted Budget estimate Committee recommendation 

Committee recommendation compared 

to— 

Revised enacted Budget estimate 

FALCON AND AMISTAD OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE FUND: Operation and maintenance ............................................. 2,477 2,959 2,959 ∂482 ..........................

TOTAL, POWER MARKETING ADMINISTRATIONS ....................................................................................................... 267,953 232,139 257,139 ¥10,814 ∂25,000 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION: 

Federal energy regulatory commission ........................................................................................................................ 260,425 273,400 273,400 ∂12,975 ..........................FERC revenues ............................................................................................................................................................. ¥260,425 ¥273,400 ¥273,400 ¥12,975 ..........................

GRAND TOTAL, DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY ............................................................................................................... 24,122,361 25,917,888 27,041,658 ∂2,919,297 ∂1,123,770 

(Total amount appropriated) ......................................................................................................................... (24,294,361 ) (25,743,888 ) (26,867,658 ) (∂2,573,297 ) (∂1,123,770 ) (Rescissions, including emergency funding) ................................................................................................. (¥322,000 ) .......................... .......................... (∂322,000 ) ..........................(Deferrals) ...................................................................................................................................................... (108,000 ) (149,000 ) (149,000 ) (∂41,000 ) ..........................(Advance appropriation) ................................................................................................................................ (42,000 ) (25,000 ) (25,000 ) (¥17,000 ) ..........................
157 

GENERAL PROVISIONS—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

The following list of general provisions is recommended by the 

Committee. The recommendation includes several provisions which 

have been included in previous Energy and Water Appropriations 

Acts and new provisions as follows: 

Section 301. Language is included under section 301 to provide 

incentives for downblending of highly enriched uranium. 

Section 302. Language is included under section 302, which prohibits the use of funds in this act to initiate a request for proposal 

of expression of interest for new programs which have not yet been 

presented to Congress in the annual budget submission and which 

have not yet been approved and funded by Congress. 

Section 303. Language is included under section 303 which prohibits the use of funds for severance payments under the worker 

and community transition program under section 3161 of Public 

Law 102–484. 

Section 304. Language is included under section 304 to prohibit 

the augmentation of several payments under section 3161 of Public 

Law 102–484 unless a reprogramming request is submitted to Congress. 

Section 305. Language is included in section 305, which permits 

the transfer and merger of unexpended balances of prior appropriations with appropriation accounts established in this bill. 

Section 306. Language is included that prohibits the use of funds 

by the Bonneville Power Administration to enter into energy efficiency contracts outside its service area. 

Section 307. This section establishes certain notice and competition requirements for Department of Energy user facilities. 

Section 308. Language is included specifically authorizing intelligence activities pending enactment of the fiscal year 2008 Intelligence Authorization Act. 

Section 309. Language included in section 309 related to laboratory directed research and development authorizes an increase of 

2 percent in laboratory directed research and development funds 

for the purpose of diversifying the laboratories’ activities in the 

areas of energy security and global climate science and modeling. 

Section 310. Language is included regarding transfer authority. 

Section 311. The Committee has included a provision related to 

general plant projects. 

Section 312. The Committee has included a provision related to 

the Reno Hydrogen Fuel Project. 

Section 313. The Committee has included a provision related to 

the integrated university program. 

Section 314. The Committee has included a provision related to 

naming laboratory facilities. 
(158) 

TITLE IV 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL COMMISSION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $73,032,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 65,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 85,000,000 

Established in 1965, the Appalachian Regional Commission is an 

economic development agency composed of 13 Appalachian States 

and a Federal co-chair appointed by the President. For fiscal year 

2009, the Committee recommends $85,000,000 for the ARC, of 

which $6,325,000 is for salaries and expenses and $71,675,000 is 

for area development and $7,000,000 is for local development districts. 

Area Development and Technical Assistant Program funds are 

used to increase job opportunities and income, improve education 

and health, strengthen infrastructure, and for the Appalachian 

Highway System. Such funds are allocated by formula, with assistance targeted to the most distressed and underdeveloped areas. 

Local Development Districts Program funds assist local governments in promoting sustainable community and economic development in the Appalachian region. 

The Committee recognizes the importance of trade and investment opportunities to the Appalachian Region and is encouraged 

by the findings in a report that Appalachian firms could find significant trade and investment opportunities, particularly in the energy, high technology, and transportation sectors in the Republic of 

Turkey and the surrounding region. In this regard, the Committee 

supports the Appalachian-Turkish Trade Project [ATTP], a project 

to promote opportunities to expand trade, encourage business interests, stimulate foreign studies, and to build a lasting and mutually 

meaningful relationship between Appalachian States and the Republic of Turkey, as well as the neighboring regions, such as 

Greece. The Committee commends the ARC for its leadership role 

in helping to implement the mission of the ATTP. The Committee 

expects the ARC to continue to be a prominent ATTP sponsor. 

The Committee has included no earmarks in the ARC funds. The 

Commission allocates its funds by formula to its member States, 

based primarily on need. Under the Commission’s formula system, 

earmarks out of ARC’s base funding could come at the expense of 

those States that have no earmarks. Accordingly, the Committee 

directs that any earmarks in any State be taken from within that 

State’s regular ARC allocation. 
159 

DEFENSE NUCLEAR FACILITIES SAFETY BOARD

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $21,909,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 25,499,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 25,499,000 

For fiscal year 2009, the Committee recommends $25,499,000, 

the same as the President’s request, for the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board [DNFSB]. This Board is responsible for evaluating the implementation of standards for design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Department of Energy’s defense nuclear facilities. Based on these evaluations, the Board 

makes specific recommendations to the Secretary of Energy to ensure that both public and employee heath and safety are protected. 

The Committee encourages the DNFSB to undertake the responsibility to provide cost estimates to accompany their recommendations. 

DELTA REGIONAL AUTHORITY

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $11,685,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 6,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 20,000,000 

For the Delta Regional Authority, the Committee recommends 

$20,000,000. The Delta Regional Authority was established to assist the eight State Mississippi Delta Region in obtaining basic infrastructure, transportation, skills training, and opportunities for 

economic development. The Government Accountability Office recently reported that the DRA has a commendable record in the percentage of funds spent in rural America, and the Committee recognizes the DRA’s role in bettering this underserved area of the Nation. 

DENALI COMMISSION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $21,800,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,800,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 21,800,000 

The Denali Commission is a Federal-State partnership responsible for promoting infrastructure development, job training, and 

other economic development services in rural areas throughout 

Alaska. For fiscal year 2009, the Committee recommends 

$21,800,000. 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

SALARIES AND EXPENSES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $917,334,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 1,007,956,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 1,022,956,000 

REVENUES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ¥$771,220,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ¥847,357,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥860,857,000 
160 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $146,114,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 160,599,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 162,099,000 

The Committee recommendation for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for fiscal year 2009 is $1,022,956, an increase of 

$15,000,000 over the budget request. This amount is offset by estimated revenues of $860,857,000 resulting in a net appropriation of 

$162,099,000. The Committee has provided $15,000,000 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to support its participation in an Integrated University Program. The Committee recommends 

$10,000,000 of this amount to be used to support university programs relevant to the NRC mission. In addition, not less than 

$5,000,000 of this amount will be used for grants to support research projects that do not align with programmatic missions but 

are critical to maintaining the discipline of nuclear science and engineering. 

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $8,744,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 9,044,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 9,344,000 

REVENUES

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ¥$7,870,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ¥8,140,600 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ¥8,410,000 

NET APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $874,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 904,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 934,000 

The Committee recommends an appropriation of $9,344,000, an increase of $300,000 over the budget request. The additional funds 

will provide the Office of Inspector General with the necessary resources to provide effective oversight of the agency’s IT security 

controls and information to identify vulnerabilities and mitigate 

risks to the agency’s operations. The Committee also recommends 

that the current no year funding authority of the Office of Inspector General be retained. The Office of Inspector General, as an administrative entity, is fully integrated into the administrative processes at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to include its accounting, pay and travel system, as well as other infrastructure support 

systems. In addition, the proposed 2-year funding authority could 

limit the continuity of the Inspector General’s oversight. 

NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. $3,621,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 3,811,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 3,811,000 

The Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board was established to 

evaluate the scientific and technical validity of the Department of 
161 

Energy’s nuclear waste disposal program. The Board reports its 

findings no fewer than two times a year to Congress and to the 

Secretary of Energy. For fiscal year 2009, the Committee recommends $3,811,000. 

OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL COORDINATOR FOR ALASKA NATURAL GAS

TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS

Appropriation, 2008 ............................................................................... $2,261,000 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... 4,400,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. 4,400,000 

The Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas 

Transportation Projects was established as an independent agency 

in the executive branch on December 13, 2006, pursuant to the 

Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline Act of 2004. The Committee recommends $4,400,000, the same as the budget request. 

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

GROSS APPROPRIATION

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... $17,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

OFFSET FROM TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY FUND

Appropriations, 2008 ............................................................................. ........................... 

Budget estimate, 2009 ........................................................................... ¥$17,000,000 

Committee recommendation ................................................................. ........................... 

The Committee recommendation does not include the administration’s proposal to establish a congressionally funded Office of the 

Inspector General to oversee the Tennessee Valley Authority. In recent years, the TVA has funded the requests of the TVA–IG office 

out of power revenues and receipts. This process has worked well, 

and the Committee sees no compelling reason to change that mechanism for funding the TVA–IG. 

GENERAL PROVISION, INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

The following general provision is recommended by the Committee. 
(162) 

TITLE V 

GENERAL PROVISIONS 

The following list of general provisions are recommended by the 

Committee. 

Section 501. The provision prohibits the use of any funds provided in this bill from being used to influence congressional action. 

Section 502. The provision addresses transfer authority under 

this act. 
(163) 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI, OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports on general appropriations bills identify each Committee amendment to 

the House bill ‘‘which proposes an item of appropriation which is 

not made to carry out the provisions of an existing law, a treaty 

stipulation, or an act or resolution previously passed by the Senate 

during that session.’’ 

The Committee recommends funding for the following programs 

or activities which currently lack authorization for fiscal year 2009: 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers: General Investigations; Construction, General; Mississippi River and Tributaries; Operations 

and Maintenance; Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program; 

Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation; 

Water and Related Resources; 

Department of Energy: Energy Conservation and Supply Activities: 

Office of Fossil Energy: Fossil Energy R&D, Clean Coal, Naval 

Petroleum and Oil Shale Research; 

Health, Safety and Security; 

Non-Defense Environmental Management; 

Office of Science; 

Department of Administration; 

National Nuclear Security Administration: Weapons Activities; 

Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation; Naval Reactors; Office of the Administrator; 

Defense Environmental Management, Defense Site Acceleration 

Completion; 

Other Defense Activities; 

Defense Nuclear Waste Fund; 

Office of Security and Performance Assurance; 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; 

Power Marketing Administrations: Southeastern, Southwestern, 

Western Area; and 

Energy Information Administration. 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI, OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 10, 2008, the 

Committee ordered reported an original bill (S. 3258) making appropriations for the energy and water development and related 

agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and authorized the chairman of the Committee or the chairman of the subcommittee to offer the text of the Senate bill as a Committee 

amendment in the nature of a substitute to the House companion 

measure, with the bill subject to amendment and subject to the 
164 

budget allocations, by a recorded vote of 29–0, a quorum being 

present. The vote was as follows: 

Yeas Nays 

Chairman Byrd 

Mr. Inouye 

Mr. Leahy 

Mr. Harkin 

Ms. Mikulski 

Mr. Kohl 

Mrs. Murray 

Mr. Dorgan 

Mrs. Feinstein 

Mr. Durbin 

Mr. Johnson 

Ms. Landrieu 

Mr. Reed 

Mr. Lautenberg 

Mr. Nelson 

Mr. Cochran 

Mr. Stevens 

Mr. Specter 

Mr. Domenici 

Mr. Bond 

Mr. McConnell 

Mr. Shelby 

Mr. Gregg 

Mr. Bennett 

Mr. Craig 

Mrs. Hutchison 

Mr. Brownback 

Mr. Allard 

Mr. Alexander 

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI, OF THE 

STANDING RULES OF THE SENATE 

Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports on 

a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute or part 

of any statute include ‘‘(a) the text of the statute or part thereof 

which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a comparative print of 

that part of the bill or joint resolution making the amendment and 

of the statute or part thereof proposed to be amended, showing by 

stricken-through type and italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical devices the omissions and insertions which 

would be made by the bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form 

recommended by the Committee.’’ 

In compliance with this rule, changes in existing law proposed to 

be made by the bill are shown as follows: existing law to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and 

existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman. 
165 

OMNIBUS CONSOLIDATED RESCISSIONS AND 

APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1996, PUBLIC LAW 104–134 

SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1996 

TITLE III 

RESCISSIONS AND OFFSETS 

CHAPTER 1 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT 

SUBCHAPTER A—UNITED STATES ENRICHMENT CORPORATION

PRIVATIZATION

SEC. 3102. DEFINITIONS. 

øFor purposes¿ Except as provided in section 3112A, for purposes of this subchapter: 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 3112. URANIUM TRANSFERS AND SALES. 

(a) TRANSFERS AND SALES BY THE SECRETARY.—The Secretary 

shall not provide enrichment services or transfer or sell any uranium (including natural uranium concentrates, natural uranium 

hexafluoride, or enriched uranium in any form) to any person except as consistent with this section. 

* * * * * * * 

(f) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this subchapter shall be 

read to modify the terms of the Russian HEU Agreement. 

SEC. 3112A. INCENTIVES FOR ADDITIONAL DOWNBLENDING OF HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM BY THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(1) COMPLETION OF THE RUSSIAN HEU AGREEMENT.—The 

term ‘‘completion of the Russian HEU Agreement’’ means the 

importation into the United States from the Russian Federation 

pursuant to the Russian HEU Agreement of uranium derived 

from the downblending of not less than 500 metric tons of highly enriched uranium of weapons origin. 

(2) DOWNBLENDING.—The term ‘‘downblending’’ means 

processing highly enriched uranium into a uranium product in 

any form in which the uranium contains less than 20 percent 

uranium-235. 

(3) HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM.—The term ‘‘highly enriched uranium’’ has the meaning given that term in section 

3102(4). 

(4) HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM OF WEAPONS ORIGIN.—The 

term ‘‘highly enriched uranium of weapons origin’’ means highly enriched uranium that— 

(A) contains 90 percent or more uranium-235; and 

(B) is verified by the Secretary of Energy to be of weapons origin. 

(5) LOW-ENRICHED URANIUM.—The term ‘‘low-enriched uranium’’ means a uranium product in any form, including uranium hexafluoride (UF6) and uranium oxide (UO2), in which 
166 

the uranium contains less than 20 percent uranium-235, including natural uranium, without regard to whether the uranium is incorporated into fuel rods or complete fuel assemblies. 

(6) RUSSIAN HEU AGREEMENT.—The term ‘‘Russian HEU 

Agreement’’ has the meaning given that term in section 

3102(11). 

(7) URANIUM-235.—The term ‘‘uranium-235’’ means the isotope 235U. 

(b) STATEMENT OF POLICY.—It is the policy of the United States 

to support the continued downblending of highly enriched uranium 

of weapons origin in the Russian Federation in order to protect the 

essential security interests of the United States with respect to the 

nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. 

(c) PROMOTION OF DOWNBLENDING OF RUSSIAN HIGHLY EN- RICHED URANIUM.— (1) COMPLETION OF THE RUSSIAN HEU AGREEMENT.—Prior 

to the completion of the Russian HEU Agreement, the importation into the United States of low-enriched uranium, including 

low-enriched uranium obtained under contracts for separative 

work units, that is produced in the Russian Federation and is 

not imported pursuant to the Russian HEU Agreement, may not 

exceed the following amounts: 

(A) In the 4-year period beginning with calendar year 

2008, 16,559 kilograms. 

(B) In calendar year 2012, 24,839 kilograms. 

(C) In calendar year 2013 and each calendar year 

thereafter through the calendar year of the completion of 

the Russian HEU Agreement, 41,398 kilograms. 

(2) INCENTIVES TO CONTINUE DOWNBLENDING RUSSIAN

HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE

RUSSIAN HEU AGREEMENT.— (A) IN GENERAL.—After the completion of the Russian 

HEU Agreement, the importation into the United States of 

low-enriched uranium, including low-enriched uranium obtained under contracts for separative work units, that is 

produced in the Russian Federation, whether or not such 

low-enriched uranium is derived from highly enriched uranium of weapons origin, may not exceed— 

(i) in calendar year 2014, 485,279 kilograms; 

(ii) in calendar year 2015, 455,142 kilograms; 

(iii) in calendar year 2016, 480,146 kilograms; 

(iv) in calendar year 2017, 490,710 kilograms; 

(v) in calendar year 2018, 492,731 kilograms; 

(vi) in calendar year 2019, 509,058 kilograms; and 

(vii) in calendar year 2020, 514,754 kilograms. 

(B) ADDITIONAL IMPORTS IN EXCHANGE FOR A COMMITMENT TO DOWNBLEND AN ADDITIONAL 300 METRIC TONS OF

HIGHLY ENRICHED URANIUM.— 

(i) IN GENERAL.—In addition to the amount authorized to be imported under subparagraph (A) and 

except as provided in clause (ii), if the Russian Federation enters into a bilateral agreement with the United 

States under which the Russian Federation agrees to 

downblend an additional 300 metric tons of highly en-
167 

riched uranium after the completion of the Russian 

HEU Agreement, 4 kilograms of low-enriched uranium, 

whether or not such low-enriched uranium is derived 

from highly enriched uranium of weapons origin and 

including low-enriched uranium obtained under contracts for separative work units, may be imported in a 

calendar year for every 1 kilogram of Russian highly 

enriched uranium of weapons origin that was 

downblended in the preceding calendar year, subject to 

the verification of the Secretary of Energy under paragraph (9). 

(ii) MAXIMUM ANNUAL IMPORTS.—Not more than 

120,000 kilograms of low-enriched uranium may be 

imported in a calendar year under clause (i). 

(3) EXCEPTIONS.—The import limitations described in paragraphs (1) and (2) shall not apply to low-enriched uranium produced in the Russian Federation that is imported into the 

United States— 

(A) for use in the initial core of a new nuclear reactor; 

(B) for processing and to be certified for re-exportation 

and not for consumption in the United States; or 

(C) to be added to the inventory of the Department of 

Energy. 

(4) ADJUSTMENTS TO IMPORT LIMITATIONS.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The import limitations described in 

paragraph (2)(A) are based on the reference data in the 

2005 Market Report on the Global Nuclear Fuel Market 

Supply and Demand 2005–2030 of the World Nuclear Association. In each of calendar years 2016 and 2019, the Secretary of Commerce shall review the projected demand for 

uranium for nuclear reactors in the United States and adjust the import limitations described in paragraph (2)(A) to 

account for changes in such demand in years after the year 

in which that report or a subsequent report is published. 

(B) INCENTIVE ADJUSTMENT.—Beginning in the second 

calendar year after the calendar year of the completion of 

the Russian HEU Agreement, the Secretary of Energy shall 

increase or decrease the amount of low-enriched uranium 

that may be imported in a calendar year under paragraph 

(2)(B) (including the amount of low-enriched uranium that 

may be imported for each kilogram of highly enriched uranium downblended under paragraph (2)(B)(i)) by a percentage equal to the percentage increase or decrease, as the case 

may be, in the average amount of uranium loaded into nuclear power reactors in the United States in the most recent 

3-calendar-year period for which data are available, as reported by the Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy, compared to the average amount of 

uranium loaded into such reactors during the 3-calendaryear period beginning on January 1, 2011, as reported by 

the Energy Information Administration. 

(C) PUBLICATION OF ADJUSTMENTS.—As soon as practicable, but not later than July 31 of each calendar year, 

the Secretary of Energy shall publish in the Federal Reg-
168 

ister the amount of low-enriched uranium that may be imported in the current calendar year after the adjustments 

under subparagraph (B). 

(5) AUTHORITY FOR ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENT.—In addition 

to the adjustment under paragraph (4)(A), the Secretary of 

Commerce may adjust the import limitations under paragraph 

(2)(A) for a calendar year if the Secretary— 

(A) in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, determines that the available supply of low-enriched uranium 

and the available stockpiles of uranium of the Department 

of Energy are insufficient to meet demand in the United 

States in the following calendar year; and 

(B) notifies Congress of the adjustment not less than 45 

days before making the adjustment. 

(6) EQUIVALENT QUANTITIES OF LOW-ENRICHED URANIUM

IMPORTS.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The import limitations described in 

paragraphs (1) and (2) are expressed in terms of uranium 

containing 4.4 percent uranium-235 and a tails assay of 

0.3 percent. 

(B) ADJUSTMENT FOR OTHER URANIUM.—Imports of 

low-enriched uranium under paragraphs (1) and (2), including low-enriched uranium obtained under contracts for 

separative work units, shall count against the import limitations described in such paragraphs in amounts calculated as the quantity of low-enriched uranium containing 

4.4 percent uranium-235 necessary to equal the total 

amount of uranium-235 contained in such imports. 

(7) DOWNBLENDING OF OTHER HIGHLY ENRICHED URA- NIUM.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The downblending of highly enriched 

uranium not of weapons origin may be counted for purposes of paragraph (2)(B), subject to verification under 

paragraph (9), if the Secretary of Energy determines that 

the highly enriched uranium to be downblended poses a 

risk to the national security of the United States. 

(B) EQUIVALENT QUANTITIES OF HIGHLY ENRICHED URA- NIUM.—For purposes of determining the additional low-enriched uranium imports allowed under paragraph (2)(B), 

highly enriched uranium not of weapons origin 

downblended pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall count as 

downblended highly enriched uranium of weapons origin 

in amounts calculated as the quantity of highly enriched 

uranium containing 90 percent uranium-235 necessary to 

equal the total amount of uranium-235 contained in the 

highly enriched uranium not of weapons origin 

downblended pursuant to subparagraph (A). 

(8) TERMINATION OF IMPORT RESTRICTIONS.—The provisions of this subsection shall terminate on December 31, 2020. 

(9) TECHNICAL VERIFICATIONS BY SECRETARY OF ENERGY.— (A) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Energy shall verify 

the origin, quantity, and uranium-235 content of the highly 

enriched uranium downblended for purposes of paragraphs 

(2)(B) and (7). 
169 

(B) METHODS OF VERIFICATION.—In conducting the 

verification required under subparagraph (A), the Secretary 

of Energy shall employ the transparency measures and access provisions agreed to under the Russian HEU Agreement for monitoring the downblending of Russian highly 

enriched uranium of weapons origin and such other methods as the Secretary determines appropriate. 

(10) ENFORCEMENT OF IMPORT LIMITATIONS.—The Secretary of Commerce shall be responsible for enforcing the import 

limitations imposed under this subsection and shall enforce 

such import limitations in a manner that imposes a minimal 

burden on the commercial nuclear industry. 

(11) EFFECT ON OTHER AGREEMENTS.— (A) RUSSIAN HEU AGREEMENT.—Nothing in this section 

shall be construed to modify the terms of the Russian HEU 

Agreement, including the provisions of the Agreement relating to the amount of low-enriched uranium that may be imported into the United States. 

(B) OTHER AGREEMENTS.—If a provision of any agreement between the United States and the Russian Federation, other than the Russian HEU Agreement, relating to 

the importation of low-enriched uranium, including low-enriched uranium obtained under contracts for separative 

work units, into the United States conflicts with a provision 

of this section, the provision of this section shall supersede 

the provision of the agreement to the extent of the conflict. 

* * * * * * * 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1996, 

PUBLIC LAW 104–303 

TITLE I—WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS 

SEC. 101. PROJECT AUTHORIZATIONS. 

(a) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(1) * * * 

* * * * * * * 

(5) SAN LORENZO RIVER, CALIFORNIA.— 

(A) IN GENERAL.—The project for flood control, San 

Lorenzo River, California: Report of the Chief of Engineers, dated June 30, 1994, at a total cost of $21,800,000, 

with an estimated Federal cost of $10,900,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost of $10,900,000 and habitat restoration, at a total cost of $4,050,000, with an estimated Federal cost of $3,040,000 and an estimated non-Federal cost 

of $1,010,000. 

(B) CREDIT TOWARD NON-FEDERAL SHARE.—The Secretary shall credit toward the non-Federal share of the 

project the costs expended by non-Federal interests for the 

replacement and reconstruction of the Soquel Avenue 

Bridge, if the Secretary determines that the work is integral 

to the project. 
170 

(C) MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF CREDIT.—The credit under 

paragraph (B) may not exceed $2,000,000. 

(D) LIMITATION OF TOTAL PROJECT COST.—The Secretary shall not include the costs to be credited under paragraphs (B) and (C) in total project costs in determining the 

amounts of the Federal and non-Federal contributions. 

* * * * * * * 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

ACT, 2004, PUBLIC LAW 108–137 

TITLE II 

GENERAL PROVISIONS

øSEC. 209. ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM. (a) 

Using funds previously appropriated, the Secretary of the Interior, 

acting through the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation and 

the Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, for purposes of improving the efficiency and expediting the efforts of the Endangered 

Species Act Collaborative Program Workgroup, is directed to establish an executive committee of seven members consisting of— 

ø(1) one member from the Bureau of Reclamation; 

ø(2) one member from the Fish and Wildlife Service; and 

ø(3) one member at large representing each of the following seven entities (selected at the discretion of the entity in 

consultation with the Bureau of Reclamation and the Fish and 

Wildlife Service) currently participating as signatories to the 

existing Memorandum of Understanding: 

ø(A) other Federal agencies; 

ø(B) State agencies; 

ø(C) municipalities; 

ø(D) universities and environmental groups; 

ø(E) agricultural communities; 

ø(F) Middle Rio Grande Pueblos (Sandia, Isleta, San 

Felipe, Cochiti, Santa Ana, and Santo Domingo); and 

ø(G) Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District. 

ø(b) Formation of this Committee shall not occur later than 45 

days after enactment of this Act. 

ø(c) Fiscal year 2004 appropriations shall not be obligated or 

expended prior to approval of a detailed spending plan by the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. 

ø(d) The above section shall come into effect within 180 days 

of enactment of this Act, unless the Bureau of Reclamation, in consultation with the above listed parties, has provided an alternative 

workgroup structure which has been approved by the House and 

Senate Committees on Appropriations.¿ 

* * * * * * * 
171 

ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS 

ACT, 2006, PUBLIC LAW 109–103 

TITLE I 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

GENERAL PROVISIONS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

SEC. 117. LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER MUSEUM AND RIVERFRONT

INTERPRETIVE SITE, MISSISSIPPI.—The Water Resources Development Act of 1992 (106 Stat. 4811) is amended by— 

(1) * * * 

(2) in section 103(c)(7)— 

(A) by striking ‘‘There is’’ and inserting the following: 

‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—There is’’; and 

(B) by striking ‘‘$2,000,000’’ and all that follows and 

inserting the following: ‘‘ø$15,000,000¿ $26,000,000 to 

plan, design, and construct generally in accordance with 

the conceptual plan to be prepared by the Corps of Engineers. 

* * * * * * * 

SEC. 121. ø(a) The Secretary of the Army may carry out and 

fund projects to comply with the 2003 Biological Opinion described 

in section 205(b) of the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–447; 118 Stat. 2949) as amended 

by subsection (b) and may award grants and enter into contracts, 

cooperative agreements, or interagency agreements with participants in the Endangered Species Act Collaborative Program 

Workgroup referenced in section 209(a) of the Energy and Water 

Development Appropriations Act, 2004 (Public Law 108– 137; 117 

Stat. 1850) in order to carry out such projects. Any project undertaken under this subsection shall require a non-Federal cost share 

of 25 percent, which may be provided through in-kind services or 

direct cash contributions and which shall be credited on a programmatic basis instead of on a project-by-project basis, with reconciliation of total project costs and total non-Federal cost share 

calculated on a three year incremental basis. Non-Federal cost 

share that exceeds that which is required in any calculated three 

year increment shall be credited to subsequent three year increments.¿ (a) Hereafter, the Secretary of the Army may carry out and 

fund planning studies, watershed surveys and assessments, or technical studies at 100 percent Federal expense to accomplish the purposes of the 2003 Biological Opinion described in section 205(b) of 

the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act, 2005 (Public Law 108–447; 118 Stat. 2949) as amended by subsection (b) or 

any related subsequent biological opinion, and the collaborative program long-term plan. In carrying out a study, survey, or assessment 

under this subsection, the Secretary of the Army shall consult with 

Federal, State, tribal and local governmental entities, as well as entities participating in the Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species 
172 

Collaborative Program referred to in section 205 of this Act: Provided, That the Secretary of the Army may also provide planning 

and administrative assistance to the Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Collaborative Program, which shall not be subject to 

cost sharing requirements with non-Federal interests. 

* * * * * * * 

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007, 

PUBLIC LAW 110–114 

TITLE III—PROJECT-RELATED PROVISIONS 

SEC. 3118. MIDDLE RIO GRANDE RESTORATION, NEW MEXICO. 

(a) * * * 

(b) PROJECT SELECTION.—The Secretary shall select and shall 

carry out restoration projects in the Middle Rio Grande from 

Cochiti Dam to the headwaters of Elephant Butte Reservoir in the 

State of New Mexico in accordance with the plans recommended in 

the feasibility report for the Middle Rio Grande Bosque, New Mexico, scheduled for completion in December 2008. 

(c) LOCAL PARTICIPATION.—In carrying out subsection (b), the 

Secretary shall consult with, and consider the activities being carried out by— 

(1) the Middle Rio Grande Endangered Species Act Collaborative Program; and 

(2) the Bosque Improvement Group of the Middle Rio 

Grande Bosque Initiative. 

(d) COST SHARING.—Any requirement for non-Federal participation in a project carried out in the bosque of Bernalillo County, 

New Mexico, pursuant to this section shall be limited to the provision of lands, easements, rights-of-way, relocations, and dredged 

material disposal areas necessary for construction, operation and 

maintenance of the project. 

ø(d)¿ (e) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized to be appropriated $25,000,000 to carry out this section. 

* * * * * * * 

CONSOLIDATED APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008, PUBLIC 

LAW 110–161 

DIVISION C—ENERGY AND WATER DEVELOPMENT AND 

RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2008 

TITLE I 

GENERAL PROVISIONS, CORPS OF ENGINEERS—CIVIL

SEC. 115. The Secretary of the Army acting through the Chief 

of Engineers is directed to plan, design, and construct a rural 

health care facility on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation of the 

Three Affiliated Tribes, North Dakota, at an estimated Federal cost 

of ø$20,000,000. The Secretary shall transfer this facility to the 

Secretary of the Interior for operation and maintenance upon the 

completion of construction.¿ $20,000,000: Provided, That the Secretary shall transfer ownership of this facility to the Secretary of 
173 

Health and Human Services for operation and maintenance upon 

the completion of construction. 

* * * * * * * 

BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL 

PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 

308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93–344, AS AMENDED 

[In millions of dollars] 

Budget authority Outlays 

Committee 

allocation 1

Amount 

of bill 

Committee 

allocation 1

Amount 

of bill 

Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee allocations 

to its subcommittees of amounts in the Budget Resolution 

for 2009: Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development: 

Mandatory ............................................................................ .................... .................... .................... ....................

Discretionary ........................................................................ 33,258 33,258 32,552 1 32,378 

Projections of outlays associated with the recommendation: 

2009 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 2 19,392 

2010 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 9,071 

2011 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 2,967 

2012 ..................................................................................... .................... .................... .................... 728 

2013 and future years ........................................................ .................... .................... .................... 1,124 

Financial assistance to State and local governments for 

2009 ......................................................................................... NA 119 NA 24 

1 Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

2 Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority. 

NA: Not applicable. 

DISCLOSURE OF CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING 

ITEMS 

The Constitution vests in the Congress the power of the purse. 

The Committee believes strongly that Congress should make the 

decisions on how to allocate the people’s money. 

As defined in Rule XLIV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the 

term ‘‘congressional directed spending item’’ means a provision or 

report language included primarily at the request of a Senator, providing, authorizing, or recommending a specific amount of discretionary budget authority, credit authority, or other spending authority for a contract, loan, loan guarantee, grant, loan authority, 

or other expenditure with or to an entity, or targeted to a specific 

State, locality or congressional district, other than through a statutory or administrative, formula-driven, or competitive award process. 

For each item, a Member is required to provide a certification 

that neither the Member nor the Senator’s immediate family has 

a pecuniary interest in such congressionally directed spending 

item. Such certifications are available to the public on the website 

of the Senate Committee on Appropriations 

(www.appropriations.senate.gov/senators.cfm). 

Following is a list of congressionally directed spending items included in the Senate recommendation discussed in this report, 

along with the name of each Senator who submitted a request to 

the Committee of jurisdiction for each item so identified. Neither 
174 

the Committee recommendation nor this report contains any limited tax benefits or limited tariff benefits as defined in rule XLIV. 
175 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS 

Account Project Funding Member 

GI .................................................... ABILENE, TX (BRAZOS RIVER BASIN-ELM CREEK) ....................................................................................... 150,000 Senator Cornyn GI .................................................... AGUA FRIA RIVER TRILBY WASH, AZ ............................................................................................................ 250,000 Senator Kyl GI .................................................... AIWW BRIDGE AT DEEP CREEK, VA .............................................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Warner, Webb GI .................................................... ALA WAI CANAL, OAHU, HI ............................................................................................................................ 300,000 The President, Senator Inouye GI .................................................... AMAZON CREEK, OR ..................................................................................................................................... 350,000 Senators Wyden, Smith GI .................................................... AMITE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA ................................................................. 250,000 Senator Landrieu GI .................................................... ANACOSTIA RIVER & TRIBUTARIES COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MD .................................................................. 400,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin GI .................................................... ANCHORAGE HARBOR DEEPENING, AK ......................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Stevens GI .................................................... AUGUSTA, GA ................................................................................................................................................ 278,000 The President GI .................................................... BALTIMORE METRO WTR RES—PATAPSCO AND BACK RIVERS ................................................................... 250,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin GI .................................................... BARROW COASTAL STORM DAMAGE REDUCTION, AK ................................................................................... 400,000 The President GI .................................................... BASALT, CO ................................................................................................................................................... 50,000 Senator Salazar GI .................................................... BAYOU SORREL LOCK, LA ............................................................................................................................. 1,599,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... BELPRE, OH .................................................................................................................................................. 150,000 Senator Voinovich, Brown GI .................................................... BLOOMSBURG, PA ......................................................................................................................................... 700,000 Senators Specter, Casey GI .................................................... BOGUE BANKS, NC ........................................................................................................................................ 132,000 Senator Burr GI .................................................... BOLINAS LAGOON ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA ....................................................................................... 350,000 Senator Boxer GI .................................................... BOSSIER PARISH, LA ..................................................................................................................................... 200,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... BOSTON HARBOR (45–FOOT CHANNEL), MA ................................................................................................ 2,300,000 The President GI .................................................... BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, BROWNSVILLE CHANNEL, TX .............................................................................. 400,000 The President, Senator Cornyn GI .................................................... BRUSH CREEK BASIN, KS & MO ................................................................................................................... 274,000 Senators Brownback, Bond GI .................................................... BUFFALO RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, NY ........................................................................................ 100,000 The President GI .................................................... CACHE LA POUDRE, CO ................................................................................................................................ 130,000 Senator Salazar GI .................................................... CALCASIEU LOCK, LA .................................................................................................................................... 600,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA ................................................................................................................. 162,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... CALCASIEU RIVER BASIN, LA ........................................................................................................................ 67,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... CALIFORNIA COASTAL SEDIMENT MASTER PLAN, CA .................................................................................... 900,000 The President GI .................................................... CARPINTERIA SHORELINE STUDY .................................................................................................................. 443,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... CEDAR RIVER (TIME CHECK AREA), CEDAR RAPIDS, IA ............................................................................... 300,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley GI .................................................... CENTRALIA, WA ............................................................................................................................................. 1,200,000 Senator Murray GI .................................................... CHATFIELD, CHERRY CREEK AND BEAR CREEK RESERVOIRS, CO ............................................................... 200,000 Senators Allard, Salazar GI .................................................... CHEHALIS RIVER BASIN, WA ......................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senator Murray GI .................................................... CHERRY RIVER BASIN, WV ........................................................................................................................... 150,000 Senator Byrd GI .................................................... CHESAPEAKE BAY MARSHLANDS, MD ........................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin GI .................................................... CHESAPEAKE BAY SHORELINE, MARYLAND COASTAL MANAGEMENT ........................................................... 200,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin GI .................................................... CHESAPEAKE BAY SUSQUEHANNA RESERVOIR SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, PA, MD, VA ............................... 200,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin 
176 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

GI .................................................... CLINCH RIVER WATERSHED, VA .................................................................................................................... 150,000 Senators Warner, Webb GI .................................................... CONNECTICUT RIVER BASIN WATERSHED STUDY CT, MA, NH AN ............................................................... 450,000 Senators Gregg, Dodd, Lieberman GI .................................................... COYOTE & BERRYESSA CREEKS, CA ............................................................................................................ 950,000 The President GI .................................................... COYOTE DAM, CA .......................................................................................................................................... 250,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... CROSS LAKE, LA WATER SUPPLY IMPROVEMENTS ....................................................................................... 250,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... CURRITUCK SOUND, NC ................................................................................................................................ 150,000 The President GI .................................................... CUYAHOGA RIVER BULKHEAD STUDY, OH .................................................................................................... 126,000 Senator Voinovich GI .................................................... DALLAS FLOODWAY, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX ................................................................................. 1,000,000 The President, Senator Hutchison GI .................................................... DELAWARE RIVER COMPREHENSIVE, NJ ....................................................................................................... 290,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... DELAWARE RIVER DREDGED MATERIAL UTILIZATION, PA, DE, & NJ ............................................................ 125,000 Senator Specter GI .................................................... DES PLAINES RIVER, IL (PHASE II) ............................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Durbin GI .................................................... DISMAL SWAMP AND DISMAL SWAMP CANAL, VA ........................................................................................ 262,000 Senators Warner, Webb GI .................................................... EASTERN SHORE, MID CHESAPEAKE BAY ISLAND, MD ................................................................................. 983,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin GI .................................................... EDISTO ISLAND, SC ....................................................................................................................................... 218,000 The President GI .................................................... ELIZABETH RIVER, HAMPTON ROADS, VA ..................................................................................................... 97,000 The President GI .................................................... ELLIOTT BAY SEAWALL .................................................................................................................................. 750,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell GI .................................................... ESPANOLA VALLEY RIO GRANDE AND TRIBS, NM ......................................................................................... 400,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman GI .................................................... FLAGLER BEACH, FL ...................................................................................................................................... 250,000 Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez GI .................................................... FORGE RIVER WATERSHED, LONG ISLAND, NY ............................................................................................. 125,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... FOUR MILE RUN, VA ..................................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senators Warner, Webb GI .................................................... FREEPORT HARBOR, TX ................................................................................................................................ 400,000 The President GI .................................................... GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER ....................................................................................................... 150,000 The President GI .................................................... GIWW, HIGH ISLAND TO BRAZOS RIVER REALIGNMENT, TX ......................................................................... 200,000 The President GI .................................................... GIWW, PORT O’CONNER TO CORPUS CHRISTI BAY, TX ................................................................................ 350,000 The President GI .................................................... GOLETA BEACH, CA ....................................................................................................................................... 150,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... GRAND (NEOSHO) RIVER BASIN WATERSHED, OK, MO, KS & AR ................................................................ 60,000 Senators Brownback, Roberts GI .................................................... GRAND LAKE COMPREHENSIVE, OK .............................................................................................................. 250,000 Senator Inhofe GI .................................................... GREAT LAKES NAV SYST STUDY, MI, IL, IN, MN, NY, OH, PA ...................................................................... 200,000 The President GI .................................................... GREAT LAKES REMEDIAL ACTION PLANS, MI ................................................................................................ 1,000,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow, Coleman, Schumer, 

Clinton, Voinovich, Brown, Kohl 

GI .................................................... GUADALUPE AND SAN ANTONIO RIVER BASINS, TX ...................................................................................... 223,000 The President GI .................................................... HAGATNA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL ................................................................................................................ 350,000 The President GI .................................................... HAMILTON CITY, CA ...................................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... HASHAMOMUCK COVE, SOUTHOLD, NY ......................................................................................................... 125,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... HEACOCK AND CACTUS CHANNELS, CA ........................................................................................................ 500,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... HILO HARBOR MODIFICATIONS, HI ................................................................................................................ 100,000 Senator Inouye 
177 

GI .................................................... HOCKING RIVER BASIN, MONDAY CREEK, OH .............................................................................................. 300,000 Senator Voinovich GI .................................................... HOMER HARBOR MODIFICATION, AK ............................................................................................................. 400,000 Senator Stevens GI .................................................... HUDSON—RARITAN ESTUARY, HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ ............................................................... 204,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... HUDSON—RARITAN ESTUARY, LOWER PASSAIC RIVER, NJ ......................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... HUDSON—RARITAN ESTUARY, NY & NJ ....................................................................................................... 200,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

GI .................................................... HUMBOLT BAY LONG TERM SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT, CA ........................................................................... 200,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... HUMBOLT, IA ................................................................................................................................................. 152,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley GI .................................................... HYDROELECTRIC POWER ASSESSMENT, HI ................................................................................................... 300,000 Senators Inouye, Akaka GI .................................................... ILLINOIS RIVER BASIN RESTORATION, IL ...................................................................................................... 400,000 The President GI .................................................... INDIANA HARBOR, IN .................................................................................................................................... 300,000 The President GI .................................................... INTERBASIN CONTROL OF GREAT LAKES-MISSISSIPPI RIVER AQUATIC NUISANCE SPECIES, IL, IN, OH, 

WI.

300,000 Senator Durbin 

GI .................................................... JAMES RIVER, SD & ND ................................................................................................................................ 350,000 Senators Johnson, Thune GI .................................................... JOHN H KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA & NC ........................................................................................... 300,000 The President GI .................................................... KAHUKU, HI ................................................................................................................................................... 344,000 Senator Inouye GI .................................................... KANSAS CITYS, MO & KS .............................................................................................................................. 315,000 The President, Senators Bond, Roberts GI .................................................... KALAELOA BARBERS POINT HARBOR MODIFICATION, HI .............................................................................. 350,000 Senator Inouye GI .................................................... KEITH CREEK, ROCKFORD, IL ........................................................................................................................ 548,000 Senator Durbin GI .................................................... KENAI RIVER BLUFF EROSION, AK ................................................................................................................ 500,000 Senator Stevens GI .................................................... LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................................................ 250,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... LAKE WORTH INLET, FL ................................................................................................................................. 200,000 Senator Bill Nelson GI .................................................... LANSING, GRAND RIVER WATERFRONT RESTORATION, MI ............................................................................ 50,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow GI .................................................... LITTLE COLORADO RIVER WATERSHED, AZ ................................................................................................... 250,000 Senator Kyl GI .................................................... LITTLE KANAWHA RIVER, WV ......................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senator Byrd GI .................................................... LONG ISLAND, MARSH AND JOHNS CREEKS, GA .......................................................................................... 150,000 The President GI .................................................... LOS ANGELES RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, CA .................................................................................. 590,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA .......................................................................... 10,000,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... LOUISIANA COASTAL AREA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, LA (SCIENCE PROGRAM) ....................................... .............................. The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... LOWER CACHE CREEK, YOLO COUNTY, WOODLAND AND VICINITY .............................................................. 200,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN, TX ............................................................................................................ 425,000 The President, Senators Hutchison, Cornyn GI .................................................... LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION OR & WA .................................................................. 100,000 The President GI .................................................... LOWER MISSION CREEK, CA ......................................................................................................................... 400,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESOURCE STUDY, AR ...................................................................................... 254,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor GI .................................................... LOWER PLATTE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NE .............................................................................................. 177,000 Seators Ben Nelson, Hagel GI .................................................... LOWER POTOMAC ESTUARY WATERSHED, ST MARY’S WATERSHED ............................................................. 150,000 Senator Cardin GI .................................................... LOWER PUYALLUP RIVER ALTERNATIVES STUDY, WA ................................................................................... 57,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell GI .................................................... LOWER SADDLE RIVER, BERGEN COUNTY, NJ .............................................................................................. 375,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... LYNNHAVEN RIVER BASIN, VA ...................................................................................................................... 175,000 The President GI .................................................... MAALAEA HARBOR, MAUI, HI ........................................................................................................................ 200,000 The President, Senator Inouye 
178 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

GI .................................................... MAHONING RIVER ENVIRONMENTAL DREDGING, OH ..................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Voinovich GI .................................................... MALIBU CREEK WATERSHED, CA .................................................................................................................. 150,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... MANHATTAN, KS ............................................................................................................................................ 300,000 Senators Brownback, Roberts GI .................................................... MARSH LAKE, MN (MN RIVER AUTHORITY) ................................................................................................... 227,000 Senators Coleman, Klobuchar GI .................................................... MATANUSKA RIVER WATERSHED, AK ............................................................................................................ 400,000 Senator Stevens GI .................................................... MATILIJA DAM, CA ......................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... MAY BRANCH, FORT SMITH, AR .................................................................................................................... 250,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor GI .................................................... MERRIMACK RIVER WATERSHED STUDY, NH & MA ...................................................................................... 200,000 The President, Senators Kennedy, Kerry GI .................................................... MIDDLE CREEK, CA ....................................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... MIDDLE POTOMAC RIVER WATERSHED, MD, VA, PA, WV, DC ...................................................................... 175,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin GI .................................................... MIDDLE POTOMAC RIVER—GREATER SENECA/MUDDY BRANCH, MD .......................................................... 300,000 Senator Cardin GI .................................................... MILE POINT, FL ............................................................................................................................................. 50,000 The President GI .................................................... MILL CREEK WATERSHED, DAVIDSON COUNTY, TN ...................................................................................... 100,000 The President GI .................................................... MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED, UMR LAKE ITASCA TO L&D ..................................................................... 350,000 Senators Coleman, Klobuchar GI .................................................... MINNESOTA RIVER BASIN, MN & SD ............................................................................................................ 350,000 Senator Coleman GI .................................................... MISSOURI RIVER DEGRADATION STUDY, KS ................................................................................................. 588,000 The President, Senators Bond, Brownback, Roberts GI .................................................... MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM, UNITS L455 & R460–471, MO ............................................................... 300,000 Senator Bond GI .................................................... MISSOURI RIVER, ND, MT, SD, NE, IA, KS, MO ............................................................................................ 3,000,000 Senators Dorgan, Johnson, Baucus, Tester, 

Conrad, Thune 

GI .................................................... MONTAUK POINT, NY ..................................................................................................................................... 375,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... MONTPELIER, VT ........................................................................................................................................... 750,000 Senator Leahy GI .................................................... NEUSE RIVER BASIN, NC .............................................................................................................................. 200,000 The President GI .................................................... NEW JERSEY SHORE PROTECTION, HEREFORD TO CAPE MAY INLET ........................................................... 154,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... NEW JERSEY SHORELINE ALTERNATIVE LONG-TERM NOURISHMENT ........................................................... 150,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... NEW RIVER, CLAYTOR LAKE, VA ................................................................................................................... 150,000 Senators Warner, Webb GI .................................................... NORTH CAROLINA INTERNATIONAL PORT, NC ............................................................................................... 100,000 Senators Dole, Burr GI .................................................... NORTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, ASHAROKEN, NY ...................................................................................... 150,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... NORTH SHORE OF LONG ISLAND, BAYVILLE, NY .......................................................................................... 175,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... NUECES RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, TX .......................................................................................................... 650,000 The President, Senator Hutchison GI .................................................... OHIO RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE STUDY, WV, KY, OH, PA .................................................................... 600,000 Senators Byrd, Voinovich GI .................................................... PAJARO RIVER, CA ........................................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... PASSAIC RIVER MAIN STEM, NJ .................................................................................................................... 250,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... PASSAIC RIVER, HARRISON, NJ ..................................................................................................................... 297,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... PEARL RIVER WATERSHED, MS ..................................................................................................................... 250,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker GI .................................................... PECKMAN RIVER BASIN AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ ............................................................................................ 375,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez 
179 

GI .................................................... PEORIA RIVERFRONT DEVELOPMENT, IL ....................................................................................................... 50,000 Senator Durbin GI .................................................... PILGRIM LAKE, MA ........................................................................................................................................ 96,000 The President GI .................................................... PINE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................................ 500,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor GI .................................................... PORT EVERGLADES HARBOR, FL ................................................................................................................... 550,000 The President, Senator Martinez GI .................................................... PORT OF IBERIA, LA ...................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... PORTSMOUTH HARBOR & PISCATAQUA RIVER, NH & ME ............................................................................ 82,000 Senator Gregg GI .................................................... PRAIRIE DUPONT LEVEE, IL .......................................................................................................................... 200,000 Senator Durbin GI .................................................... PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE MARINE HABITAT RESTORATION, WA ............................................................... 1,500,000 The President, Senators Murray, Cantwell GI .................................................... RAHWAY RIVER BASIN, NJ ............................................................................................................................ 300,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, HIGHLANDS, NJ ................................................................................ 300,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, LEONARDO, NJ ................................................................................. 100,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, UNION BEACH, NJ ............................................................................ 100,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... RAYMONDVILLE DRAIN, TX ............................................................................................................................ 350,000 Senators Hutchison, Cornyn GI .................................................... RED CLAY CREEK, CHRISTINA RIVER WATERSHED, DE ................................................................................ 300,000 Senators Biden, Carper GI .................................................... RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN, ND, SD & MANITOBA, CA .............................................................. 500,000 Senator Dorgan, Coleman GI .................................................... REDWOOD CITY HARBOR, CA ........................................................................................................................ 300,000 Senator Boxer GI .................................................... RILLITO RIVER, PIMA COUNTY, AZ ................................................................................................................ 275,000 The President GI .................................................... RIO GRANDE BASIN, NM, CO & TX ............................................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman GI .................................................... RIO GRANDE BASIN, TX ................................................................................................................................ 100,000 The President GI .................................................... RIVER DES PERES, MO ................................................................................................................................. 150,000 Senator Bond GI .................................................... RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAMP, CA ...................................................................................................................... 200,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... ROCK CREEK, KEEFER SLOUGH, CA ............................................................................................................. 200,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... SABINE PASS TO GALVESTON BAY, TX ......................................................................................................... 400,000 Senator Cornyn GI .................................................... SABINE-NECHES WATERWAY, TX ................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Hutchison GI .................................................... SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASINS COMPREHENSIVE STUDY, CA ................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... SAC-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ISLANDS AND LEVEES, CA ................................................................................... 2,000,000 The President, Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAMP, CA ..................................................................................................................... 250,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... SAN DIEGO COUNTY SHORELINE, CA ............................................................................................................ 200,000 Senator Boxer GI .................................................... SAN JOAQUIN RB, WEST STANISLAUS COUNTY, ORESTIMBA CREE .............................................................. 400,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), FRAZIER CREEK/STRATHMO ................................................................. 200,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), LOWER SAN JOAQUIN RIVER ................................................................ 600,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... SAN JOAQUIN RIVER BASIN (SJRB), WHITE RIVER/DRY CREEK .................................................................... 125,000 Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... SAN PABLO BAY WATERSHED, CA ................................................................................................................ 250,000 Senator Boxer GI .................................................... SANTA FE, NM ............................................................................................................................................... 28,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman GI .................................................... SARASOTA, LIDO KEY, FL .............................................................................................................................. 158,000 Senator Bill Nelson GI .................................................... SAVANNAH HARBOR EXPANSION, GA ............................................................................................................ 700,000 The President, Senator Chambliss GI .................................................... SAW MILL RIVER AT ELMSFORD/GREENBURGH, NY ..................................................................................... 250,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... SEARSPORT HARBOR, ME ............................................................................................................................. 157,000 Senators Snowe, Collins GI .................................................... SHREWSBURY RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, NJ ................................................................................................. 250,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... SKAGIT RIVER, WA ........................................................................................................................................ 505,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell 
180 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

GI .................................................... SKOKOMISH RIVER BASIN, WA ...................................................................................................................... 375,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell GI .................................................... SOLANA-ENCINITAS SHORELINE, CA ............................................................................................................. 171,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer GI .................................................... SOUTH BOULDER CREEK, CO ........................................................................................................................ 252,000 Senators Allard, Salazar GI .................................................... SOUTH FORK OF SOUTH BRANCH OF CHICAGO RIVER ................................................................................. 400,000 Senator Durbin GI .................................................... SOUTH RIVER, RARITAN RIVER BASIN, NJ .................................................................................................... 375,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SHORELINE, CA ...................................................................................................... 1,400,000 Senators Feinstein,Boxer GI .................................................... SOUTH SHORE OF STATEN ISLAND, NY ......................................................................................................... 200,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... SOUTHEAST OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCE STUDY, OK ............................................................................... 500,000 Senator Inhofe GI .................................................... SOUTHWEST COASTAL HURRICANE PROTECTION, LA .................................................................................... 1,500,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... SOUTHWEST, ARKANSAS, AR ......................................................................................................................... 327,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor GI .................................................... SPARKS ARROYO COLONIA, EL PASO COUNTY, TX ....................................................................................... 150,000 Senators Hutchison, Cornyn GI .................................................... ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FL ................................................................................................................................. 250,000 Senator Bill Nelson GI .................................................... ST. CHARLES PARISH URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA ..................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... ST. CLAIR RIVER AND LAKE ST. CLAIR MANAGEMENT PLAN, MI .................................................................. 200,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow GI .................................................... ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST URBAN FLOOD CONTROL, LA ................................................................................... 250,000 Senator Landrieu GI .................................................... STONY BROOK, MILLSTONE RIVER BASIN, NJ ............................................................................................... 250,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... SURF CITY AND NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH, NC ............................................................................................... 386,000 Senators Dole, Burr GI .................................................... SUSQUEHANNA RIVER BASIN LOW FLOW MANAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION STUDY, MD, 

PA, & NY.

300,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin 

GI .................................................... SUTTER COUNTY (Northern California Streams), CA .................................................................................... 339,000 The President, Senator Feinstein GI .................................................... TAHOE REGIONAL PLANNING, CA AND NV .................................................................................................... 125,000 Senators Reid, Feinstein, Ensign GI .................................................... TEN MILE RIVER, NY AND CT ....................................................................................................................... 125,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... TOPEKA, KS ................................................................................................................................................... 100,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts GI .................................................... TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV ............................................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Reid, Ensign GI .................................................... TYBEE ISLAND CHANNEL, GA ........................................................................................................................ 250,000 The President, Senator Chambliss, Isakson GI .................................................... UPPER DELAWARE RIVER WATERSHED, NY .................................................................................................. 300,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... UPPER MISS RIVER—ILLINOIS WW SYSTEM, IL, IA, MN, MO ....................................................................... 10,000,000 Senators Harkin, Bond, Grassley, Coleman, 

Klobuchar 

GI .................................................... UPPER MISS RVR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IL, IA, MO, MN & WI ................................................................. 220,000 Senators Durbin, Harkin, Bond, Grassley GI .................................................... UPPER OHIO NAVIGATION STUDY, PA ........................................................................................................... 4,200,000 Senators Byrd, Specter, Casey GI .................................................... UPPER PENITENCIA CREEK, CA .................................................................................................................... 191,000 The President GI .................................................... UPPER RAPPAHANNOCK RIVER, VA (PHASE II) ............................................................................................. 200,000 Senators Warner, Webb GI .................................................... UPPER TURKEY CREEK, KS ........................................................................................................................... 150,000 Senator Brownback GI .................................................... VA SHLY-AY AKIMEL SALT RIVER RESTORATION, AZ .................................................................................... 658,000 The President GI .................................................... VALDEZ HARBOR EXPANSION, AK ................................................................................................................. 150,000 Senators Stevens, Murkowski GI .................................................... VICINITY AND WILOUGHBY SPIT, VA ............................................................................................................. 200,000 Senators Warner, Webb 
181 

GI .................................................... WAILUPE STREAM, OAHU, HI ......................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senator Inouye GI .................................................... WALLA WALLA RIVER WATERSHED, OR & WA ............................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Murray, Wyden, Smith, Cantwell GI .................................................... WALTON COUNTY, FL ..................................................................................................................................... 591,000 Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez GI .................................................... WASHITA RIVER BASIN, OK ........................................................................................................................... 250,000 Senator Inhofe GI .................................................... WATERTOWN, SD ........................................................................................................................................... 450,000 Senators Johnson, Thune GI .................................................... WAUWATOSA, WI ............................................................................................................................................ 200,000 Senator Kohl GI .................................................... WEST SHORE, LAKE PONTCHARTRAIN, LA ..................................................................................................... 900,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... WESTCHESTER COUNTY STREAMS, NY ......................................................................................................... 175,000 Senator Schumer GI .................................................... WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, BLANCHARD RIVER WATERSHED, OH, IN, & MI ............................................. 250,000 Senator Voinovich GI .................................................... WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN, OH, IN, & MI ................................................................................................... 250,000 Senator Voinovich GI .................................................... WHITE RIVER BASIN COMPREHENSIVE, AR & MO ........................................................................................ 500,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor GI .................................................... WHITE RIVER NAVIGATION TO BATESVILLE, AR ............................................................................................ 325,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor GI .................................................... WILD RICE RIVER, RED RIVER OF THE NORTH BASIN, MN .......................................................................... 271,000 The President, Senator Coleman GI .................................................... WILLAMETTE RIVER FLOODPLAIN RESTORATION, OR .................................................................................... 240,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith GI .................................................... YAKUTAT HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................................................... 700,000 The President GI .................................................... YELLOWSTONE RIVER CORRIDOR, MT ........................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senators Baucus, Tester GI .................................................... ACTIONS FOR CHANGE TO IMPROVE INVESTIGATIONS .................................................................................. .............................. The President GI .................................................... COASTAL FIELD DATA COLLECTION ............................................................................................................... 5,600,000 The President GI .................................................... Coastal Data Information Program ..................................................................................................... (1,000,000 ) Senators Feinstein, Cantwell GI .................................................... Pacific Island Land Ocean Typhoon Experiment, HI ........................................................................... (1,000,000 ) Senator Inouye GI .................................................... Surge and Wave Island Modeling Studies, HI .................................................................................... (1,200,000 ) Senator Inouye GI .................................................... Wave Data Study ................................................................................................................................. (1,000,000 ) Senators Biden, Carper GI .................................................... COMMITTEE ON MARINE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS .................................................................................. 100,000 The President GI .................................................... ENVIRONMENTAL DATA STUDIES ................................................................................................................... 75,000 The President GI .................................................... FEME/MAP MOD COORDINATION ................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 The President GI .................................................... FLOOD DAMAGE DATA PROGRAM .................................................................................................................. 220,000 The President GI .................................................... FLOOD PLAIN MANAGEMENT SERVICES ........................................................................................................ 11,000,000 The President GI .................................................... City of Gretna, LA (GIS) ....................................................................................................................... (254,000 ) Senator Landrieu GI .................................................... East Baton Rouge Parish, LA (GIS) ..................................................................................................... (400,000 ) Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... Hurricane Evacuation Studies, Hawaii ................................................................................................ (1,000,000 ) Senator Inouye GI .................................................... Iowa Multi-State Dam Safety Analyses, Iowa ..................................................................................... (37,000 ) Senator Grassley GI .................................................... Kekaha Flood Study, HI ....................................................................................................................... (100,000 ) Senators Inouye, Akaka GI .................................................... Little Sioux Watershed, IA ................................................................................................................... (30,000 ) Senator Grassley GI .................................................... Livingston Parish, LA (GIS) ................................................................................................................. (735,000 ) Senators Landrieu, Vitter GI .................................................... Mon-Maq Dam Removal Study & Local Floodplain Master Planning, Monticello, IA ......................... (100,000 ) Senator Grassley GI .................................................... Papillion Creek Watershed, Flood Plain Mapping, Nebraska .............................................................. (500,000 ) Senators Ben Nelson, Hagel GI .................................................... Southeastern, PA ................................................................................................................................. (300,000 ) Senators Specter, Casey GI .................................................... HYDROLOGIC STUDIES .................................................................................................................................. 250,000 The President GI .................................................... INDEPENDENT PEER REVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 The President GI .................................................... INTERNATIONAL WATER STUDIES .................................................................................................................. 200,000 The President 
182 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

GI .................................................... NATIONAL SHORELINE STUDY ....................................................................................................................... 375,000 The President GI .................................................... OTHER COORDINATION PROGRAMS ............................................................................................................... 4,580,000 The President GI .................................................... Lake Tahoe Coordination ..................................................................................................................... (500,000 ) Senators Reid, Feinstein, Ensign GI .................................................... PLANNING ASSISTANCE TO STATES ............................................................................................................... 8,750,000 The President GI .................................................... Asheville, NC ........................................................................................................................................ (50,000 ) Senator Dole GI .................................................... Assessment of Bridges and Impacts on Flows and Flooding, Delaware County, NY ........................ (150,000 ) Senator Schumer GI .................................................... Bacon Creek, Sioux City, IA ................................................................................................................. (50,000 ) Senator Grassley GI .................................................... Boyer River, Missouri Valley, IA ........................................................................................................... (13,000 ) Senator Grassley GI .................................................... Choctaw County Reservoir, MS ............................................................................................................ (100,000 ) Senator Wicker GI .................................................... Delaware Estuary Salinity Monitoring Study, Delaware & New Jersey ............................................... (200,000 ) Senator Lautenberg, Menendez GI .................................................... Fife Lake Aquatic Weed Control, MI .................................................................................................... (300,000 ) Senator Levin, Stabenow GI .................................................... Jones County Water Supply, MS .......................................................................................................... (50,000 ) Senator Wicker GI .................................................... Kansas River Basin Technical Assistance, Kansas ............................................................................ (400,000 ) Senator Brownback GI .................................................... Little Sioux Watershed, IA ................................................................................................................... (30,000 ) Senator Grassley GI .................................................... Mississippi Band of Choctaws, MS ..................................................................................................... (50,000 ) Senator Wicker GI .................................................... PLANNING SUPPORT PROGRAM ..................................................................................................................... 3,100,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Schumer GI .................................................... PRECIPITATION STUDIES (NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE) ............................................................................. 225,000 The President GI .................................................... REMOTE SENSING/GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM SUPPORT ........................................................... 150,000 The President GI .................................................... RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................... 28,000,000 The President, Senator Cochran GI .................................................... Submerged Aquatic Vegetation, Maryland .......................................................................................... (1,000,000 ) Senator Cardin GI .................................................... SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL INFORMATION CENTERS .................................................................................. 50,000 The President GI .................................................... STREAM GAGING (U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY) .............................................................................................. 600,000 The President GI .................................................... TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ............................................................................................................................ 350,000 The President GI .................................................... TRIBAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM .................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman GI .................................................... TRI-SERVICE CADD/GIS TECHNOLOGY CENTER ............................................................................................ 350,000 The President GI .................................................... WATER RESOURCES PRIORITIES STUDY ....................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... ACEQUIAS IRRIGATION SYSTEM, NM ............................................................................................................. 2,400,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... AKUTAN HARBOR, AK .................................................................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senator Stevens CG ................................................... ALAMOGORDO, NM ........................................................................................................................................ 4,200,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... ALASKA COASTAL EROSION, AK .................................................................................................................... 4,500,000 Senators Stevens, Murkowski CG ................................................... AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (COMMON FEATURES), CA ........................................................................... 13,000,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM MODIFICATIONS), CA ........................................................... 9,000,000 The President, Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... AMERICAN RIVER WATERSHED (FOLSOM DAM RAISE), CA ........................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... ANACOSTIA RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (PHASE I), MD & DC ......................................................................... 30,000 Senator Cardin CG ................................................... ANTELOPE CREEK, LINCOLN, NE ................................................................................................................... 4,828,000 The President, Senators Ben Nelson, Hagel CG ................................................... ASSATEAGUE ISLAND, MD 1 .......................................................................................................................... 1,900,000 The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin 
183 

CG ................................................... ATLANTA (EI), GA .......................................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Chambliss, Isakson CG ................................................... ATLANTIC COAST OF LONG ISLAND, LONG BEACH ISLAND, NY .................................................................... 100,000 Senator Schumer CG ................................................... ATLANTIC COAST OF MARYLAND, MD ........................................................................................................... 200,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin CG ................................................... ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, EAST ROCKAWAY INLET TO ROCKAWAY & JAMAICA BAY, NY ............................ 750,000 Senator Schumer CG ................................................... ATLANTIC COAST OF NYC, ROCKAWAY INLET TO NORTON POINT, NY .......................................................... 3,800,000 Senator Schumer CG ................................................... BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN WATER RESOURCES, GWYNNS FALLS, MD ....................................................... 500,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin CG ................................................... BARNEGAT INLET TO LITTLE EGG HARBOR (NJ SHORE PROTECTION), NJ .................................................... 11,700,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... BIG SIOUX RIVER, SIOUX FALLS, SD ............................................................................................................. 4,000,000 Senators Johnson, Thune CG ................................................... BLUE RIVER BASIN, KANSAS CITY, MO ......................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senator Bond CG ................................................... BLUE RIVER CHANNEL, KANSAS CITY, MO ................................................................................................... 1,700,000 The President, Senator Bond CG ................................................... BLUESTONE LAKE (DAM SAFETY ASSURANCE), WV ...................................................................................... 12,000,000 The President, Senator Byrd CG ................................................... BRAYS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX ....................................................................................................................... 5,382,000 The President, Senator Cornyn CG ................................................... BRECKENRIDGE, MN ..................................................................................................................................... 2,877,000 Senators Dorgan, Coleman, Klobuchar CG ................................................... BREVARD COUNTY (MID REACH), FL ............................................................................................................ 500,000 Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... BRIDGEPORT ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, CT ................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman CG ................................................... BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET (ABSECON), NJ ............................................................. 3,000,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... BRIGANTINE INLET TO GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET, BRIGANTINE, NJ ........................................................... 80,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... BRUNSWICK COUNTY BEACHES, NC (Ocean Isle) ........................................................................................ 250,000 Senators Dole, Burr CG ................................................... BURLINGTON HARBOR, VT ............................................................................................................................ 500,000 Senator Leahy CG ................................................... CALFED LEVEE STABILITY PROGRAM ............................................................................................................ 5,000,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... CANTON LAKE (DAM SAFETY), OK ................................................................................................................. 21,200,000 The President CG ................................................... CAPE MAY INLET TO LOWER TOWNSHIP, NJ 1 .............................................................................................. 2,500,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... CEDAR HAMMOCK, WARES CREEK, FL .......................................................................................................... 2,773,000 The President, Senator, Martinez CG ................................................... CENTER HILL DAM (SEEPAGE CONTROL), TN ............................................................................................... 53,400,000 The President, Alexander, Corker CG ................................................... CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL ........................................................................................................ 95,188,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... CENTRAL CITY, FORT WORTH, UPPER TRINITY RIVER BASIN, TX ................................................................. 500,000 Senators Hutchison, Cornyn CG ................................................... CENTRAL NEW MEXICO, NM .......................................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... CHAIN OF ROCKS CANAL, MISSISSIPPI RIVER (DEF CORR), IL .................................................................... 2,500,000 The President, Senator Durbin CG ................................................... CHARLESTOWN, MD ....................................................................................................................................... 50,000 Senator Mikulski CG ................................................... CHESAPEAKE BAY ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND PROTECTION, MD, VA & PA ................................. 2,500,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin, Warner, Webb CG ................................................... CHESAPEAKE BAY OYSTER RECOVERY, MD & VA ........................................................................................ 2,000,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin, Warner, Webb CG ................................................... CHESTERFIELD, MO ....................................................................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senator Bond CG ................................................... CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX, SD ......................................................................... 4,000,000 Senators Johnson, Thune CG ................................................... CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL, DISPERSAL BARRIER, IL .................................................................. 5,750,000 The President, Senators Durbin, Levin, 

Stabenow, Coleman, Voinovich, Brown, Kohl 

CG ................................................... CHICAGO SANITARY AND SHIP CANAL, SECOND BARRIER, IL ...................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senators Durbin, Levin, 

Stabenow, Coleman, Voinovich, Brown, Kohl 

CG ................................................... CHICAGO SHORELINE, IL ............................................................................................................................... 4,000,000 The President, Senator Durbin CG ................................................... CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ............................................................................................... 42,000,000 The President, Alexander, Corker CG ................................................... CHIEF JOSEPH DAM GAS ABATEMENT, WA 1 ................................................................................................ 2,500,000 The President, Senator Murray 
184 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

CG ................................................... CLEARWATER LAKE (SEEPAGE CONTROL), MO ............................................................................................. 25,000,000 The President CG ................................................... COLUMBIA RIVER CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS, OR & WA .............................................................................. 36,000,000 The President, Senators Murray, Crapo, Wyden, 

Smith, Cantwell 

CG ................................................... COLUMBIA RIVER FISH MITIGATION, WA, OR & ID 1 .................................................................................... 92,000,000 The President, Senator Murray CG ................................................... COLUMBIA RIVER TREATY FISHING ACCESS SITES, OR & WA ..................................................................... 2,455,000 The President, Senators Murray, Wyden, Smith, 

Cantwell 

CG ................................................... COMITE RIVER, LA ........................................................................................................................................ 10,000,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter CG ................................................... CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX ........................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Hutchison, Cornyn CG ................................................... CROOKSTON, MN ........................................................................................................................................... 300,000 The President, Senator Klobuchar CG ................................................... CUMBERLAND, MD ........................................................................................................................................ 200,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin CG ................................................... DALLAS FLOODWAY EXTENSION, TRINITY RIVER PROJECT, TX ..................................................................... 13,000,000 Senators Hutchison, Cornyn CG ................................................... DAVENPORT, IA ............................................................................................................................................. 4,850,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley CG ................................................... DELAWARE BAY COASTLINE, ROOSEVELT INLET TO LEWES BEACH, DE 1 ................................................... 350,000 The President CG ................................................... DELAWARE COAST PROTECTION, DE ............................................................................................................. 390,000 Senators Biden, Carper CG ................................................... DELAWARE RIVER MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING, NJ, PA & DE ...................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Specter, Casey CG ................................................... DES MOINES AND RACCOON RIVERS, IA ...................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley CG ................................................... DES MOINES RECREATION RIVER AND GREENBELT, IA ................................................................................ 3,900,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley CG ................................................... DES PLAINES RIVER, IL ................................................................................................................................. 8,000,000 The President, Senator Durbin CG ................................................... DESOTO COUNTY REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM, MS .............................................................................. 4,860,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker CG ................................................... DUWAMISH AND GREEN RIVER BASIN, WA ................................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell CG ................................................... EAST BATON ROUGE PARISH, LA (FC) .......................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senator Landrieu CG ................................................... EAST ST LOUIS AND VICINITY, IL .................................................................................................................. 375,000 Senator Durbin CG ................................................... EAST ST LOUIS, IL ......................................................................................................................................... 1,207,000 The President, Senator Durbin CG ................................................... ELK CREEK LAKE, OR .................................................................................................................................... 3,120,000 The President CG ................................................... EMSWORTH L&D, OHIO RIVER (STATIC INSTABILITY CORRECTION), PA ....................................................... 25,800,000 The President, Senators Specter, Casey CG ................................................... EVERGLADES AND S. FLORIDA ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL .................................................................... 3,797,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... FIRE ISLAND INLET TO JONES INLET, NY ...................................................................................................... 500,000 The President CG ................................................... FIRE ISLAND INLET TO MONTAUK POINT, NY ................................................................................................ 2,150,000 Senator Schumer CG ................................................... FLORIDA KEYS WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS, FL .................................................................................... 2,200,000 Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... FOLLY BEACH, SC 1 ...................................................................................................................................... 35,000 The President CG ................................................... FT. PECK CABIN CONVEYANCE, MT .............................................................................................................. 1,500,000 Senators Baucus, Tester CG ................................................... GARRISON DAM AND POWER PLANT (REPLACEMENT), ND ........................................................................... 3,500,000 The President CG ................................................... GENESEE COUNTY, MI ................................................................................................................................... 600,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow CG ................................................... GRAYS LANDING LOCK AND DAM, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ...................................................................... 600,000 The President CG ................................................... GREAT EGG HARBOR INLET TO PECK BEACH (OCEAN CITY), NJ .................................................................. 3,000,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... GREAT EGG HARBOR TO TOWNSENDS INLET, NJ .......................................................................................... 250,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez 
185 

CG ................................................... GREAT LAKES FISHERY AND ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, MI ....................................................................... 2,500,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow, Coleman, Voinovich CG ................................................... GREENBRIER RIVER BASIN, WV .................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 Senator Byrd CG ................................................... GUADALUPE RIVER, CA ................................................................................................................................. 5,000,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... HACKENSACK MEADOWLANDS, NJ ................................................................................................................. 100,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... HAINES BOAT HARBOR, AK ........................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senator Stevens CG ................................................... HAMILTON AIRFIELD WETLANDS RESTORATION, CA ...................................................................................... 4,900,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... HARBOR/SOUTH BAY WATER RECYCLING STUDY, LOS ANGELES, CA .......................................................... 3,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... HERBERT HOOVER DIKE (SEEPAGE CONTROL) , FL ...................................................................................... 77,400,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX ....................................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Cornyn CG ................................................... HOUSTON-GALVESTON NAVIGATION CHANNELS, TX ...................................................................................... 19,700,000 The President, Senator Hutchison CG ................................................... HOWARD HANSON DAM ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, WA 1 .......................................................................... 15,000,000 The President, Senator Murray CG ................................................... IAO STREAMS, HI .......................................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Inouye, Akaka CG ................................................... ILLINOIS WATERWAY, LOCKPORT LOCK AND DAM (REPLACEMENT), IL ........................................................ 28,600,000 The President CG ................................................... INDIANA HARBOR (CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITY), IN 1 ............................................................................. 8,385,000 The President CG ................................................... INNER HARBOR NAVIGATION CANAL LOCK REPLACEMENT, LA ..................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter CG ................................................... ISLAND CREEK BASIN IN AND AROUND LOGAN, WV ..................................................................................... 200,000 Senator Byrd CG ................................................... J. BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA ......................................................................................................... 8,500,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter CG ................................................... JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL .......................................................................................................................... 3,500,000 Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... JAMES RIVER DEEPWATER TURNING BASIN, VA ........................................................................................... 1,763,000 Senator Warner, Webb CG ................................................... JOHN H KERR DAM AND RESERVOIR (REPLACEMENT), VA & NC ................................................................ 14,000,000 The President CG ................................................... JOHNSON CREEK, UPPER TRINITY BASIN, ARLINGTON, TX ........................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Hutchison, Cornyn CG ................................................... JOSEPH G MINISH HISTORIC WATERFRONT PARK, NJ ................................................................................... 4,000,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... KAWEAH RIVER, CA ....................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 The President CG ................................................... KENTUCKY LOCK AND DAM, TENNESSEE RIVER, KY ..................................................................................... 22,330,000 The President, Senator McConnell CG ................................................... KISSIMMEE RIVER, FL ................................................................................................................................... 31,015,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... LACKAWANNA RIVER, SCRANTON, PA ........................................................................................................... 4,782,000 Senators Specter, Casey CG ................................................... LAKE CHAMPLAIN WATERSHED INITIATE, VT ................................................................................................. 2,000,000 Senator Leahy CG ................................................... LAKE SAKAKAWEA PROJECT, ND ................................................................................................................... 17,048,000 Senator Dorgan CG ................................................... LAKE WORTH SAND TRANSFER PLANT, FL 1 ................................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senator Bill Nelson CG ................................................... LAROSE TO GOLDEN MEADOW, LA (CG) ....................................................................................................... 2,500,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter CG ................................................... LEVISA AND TUG FORKS AND UPPER CUMBERLAND RIVER, WV, VA & KY .................................................. 16,500,000 Senators Byrd, Warner, Webb CG ................................................... LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, IN ........................................................................................................................... 8,000,000 The President CG ................................................... LLAGAS CREEK, CA ....................................................................................................................................... 400,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... LOCK & DAM 27, MISSISSIPPI RIVER (REHABILITATION), IL 1 ..................................................................... 2,598,000 The President, Senators Durbin, Bond CG ................................................... LOCK AND DAM 11, MISSISSIPPI RIVER (MAJOR REHAB), IA 1 ................................................................... 2,750,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley CG ................................................... LOCK AND DAM 3, MISSISSIPPI RIVER (MAJOR REHAB) , MN ..................................................................... 2,000,000 Senator Coleman CG ................................................... LOCKS AND DAMS 2, 3, AND 4, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ........................................................................ 19,050,000 The President, Senators Specter, Casey CG ................................................... LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA ................................................................................................ 5,700,000 The President CG ................................................... LOWER CAPE MAY MEADOWS, CAPE MAY POINT, NJ 1 ................................................................................ 150,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... LOWER COLUMBIA RIVER ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, OR & WA ................................................................. 1,500,000 The President, Senator Murray 
186 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

CG ................................................... LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA .................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senator Murray CG ................................................... LOWER MUD RIVER, MILTON, WV ................................................................................................................. 1,050,000 Senator Byrd CG ................................................... LOWER SNAKE RIVER FISH & WILDLIFE COMPENSATION, WA, OR 1 ............................................................ 1,500,000 The President CG ................................................... LYNCHBURG CSO, VA .................................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senator Warner, Webb CG ................................................... MARKLAND LOCKS & DAM, KY & IL 1 .......................................................................................................... 10,600,000 The President CG ................................................... MARMET LOCK, KANAWHA RIVER, WV .......................................................................................................... 9,000,000 The President, Senator Byrd CG ................................................... MCALPINE LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, KY & IN ..................................................................................... 6,270,000 The President, Senator McConnell CG ................................................... MCCOOK AND THORNTON RESERVOIRS, IL ................................................................................................... 34,000,000 The President, Senator Durbin CG ................................................... METROPOLITAN REGION OF CINCINNATI, DUCK CREEK, OH ......................................................................... 4,000,000 The President, Senator Brown CG ................................................... MIAMI HARBOR CHANNEL DEEPENING, FL .................................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Martinez CG ................................................... MIDDLE RIO GRANDE FLOOD PROTECTION, BERNALILLO TO BELEN, NM ..................................................... 800,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... MIDDLE RIO GRANDE RESTORATION, NM ..................................................................................................... 24,016,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... MID-VALLEY AREA LEVEE RECONSTRUCTION, CA ......................................................................................... 1,500,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... MILWAUKEE HARBOR CDF EXPANSION, WI ................................................................................................... 1,600,000 Senator Kohl CG ................................................... MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS (REG WORKS), MO ............................................................. 5,011,000 The President, Senator Bond CG ................................................... MISSISSIPPI ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, MS .................................................................................. 18,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker CG ................................................... MISSOURI & MIDDLE MISSISSIPPI RIVERS ENHANCEMENT, MO ................................................................... 1,500,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley, Hagel CG ................................................... MISSOURI NATIONAL RECREATIONAL RIVER, NE & SD ................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senator Hagel CG ................................................... MISSOURI R FISH AND WILDLIFE RECOVERY, IA,KS,MO,MT,NE & ND 1 ....................................................... 70,000,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley, Baucus, Tester CG ................................................... MISSOURI RIVER LEVEE SYSTEM (L–385), MO, IA, NE & KS ....................................................................... 2,600,000 Senator Bond CG ................................................... MISSOURI RIVER RESTORATION, ND ............................................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senator Conrad CG ................................................... MOBILE HARBOR TURNING BASIN, AL .......................................................................................................... 3,400,000 Senators Shelby, Sessions CG ................................................... MT ST HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA ..................................................................................................... 4,410,000 The President, Senator Murray CG ................................................... MUD MOUNTAIN DAM (FISH PASSAGE), WA .................................................................................................. 1,000,000 The President, Senator Murray CG ................................................... MUDDY RIVER, MA ........................................................................................................................................ 5,000,000 The President, Senators Kennedy, Kerry CG ................................................... MURRIETA CREEK, CA ................................................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... NAPA RIVER, CA ............................................................................................................................................ 11,000,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... NEGAUNEE, MI .............................................................................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow CG ................................................... NEW MEXICO (Environmental Infrastructure), NM ....................................................................................... 7,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY HARBOR, NY & NJ ......................................................................................... 85,000,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

CG ................................................... NEW YORK CITY WATERSHED, NY ................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senator Schumer CG ................................................... NOGALES WASH, AZ (Chula Vista) ............................................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senator Kyl CG ................................................... NORFOLK HARBOR AND CHANNELS (DEEPENING), VA .................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senator Warner, Webb CG ................................................... NORTH DAKOTA ENVIRONMENTAL INFRASTRUCTURE, ND ............................................................................. 10,000,000 Senator Dorgan 
187 

CG ................................................... NUTWOOD DRAINAGE AND LEVEE DISTRICT, IL ............................................................................................ 300,000 Senator Durbin CG ................................................... OAKLAND HARBOR (50 FOOT PROJECT), CA ................................................................................................. 24,000,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... OLMSTED LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, IL & KY ....................................................................................... 114,000,000 The President, Senator McConnell CG ................................................... OUACHITA RIVER LEVEES, LA ....................................................................................................................... 1,600,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter CG ................................................... OZARK-JETA TAYLOR POWERHOUSE (MAJOR REHAB), AR ............................................................................ 17,300,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor CG ................................................... PANAMA CITY BEACHES, FL .......................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senator Bill Nelson CG ................................................... PASSAIC RIVER PRESERVATION OF NATURAL STORAGE AREAS, NJ ............................................................. 1,500,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... PERRY CREEK, IA .......................................................................................................................................... 3,800,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley CG ................................................... PETALUMA RIVER FLOOD CONTROL, CA ....................................................................................................... 350,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... PINHOOK CREEK, HUNTSVILLE, AL ................................................................................................................ 1,400,000 Senator Shelby CG ................................................... POINT MARION, LOCK AND DAM8, MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA & WV ........................................................... 150,000 The President CG ................................................... POPLAR ISLAND, MD 1 .................................................................................................................................. 12,000,000 The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin CG ................................................... PORT OF LOS ANGELES HARBOR MAIN CHANNEL DEEPENING, CA .............................................................. 885,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... PORTUGUES AND BUCANA RIVERS, PR ........................................................................................................ 43,000,000 The President CG ................................................... PRESQUE ISLE PENINSULA (PERMANENT), PA .............................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senators Specter, Casey CG ................................................... PUGET SOUND AND ADJACENT WATERS RESTORATION, WA ......................................................................... 621,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell CG ................................................... RAMAPO AND MAHWAH RIVERS, MAHWAH, NJ AND SUFFERN, NY ............................................................... 500,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, Schumer CG ................................................... RARITAN BAY AND SANDY HOOK BAY, PORT MONMOUTH, NJ ...................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... RARITAN RIVER BASIN, GREEN BROOK SUB-BASIN, NJ ............................................................................... 10,000,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... RED RIVER BASIN CHLORIDE CONTROL, TX & OK ....................................................................................... 1,500,000 Senator Inhofe CG ................................................... RED RIVER BELOW DENISON DAM AR, LA & TX .......................................................................................... 2,500,000 Senators Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor, Vitter CG ................................................... RED RIVER EMERGENCY BANK PROTECTION, AR & LA ................................................................................ 4,000,000 Senators Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor, Vitter CG ................................................... RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC .......................................................................................... 1,450,000 The President CG ................................................... RICHMOND CSO, VA ...................................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senator Warner, Webb CG ................................................... RIO DE FLAG FLAGSTAFF, AZ ........................................................................................................................ 3,000,000 Senator Kyl CG ................................................... RIO GRANDE FLOODWAY, SAN ACACIA TO BOSQUE DEL APACHE, NM ........................................................ 800,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... RIO PUERTO NUEVO, PR ............................................................................................................................... 12,000,000 The President CG ................................................... ROANOKE RIVER UPPER BASIN, HEADWATERS AREA, VA ............................................................................. 1,075,000 The President, Senator Warner, Webb CG ................................................... ROBERT C BYRD LOCKS AND DAM, OHIO RIVER, WV & OH ........................................................................ 1,000,000 The President CG ................................................... RURAL IDAHO, ID .......................................................................................................................................... 4,000,000 Senators Craig, Crapo CG ................................................... RURAL MONTANA, MT ................................................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Baucus, Tester CG ................................................... RURAL UTAH, UT (EI) .................................................................................................................................... 12,000,000 Senators Bennett, Hatch CG ................................................... RURAL, NV (EI) ............................................................................................................................................. 18,000,000 Senators Reid, Ensign CG ................................................... SACRAMENTO DEEPWATER SHIP CHANNEL, CA ............................................................................................ 900,000 The President, Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... SACRAMENTO RIVER BANK PROTECTION PROJECT, CA ................................................................................ 23,968,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... SACRAMENTO RIVER FLOOD CONTROL, GRR, CA ......................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... SACRAMENTO RIVER, GLENN-COLUSA IRRIGATION DISTRICT, CA ................................................................ 500,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... SAN ANTONIO CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, TX ................................................................................................. 10,000,000 Senators Hutchison, Cornyn CG ................................................... SAN FRANCISCO BAY TO STOCKTON, CA ...................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... SAN LUIS REY RIVER, CA ............................................................................................................................. 750,000 Senator Feinstein 
188 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

CG ................................................... SAN RAMON VALLEY RECYCLED WATER, CA ................................................................................................ 3,500,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... SAND CREEK WATERSHED, SAUNDERS COUNTY, NE .................................................................................... 2,400,000 Senators Ben Nelson, Hagel CG ................................................... SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NJ ......................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... SANTA ANA RIVER MAINSTEM, CA ................................................................................................................ 14,000,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... SANTA MARIA RIVER, CA .............................................................................................................................. 6,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... SAULT STE MARIE, MI ................................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow CG ................................................... SEWARD HARBOR BREAKWATER EXTENSION ................................................................................................ 1,000,000 Senator Stevens CG ................................................... SHOALWATER BAY SHORELINE, WA .............................................................................................................. 2,000,000 Senator Murray CG ................................................... SIMS BAYOU, HOUSTON, TX .......................................................................................................................... 21,465,000 The President, Senator Cornyn CG ................................................... SOUTH SACRAMENTO COUNTY STREAMS, CA ............................................................................................... 12,000,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... SOUTHWEST VALLEY ALBUQUERQUE, NM ..................................................................................................... 8,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman CG ................................................... ST LOUIS FLOOD PROTECTION, MO ............................................................................................................... 3,750,000 The President, Senator Bond CG ................................................... ST PAUL HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senator Stevens CG ................................................... ST. LUCIE INLET, FL ...................................................................................................................................... 4,000,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................... 900,000 The President CG ................................................... SUCCESS DAM, TULE RIVER (DAM SAFETY), CA .......................................................................................... 8,000,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... SUCCESS DAM, TULE RIVER (ENLARGEMENT), CA ....................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... SWOPE PARK INDUSTRIAL AREA, KANSAS CITY, MO .................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senator Bond CG ................................................... TAHOE BASIN RESTORATION, CA .................................................................................................................. 3,000,000 Senators Reid, Feinstein, Ensign CG ................................................... TAMPA HARBOR, FL ...................................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez CG ................................................... TEXAS CITY CHANNEL, TX ............................................................................................................................. 3,000,000 Senator Hutchison CG ................................................... TOWNSENDS INLET TO CAPE MAY INLET, NJ ................................................................................................ 3,000,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez CG ................................................... TRES RIOS, AZ .............................................................................................................................................. 3,000,000 Senator Kyl CG ................................................... TURKEY CREEK BASIN, KS & MO ................................................................................................................. 10,000,000 The President, Senators Bond, Roberts CG ................................................... TUSCALOOSA, AL ........................................................................................................................................... 7,500,000 Senator Shelby CG ................................................... TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS (DAM SAFETY) ....................................................................................................... 23,800,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts CG ................................................... UNALASKA, AK ............................................................................................................................................... 6,000,000 Senators Stevens, Murkowski CG ................................................... UPPER GUADALUPE RIVER, CA ..................................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER RESTORATION, IL, IA, MN, MO & WI .................................................................. 18,000,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley, Coleman CG ................................................... UPPER NEWPORT BAY, CA ............................................................................................................................ 3,000,000 Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... VIRGINIA BEACH (HURRICANE PROTECTION), VA ......................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senator Warner, Webb CG ................................................... WEST SACRAMENTO, CA ............................................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... WESTERN SARPY COUNTY AND CLEAR CREEK, NE ...................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senators Ben Nelson, Hagel CG ................................................... WHITE RIVER MINIMUM FLOW, AR ................................................................................................................ 2,000,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor CG ................................................... WILLAMETTE RIVER TEMPERATURE CONTROL, OR 1 .................................................................................... 3,331,000 The President 
189 

CG ................................................... WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC ............................................................................................................................ 2,000,000 Senators Dole, Burr CG ................................................... WOLF CREEK (SEEPAGE CONTROL), KY ........................................................................................................ 57,000,000 The President, Senators McConnell, Alexander, 

Corker 

CG ................................................... WOOD RIVER LEVEE, IL ................................................................................................................................. 3,700,000 The President, Senator Durbin CG ................................................... WRIGHTSVILLE BEACH, NC ............................................................................................................................ 300,000 Senators Dole, Burr CG ................................................... WYOMING VALLEY (LEVEE RAISING), PA ....................................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senators Specter, Casey CG ................................................... YUBA RIVER BASIN, CA ................................................................................................................................ 3,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... ABANDONED MINE RESTORATION ................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer CG ................................................... AQUATIC PLANT CONTROL ............................................................................................................................. 4,550,000 The President, Senators Leahy, Schumer, Dole CG ................................................... DAM SAFETY AND SEEPAGE/STABILITY CORRECTION PROGRAM .................................................................. 48,650,000 The President CG ................................................... Dam Safety Assurance Studies .................................................................................................................... ..............................CG ................................................... Cherry Creek Dam, CO ......................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Dworshak Dam, ID ............................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Isabella Dam, CA ................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senator Feinstein CG ................................................... John Day Lock and Dam, OR & WA .................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Martis Creek Dam, CA & NV ............................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Ensign CG ................................................... Mississippi Lock and Dam 25, MO ..................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Seepage/Stability Correction Major Rehabilitation Studies ......................................................................... ..............................CG ................................................... Addicks Dam, Buffalo Bayou, TX ........................................................................................................ .............................. The President CG ................................................... Ball Mountain Dam, VT ....................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Beach City Dam, OH ............................................................................................................................ .............................. The President CG ................................................... Bolivar Dam, OH .................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... East Branch Dam, Clarion River, PA .................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... Green River Lake Dam, KY .................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... Hidden Dam, CA .................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... Hop Brook Dam, CT ............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... J. Edward Roush Dam, KY ................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Keystone lake Dam, OK ....................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Lake Shelbyville Dam, IL ..................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Lewisville Dam, TX .............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... Mansfield Hollow Dam, CT .................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... Mohawk Dam, OH ................................................................................................................................ .............................. The President CG ................................................... Montgomery Locks and Dam, PA ......................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Nolin Lake dam, KY ............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... Rough River Lake Dam, KY ................................................................................................................. .............................. The President CG ................................................... Salamonie Lake Dam, KY .................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Whittier Narrows Dam, CA ................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... Zoar Levee (Dover Dam), OH ............................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... DREDGED MATERIAL DISPOSAL FACILITIES PROGRAM (DMDF) .................................................................... 8,965,000 The President CG ................................................... Charleston Harbor, SC 1 ..................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Graham 
190 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

CG ................................................... Green Bay Harbor, WI 1 ....................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Kohl CG ................................................... Rouge River, MI 1 ................................................................................................................................ .............................. The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow CG ................................................... Savannah Harbor, GA 1 ....................................................................................................................... .............................. The President CG ................................................... EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION FUND ............................................................................................................... 21,000,000 The President CG ................................................... ESTUARY RESTORATION PROGRAM (PUBLIC LAW 106–457) ........................................................................ 1,000,000 The President CG ................................................... INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (BOARD EXPENSES) .............................................................................. 50,000 The President CG ................................................... INLAND WATERWAYS USER BOARD (COE EXP) ............................................................................................. 250,000 The President CG ................................................... SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL DEVELOPMENT & DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM .......................................... 875,000 Inouye CG ................................................... CONTINUING AUTHORITIES PROGRAM ........................................................................................................... ..............................Section 14 ...................................... EMERGENCY STREAMBANK AND SHORELINE PROTECTION (SECTION 14) .................................................... 10,000,000 The President Section 208 .................................... SNAGGING AND CLEARING (SECTION 208) ................................................................................................... 500,000 The President Section 208 .................................... Blackwell Lake, Blackwell, OK ............................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 208 .................................... Muscatatuck River Log Jam, Scott County, IN .................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 208 .................................... Oran, MO .............................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... SHORE PROTECTION (SECTION 103) ............................................................................................................. 7,500,000 The President Section 103 .................................... Athol Springs, Lake Erie, NY ............................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Bay Farm Dike, CA .............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Feinstein Section 103 .................................... Chesapeake Bay Shoreline, Hampton, VA ........................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Ft. San Geronimo, PR .......................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Lake Erie at Painesville, OH ................................................................................................................ .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Lasalle Park, Buffalo, NY .................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Lincoln Park Beach, Seattle, WA ......................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Old Lakeshore Road, NY ...................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Philadelphia Shipyard Sea Wall, Philadelphia, PA ............................................................................. .............................. The President Section 103 .................................... Pismo Beach, CA ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Feinstein Section 103 .................................... Unalakleet Storm Damage Reduction, Unalakleet, AK ........................................................................ .............................. The President, Senator Stevens Section 103 .................................... Veteran’s Drive Shoreline, St. Thomas, USVI ...................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 107 .................................... NAVIGATION PROGRAM (SECTION 107) ......................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 107 .................................... Bass Harbor, ME .................................................................................................................................. .............................. Snowe, Collins Section 107 .................................... Charlestown Breachway and Inlet, RI ................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 107 .................................... Fairless Hills Turning Basin, PA ......................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Specter, Casey Section 107 .................................... Grand Marais Harbor of Refuge, MN .................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Coleman Section 107 .................................... Hampton Harbor, NH ........................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Gregg Section 107 .................................... Mackinac Isle, Harbor Breakwall, MI .................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 107 .................................... McQuade Road Harbor of Refuge, Duluth, MN ................................................................................... .............................. Senators Coleman, Klobuchar Section 107 .................................... Nassawadox Creek, VA ........................................................................................................................ .............................. The President 
191 

Section 107 .................................... North Kohala Navigation Improvements, HI ........................................................................................ .............................. Senators Inouye, Akaka Section 107 .................................... Northwest Tennessee Harbor, TN ......................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Alexander, Corker Section 107 .................................... Northwestern Michigan, Traverse City, MI .......................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow Section 107 .................................... Ontonagon Channel Extension, MI ...................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow Section 107 .................................... Ottawa River Navigation, Toledo, OH .................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Voinovich Section 107 .................................... Port Fourchon Extension, Lafourche Parish, LA .................................................................................. .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Section 107 .................................... Round Pond, Bristol, ME ..................................................................................................................... .............................. Snowe, Collins Section 107 .................................... Savoonga Harbor, AK ........................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 107 .................................... St. Jerome Creek, MD .......................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Cardin Section 111 .................................... MITIGATION OF SHORE DAMAGES (SECTION 111) 1 ..................................................................................... 10,000,000 The President Section 111 .................................... Camp Ellis Restoration Project, ME .................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Snowe, Collins Section 111 .................................... Fairport Harbor, OH ............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senator Voinovich Section 111 .................................... Mattituck Harbor, NY ........................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Schumer Section 111 .................................... Mobile Pass, AL ................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 111 .................................... Tybee Island Channel Impacts, GA ..................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 111 .................................... Vermillion, OH ...................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. BENEFICIAL USES OF DREDGED MATERIAL (SECTION 204, 207, 933) 1 ..................................................... 7,187,000 The President Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. 21st Avenue West Channel, Duluth, MN ............................................................................................. .............................. The President Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Atchafalaya River, Shell Island, St. Mary Parish, LA ......................................................................... .............................. Senator Landrieu Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Barataria Bay Waterway, LA ................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Blackhawk Bottoms, IA ........................................................................................................................ .............................. The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Calcasieu River, Cameron Parish, LA ................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Isle Aux Herbes, AL .............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Maumee Bay Restoration, OH .............................................................................................................. .............................. The President Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Newburyport Harbor, MA ...................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Kennedy, Kerry Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Restoration of the Cat Islands Chain, Green Bay, WI ........................................................................ .............................. The President, Senator Kohl Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Shell Island Pass, LA .......................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Wanchese Marsh Creation, NC ............................................................................................................ .............................. The President Sections 204, 207, 933 ................. Wynn Road, Oregon, OH ...................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 205 .................................... FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS (SECTION 205) ................................................................................................. 43,123,000 The President Section 205 .................................... Ada, MN ............................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Coleman, KlobucharSection 205 .................................... Assunpink Creek, Hamiliton Township, Mercer County, NJ ................................................................. .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 205 .................................... Bayou Choupique, St Mary Parish, LA ................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Section 205 .................................... Bayou Queue de Tortue, Vermillion Parish, LA ................................................................................... .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Section 205 .................................... Beaver Creek & Tribs, Bristol, TN ....................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Alexander Section 205 .................................... Blacksnake Creek, St. Joseph, MO ...................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Bond Section 205 .................................... Concordia, KS ...................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Brownback, Roberts Section 205 .................................... Cosgrove Creek, Calaveras County, CA ............................................................................................... .............................. Senator Feinstein Section 205 .................................... Crosscreek, Rossville, KS ..................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Brownback, Roberts Section 205 .................................... Duck Creek Flood Warning System, OH ............................................................................................... .............................. The President 
192 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

Section 205 .................................... Elkton, MD ........................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Mikulski Section 205 .................................... Eureka Creek, Mannhattan, KS ........................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Brownback Section 205 .................................... Findley, OH ........................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Voinovich, Brown Section 205 .................................... Granite Falls, MN ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Coleman, Klobuchar Section 205 .................................... Hatch, NM ............................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Domenici, Bingaman Section 205 .................................... Hopkinsville, Little River, KY ............................................................................................................... .............................. Senator McConnell Section 205 .................................... Independence, OH ................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Voinovich Section 205 .................................... Indian/Dry Creek Cedar Rapids, IA ..................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Harkin, Grassley Section 205 .................................... Jackson Brook, Morris County, NJ ........................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 205 .................................... Jewett Brook, Laconia, NH ................................................................................................................... (100,000 ) Senator Gregg Section 205 .................................... Keopu-Hienaloli Strm, HI ..................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 205 .................................... Kings Point, Warren County, MS ......................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Cochran, Wicker Section 205 .................................... Kuliouou Stream, Oahu, HI .................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Inouye Section 205 .................................... Las Gallinas Creek/Santa Venetia Levee, CA ...................................................................................... .............................. Senator Feinstein Section 205 .................................... Little Mill Creek, Elsemere, DE ............................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Salazar Section 205 .................................... Little River Diversion, Dutchtown, MO ................................................................................................ .............................. The President, Senator Bond Section 205 .................................... Livingston, MT ..................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 205 .................................... Mad Creek, Muscatine, IA ................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley Section 205 .................................... McKinney Bayou, Tunica County, MS .................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Cochran, Wicker Section 205 .................................... Mill Brook, Highland Park, NJ ............................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 205 .................................... Montevideo, MN ................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Coleman Section 205 .................................... North River, Peabody, MA .................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Kennedy, Kerry Section 205 .................................... Oak Creek, Florence, Colorado ............................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Allard, Salazar Section 205 .................................... Pailet Basin, Barataria, LA ................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Vitter Section 205 .................................... Palai Stream, Hawaii, HI ..................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Inouye, Akaka Section 205 .................................... Pecan Creek, Gainesville, TX ............................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Hutchison Section 205 .................................... Pennsville, NJ ....................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Lautenberg Section 205 .................................... Pennsylvania Avenue Improvement Project, Bethany Beach, DE ........................................................ .............................. Senators Biden, Carper Section 205 .................................... Philadelphia Shipyard Sea Wall, Philadelphia, PA ............................................................................. .............................. Senator Casey Section 205 .................................... Platte River, Fremont, NE .................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Ben Nelson, Hagel Section 205 .................................... Platte River, Schuyler, NE ................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Ben Nelson, Hagel Section 205 .................................... Poplar Brook, Deal and Ocean Township, NJ ...................................................................................... .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 205 .................................... Randolph, NE (Middle Logan Creek) ................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Hagel Section 205 .................................... Red Oak Creek, Red Oak, IA ............................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Grassley Section 205 .................................... Rio Descalabrado, PR .......................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 205 .................................... Rio Guamani-Guaya, PR ...................................................................................................................... .............................. The President 
193 

Section 205 .................................... Salisbury, MA ....................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Kennedy, Kerry Section 205 .................................... Swannanoa River Watershed, NC ........................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Dole Section 205 .................................... Town of Carencro, Lafayette Parish, LA .............................................................................................. .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Section 205 .................................... Turkey Creek, Ben Hill County, GA ...................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Biden, Carper Section 205 .................................... Upper Passaic River and Tributaries, Long Hill Township, NJ ........................................................... .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 205 .................................... Wahpeton, ND ...................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Dorgan Section 205 .................................... Wailele Strm, Oahu, HI ........................................................................................................................ .............................. The President Section 205 .................................... White Slough, CA ................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 205 .................................... Winnebago River, Mason City, IA ........................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Grassley Section 205 .................................... WV Statewide Flood Warning System, WV ........................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Byrd Section 205 .................................... Wynne, AR ............................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Lincoln, Pryor Section 206 .................................... AQUATIC ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION (SECTION 206) ................................................................................... 25,000,000 The President Section 206 .................................... Arkansas River Habitat Restoration Project, CO ................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Arrowhead Creek, OR ........................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Wyden, Smith Section 206 .................................... Asheville-Buncomb County, NC ........................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Dole Section 206 .................................... Beaver Creek, OR ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Wyden, Smith Section 206 .................................... Blue Hole Lake State Park, NM ........................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Domenici, Bingaman Section 206 .................................... Blue River, CO ..................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator SalazarSection 206 .................................... Bottomless Lakes State Park, NM ....................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Domenici, Bingaman Section 206 .................................... Brownsville Branch, AR ....................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Lincoln, Pryor Section 206 .................................... Buras Marina, LA ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Landrieu Section 206 .................................... Camp Creek-Zumwalt Prairie, OR ....................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Wyden, Smith Section 206 .................................... Carpenter Creek, WA ............................................................................................................................ .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Chariton River/Rathbun Lake, IA ......................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Harkin, Grassley Section 206 .................................... Chattahoochee Fall-Line Ecosystem Restoration, GA .......................................................................... .............................. Senators Shelby, Chambliss, Isakson Section 206 .................................... Christine and Hickson Dams, ND ........................................................................................................ .............................. The President, Senator Dorgan Section 206 .................................... Codorus Creek Watershed Restoration, PA .......................................................................................... .............................. Senator Casey Section 206 .................................... Concord Streams Restoration, NC ....................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Dole Section 206 .................................... Deep Run/Tiber Hudson, Howard County, MD ..................................................................................... .............................. Senators Mikulski, Cardin Section 206 .................................... Dents Run, Elk County, PA .................................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senator Casey Section 206 .................................... Dog Island Shoals, MD ........................................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Cardin Section 206 .................................... Drayton Dam, ND ................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senators Dorgan, Coleman Section 206 .................................... Duck Creek, Davenport, IA ................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Grassley Section 206 .................................... Emiquon Preserve, Fulton County, IL .................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Durbin Section 206 .................................... Eugene Delta Ponds, OR ..................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Wyden, Smith Section 206 .................................... Eugene Field, IL ................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Gerritsen Creek, Brooklyn, NY .............................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Schumer Section 206 .................................... Goose Creek, Boulder, CO .................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senator Salazar Section 206 .................................... Greenbury Point, MD ............................................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Cardin Section 206 .................................... Heron Haven, NE .................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Hagel 
194 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

Section 206 .................................... Hoffman Dam, IL ................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Incline and Third Creeks, NV .............................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Ensign Section 206 .................................... Jackson Creek, GA ............................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Janes-Wallace Memorial Dam, Santa Rosa, NM ................................................................................. .............................. Senators Domenici, Bingaman Section 206 .................................... Kings Park, NY ..................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Schumer Section 206 .................................... Lake Killarney, Louisiana State Penitentiary, LA ................................................................................ .............................. Senator Landrieu Section 206 .................................... Lake Verret, Assumption Parish, LA .................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Section 206 .................................... Lower Boulder Creek, CO ..................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Salazar Section 206 .................................... Lower Hempstead Harbor, NY .............................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Schumer Section 206 .................................... Mandeville Ecosystem Restoration, LA ................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Vitter Section 206 .................................... Manhasset Bay, NY ............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Schumer Section 206 .................................... Marion Aquatic Ecosystem Restoration, MI ......................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow Section 206 .................................... Milford Pond, Milford, MA .................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Kennedy, Kerry Section 206 .................................... Mokuhinia/Mokuula Restoration, HI ..................................................................................................... .............................. Senators, Inouye, Akaka Section 206 .................................... Mud Creek, Great South Bay, NY ........................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Schumer Section 206 .................................... Musconetcong River Dam Removals, NJ ............................................................................................. .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 206 .................................... North Beach Wetland Restoration, MD ................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Mikulski, Cardin Section 206 .................................... North Fork Gunnison River, CO ........................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Salazar Section 206 .................................... Northport Harbor, Huntington, NY ....................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Schumer Section 206 .................................... Northwest Branch Anacostia River, MD .............................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin Section 206 .................................... Ogden River Restoration, UT ............................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Bennett Section 206 .................................... Olentangy 5th Avenue Dam, OH .......................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Voinovich Section 206 .................................... Orland Park, IL .................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Painter Creek, MN ................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Coleman, Klobuchar Section 206 .................................... Pennsville, Salem County, NJ .............................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Menendez Section 206 .................................... Pleasure Island, MD ............................................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Cardin Section 206 .................................... Rancocas Creek Fish Passage Restoration Project, NJ ....................................................................... .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 206 .................................... Rose Bay Ecosystem Restoration Project, FL ...................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Soundview Park, Bronx, NY ................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Schumer Section 206 .................................... Spring Lake, San Marcos, TX .............................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Hutchison Section 206 .................................... Springfield Mill Race Stabilization and Protection, OR ...................................................................... .............................. Senators Wyden, Smith Section 206 .................................... Squaw Creek, (Round Lake Drain), IL ................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Durbin Section 206 .................................... St. Helena-Napa River, CA .................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Stephenville WWTP, Meridian, TX ........................................................................................................ .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Storm Lake, IA ..................................................................................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley Section 206 .................................... Sweetwater Reservoir Ecosystem Restoration, CA .............................................................................. .............................. Senator Feinstein 
195 

Section 206 .................................... Swift Creek Asbestos Sediment Management, WA ............................................................................. .............................. Senator Cantwell Section 206 .................................... Tamarisk Eradication, CO .................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Salazar Section 206 .................................... Tangier Island, Accomack County, VA ................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Warner, Webb Section 206 .................................... University Lakes, Baton Rouge, LA ..................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Section 206 .................................... Upper York Creek, Dam Removal, CA ................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Feinstein Section 206 .................................... Urieville Lake, MD ................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Cardin Section 206 .................................... Ventura Marsh Habitat Restoration, Clear Lake, IA ........................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley Section 206 .................................... Vermillion River Ecosystem Restoration, LA ........................................................................................ .............................. Senator Vitter Section 206 .................................... Western Branch, Patuxent River, MD .................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Mikulski, Cardin Section 206 .................................... Whitebreast Creek Watershed, IA ........................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Grassley Section 206 .................................... Wilson Bay Restoration, NC ................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 206 .................................... Winneapaug Pond Restoration, RI ....................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Reed, Whitehouse Section 206 .................................... Wright’s Creek, Dorchester Creek, MD ................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Cardin Section 206 .................................... Zemurray Park Lake Restoration, Tangipahoa Parish, LA .................................................................. .............................. Senator Vitter Section 1135 .................................. PROJECT MODS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT (SECTION 1135) ............................................. 25,000,000 The President Section 1135 .................................. Assunpink Creek, Trenton, NJ .............................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 1135 .................................. Bayou Desiard, Monroe, LA .................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Landrieu Section 1135 .................................. Belhaven Harbor, NC ........................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Dole Section 1135 .................................. Bloomington State Park, MO ............................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Blue Valley Wetlands, Jackson, MO ..................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Braided Reach, WA .............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Duck Creek Conservation Area, Stoddard County, MO ........................................................................ .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Eagleland Ecosystem, TX ..................................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Frazier/Whitehorse Oxbow Lake Weir, LA ............................................................................................. .............................. Senator Landrieu Section 1135 .................................. Gerritsen Creek, NY ............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Green River Dam Modifications, KY .................................................................................................... .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Indian Ridge Marsh, Chicago, IL ........................................................................................................ .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Kanaha Pond Wildlife Sanctuary Restoration, HI ................................................................................ .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Kaunakakai Stream Environmental Restoration, HI ............................................................................ .............................. The President, Senators Inouye, Akaka Section 1135 .................................. Lake Champlain Lamprey Barriers, VT ................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Leahy Section 1135 .................................. Lake Fausse Pointe, Iberia Parish, LA ................................................................................................ .............................. Senator Vitter Section 1135 .................................. Lake St. Joseph, Tensas Parish, LA .................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Landrieu, Vitter Section 1135 .................................. Lake Whittington Weir, MS & AR ........................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Cochran, Wicker Section 1135 .................................. Las Cruces Dam Environmental Restoration, Don ̃ a Ana County, NM ................................................. .............................. Senators Domenici, Bingaman Section 1135 .................................. Lincoln Park West, Ecosystem Restoration Study, NJ ......................................................................... .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 1135 .................................. Lower Assunpink Creek, NJ .................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 1135 .................................. Lower Cache Restoration, AR .............................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Lincoln, Pryor Section 1135 .................................. Lower Columbia Slough, OR ................................................................................................................ .............................. The President, Senators Wyden, Smith Section 1135 .................................. Lower Kingman Island, DC .................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Millwood Lake, Grassy Lake, AR .......................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Lincoln, Pryor 
196 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

Section 1135 .................................. Mordecai Island Coastal Wetland Restoration, NJ .............................................................................. .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 1135 .................................. Morganza Fore-Bay Restoration, LA .................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Vitter Section 1135 .................................. Pine Mount Creek, NJ .......................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 1135 .................................. Pond Creek Salt Marsh Restoration, Cape May County, NJ ................................................................ .............................. Senators Lautenberg, Menendez Section 1135 .................................. Prison Farm, ND .................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senator Dorgan Section 1135 .................................. Pueblo of Santa Ana Aquatic Restoration, NM ................................................................................... .............................. Senator Bingaman Section 1135 .................................. Rathbun Lake, South Fork Restoration, IA .......................................................................................... .............................. Senators Harkin, Grassley Section 1135 .................................. Rock Creek at Boyle Park, Little Rock, AR .......................................................................................... .............................. Senators Lincoln, Pryor Section 1135 .................................. Route 66 Environmental Restoration, Albuquerque, NM ..................................................................... .............................. Senators Domenici, Bingaman Section 1135 .................................. Sand Hill River, MN ............................................................................................................................. .............................. The President Section 1135 .................................. Shorty’s Islands, WA ............................................................................................................................ .............................. The President, Senators Murray, Cantwell Section 1135 .................................. Spring Creek, NY ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Schumer Section 1135 .................................. Tappan Lake, OH ................................................................................................................................. .............................. The President, Senator Inhofe Section 1135 .................................. Tujunga Wash Environmental Restoration, CA ................................................................................... .............................. Senator Feinstein Section 1135 .................................. Village of Oyster, Northampton County, VA ........................................................................................ .............................. Senators Warner, Webb MR&T—GI ...................................... ALEXANDRIA TO THE GULF, LA ..................................................................................................................... 790,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—GI ...................................... ATCHAFALAYA BASIN FLOODWAY SYSTEM LAND STUDY, LA ......................................................................... .............................. The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—GI ...................................... BAYOU METO BASIN, AR ............................................................................................................................... 43,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor MR&T—GI ...................................... COLDWATER RIVER BASIN BELOW ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS ............................................................................ 130,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—GI ...................................... COLLECTION AND STUDY OF BASIC DATA .................................................................................................... 1,430,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Landrieu, 

Wicker 

MR&T—GI ...................................... MEMPHIS METRO AREA, STORM WATER MGMT STUDY, TN .......................................................................... 34,000 The President MR&T—GI ...................................... MORGANZA TO THE GULF, LA ....................................................................................................................... 6,000,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—GI ...................................... QUIVER RIVER, MS ........................................................................................................................................ 250,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—GI ...................................... SOUTHEAST ARKANSAS, AR ........................................................................................................................... 400,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor MR&T—GI ...................................... SPRING BAYOU, LA ....................................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—CG ..................................... ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ............................................................................................. 2,025,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—CG ..................................... ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ............................................................................................................................... 15,500,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—CG ..................................... CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ............................................................................. 50,200,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Lincoln, Pryor MR&T—CG ..................................... CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, DIKES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .................................................................. .............................. The President MR&T—CG ..................................... CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, REVETMENT OPERATIONS, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ................................... .............................. The President MR&T—CG ..................................... GRAND PRAIRIE REGION, AR ........................................................................................................................ 9,000,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor MR&T—CG ..................................... MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA .................................................................................................................... 3,933,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—CG ..................................... MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .......................................................................... 63,823,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Landrieu, 

Wicker, Bond, Lincoln, Pryor, Vitter 

MR&T—CG ..................................... ST. FRANCIS RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES, AR & MO ........................................................................................ 5,700,000 Senators Bond, Lincoln, Pryor 
197 

MR&T—CG ..................................... ST. JOHNS BAYOU AND NEW MADRID FLOODWAY, MO ................................................................................. 200,000 Senator Bond MR&T—CG ..................................... YAZOO BASIN, BACKWATER LESS ROCKY BAYOU ......................................................................................... 50,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—CG ..................................... YAZOO BASIN—BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS ............................................................................................... 2,275,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—CG ..................................... YAZOO BASIN—DELTA HEADWATERS PROJECT, MS ..................................................................................... 18,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—CG ..................................... YAZOO BASIN—MAIN STEM, MS .................................................................................................................. 25,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—CG ..................................... YAZOO BASIN—REFORMULATION UNIT, MS ................................................................................................. 2,800,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—CG ..................................... YAZOO BASIN—UPPER YAZOO PROJECTS, MS ............................................................................................. 14,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—CG ..................................... YAZOO BASIN—YAZOO BACKWATER, MS ..................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, FLOODWAY SYSTEM, LA ............................................................................................. 2,117,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—O&M .................................. ATCHAFALAYA BASIN, LA ............................................................................................................................... 8,619,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—O&M .................................. BATON ROUGE HARBOR, DEVIL SWAMP, LA ................................................................................................. 162,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—O&M .................................. BAYOU COCODRIE AND TRIBUTARIES, LA ..................................................................................................... 42,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—O&M .................................. BONNET CARRE, LA ...................................................................................................................................... 2,346,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—O&M .................................. CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN ............................................................................. 70,000,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Landrieu, 

Wicker 

MR&T—O&M .................................. GREENVILLE HARBOR, MS ............................................................................................................................ 436,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR ..................................................................................................... 128,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor MR&T—O&M .................................. HICKMAN/MAGNOLIA BLUFF, KY .................................................................................................................... 60,000 Senator McConnell MR&T—O&M .................................. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR ..................................................................................................... 249,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL ....................................................................................................... 135,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY ...................................................................................................... 93,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ...................................................................................................... 1,927,000 The President, Senator Landrieu MR&T—O&M .................................. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ..................................................................................................... 185,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS ..................................................................................................... 101,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN ...................................................................................................... 81,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, NORTH BANK, AR ................................................................................................ 256,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. LOWER ARKANSAS RIVER, SOUTH BANK, AR ................................................................................................ 161,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. LOWER RED RIVER, SOUTH BANK LEVEES, LA ............................................................................................. 53,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. MAPPING ....................................................................................................................................................... 1,488,000 The President, Senator Landrieu MR&T—O&M .................................. MEMPHIS HARBOR, MCKELLAR LAKE, TN ..................................................................................................... 3,283,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. MISSISSIPPI DELTA REGION, LA .................................................................................................................... 578,000 The President, Senator Landrieu MR&T—O&M .................................. MISSISSIPPI RIVER LEVEES, AR, IL, KY, LA, MS, MO & TN .......................................................................... 16,368,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Landrieu, 

Wicker, Bond, Lincoln, Pryor, Vitter 

MR&T—O&M .................................. OLD RIVER, LA .............................................................................................................................................. 13,882,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—O&M .................................. ST FRANCIS BASIN, AR & MO ....................................................................................................................... 8,200,000 The President, Senators Bond, Lincoln, Pryor MR&T—O&M .................................. TENSAS BASIN, BOEUF AND TENSAS RIVERS, AR & LA ............................................................................... 1,880,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Lincoln, 

Pryor, Vitter 

MR&T—O&M .................................. TENSAS BASIN, RED RIVER BACKWATER, LA ................................................................................................ 2,501,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter MR&T—O&M .................................. VICKSBURG HARBOR, MS ............................................................................................................................. 424,000 The President, Senator Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. WAPPAPELLO LAKE, MO ................................................................................................................................ 4,567,000 The President, Senator Bond 
198 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

MR&T—O&M .................................. WHITE RIVER BACKWATER, AR ..................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, ARKABUTLA LAKE, MS ........................................................................................................... 6,673,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, BIG SUNFLOWER RIVER, MS ................................................................................................. 1,500,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, ENID LAKE, MS ...................................................................................................................... 7,417,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, GREENWOOD, MS .................................................................................................................. 1,650,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, GRENADA LAKE, MS .............................................................................................................. 7,166,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, MAIN STEM, MS .................................................................................................................... 2,237,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, SARDIS LAKE, MS .................................................................................................................. 8,916,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, TRIBUTARIES, MS .................................................................................................................. 925,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, WILL M WHITTINGTON AUX CHAN, MS .................................................................................. 285,000 The President MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO BACKWATER AREA, MS ............................................................................................. 442,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker MR&T—O&M .................................. YAZOO BASIN, YAZOO CITY, MS ................................................................................................................... 534,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ ABIQUIU DAM, NM ......................................................................................................................................... 2,220,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ ABSECON INLET, NJ ...................................................................................................................................... 265,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ ALABAMA RIVER LAKES, AL .......................................................................................................................... 15,672,000 The President, Senators Shelby, Sessions O&M ................................................ ALABAMA—COOSA COMPREHENSIVE WATER STUDY, AL ............................................................................. 375,000 The President O&M ................................................ ALAMO LAKE, AZ ........................................................................................................................................... 1,585,000 The President O&M ................................................ ALBENI FALLS DAM, ID ................................................................................................................................. 1,539,000 The President O&M ................................................ ALLATOONA LAKE, GA .................................................................................................................................... 6,016,000 The President O&M ................................................ ALLEGHENY RIVER, PA .................................................................................................................................. 6,578,000 The President O&M ................................................ ALMOND LAKE, NY ........................................................................................................................................ 424,000 The President O&M ................................................ ALPENA HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ ALUM CREEK LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................................. 1,439,000 The President O&M ................................................ ALVIN R BUSH DAM, PA ................................................................................................................................ 591,000 The President O&M ................................................ ANCHORAGE HARBOR, AK ............................................................................................................................. 17,601,000 The President O&M ................................................ APALACHICOLA, CHATTAHOOCHEE AND FLINT RIVERS, GA, AL & FL ........................................................... 3,418,000 The President, Senator Shelby O&M ................................................ APPLEGATE LAKE, OR .................................................................................................................................... 904,000 The President O&M ................................................ APPOMATTOX RIVER, VA ............................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Warner, Webb O&M ................................................ AQUILLA LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................................................... 1,354,000 The President O&M ................................................ ARCADIA HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, StabenowO&M ................................................ ARCADIA LAKE, OK ........................................................................................................................................ 472,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ ARECIBO HARBOR, PR .................................................................................................................................. 100,000 The President O&M ................................................ ARKANSAS—RED RIVER BASINS CHLORIDE CONTROL—AREA VI ............................................................... 1,415,000 The President O&M ................................................ ARKPORT DAM, NY ........................................................................................................................................ 225,000 The President O&M ................................................ ASHTABULA HARBOR, OH .............................................................................................................................. 1,850,000 The President, Senator Voinovich O&M ................................................ ATCHAFALAYA RIVER AND BAYOUS CHENE, BOEUF AND BLACK, LA ........................................................... 8,993,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter 
199 

O&M ................................................ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, GA .................................................................................................... 1,000,000 The President, Senators Chambliss, Isakson O&M ................................................ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NC .................................................................................................... 2,000,000 The President, Senator Dole O&M ................................................ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, SC .................................................................................................... 1,500,000 The President, Senator Graham O&M ................................................ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—ACC, VA .......................................................................................... 1,823,000 The President O&M ................................................ ATLANTIC INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY—DSC, VA .......................................................................................... 967,000 The President O&M ................................................ AU SABLE, MI ................................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ AYLESWORTH CREEK LAKE, PA ..................................................................................................................... 215,000 The President O&M ................................................ B EVERETT JORDAN DAM AND LAKE, NC ...................................................................................................... 1,633,000 The President O&M ................................................ BALL MOUNTAIN LAKE, VT ............................................................................................................................ 719,000 The President, Senator Leahy O&M ................................................ BALTIMORE HARBOR (DRIFT REMOVAL), MD ................................................................................................ 338,000 The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ BALTIMORE HARBOR AND CHANNELS (50 FOOT), MD .................................................................................. 16,193,000 The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ BARATARIA BAY WATERWAY, LA ................................................................................................................... 926,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ BARBERS POINT HARBOR, HI ....................................................................................................................... 548,000 The President, Senator Inouye O&M ................................................ BARBOUR TERMINAL CHANNEL, TX .............................................................................................................. 1,417,000 The President O&M ................................................ BARDWELL LAKE, TX ..................................................................................................................................... 2,162,000 The President O&M ................................................ BARKLEY DAM AND LAKE BARKLEY, KY & TN .............................................................................................. 10,255,000 The President O&M ................................................ BARNEGAT INLET, NJ ..................................................................................................................................... 225,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, MenendezO&M ................................................ BARRE FALLS DAM, MA ................................................................................................................................ 580,000 The President O&M ................................................ BARREN RIVER LAKE, KY .............................................................................................................................. 5,969,000 The President, Senator McConnell O&M ................................................ BAY PORT HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ BAYOU BODCAU RESERVOIR, LA .................................................................................................................. 809,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ BAYOU LACOMBE, LA .................................................................................................................................... 450,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ BAYOU LAFOURCHE AND LAFOURCHE JUMP WATERWAY, LA ....................................................................... 724,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ BAYOU PIERRE, LA ........................................................................................................................................ 18,000 The President, Senator Landrieu O&M ................................................ BAYOU SEGNETTE WATERWAY, LA ................................................................................................................ 321,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ BAYOU TECHE AND VERMILION RIVER, LA ................................................................................................... 14,000 The President, Senator Landrieu O&M ................................................ BAYOU TECHE, LA ......................................................................................................................................... 209,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ BAYPORT SHIP CHANNEL, TX ........................................................................................................................ 3,122,000 The President O&M ................................................ BEAR CREEK LAKE, CO ................................................................................................................................. 332,000 The President O&M ................................................ BEAVER LAKE, AR ......................................................................................................................................... 5,270,000 The President O&M ................................................ BEECH FORK LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................................. 2,500,000 The President, Senator Byrd O&M ................................................ BELTON LAKE, TX .......................................................................................................................................... 3,567,000 The President O&M ................................................ BELTZVILLE LAKE, PA .................................................................................................................................... 1,311,000 The President O&M ................................................ BENBROOK LAKE, TX ..................................................................................................................................... 2,302,000 The President O&M ................................................ BERLIN LAKE, OH .......................................................................................................................................... 4,867,000 The President O&M ................................................ BIG BAY HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senator Levin O&M ................................................ BIG BEND DAM, LAKE SHARPE, SD .............................................................................................................. 6,799,000 The President O&M ................................................ BIG SANDY HARBOR, KY ............................................................................................................................... 1,250,000 The President O&M ................................................ BIGSTONE LAKE WHETSTONE RIVER, MN & SD ............................................................................................ 172,000 The President O&M ................................................ BIRCH HILL DAM, MA .................................................................................................................................... 574,000 The President 
200 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ BIRCH LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................................................ 648,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ BLACK BUTTE LAKE, CA ................................................................................................................................ 1,954,000 The President O&M ................................................ BLACK RIVER (GOGEBIC), MI ........................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ BLACK ROCK CHANNEL AND TONAWANDA HARBOR, NY .............................................................................. 1,235,000 The President O&M ................................................ BLACK ROCK LAKE, CT ................................................................................................................................. 416,000 The President O&M ................................................ BLACK WARRIOR AND TOMBIGBEE RIVERS, AL ............................................................................................ 22,191,000 The President, Senators Shelby, Sessions O&M ................................................ BLACKWATER DAM, NH ................................................................................................................................. 567,000 The President O&M ................................................ BLAKELY MT DAM, LAKE OUACHITA, AR ....................................................................................................... 8,384,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ BLOCK ISLAND HARBOR, RI (old Harbor) ..................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Reed O&M ................................................ BLUE MARSH LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................................. 2,736,000 The President O&M ................................................ BLUE MOUNTAIN LAKE, AR ........................................................................................................................... 1,427,000 The President O&M ................................................ BLUE RIVER LAKE, OR .................................................................................................................................. 427,000 The President O&M ................................................ BLUESTONE LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................................... 1,508,000 The President O&M ................................................ BOGUE INLET, NC ......................................................................................................................................... 400,000 Senator Dole O&M ................................................ BONNEVILLE LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA ....................................................................................................... 9,691,000 The President O&M ................................................ BOSTON HARBOR, MA ................................................................................................................................... 6,000,000 The President, Senators Kennedy, Kerry O&M ................................................ BOWMAN—HALEY LAKE, ND ......................................................................................................................... 153,000 The President O&M ................................................ BRAZOS ISLAND HARBOR, TX ....................................................................................................................... 3,259,000 The President, Senator Cornyn O&M ................................................ BRIDGEPORT HARBOR DREDGING, CT .......................................................................................................... 2,000,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman O&M ................................................ BROKEN BOW LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................................ 1,903,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ BRONX RIVER, NY ......................................................................................................................................... 250,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ BROOKVILLE LAKE, IN ................................................................................................................................... 1,649,000 The President O&M ................................................ BRUNSWICK HARBOR, GA ............................................................................................................................. 5,545,000 The President, Senators Chambliss, Isakson O&M ................................................ BUCHANAN DAM, HV EASTMAN LAKE, CA ..................................................................................................... 1,820,000 The President O&M ................................................ BUCKHORN LAKE, KY .................................................................................................................................... 2,433,000 The President O&M ................................................ BUFFALO BAYOU AND TRIBUTARIES, TX ....................................................................................................... 1,723,000 The President O&M ................................................ BUFFALO HARBOR, NY .................................................................................................................................. 50,000 The President O&M ................................................ BUFFUMVILLE LAKE, MA ................................................................................................................................ 515,000 The President O&M ................................................ BUFORD DAM AND LAKE SIDNEY LANIER, GA .............................................................................................. 7,946,000 The President O&M ................................................ BULL SHOALS LAKE, AR ................................................................................................................................ 7,367,000 The President O&M ................................................ BURNS WATERWAY HARBOR, IN ................................................................................................................... 160,000 The President O&M ................................................ BURNSVILLE LAKE, WV .................................................................................................................................. 1,973,000 The President O&M ................................................ BUTTERMILK CHANNEL, NY ........................................................................................................................... 220,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ CADDO LAKE, LA ........................................................................................................................................... 181,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ CAESAR CREEK LAKE, OH ............................................................................................................................. 2,149,000 The President O&M ................................................ CAGLES MILL LAKE, IN .................................................................................................................................. 2,053,000 The President 
201 

O&M ................................................ CALCASIEU RIVER AND PASS, LA ................................................................................................................. 14,968,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ CALUMET HARBOR AND RIVER, IL & IN ....................................................................................................... 4,780,000 The President O&M ................................................ CANAVERAL HARBOR, FL .............................................................................................................................. 4,404,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez O&M ................................................ CANTON LAKE, OK ......................................................................................................................................... 1,707,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ CANYON LAKE, TX ......................................................................................................................................... 3,686,000 The President O&M ................................................ CAPE COD CANAL, MA .................................................................................................................................. 11,546,000 The President O&M ................................................ CAPE FEAR RIVER ABOVE WILMINGTON, NC ................................................................................................ 718,000 The President, Senator Dole O&M ................................................ CARLYLE LAKE, IL ......................................................................................................................................... 4,155,000 The President, Senator Durbin O&M ................................................ CAROLINA BEACH INLET, NC ........................................................................................................................ 600,000 Senator Dole O&M ................................................ CARR CREEK LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................................. 1,797,000 The President O&M ................................................ CARTERS DAM AND LAKE, GA ....................................................................................................................... 7,703,000 The President O&M ................................................ CARUTHERSVILLE HARBOR, MO .................................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ CASEVILLE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ CAVE RUN LAKE, KY ..................................................................................................................................... 1,098,000 The President O&M ................................................ CECIL M HARDEN LAKE, IN ........................................................................................................................... 1,226,000 The President O&M ................................................ CENTER HILL LAKE, TN ................................................................................................................................. 7,021,000 The President O&M ................................................ CENTRAL AND SOUTHERN FLORIDA, FL ........................................................................................................ 13,234,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR, CA ................................................................................................................... 5,360,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHANNEL TO PORT BOLIVAR, TX .................................................................................................................. 348,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHANNELS IN LAKE ST CLAIR, MI ................................................................................................................. 156,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ CHARLES RIVER NATURAL VALLEY STORAGE AREA, MA .............................................................................. 291,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC ........................................................................................................................... 9,947,000 The President, Senator Graham O&M ................................................ CHARLEVOIX HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................. 197,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ CHATFIELD LAKE, CO .................................................................................................................................... 1,509,000 The President, Senators Allard, Salazar O&M ................................................ CHEATHAM LOCK AND DAM, TN .................................................................................................................... 6,829,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHENA RIVER LAKES, AK .............................................................................................................................. 2,225,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHERRY CREEK LAKE, CO ............................................................................................................................ 1,203,000 The President, Senators Allard, Salazar O&M ................................................ CHETCO RIVER, OR ....................................................................................................................................... 574,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ CHEYENNE RIVER SIOUX TRIBE, LOWER BRULE SIOUX, SD ......................................................................... 3,000,000 Senators Johnson, Thune O&M ................................................ CHICAGO HARBOR, IL ................................................................................................................................... 2,015,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHICAGO RIVER, IL ....................................................................................................................................... 475,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHICKAMAUGA LOCK, TENNESSEE RIVER, TN ............................................................................................... 1,200,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHIEF JOSEPH DAM, WA ............................................................................................................................... 785,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHINCOTEAGUE HARBOR OF REFUGE, VA .................................................................................................... 266,000 The President O&M ................................................ CHINCOTEAGUE INLET, VA ............................................................................................................................ 207,000 The President O&M ................................................ CLAIBORNE COUNTY PORT, MS .................................................................................................................... 60,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ CLARENCE CANNON DAM AND MARK TWAIN LAKE, MO ............................................................................... 6,449,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ CLARENCE J BROWN DAM, OH ..................................................................................................................... 2,520,000 The President O&M ................................................ CLEARWATER LAKE, MO ................................................................................................................................ 2,825,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ CLEVELAND HARBOR, OH .............................................................................................................................. 6,710,000 The President, Senator Voinovich 
202 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ CLINTON LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................................................ 2,042,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ CLINTON RIVER, MI ....................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ COCHITI LAKE, NM ........................................................................................................................................ 2,392,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ COLD BROOK LAKE, SD ................................................................................................................................. 303,000 The President O&M ................................................ COLD SPRING INLET, NJ ................................................................................................................................ 243,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ COLEBROOK RIVER LAKE, CT ........................................................................................................................ 547,000 The President O&M ................................................ COLUMBIA & LWR WILLAMETTE R BLW VANCOUVER, WA & PORTLAND ...................................................... 18,052,000 The President, Senators Murray, Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ COLUMBIA RIVER AT BAKER BAY, WA & OR ................................................................................................ 500,000 The President, Senators Murray, Cantwell O&M ................................................ COLUMBIA RIVER AT THE MOUTH, OR & WA ............................................................................................... 15,125,000 The President, Senators Murray, Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN CHINOOK AND SAND ISLAND, WA .................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senators Murray, Cantwell O&M ................................................ COLUMBIA RIVER BETWEEN VANCOUVER, WA AND THE DALLES, OR .......................................................... 640,000 The President O&M ................................................ CONANT BROOK LAKE, MA ............................................................................................................................ 232,000 The President O&M ................................................ CONCHAS LAKE, NM ...................................................................................................................................... 1,121,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ CONEMAUGH RIVER LAKE, PA ....................................................................................................................... 1,734,000 The President O&M ................................................ CONNEAUT HARBOR, OH ............................................................................................................................... 350,000 The President O&M ................................................ COOPER RIVER, CHARLESTON HARBOR, SC ................................................................................................. 4,685,000 The President, Senator Graham O&M ................................................ COOS BAY, OR .............................................................................................................................................. 4,769,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ COPAN LAKE, OK ........................................................................................................................................... 937,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ COQUILLE RIVER, OR .................................................................................................................................... 307,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ CORALVILLE LAKE, IA .................................................................................................................................... 2,887,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley O&M ................................................ CORDELL HULL DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ................................................................................................... 6,386,000 The President O&M ................................................ CORPUS CHRISTI SHIP CHANNEL, TX ........................................................................................................... 3,398,000 The President O&M ................................................ COTTAGE GROVE LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................................... 991,000 The President O&M ................................................ COTTONWOOD SPRINGS LAKE, SD ................................................................................................................ 223,000 The President O&M ................................................ COUGAR LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................................................ 5,380,000 The President O&M ................................................ COUNCIL GROVE LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................................ 1,328,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ COWANESQUE LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................................ 1,847,000 The President O&M ................................................ COYOTE VALLEY DAM, LAKE MENDOCINO, CA .............................................................................................. 3,384,000 The President O&M ................................................ CROOKED CREEK LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................................... 2,530,000 The President O&M ................................................ CUMBERLAND, MD AND RIDGELEY, WV ........................................................................................................ 98,000 The President O&M ................................................ CURWENSVILLE LAKE, PA .............................................................................................................................. 625,000 The President O&M ................................................ DALE HOLLOW LAKE, TN ............................................................................................................................... 6,262,000 The President O&M ................................................ DANA POINT HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................................................. 700,000 Senator Boxer O&M ................................................ DARDANELLE LOCK AND DAM, AR ................................................................................................................ 8,491,000 The President O&M ................................................ DEER CREEK LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................................. 1,359,000 The President O&M ................................................ DEGRAY LAKE, AR ......................................................................................................................................... 6,317,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor 
203 

O&M ................................................ DELAWARE LAKE, OH .................................................................................................................................... 1,445,000 The President O&M ................................................ DELAWARE RIVER AT CAMDEN, NJ ............................................................................................................... 15,000 The President O&M ................................................ DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA TO THE SEA, NJ, PA & DE ...................................................................... 18,778,000 The President, Senators Specter, Lautenberg, 

Menendez, Casey 

O&M ................................................ DELAWARE RIVER, PHILADELPHIA, PA TO TRENTON, NJ ............................................................................... 750,000 The President, Senators Specter, Lautenberg, 

Menendez 

O&M ................................................ DENISON DAM, LAKE TEXOMA, TX ................................................................................................................ 6,393,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ DEPOE BAY, OR ............................................................................................................................................ 124,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ DEQUEEN LAKE, AR ....................................................................................................................................... 1,286,000 The President O&M ................................................ DETROIT LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................................................ 2,564,000 The President O&M ................................................ DETROIT RIVER, MI ....................................................................................................................................... 5,327,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ DEWEY LAKE, KY ........................................................................................................................................... 1,768,000 The President O&M ................................................ DIERKS LAKE, AR .......................................................................................................................................... 1,354,000 The President O&M ................................................ DILLINGHAM HARBOR, AK ............................................................................................................................. 840,000 The President O&M ................................................ DILLON LAKE, OH .......................................................................................................................................... 1,454,000 The President O&M ................................................ DISPOSAL AREA MONITORING, ME ................................................................................................................ 1,200,000 The President O&M ................................................ DORENA LAKE, OR ........................................................................................................................................ 831,000 The President O&M ................................................ DRY CREEK (WARM SPRINGS) LAKE AND CHANNEL, CA .............................................................................. 5,067,000 The President O&M ................................................ DULUTH—SUPERIOR HARBOR, MN & WI ..................................................................................................... 4,929,000 The President O&M ................................................ DWORSHAK DAM AND RESERVOIR, ID .......................................................................................................... 2,404,000 The President O&M ................................................ EAST BRANCH CLARION RIVER LAKE, PA ..................................................................................................... 2,179,000 The President O&M ................................................ EAST BRIMFIELD LAKE, MA ........................................................................................................................... 398,000 The President O&M ................................................ EAST FORK, TOMBIGBEE RIVER, MS ............................................................................................................. 135,000 The President O&M ................................................ EAST LYNN LAKE, WV .................................................................................................................................... 2,044,000 The President O&M ................................................ EAST RIVER, NY ............................................................................................................................................ 500,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ EAST ROCKAWAY INLET, NY .......................................................................................................................... 4,220,000 The President O&M ................................................ EAST SIDNEY LAKE, NY ................................................................................................................................. 473,000 The President O&M ................................................ EASTCHESTER CREEK, NY ............................................................................................................................. 180,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ EAU GALLE RIVER LAKE, WI .......................................................................................................................... 611,000 The President O&M ................................................ EDIZ HOOK, WA ............................................................................................................................................. 63,000 The President O&M ................................................ EDWARD MACDOWELL LAKE, NH ................................................................................................................... 514,000 The President O&M ................................................ EL DORADO LAKE, KS ................................................................................................................................... 569,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ ELK CITY LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................................................ 734,000 The President, Senators Brownback, RobertsO&M ................................................ ELKINS, WV ................................................................................................................................................... 14,000 The President O&M ................................................ ELVIS STAHR (HICKMAN) HARBOR, KY ......................................................................................................... 25,000 The President O&M ................................................ ESCAMBIA AND CONECUH RIVERS, FL ......................................................................................................... 25,000 The President O&M ................................................ ESTELLINE SPRINGS EXPERIMENTAL PROJECT, TX ....................................................................................... 38,000 The President O&M ................................................ EUFAULA LAKE, OK ........................................................................................................................................ 5,348,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ EVERETT HARBOR AND SNOHOMISH RIVER, WA .......................................................................................... 1,293,000 The President, Senator Murray O&M ................................................ EVERGLADES AND SOUTH FLORIDA, SBC RESERVATION PLAN, FL ............................................................... 400,000 The President 
204 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ FAIRPORT HARBOR, OH ................................................................................................................................. 2,026,000 The President O&M ................................................ FALL CREEK LAKE, OR .................................................................................................................................. 1,418,000 The President O&M ................................................ FALL RIVER LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................................... 1,284,000 The President, Senators Brownback, RobertsO&M ................................................ FALLS LAKE, NC ............................................................................................................................................ 1,683,000 The President O&M ................................................ FARM CREEK RESERVOIRS, IL ...................................................................................................................... 203,000 The President O&M ................................................ FARMINGTON DAM, CA .................................................................................................................................. 443,000 The President O&M ................................................ FERN RIDGE LAKE, OR .................................................................................................................................. 1,433,000 The President O&M ................................................ FERNANDINA HARBOR, FL ............................................................................................................................. 2,025,000 The President O&M ................................................ FERRELLS BRIDGE DAM, LAKE O’ THE PINES, TX ........................................................................................ 4,179,000 The President O&M ................................................ FISHTRAP LAKE, KY ....................................................................................................................................... 1,830,000 The President O&M ................................................ FLUSHING BAY AND CREEK, NY .................................................................................................................... 380,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ FORT GIBSON LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................................ 10,218,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ FORT RANDALL DAM, LAKE FRANCIS CASE, SD ............................................................................................ 7,328,000 The President O&M ................................................ FORT SUPPLY LAKE, OK ................................................................................................................................ 742,000 The President O&M ................................................ FOSTER JOSEPH SAYERS DAM, PA ................................................................................................................ 633,000 The President O&M ................................................ FOX POINT HURRICANE BARRIER, RI ............................................................................................................ 500,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse O&M ................................................ FOX RIVER, WI .............................................................................................................................................. 3,775,000 The President, Senator Kohl O&M ................................................ FRANCIS E WALTER DAM, PA ........................................................................................................................ 774,000 The President, Senator Casey O&M ................................................ FRANKFORT HARBOR, MI .............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ FRANKLIN FALLS DAM, NH ............................................................................................................................ 619,000 The President O&M ................................................ FREEPORT HARBOR, TX ................................................................................................................................ 7,020,000 The President O&M ................................................ FRESHWATER BAYOU, LA .............................................................................................................................. 1,848,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ FT PECK DAM AND LAKE, MT ........................................................................................................................ 4,444,000 The President O&M ................................................ GALISTEO DAM, NM ....................................................................................................................................... 423,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ GALVESTON HARBOR AND CHANNEL, TX ...................................................................................................... 6,022,000 The President O&M ................................................ GARRISON DAM, LAKE SAKAKAWEA, ND ....................................................................................................... 11,789,000 The President, Senator Dorgan O&M ................................................ GATHRIGHT DAM AND LAKE MOOMAW, VA ................................................................................................... 2,022,000 The President O&M ................................................ GAVINS POINT DAM, LEWIS AND CLARK LAKE, NE & SD ............................................................................. 6,518,000 The President, Hagel O&M ................................................ GENERAL EDGAR JADWIN DAM AND RESERVOIR, PA ................................................................................... 228,000 The President O&M ................................................ GEORGETOWN HARBOR, SC .......................................................................................................................... 690,000 The President, Senator Graham O&M ................................................ GILLHAM LAKE, AR ........................................................................................................................................ 1,156,000 The President O&M ................................................ GIWW, CHANNEL TO VICTORIA, TX ................................................................................................................ 2,706,000 The President O&M ................................................ GIWW, CHOCOLATE BAYOU, TX ..................................................................................................................... 2,926,000 The President O&M ................................................ GRAND HAVEN HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................................... 1,312,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ GRAND MARAIS HARBOR, MI ........................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ GRAND TRAVERSE BAY HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow 
205 

O&M ................................................ GRANGER DAM AND LAKE, TX ...................................................................................................................... 2,225,000 The President O&M ................................................ GRAPEVINE LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................................... 2,900,000 The President O&M ................................................ GRAYS HARBOR AND CHEHALIS RIVER, WA ................................................................................................. 9,180,000 The President O&M ................................................ GRAYS REEF PASSAGE, MI ............................................................................................................................ 180,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ GRAYSON LAKE, KY ....................................................................................................................................... 1,445,000 The President O&M ................................................ GREAT SALT PLAINS LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................................... 256,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ GREAT SALT POND, BLOCK ISLAND, RI (new Harbor) .................................................................................. 250,000 Senator Reed O&M ................................................ GREAT SOUTH BAY, NY ................................................................................................................................. 80,000 The President O&M ................................................ GREEN AND BARREN RIVERS, KY ................................................................................................................. 3,698,000 The President, Senator McConnell O&M ................................................ GREEN BAY HARBOR, WI .............................................................................................................................. 5,394,000 The President, Senator Kohl O&M ................................................ GREEN PETER—FOSTER LAKES, OR ............................................................................................................. 2,323,000 The President O&M ................................................ GREEN RIVER LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................................ 4,942,000 The President O&M ................................................ GREENS BAYOU, TX ...................................................................................................................................... 850,000 The President O&M ................................................ GREERS FERRY LAKE, AR ............................................................................................................................. 6,861,000 The President O&M ................................................ GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AL ............................................................................................................ 5,230,000 The President, Senators Shelby, Sessions O&M ................................................ GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, LA ............................................................................................................ 17,769,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter, Wicker O&M ................................................ GULF INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, TX ............................................................................................................ 31,874,000 The President, Senator Hutchison O&M ................................................ GULFPORT HARBOR, MS ............................................................................................................................... 10,000,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ HALEIWA HARBOR, OAHU, HI ........................................................................................................................ 1,000,000 Senator Inouye O&M ................................................ HAMPTON RDS, NORFOLK & NEWPORT NEWS HBR, VA (DRIFT REMOVAL) .................................................. 1,108,000 The President O&M ................................................ HANCOCK BROOK LAKE, CT .......................................................................................................................... 338,000 The President O&M ................................................ HARBOR OF REFUGE, LEWES, DE ................................................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Biden, Carper O&M ................................................ HARLAN COUNTY LAKE, NE ........................................................................................................................... 1,786,000 The President, Senators Ben Nelson, Hagel O&M ................................................ HARRY S TRUMAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, MO ............................................................................................. 8,863,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ HARTWELL LAKE, GA & SC ........................................................................................................................... 12,188,000 The President O&M ................................................ HELENA HARBOR, PHILLIPS COUNTY, AR ..................................................................................................... 400,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ HERRING BAY AND ROCKHOLD, MD ............................................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ HEYBURN LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................................................... 555,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ HIDDEN DAM, HENSLEY LAKE, CA ................................................................................................................ 1,786,000 The President O&M ................................................ HILLS CREEK LAKE, OR ................................................................................................................................. 1,292,000 The President O&M ................................................ HILLSDALE LAKE, KS ..................................................................................................................................... 764,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ HODGES VILLAGE DAM, MA ........................................................................................................................... 503,000 The President O&M ................................................ HOLLAND HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................................................. 588,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ HOMER HARBOR, AK ..................................................................................................................................... 620,000 The President O&M ................................................ HOMME LAKE, ND ......................................................................................................................................... 293,000 The President, Senator Dorgan O&M ................................................ HONGA RIVER AND TAR BAY, MD ................................................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ HOP BROOK LAKE, CT ................................................................................................................................... 919,000 The President O&M ................................................ HOPKINTON—EVERETT LAKES, NH ............................................................................................................... 1,081,000 The President O&M ................................................ HORDS CREEK LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................................... 1,479,000 The President O&M ................................................ HOUMA NAVIGATION CANAL, LA .................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter 
206 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL, TX ....................................................................................................................... 14,854,000 The President, Senators Hutchison, Cornyn O&M ................................................ HOWARD HANSON DAM, WA .......................................................................................................................... 2,627,000 The President O&M ................................................ HUDSON RIVER (MAINT), NY ......................................................................................................................... 1,125,000 The President O&M ................................................ HUDSON RIVER (O&C), NY ............................................................................................................................ 1,525,000 The President O&M ................................................ HUDSON RIVER CHANNEL, NY ...................................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ HUGO LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................................................. 1,493,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ HULAH LAKE, OK ........................................................................................................................................... 476,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ HUMBOLDT HARBOR AND BAY, CA ............................................................................................................... 5,144,000 The President, Senator Feinstein O&M ................................................ HURON HARBOR, OH ..................................................................................................................................... 1,530,000 The President O&M ................................................ ICE HARBOR LOCK AND DAM, WA ................................................................................................................ 4,982,000 The President O&M ................................................ ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVR PORTION), IL & IN ............................................................................................. 36,287,000 The President O&M ................................................ ILLINOIS WATERWAY (MVS PORTION), IL & IN .............................................................................................. 1,834,000 The President O&M ................................................ INDIAN RIVER INLET AND BAY, SUSSEX COUNTY, DE .................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Biden, Carper O&M ................................................ INDIANA HARBOR, IN .................................................................................................................................... 3,138,000 The President O&M ................................................ INLAND ROUTE, MI ........................................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, GA ..................................................................... 63,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, IL ...................................................................... 65,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, OR ..................................................................... 33,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS, WA .................................................................... 70,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AK ...................................................................................................... 1,058,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AL ...................................................................................................... 60,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AR ..................................................................................................... 508,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, AZ ...................................................................................................... 98,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CA ..................................................................................................... 3,822,000 The President, Senator Feinstein O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CO ..................................................................................................... 457,000 The President, Senator Salazar O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, CT ...................................................................................................... 316,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, DC25 ................................................................................................. 62,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, FL ...................................................................................................... 300,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, GA ..................................................................................................... 142,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, HI ...................................................................................................... 659,000 The President, Senator Inouye O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IA ....................................................................................................... 1,183,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ID ...................................................................................................... 334,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IL ....................................................................................................... 2,342,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, IN ...................................................................................................... 635,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KS ...................................................................................................... 177,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, KY ...................................................................................................... 554,000 The President 
207 

O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, LA ...................................................................................................... 1,814,000 The President, Senator Vitter O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MA ..................................................................................................... 381,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MD ..................................................................................................... 89,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ME ..................................................................................................... 29,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MI ...................................................................................................... 230,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MN ..................................................................................................... 623,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MO ..................................................................................................... 1,688,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MS ..................................................................................................... 223,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, MT ..................................................................................................... 54,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NC ..................................................................................................... 250,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, ND ..................................................................................................... 360,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NE ..................................................................................................... 508,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NH ..................................................................................................... 37,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NJ ...................................................................................................... 253,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NM ..................................................................................................... 811,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NV ..................................................................................................... 127,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, NY ..................................................................................................... 1,031,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OH ..................................................................................................... 452,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OK ..................................................................................................... 177,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, OR ..................................................................................................... 413,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, PA ...................................................................................................... 592,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, RI ...................................................................................................... 43,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SC ..................................................................................................... 65,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, SD ..................................................................................................... 49,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TN ...................................................................................................... 85,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, TX ...................................................................................................... 1,936,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, UT ...................................................................................................... 75,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VA ...................................................................................................... 226,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, VT ...................................................................................................... 70,000 The President, Senator Leahy O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WA ..................................................................................................... 623,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WI ...................................................................................................... 125,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WV ..................................................................................................... 255,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS, WY ..................................................................................................... 34,000 The President O&M ................................................ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, CALOOSAHATCHEE R TO ANCLOTE R, FL ......................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez O&M ................................................ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, DELAWARE R TO CHESAPEAKE BAY, DE .......................................................... 14,065,000 Mikulski, Biden, Carper, Cardin O&M ................................................ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, JACKSONVILLE TO MIAMI, FL ............................................................................ 2,500,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez O&M ................................................ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, REHOBOTH BAY TO DELAWARE BAY, DE ......................................................... 40,000 The President O&M ................................................ ISABELLA LAKE, CA ....................................................................................................................................... 1,404,000 The President O&M ................................................ J BENNETT JOHNSTON WATERWAY, LA .......................................................................................................... 10,555,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ J EDWARD ROUSH LAKE, IN .......................................................................................................................... 2,842,000 The President 
208 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ J PERCY PRIEST DAM AND RESERVOIR, TN ................................................................................................. 4,602,000 The President O&M ................................................ J STROM THURMOND LAKE, GA & SC ........................................................................................................... 11,066,000 The President O&M ................................................ JACKSON HOLE LEVEES, WY ......................................................................................................................... 326,000 The President O&M ................................................ JACKSONVILLE HARBOR, FL .......................................................................................................................... 6,000,000 The President, Senator Martinez O&M ................................................ JAMAICA BAY, NY .......................................................................................................................................... 250,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ JAMES RIVER CHANNEL, VA .......................................................................................................................... 3,667,000 The President O&M ................................................ JEMEZ CANYON DAM, NM ............................................................................................................................. 684,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ JENNINGS RANDOLPH LAKE, MD & WV ......................................................................................................... 1,713,000 The President, Senator Mikulski O&M ................................................ JIM CHAPMAN LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................................ 2,001,000 The President O&M ................................................ JIM WOODRUFF LOCK AND DAM, LAKE SEMINOLE, FL, AL & GA .................................................................. 9,165,000 The President O&M ................................................ JOE POOL LAKE, TX ....................................................................................................................................... 1,771,000 The President O&M ................................................ JOHN DAY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA .......................................................................................................... 7,049,000 The President, Senator Murray O&M ................................................ JOHN H KERR LAKE, VA & NC ...................................................................................................................... 11,571,000 The President O&M ................................................ JOHN MARTIN RESERVOIR, CO ...................................................................................................................... 2,418,000 The President, Senator Salazar O&M ................................................ JOHN REDMOND DAM AND RESERVOIR, KS .................................................................................................. 1,042,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ JOHN W FLANNAGAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, VA ........................................................................................... 1,938,000 The President O&M ................................................ JOHNSTOWN, PA ............................................................................................................................................ 2,255,000 The President O&M ................................................ JONES INLET, NY ........................................................................................................................................... 350,000 The President O&M ................................................ KANAWHA RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV ...................................................................................................... 9,380,000 The President O&M ................................................ KANOPOLIS LAKE, KS .................................................................................................................................... 1,418,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ KASKASKIA RIVER NAVIGATION, IL ................................................................................................................ 1,903,000 The President O&M ................................................ KAW LAKE, OK ............................................................................................................................................... 2,574,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ KENTUCKY RIVER, KY .................................................................................................................................... 10,000 The President O&M ................................................ KEWEENAW WATERWAY, MI ........................................................................................................................... 86,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ KEYSTONE LAKE, OK ..................................................................................................................................... 6,073,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ KINZUA DAM AND ALLEGHENY RESERVOIR, PA ............................................................................................ 2,493,000 The President O&M ................................................ KNIGHTVILLE DAM, MA .................................................................................................................................. 526,000 The President O&M ................................................ LAC LA BELLE HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ LAC QUI PARLE LAKES, MINNESOTA RIVER, MN ........................................................................................... 431,000 The President O&M ................................................ LAKE ASHTABULA AND BALDHILL DAM, ND .................................................................................................. 1,742,000 The President, Senator Dorgan O&M ................................................ LAKE KEMP, TX ............................................................................................................................................. 214,000 The President O&M ................................................ LAKE MICHIGAN DIVERSION, IL ..................................................................................................................... 860,000 The President O&M ................................................ LAKE MONTAUK HARBOR, NY ........................................................................................................................ 700,000 The President O&M ................................................ LAKE PROVIDENCE HARBOR, LA ................................................................................................................... 440,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ LAKE SHELBYVILLE, IL .................................................................................................................................. 4,761,000 The President, Senator Durbin O&M ................................................ LAKE TRAVERSE, SD & MN ........................................................................................................................... 403,000 The President 
209 

O&M ................................................ LAKE WASHINGTON SHIP CANAL, WA ............................................................................................................ 7,554,000 The President, Senator Murray O&M ................................................ LAUREL RIVER LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................................... 1,748,000 The President O&M ................................................ LAVON LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................................................ 3,065,000 The President O&M ................................................ LELAND HARBOR, MI ..................................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ LES CHENEAUX ISLAND CHANNELS, MI ........................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ LEWISVILLE DAM, TX ..................................................................................................................................... 4,110,000 The President O&M ................................................ LEXINGTON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ LIBBY DAM, LAKE KOOCANUSA, MT .............................................................................................................. 1,712,000 The President O&M ................................................ LITTLE BLUE RIVER LAKES, MO .................................................................................................................... 935,000 The President O&M ................................................ LITTLE GOOSE LOCK AND DAM, WA .............................................................................................................. 2,360,000 The President, Senator Murray O&M ................................................ LITTLE LAKE HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ LITTLE SODUS BAY HARBOR, NY .................................................................................................................. 10,000 The President O&M ................................................ LITTLEVILLE LAKE, MA ................................................................................................................................... 489,000 The President O&M ................................................ LOCKWOODS FOLLY RIVER, NC ..................................................................................................................... 200,000 Senator Dole O&M ................................................ LONG BRANCH LAKE, MO .............................................................................................................................. 1,100,000 The President O&M ................................................ LONG ISLAND INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NY .............................................................................................. 200,000 The President O&M ................................................ LONG ISLAND SOUND DMMP, CT .................................................................................................................. 1,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ LOOKOUT POINT LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................................ 2,761,000 The President O&M ................................................ LORAIN HARBOR, OH .................................................................................................................................... 2,423,000 The President O&M ................................................ LOS ANGELES COUNTY DRAINAGE AREA, CA ................................................................................................ 3,996,000 The President O&M ................................................ LOST CREEK LAKE, OR .................................................................................................................................. 3,560,000 The President O&M ................................................ LOWELL CREEK TUNNEL, AK ......................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Stevens O&M ................................................ LOWER GRANITE LOCK AND DAM, WA .......................................................................................................... 6,874,000 The President O&M ................................................ LOWER MONUMENTAL LOCK AND DAM, WA .................................................................................................. 4,664,000 The President, Senator Murray O&M ................................................ LOYALHANNA LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................................. 2,880,000 The President O&M ................................................ LUCKY PEAK LAKE, ID ................................................................................................................................... 1,801,000 The President O&M ................................................ LUDINGTON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................... 442,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ LYNNHAVEN INLET, VA .................................................................................................................................. 1,058,000 The President O&M ................................................ MADISON PARISH PORT, LA .......................................................................................................................... 85,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ MAHONING CREEK LAKE, PA ......................................................................................................................... 1,823,000 The President O&M ................................................ MANASQUAN RIVER, NJ ................................................................................................................................. 160,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ MANATEE HARBOR, FL .................................................................................................................................. 2,675,000 The President, Senator Martinez O&M ................................................ MANISTEE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ MANISTIQUE HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ MANSFIELD HOLLOW LAKE, CT ...................................................................................................................... 493,000 The President O&M ................................................ MANTEO (SHALLOWBAG) BAY, NC ................................................................................................................. 4,100,000 The President, Senator Dole O&M ................................................ MARINA DEL REY, CA ................................................................................................................................... 2,499,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer O&M ................................................ MARION LAKE, KS ......................................................................................................................................... 1,504,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ MARQUETTE HARBOR, MI .............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ MARTINS FORK LAKE, KY .............................................................................................................................. 1,062,000 The President 
210 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ MARTIS CREEK LAKE, NV & CA .................................................................................................................... 737,000 The President O&M ................................................ MASONBORO INLET AND CONNECTING CHANNELS, NC ................................................................................ 365,000 The President, Senator Dole O&M ................................................ MASSILLON, OH ............................................................................................................................................. 24,000 The President O&M ................................................ MATAGORDA SHIP CHANNEL, TX ................................................................................................................... 6,173,000 The President, Senator Hutchison O&M ................................................ MATTITUCK HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................................................... 20,000 The President O&M ................................................ MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, AR ................................................................... 28,395,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ MCCLELLAN-KERR ARKANSAS RIVER NAVIGATION SYSTEM, OK ................................................................... 5,819,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ MCNARY LOCK AND DAM, OR & WA ............................................................................................................. 5,183,000 The President O&M ................................................ MELVERN LAKE, KS ....................................................................................................................................... 2,111,000 The President, Senators Brownback, RobertsO&M ................................................ MENOMINEE HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ MERCED COUNTY STREAMS, CA ................................................................................................................... 239,000 The President O&M ................................................ MERMENTAU RIVER, LA ................................................................................................................................ 1,969,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ MIAMI RIVER, FL ........................................................................................................................................... 10,820,000 The President, Senators Bill Nelson, Martinez O&M ................................................ MICHAEL J KIRWAN DAM AND RESERVOIR, OH ............................................................................................ 2,023,000 The President O&M ................................................ MICHIGAN HARBOR DREDGING, MI ............................................................................................................... 5,000,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ MIDDLE RIO GRANDE ENDANGERED SPECIES COLLABORATIVE PROGRAM, NM (MRGESCP) ....................... 200,000 Senators Domenici Bingaman O&M ................................................ MIDDLESBORO CUMBERLAND RIVER BASIN, KY ........................................................................................... 102,000 The President O&M ................................................ MILFORD LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................................................ 2,133,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ MILL CREEK LAKE, WA .................................................................................................................................. 2,437,000 The President O&M ................................................ MILLWOOD LAKE, AR ..................................................................................................................................... 2,074,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ MILWAUKEE HARBOR, WI .............................................................................................................................. 650,000 The President O&M ................................................ MINNESOTA RIVER, MN ................................................................................................................................. 200,000 The President O&M ................................................ MISPILLION RIVER, DE .................................................................................................................................. 500,000 The President, Senators Biden, Carper O&M ................................................ MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVP PORTION), MN ....................................................... 44,904,000 The President O&M ................................................ MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVR PORTION), IL ......................................................... 63,207,000 The President, Senators Durbin, Harkin, Bond, 

Grassley 

O&M ................................................ MISS RIVER BTWN MO RIVER AND MINNEAPOLIS (MVS PORTION), IL ......................................................... 20,004,000 The President, Senators Bond, Grassley O&M ................................................ MISS RIVER BTWN THE OHIO AND MO RIVERS (LOWER RIVER), MO ........................................................... 25,359,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ MISSISSINEWA LAKE, IN ................................................................................................................................ 1,051,000 The President O&M ................................................ MISSISSIPPI RIVER OUTLETS AT VENICE, LA ................................................................................................ 3,136,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ MISSISSIPPI RIVER, BATON ROUGE TO THE GULF OF MEXICO, LA .............................................................. 55,325,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ MISSOURI RIVER—KENSLERS BEND, NE TO SIOUX CITY, IA ....................................................................... 166,000 The President O&M ................................................ MISSOURI RIVER—RULO TO MOUTH, IA, NE, KS & MO ............................................................................... 5,106,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Bond, Grassley, 

Hagel 

O&M ................................................ MISSOURI RIVER—SIOUX CITY TO RULO, IA & NE ...................................................................................... 2,560,000 The President, Senators Grassley, Hagel O&M ................................................ MOBILE HARBOR, AL ..................................................................................................................................... 21,562,000 The President, Senator Shelby 
211 

O&M ................................................ MOJAVE RIVER DAM, CA ............................................................................................................................... 285,000 The President O&M ................................................ MONONGAHELA RIVER, PA ............................................................................................................................ 12,392,000 The President, Senator Casey O&M ................................................ MONROE HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................... 1,018,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ MONROE LAKE, IN ......................................................................................................................................... 1,326,000 The President O&M ................................................ MOREHEAD CITY HARBOR, NC ...................................................................................................................... 5,000,000 The President, Senators Dole, Burr O&M ................................................ MORICHES INLET, NY .................................................................................................................................... 2,050,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ MORRO BAY HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................................................. 1,630,000 The President O&M ................................................ MOSQUITO CREEK LAKE, OH ......................................................................................................................... 1,383,000 The President O&M ................................................ MOUNT MORRIS DAM, NY ............................................................................................................................. 4,839,000 The President O&M ................................................ MOUTH OF YAZOO RIVER, MS ....................................................................................................................... 160,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ MT ST HELENS SEDIMENT CONTROL, WA ..................................................................................................... 257,000 The President O&M ................................................ MUD MOUNTAIN DAM, WA ............................................................................................................................. 3,271,000 The President, Senator Murray O&M ................................................ MURDERKILL RIVER, DE ................................................................................................................................ 30,000 The President O&M ................................................ MUSKEGON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................... 350,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ MUSKINGUM RIVER LAKES, OH ..................................................................................................................... 8,275,000 The President O&M ................................................ NARRAGUAGUS RIVER, ME ............................................................................................................................ 600,000 Senators Snowe, Collins O&M ................................................ NARROWS DAM, LAKE GREESON, AR ............................................................................................................ 4,591,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ NARROWS OF LAKE CHAMPLAIN, VT & NY ................................................................................................... 80,000 The President, Senator Leahy O&M ................................................ NAVARRO MILLS LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................................ 3,542,000 The President O&M ................................................ NEAH BAY, WA .............................................................................................................................................. 308,000 The President O&M ................................................ NEW BEDFORD AND FAIRHAVEN HARBOR, MA ............................................................................................. 250,000 Senators Kennedy, Kerry O&M ................................................ NEW BEDFORD FAIRHAVEN AND ACUSHNET HURRICANE BARRIER, MA ...................................................... 372,000 The President, Senators Kennedy, Kerry O&M ................................................ NEW HOGAN LAKE, CA .................................................................................................................................. 2,115,000 The President O&M ................................................ NEW JERSEY INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, NJ ................................................................................................ 250,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ NEW MADRID HARBOR (MILE 889), MO ....................................................................................................... 300,000 Senator Bond O&M ................................................ NEW MADRID HARBOR, MO .......................................................................................................................... 400,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ NEW MELONES LAKE, DOWNSTREAM CHANNEL, CA ..................................................................................... 1,730,000 The President O&M ................................................ NEW RIVER INLET, NC .................................................................................................................................. 800,000 The President, Senator Dole O&M ................................................ NEW TOPSAIL INLET, NC ............................................................................................................................... 400,000 Senator Dole O&M ................................................ NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY CHANNELS, NY .............................................................................................. 6,750,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ NEW YORK HARBOR (DRIFT REMOVAL), NY & NJ ......................................................................................... 6,300,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ NEW YORK HARBOR (PREVENTION OF OBSTRUCTIVE DEPOSIT), NY ............................................................ 950,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ NEW YORK HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................................................... 4,000,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ NEWARK BAY, HACKENSACK AND PASSAIC RIVERS, NJ ............................................................................... 300,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ NEWBURYPORT HARBOR, MA ........................................................................................................................ 400,000 Senators Kennedy, Kerry 
212 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ NEWTOWN CREEK, NY ................................................................................................................................... 220,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ NIMROD LAKE, AR ......................................................................................................................................... 1,609,000 The President O&M ................................................ NINILCHIK HARBOR, AK ................................................................................................................................. 350,000 The President O&M ................................................ NOLIN LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................................................ 3,337,000 The President O&M ................................................ NOME HARBOR, AK ....................................................................................................................................... 780,000 The President, Senator Stevens O&M ................................................ NORFOLK HARBOR, VA .................................................................................................................................. 10,072,000 The President, Senators Warner, Webb O&M ................................................ NORFORK LAKE, AR ....................................................................................................................................... 3,920,000 The President O&M ................................................ NORTH BRANCH KOKOSING RIVER LAKE, OH ............................................................................................... 593,000 The President O&M ................................................ NORTH FORK OF POUND RIVER LAKE, VA .................................................................................................... 656,000 The President O&M ................................................ NORTH HARTLAND LAKE, VT ......................................................................................................................... 635,000 The President, Senator Leahy O&M ................................................ NORTH SAN GABRIEL DAM AND LAKE GEORGETOWN, TX ............................................................................. 2,066,000 The President O&M ................................................ NORTH SPRINGFIELD LAKE, VT ..................................................................................................................... 747,000 The President, Senator Leahy O&M ................................................ NORTHFIELD BROOK LAKE, CT ...................................................................................................................... 385,000 The President O&M ................................................ NOYO HARBOR, CA ....................................................................................................................................... 750,000 Senator Feinstein O&M ................................................ O C FISHER DAM AND LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................... 907,000 The President O&M ................................................ OAHE DAM, LAKE OAHE, SD & ND ................................................................................................................ 9,277,000 The President, Senator Dorgan O&M ................................................ OAKLAND HARBOR, CA .................................................................................................................................. 7,445,000 The President O&M ................................................ OCEAN CITY HARBOR AND INLET AND SINEPUXENT BAY, MD ..................................................................... 450,000 The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ OCEANSIDE HARBOR, CA .............................................................................................................................. 1,620,000 The President O&M ................................................ OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, KY, IL, IN & OH ......................................................................................... 39,419,000 The President O&M ................................................ OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, PA, OH & WV ............................................................................................. 24,796,000 The President O&M ................................................ OHIO RIVER LOCKS AND DAMS, WV, KY & OH ............................................................................................. 30,292,000 The President O&M ................................................ OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, KY, IL, IN & OH .................................................................................. 4,485,000 The President O&M ................................................ OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, PA, OH & WV ...................................................................................... 509,000 The President O&M ................................................ OHIO RIVER OPEN CHANNEL WORK, WV, KY & OH ...................................................................................... 2,700,000 The President O&M ................................................ OHIO-MISSISSIPPI FLOOD CONTROL, OH ....................................................................................................... 1,089,000 The President O&M ................................................ OKATIBBEE LAKE, MS .................................................................................................................................... 1,900,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ OKEECHOBEE WATERWAY, FL ....................................................................................................................... 4,530,000 The President O&M ................................................ OLD HICKORY LOCK AND DAM, TN ............................................................................................................... 9,845,000 The President O&M ................................................ ONTONAGON HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................. 655,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ OOLOGAH LAKE, OK ....................................................................................................................................... 1,923,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ OPTIMA LAKE, OK .......................................................................................................................................... 164,000 The President O&M ................................................ ORWELL LAKE, MN ........................................................................................................................................ 256,000 The President O&M ................................................ OSCEOLA HARBOR, AR .................................................................................................................................. 500,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ OTTER BROOK LAKE, NH ............................................................................................................................... 598,000 The President 
213 

O&M ................................................ OUACHITA AND BLACK RIVERS, AR & LA ..................................................................................................... 8,509,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Lincoln, 

Pryor, Vitter 

O&M ................................................ OZARK—JETA TAYLOR LOCK AND DAM, AR ................................................................................................. 5,287,000 The President O&M ................................................ PAINT CREEK LAKE, OH ................................................................................................................................ 1,307,000 The President O&M ................................................ PAINTED ROCK DAM, AZ ............................................................................................................................... 1,206,000 The President O&M ................................................ PAINTSVILLE LAKE, KY .................................................................................................................................. 954,000 The President O&M ................................................ PALM BEACH HARBOR, FL ............................................................................................................................ 2,385,000 The President, Senator Martinez O&M ................................................ PANAMA CITY HARBOR, FL ........................................................................................................................... 55,000 The President O&M ................................................ PAPILLION CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES LAKES, NE .......................................................................................... 531,000 The President, Hagel O&M ................................................ PARISH CREEK, MD ....................................................................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ PASCAGOULA HARBOR, MS ........................................................................................................................... 7,511,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ PASSAIC RIVER FLOOD WARNING SYSTEMS, NJ ........................................................................................... 254,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ PAT MAYSE LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................................... 1,005,000 The President O&M ................................................ PATOKA LAKE, IN ........................................................................................................................................... 1,150,000 The President O&M ................................................ PEARL RIVER, MS & LA ................................................................................................................................ 193,000 The President, Senator Wicker O&M ................................................ PEARSON—SKUBITZ BIG HILL LAKE, KS ...................................................................................................... 1,048,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ PENSACOLA HARBOR, FL .............................................................................................................................. 67,000 The President O&M ................................................ PENSACOLA RESERVOIR, LAKE OF THE CHEROKEES, OK ............................................................................. 119,000 The President O&M ................................................ PENTWATER HARBOR, MI .............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ PERRY LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................................................... 2,516,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ PETERSBERG NORTH HARBOR PROJECT, AK ................................................................................................ 500,000 Senator Stevens O&M ................................................ PETOSKEY HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ PHILPOTT LAKE, VA ....................................................................................................................................... 6,961,000 The President O&M ................................................ PINE AND MATHEWS CANYONS LAKES, NV ................................................................................................... 204,000 The President O&M ................................................ PINE CREEK LAKE, OK .................................................................................................................................. 1,099,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ PINE FLAT LAKE, CA ...................................................................................................................................... 2,854,000 The President O&M ................................................ PINOLE SHOAL MANAGEMENT STUDY, CA ..................................................................................................... 500,000 Senator Feinstein O&M ................................................ PIPESTEM LAKE, ND ...................................................................................................................................... 572,000 The President O&M ................................................ POINT JUDITH HARBOR OF REUGE, RI .......................................................................................................... 1,250,000 The President, Senator Reed O&M ................................................ POINT LOOKOUT HARBOR, MI ....................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ POMME DE TERRE LAKE, MO ........................................................................................................................ 2,108,000 The President O&M ................................................ POMONA LAKE, KS ........................................................................................................................................ 1,969,000 The President, Senators Brownback, RobertsO&M ................................................ PORT AUSTIN HARBOR, MI ............................................................................................................................ .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ PORT HUENEME, CA ...................................................................................................................................... 4,029,000 The President, Senator Feinstein O&M ................................................ PORT ORFORD, OR ........................................................................................................................................ 7,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ PORT SANILAC HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................................... .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ PORTAGE HARBOR, MI .................................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ PORTCHESTER HARBOR, NY ......................................................................................................................... 150,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ PORTLAND HARBOR, ME ............................................................................................................................... 100,000 The President, Senators Snowe, Collins O&M ................................................ POTOMAC AND ANACOSTIA RIVERS (DRIFT REMOVAL), DC .......................................................................... 805,000 The President 
214 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ PRESQUE ISLE HARBOR, MI .......................................................................................................................... 312,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ PROCTOR LAKE, TX ....................................................................................................................................... 2,155,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AK ............................................................................................................... 550,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AL ............................................................................................................... 100,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, AR .............................................................................................................. 8,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CA .............................................................................................................. 2,422,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, CT ............................................................................................................... 1,100,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DC .............................................................................................................. 28,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, DE .............................................................................................................. 147,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, FL ............................................................................................................... 1,265,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, GA .............................................................................................................. 162,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, HI ............................................................................................................... 537,000 The President, Senator Inouye O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IL ................................................................................................................ 111,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, IN ............................................................................................................... 185,000 The President O&M ................................................ Project Condition Surveys, KY ...................................................................................................................... 7,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MA .............................................................................................................. 1,200,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MD .............................................................................................................. 376,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, ME .............................................................................................................. 750,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MI ............................................................................................................... 276,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MN .............................................................................................................. 95,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MO .............................................................................................................. 14,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, MS .............................................................................................................. 82,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NC .............................................................................................................. 675,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NH .............................................................................................................. 300,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NJ ............................................................................................................... 1,363,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, NY .............................................................................................................. 1,830,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OH .............................................................................................................. 295,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, OR .............................................................................................................. 220,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, PA ............................................................................................................... 70,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, RI ............................................................................................................... 400,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, SC .............................................................................................................. 624,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TN ............................................................................................................... 9,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, TX ............................................................................................................... 304,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, VA ............................................................................................................... 870,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WA .............................................................................................................. 338,000 The President 
215 

O&M ................................................ PROJECT CONDITION SURVEYS, WI ............................................................................................................... 160,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROMPTON LAKE, PA .................................................................................................................................... 505,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROVIDENCE HARBOR SHIPPING CHANNEL, RI ............................................................................................ 300,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse O&M ................................................ PUGET SOUND AND TRIBUTARY WATERS, WA .............................................................................................. 997,000 The President O&M ................................................ PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA ...................................................................................................................................... 20,000 The President O&M ................................................ QUILLAYUTE RIVER, WA ................................................................................................................................ 1,572,000 The President O&M ................................................ R D BAILEY LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................................... 2,836,000 The President O&M ................................................ RARITAN RIVER TO ARTHUR KILL CUT-OFF, NJ ............................................................................................ 200,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ RARITAN RIVER, NJ ....................................................................................................................................... 220,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez, 

Schumer 

O&M ................................................ RATHBUN LAKE, IA ........................................................................................................................................ 2,277,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley O&M ................................................ RAY ROBERTS LAKE, TX ................................................................................................................................ 1,456,000 The President O&M ................................................ RAYSTOWN LAKE, PA ..................................................................................................................................... 3,312,000 The President, Senator Specter O&M ................................................ RED LAKE RESERVOIR, MN ........................................................................................................................... 84,000 The President O&M ................................................ RED ROCK DAM AND LAKE RED ROCK, IA ................................................................................................... 3,278,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley O&M ................................................ REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, FL ............................................................................................................. 4,420,000 The President O&M ................................................ REMOVAL OF AQUATIC GROWTH, LA ............................................................................................................. 1,500,000 The President, Senator Landrieu O&M ................................................ REND LAKE, IL .............................................................................................................................................. 4,570,000 The President, Senator Durbin O&M ................................................ RESERVOIRS AT HEADWATERS OF MISSISSIPPI RIVER, MN ......................................................................... 3,170,000 The President O&M ................................................ RHODES POINT TO TYLERTON, MD ............................................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ RICHARD B RUSSELL DAM AND LAKE, GA & SC .......................................................................................... 8,386,000 The President O&M ................................................ RICHMOND HARBOR, CA ............................................................................................................................... 6,950,000 The President O&M ................................................ RIO GRANDE BOSQUE REHABILITATION, NM ................................................................................................. 4,000,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ ROBERT S KERR LOCK AND DAM AND RESERVOIRS, OK ............................................................................. 6,599,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ ROCHESTER HARBOR, NY ............................................................................................................................. 1,605,000 The President O&M ................................................ ROGUE RIVER AT GOLD BEACH, OR ............................................................................................................. 587,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ ROLLINSON CHANNEL, NC ............................................................................................................................. 300,000 The President, Senator Dole O&M ................................................ ROSEDALE HARBOR, MS ............................................................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ ROSEVILLE, OH .............................................................................................................................................. 35,000 The President O&M ................................................ ROUGE RIVER, MI ......................................................................................................................................... 1,161,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ ROUGH RIVER LAKE, KY ................................................................................................................................ 2,832,000 The President O&M ................................................ ROUSH RIVER MAJOR REHAB REPORT, IN .................................................................................................... 300,000 The President O&M ................................................ RUDEE INLET, VA .......................................................................................................................................... 370,000 The President, Senators Warner, Webb O&M ................................................ SABINE—NECHES WATERWAY, TX ................................................................................................................ 8,822,000 The President O&M ................................................ SACRAMENTO RIVER (30 FOOT PROJECT), CA .............................................................................................. 5,582,000 The President O&M ................................................ SACRAMENTO RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES (DEBRIS CONTROL), CA ................................................................ 1,566,000 The President O&M ................................................ SACRAMENTO RIVER SHALLOW DRAFT CHANNEL, CA .................................................................................. 175,000 The President O&M ................................................ SAGINAW RIVER, MI ...................................................................................................................................... 3,798,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ SALAMONIE LAKE, IN ..................................................................................................................................... 1,226,000 The President 
216 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ SALEM RIVER, NJ .......................................................................................................................................... 70,000 The President, Senator Lautenberg O&M ................................................ SALT CREEK AND TRIBUTARIES, NE ............................................................................................................. 702,000 The President, Hagel O&M ................................................ SAM RAYBURN DAM AND RESERVOIR, TX .................................................................................................... 5,820,000 The President O&M ................................................ SAN FRANCISCO BAY LONG TERM MANAGEMENT STRATEGY, CA ................................................................ 1,106,000 The President, Senator Feinstein O&M ................................................ SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR AND BAY (DRIFT REMOVAL), CA ......................................................................... 2,805,000 The President O&M ................................................ SAN FRANCISCO HARBOR, CA ...................................................................................................................... 2,514,000 The President O&M ................................................ SAN JOAQUIN RIVER, PORT OF STOCKTON, CA ............................................................................................. 5,411,000 The President, Senator Feinstein O&M ................................................ SAN PABLO BAY AND MARE ISLAND STRAIT, CA .......................................................................................... 1,140,000 The President O&M ................................................ SANDY HOOK BAY AT LEONARDO, NJ ........................................................................................................... 40,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ SANTA ANA RIVER BASIN, CA ....................................................................................................................... 3,148,000 The President O&M ................................................ SANTA BARBARA HARBOR, CA ...................................................................................................................... 2,090,000 The President O&M ................................................ SANTA ROSA DAM AND LAKE, NM ................................................................................................................ 940,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ SARDIS LAKE, OK .......................................................................................................................................... 912,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ SAUGATUCK HARBOR, MI .............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senator Stabenow O&M ................................................ SAVANNAH HARBOR, GA ............................................................................................................................... 13,895,000 The President O&M ................................................ SAVANNAH RIVER BELOW AUGUSTA, GA ....................................................................................................... 183,000 The President O&M ................................................ SAYLORVILLE LAKE, IA .................................................................................................................................. 3,908,000 The President, Senators Harkin, Grassley O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AL .................................................................................................. 94,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, AZ .................................................................................................. 39,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CA .................................................................................................. 1,639,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, CO .................................................................................................. 720,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, FL ................................................................................................... 30,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ID ................................................................................................... 469,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, KS .................................................................................................. 30,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MD ................................................................................................. 64,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MO ................................................................................................. 327,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, MT .................................................................................................. 88,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, ND .................................................................................................. 119,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, NM ................................................................................................. 502,000 The President, Senators Domenici Bingaman O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OK .................................................................................................. 520,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, OR .................................................................................................. 82,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, PA .................................................................................................. 46,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, SD .................................................................................................. 52,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, TX .................................................................................................. 101,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, UT .................................................................................................. 598,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WA ................................................................................................. 506,000 The President 
217 

O&M ................................................ SCHEDULING RESERVOIR OPERATIONS, WY ................................................................................................. 87,000 The President O&M ................................................ SCHUYLKILL RIVER, PA ................................................................................................................................. 3,000,000 The President, Senators Specter, Casey O&M ................................................ SEATTLE HARBOR, WA .................................................................................................................................. 913,000 The President O&M ................................................ SEBEWAING RIVER, MI .................................................................................................................................. 75,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ SHARK RIVER, NJ .......................................................................................................................................... 775,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ SHENANGO RIVER LAKE, PA .......................................................................................................................... 2,366,000 The President O&M ................................................ SHINNECOCK INLET, NY ................................................................................................................................ 200,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ SHOAL HARBOR AND COMPTON CREEK, NJ .................................................................................................. 300,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ SHREWSBURY RIVER, MAIN CHANNEL, NJ .................................................................................................... 120,000 The President, Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ SILVER LAKE HARBOR, NC ............................................................................................................................ 400,000 The President O&M ................................................ SIUSLAW RIVER, OR ...................................................................................................................................... 583,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ SKIATOOK LAKE, OK ...................................................................................................................................... 1,318,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ SKIPANON CHANNEL, OR ............................................................................................................................... 5,000 The President O&M ................................................ SMITHVILLE LAKE, MO ................................................................................................................................... 1,203,000 The President O&M ................................................ SOMERVILLE LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................................. 3,157,000 The President O&M ................................................ SOURIS RIVER, ND ........................................................................................................................................ 280,000 The President O&M ................................................ SOUTH FLORIDA EVERGLADES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION, FL ..................................................................... 357,000 The President O&M ................................................ SOUTHEAST MISSOURI PORT, MO ................................................................................................................. 8,000 The President O&M ................................................ SOUTHERN NEW YORK FLOOD CONTROL PROJECTS, NY .............................................................................. 839,000 The President O&M ................................................ ST CLAIR RIVER, MI ...................................................................................................................................... 1,791,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ ST JOSEPH HARBOR, MI ................................................................................................................................ 595,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ ST MARYS RIVER, MI .................................................................................................................................... 18,836,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ STAMFORD HURRICANE BARRIER, CT ........................................................................................................... 374,000 The President O&M ................................................ STILLAGUAMISH RIVER, WA ........................................................................................................................... 248,000 The President O&M ................................................ STILLHOUSE HOLLOW DAM, TX ..................................................................................................................... 2,210,000 The President O&M ................................................ STILLWATER LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................................... 331,000 The President O&M ................................................ STOCKTON LAKE, MO .................................................................................................................................... 3,828,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ STONEWALL JACKSON LAKE, WV ................................................................................................................... 1,039,000 The President O&M ................................................ STURGEON BAY, WI ....................................................................................................................................... 16,000 The President O&M ................................................ SUCCESS LAKE, CA ....................................................................................................................................... 1,791,000 The President O&M ................................................ SUISUN BAY CHANNEL, CA ........................................................................................................................... 2,982,000 The President O&M ................................................ SUMMERSVILLE LAKE, WV ............................................................................................................................. 2,044,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURRY MOUNTAIN LAKE, NH ......................................................................................................................... 596,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IL ............................................................................... 565,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, IN ............................................................................... 91,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ME ............................................................................. 17,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MI .............................................................................. 2,444,000 The President, Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, MN ............................................................................. 323,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, ND .............................................................................. 24,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, NY .............................................................................. 551,000 The President 
218 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, OH .............................................................................. 223,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, PA .............................................................................. 93,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA ............................................................................. 10,400,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WA ............................................................................. 53,000 The President O&M ................................................ SURVEILLANCE OF NORTHERN BOUNDARY WATERS, WI .............................................................................. 498,000 The President O&M ................................................ SUTTON LAKE, WV ......................................................................................................................................... 2,210,000 The President O&M ................................................ SWINOMISH CHANNEL, WA ............................................................................................................................ 400,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell O&M ................................................ TABLE ROCK LAKE, MO ................................................................................................................................. 6,667,000 The President, Senator Bond O&M ................................................ TACOMA, PUYALLUP RIVER, WA .................................................................................................................... 120,000 The President O&M ................................................ TAMPA HARBOR, FL ...................................................................................................................................... 4,550,000 The President, Senator Martinez O&M ................................................ TANGIPAHOA RIVER, LA ................................................................................................................................. 321,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ TAYLORSVILLE LAKE, KY ............................................................................................................................... 1,312,000 The President O&M ................................................ TCHEFUNCTE RIVER & BOGUE FALIA, LA ..................................................................................................... 400,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ TENKILLER FERRY LAKE, OK ......................................................................................................................... 3,794,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ TENNESSEE RIVER, TN .................................................................................................................................. 20,219,000 The President O&M ................................................ TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY WILDLIFE MITIGATION, AL ................................................................... 2,350,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Shelby, Sessions, Wicker O&M ................................................ TENNESSEE-TOMBIGBEE WATERWAY, AL & MS ............................................................................................ 22,009,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Shelby, Sessions, Wicker O&M ................................................ TERMINUS DAM, LAKE KAWEAH, CA ............................................................................................................. 1,912,000 The President O&M ................................................ TEXAS CITY SHIP CHANNEL, TX .................................................................................................................... 1,482,000 The President, Senator Cornyn O&M ................................................ TEXAS WATER ALLOCATION ASSESSMENT, TX .............................................................................................. 1,000,000 The President, Senators Hutchison, Cornyn O&M ................................................ THE DALLES LOCK AND DAM, WA & OR ....................................................................................................... 7,696,000 The President O&M ................................................ THOMASTON DAM, CT ................................................................................................................................... 615,000 The President O&M ................................................ TILLAMOOK BAY AND BAR, OR ..................................................................................................................... 2,200,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ TIOGA-HAMMOND LAKES, PA ......................................................................................................................... 2,213,000 The President O&M ................................................ TIONESTA LAKE, PA ....................................................................................................................................... 3,115,000 The President O&M ................................................ TOLEDO HARBOR, OH .................................................................................................................................... 4,701,000 The President, Senator Voinovich O&M ................................................ TOM JENKINS DAM, OH ................................................................................................................................. 791,000 The President O&M ................................................ TORONTO LAKE, KS ....................................................................................................................................... 535,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ TOWN BLUFF DAM, B A STEINHAGEN LAKE, TX ............................................................................................ 2,735,000 The President O&M ................................................ TOWNSHEND LAKE, VT .................................................................................................................................. 681,000 The President, Senator Leahy O&M ................................................ TRINIDAD LAKE, CO ....................................................................................................................................... 1,290,000 The President, Senators Allard, Salazar O&M ................................................ TULLY LAKE, MA ............................................................................................................................................ 543,000 The President O&M ................................................ TUTTLE CREEK LAKE, KS ............................................................................................................................... 2,135,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ TWITCH COVE AND BIG THOROFARE RIVER, MD .......................................................................................... 135,000 The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin 
219 

O&M ................................................ TWO HARBORS, MN ....................................................................................................................................... 300,000 The President O&M ................................................ TWO RIVERS DAM, NM .................................................................................................................................. 452,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ TWO RIVERS HARBOR, WI ............................................................................................................................. 400,000 Senator Kohl O&M ................................................ TYGART LAKE, WV ......................................................................................................................................... 1,521,000 The President O&M ................................................ UMPQUA RIVER, OR ...................................................................................................................................... 635,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ UNION CITY LAKE, PA ................................................................................................................................... 1,017,000 The President O&M ................................................ UNION LAKE, MO ........................................................................................................................................... 10,000 The President O&M ................................................ UNION VILLAGE DAM, VT ............................................................................................................................... 578,000 The President, Senator Leahy O&M ................................................ UPPER RIO GRANDE WATER OPERATIONS MODEL STUDY, NM .................................................................... 1,201,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman O&M ................................................ VENTURA HARBOR, CA .................................................................................................................................. 3,095,000 The President O&M ................................................ W KERR SCOTT DAM AND RESERVOIR, NC .................................................................................................. 2,977,000 The President, Senator Dole O&M ................................................ WACO LAKE, TX ............................................................................................................................................. 3,090,000 The President O&M ................................................ WAIANAE HARBOR, HI ................................................................................................................................... 1,000,000 Senator Inouye O&M ................................................ WALLACE LAKE, LA ........................................................................................................................................ 200,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ WALLISVILLE LAKE, TX .................................................................................................................................. 1,747,000 The President O&M ................................................ WALTER F GEORGE LOCK AND DAM, AL & GA ............................................................................................. 8,417,000 The President O&M ................................................ WASHINGTON HARBOR, DC ........................................................................................................................... 25,000 The President O&M ................................................ WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, AL ................................................................................................ 120,000 The President O&M ................................................ WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, FL ................................................................................................ 405,000 The President O&M ................................................ WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, MS ............................................................................................... 30,000 The President O&M ................................................ WATER/ENVIRONMENTAL CERTIFICATION, VA ................................................................................................ 54,000 The President O&M ................................................ WATERWAY FROM EMPIRE TO THE GULF, LA ............................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senators Landrieu, Vitter O&M ................................................ WATERWAY FROM INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY TO BAYOU DULAC, LA .......................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Landrieu O&M ................................................ WATERWAY ON THE COAST OF VIRGINIA, VA ................................................................................................ 260,000 The President O&M ................................................ WAUKEGAN HARBOR, IL ................................................................................................................................ 1,099,000 The President O&M ................................................ WAURIKA LAKE, OK ....................................................................................................................................... 1,093,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ WEBBERS FALLS LOCK AND DAM, OK .......................................................................................................... 4,695,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ WEST FORK OF MILL CREEK LAKE, OH ......................................................................................................... 865,000 The President O&M ................................................ WEST HILL DAM, MA ..................................................................................................................................... 674,000 The President O&M ................................................ WEST POINT DAM AND LAKE, GA & AL ......................................................................................................... 7,446,000 The President O&M ................................................ WEST THOMPSON LAKE, CT .......................................................................................................................... 568,000 The President O&M ................................................ WESTCHESTER CREEK, NY ............................................................................................................................ 250,000 The President, Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ WESTVILLE LAKE, MA .................................................................................................................................... 497,000 The President O&M ................................................ WHITE LAKE HARBOR, MI .............................................................................................................................. .............................. Senators Levin, Stabenow O&M ................................................ WHITE RIVER, AR .......................................................................................................................................... 52,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ WHITLOW RANCH DAM, AZ ............................................................................................................................ 171,000 The President O&M ................................................ WHITNEY LAKE, TX ........................................................................................................................................ 8,559,000 The President O&M ................................................ WHITNEY POINT LAKE, NY ............................................................................................................................. 553,000 The President O&M ................................................ WICOMICO RIVER, MD ................................................................................................................................... 1,400,000 The President, Senators Mikulski, Cardin O&M ................................................ WILLAMETTE RIVER AT WILLAMETTE FALLS, OR ........................................................................................... 210,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith 
220 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

O&M ................................................ WILLAMETTE RIVER BANK PROTECTION, OR ................................................................................................. 62,000 The President O&M ................................................ WILLAPA RIVER AND HARBOR, WA ............................................................................................................... 34,000 The President O&M ................................................ WILLIAM H HARSHA LAKE, OH ...................................................................................................................... 1,837,000 The President O&M ................................................ WILLOW CREEK LAKE, OR ............................................................................................................................. 610,000 The President O&M ................................................ WILMINGTON HARBOR, DE ............................................................................................................................ 3,750,000 The President, Senators Biden, Carper O&M ................................................ WILMINGTON HARBOR, NC ............................................................................................................................ 13,000,000 The President, Senators Dole, Burr O&M ................................................ WILSON LAKE, KS .......................................................................................................................................... 1,977,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts O&M ................................................ WISTER LAKE, OK .......................................................................................................................................... 678,000 The President, Senator Inhofe O&M ................................................ WOLF CREEK DAM, LAKE CUMBERLAND, KY ................................................................................................ 7,834,000 The President, Senator McConnell O&M ................................................ WOLF RIVER HARBOR, TN ............................................................................................................................. 107,000 The President O&M ................................................ WOODCOCK CREEK LAKE, PA ........................................................................................................................ 1,033,000 The President O&M ................................................ WOONSOCKET, RI .......................................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senator Reed O&M ................................................ WRIGHT PATMAN DAM AND LAKE, TX ........................................................................................................... 4,532,000 The President O&M ................................................ YAQUINA BAY AND HARBOR, OR .................................................................................................................. 1,482,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ YAQUINA RIVER, OR ...................................................................................................................................... 300,000 Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ YATESVILLE LAKE, KY .................................................................................................................................... 1,180,000 The President O&M ................................................ YAZOO RIVER, MS ......................................................................................................................................... 26,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ YELLOW BEND PORT, AR .............................................................................................................................. 160,000 The President, Senators Lincoln, Pryor O&M ................................................ YORK INDIAN ROCK DAM, PA ........................................................................................................................ 471,000 The President O&M ................................................ YORK RIVER, VA ............................................................................................................................................ 250,000 The President O&M ................................................ YOUGHIOGHENY RIVER LAKE, PA & MD ....................................................................................................... 2,908,000 The President O&M ................................................ YUBA RIVER, CA ........................................................................................................................................... 129,000 The President O&M ................................................ ACTIONS FOR CHANGE TO IMPROVE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE ......................................................... 5,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ AQUATIC NUISANCE CONTROL RESEARCH .................................................................................................... 690,000 The President O&M ................................................ ASSET MANAGEMENT/FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE ............................................................... 4,750,000 The President O&M ................................................ BUDGET/MANAGEMENT SUPPORT FOR O&M BUSINESS LINES ..................................................................... 5,865,000 The President O&M ................................................ COASTAL INLET RESEARCH PROGRAM .......................................................................................................... 2,475,000 The President O&M ................................................ CULTURAL RESOURCES (NAGPRA/CURATION) ............................................................................................... 1,500,000 The President O&M ................................................ DREDGE WHEELER READY RESERVE ............................................................................................................ 12,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ DREDGING DATA AND LOCK PERFORMANCE MONITORING SYSTEM ............................................................. 1,062,000 The President O&M ................................................ DREDGING OPERATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION (DOER) ........................................................ 6,080,000 The President O&M ................................................ DREDGING OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM (DOTS) ............................................................... 1,391,000 The President O&M ................................................ EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM ............................................................................................ 270,000 The President O&M ................................................ FACILITY PROTECTION ................................................................................................................................... 12,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ GREAT LAKES SEDIMENT TRANSPORT MODEL .............................................................................................. 900,000 The President O&M ................................................ INDEPENDENT (PART) ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENT—STEWARDSHIP ..................................................... 500,000 The President 
221 

O&M ................................................ INLAND NAVIGATION SAFETY INITIATIVE ........................................................................................................ 3,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ INLAND WATERWAY NAVIGATION CHARTS ..................................................................................................... 3,708,000 The President O&M ................................................ INSPECTION OF COMPLETED WORKS ............................................................................................................ 1,780,000 The President O&M ................................................ MONITORING OFCOMPLETED NAVIGATION PROJECTS .................................................................................... 1,575,000 The President O&M ................................................ NATIONAL (LEVEE) FLOOD INVENTORY .......................................................................................................... 10,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ NATIONAL COASTAL MAPPING ....................................................................................................................... 13,900,000 The President, Senators Cochran, Wicker O&M ................................................ NATIONAL DAM SAFETY PROGRAM ................................................................................................................ 15,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ NATIONAL EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS (NEPP) .......................................................................................... 6,000,000 The President O&M ................................................ NATIONAL NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES ........................................................................ 3,326,000 The President O&M ................................................ NATIONAL PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT FOR REALLOCATION ............................................................................. 300,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT TECHNICAL SUPPORT .......................................................................................... 300,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION: ....................................................................................................................... ..............................O&M ................................................ HARBOR MAINTENANCE FEE DATA COLLECTION ........................................................................................... 725,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION—REMOVAL OF SUNKEN VESSELS .................................................................. 500,000 The President O&M ................................................ PROTECTION OF NAVIGATION—STRAIGHTENING OF CHANNELS ................................................................... 50,000 The President O&M ................................................ WATERBORNE COMMERCE STATISTICS ......................................................................................................... 4,271,000 The President O&M ................................................ RECREATION ONE STOP (R1S) NATIONAL RECREATION RESERVATION ........................................................ 1,130,000 The President O&M ................................................ REGIONAL SEDIMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ............................................................................................ 4,500,000 The President, Senators Inouye, Lautenberg, 

Menendez, Schumer, Dole, Burr, Wyden, Smith, Reed, Whitehouse 

O&M ................................................ Delaware Estuary RSM, NJ .................................................................................................................. (300,000 ) Senators Lautenberg, Menendez O&M ................................................ Long Island Coastal Planning, NY ...................................................................................................... (500,000 ) Senator Schumer O&M ................................................ North Carolina RSM, NC ...................................................................................................................... (600,000 ) Senator Dole, Burr O&M ................................................ South Coastal Rhode Island Regional Sediment Management Study, RI .......................................... (750,000 ) Senators Reed, Whitehouse O&M ................................................ South Jetty and Clatsop Spit, OR ....................................................................................................... (500,000 ) Senators Wyden, Smith O&M ................................................ Southeast Oahu Regional Sediment Management, HI ........................................................................ (500,000 ) Senators Inouye, Akaka O&M ................................................ RELIABILITY MODELS PROGRAM FOR MAJOR REHAB ................................................................................... 608,000 The President O&M ................................................ WATER OPERATIONS TECHNICAL SUPPORT (WOTS) ...................................................................................... 653,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ AK CHIN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT, AZ ............................................................................ 9,900,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ ALBUQUERQUE METRO AREA WATER RECYCLING AND REUSE, NM ............................................................. 1,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ ANIMAS-LA PLATA PROJECT, CRSP, CO, NM, AZ .......................................................................................... 50,000,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Allard, 

Salazar 

Water and Related Resources ........ ARBUCKLE PROJECT, OK ............................................................................................................................... 289,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ ARIZONA WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT .................................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senator Kyl Water and Related Resources ........ BALMORHEA PROJECT, TX ............................................................................................................................. 58,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ BOISE AREA PROJECTS, ID ........................................................................................................................... 5,284,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ BURNT, MALHEUR, OWYHEE, AND POWER RIVER BASIN WATER OPTIMIZATION FEASIBILITY STUDY, OR ... 300,000 Senators Wyden, Smith Water and Related Resources ........ CACHUMA PROJECT, CA ................................................................................................................................ 2,118,000 The President, Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ....................................................................................................... 352,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ CALLEGUAS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT RECYCLING PLANT, CA ............................................................... 1,500,000 The President, Senators Feinstein, Boxer 
222 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

Water and Related Resources ........ CANADIAN RIVER PROJECT, TX ..................................................................................................................... 145,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ CARLSBAD PROJECT, NM .............................................................................................................................. 3,784,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT, COLORADO RIVER BASIN ............................................................................... 28,350,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Kyl, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ CENTRAL OKLAHOMA MASTER CONSERVATORY DISTRICT FEASIBILITY STUDY ............................................ 250,000 Senator Inhofe Water and Related Resources ........ CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECTS, CA .................................................................................................................. ..............................Water and Related Resources ........ AMERICAN RIVER DIVISION .................................................................................................................. 9,480,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT ............................................................................................................ 2,088,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ DELTA DIVISION .................................................................................................................................... 20,737,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ EAST SIDE DIVISION ............................................................................................................................. 4,534,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ FRIANT DIVISION .................................................................................................................................. 7,721,000 The President, Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ MISCELLANEOUS PROJECT PROGRAMS ................................................................................................ 17,151,000 The President, Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ REPLACEMENTS, ADDITIONS, AND EXTRAORDINARY MAINT ................................................................ 24,091,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SACRAMENTO RIVER DIVISION ............................................................................................................. 9,428,000 The President, Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ SAN FELIPE DIVISION ........................................................................................................................... 775,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION ........................................................................................................................ 391,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SHASTA DIVISION ................................................................................................................................. 7,914,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ TRINITY RIVER DIVISION ...................................................................................................................... 10,917,000 The President, Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ WATER AND POWER OPERATIONS ........................................................................................................ 9,451,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ WEST SAN JOAQUIN DIVISION, SAN LUIS UNIT .................................................................................... 8,919,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ YIELD FEASIBILITY INVESTIGATION ....................................................................................................... 303,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLLBRAN PROJECT, CO ............................................................................................................................... 1,556,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ........................................................................................................ 204,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO RIVER FRONT WORK AND LEVEE SYSTEM .................................................................................. 2,350,000 The President, Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO—BIG THOMPSON PROJECT, CO ................................................................................................. 13,292,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLUMBIA AND SNAKE RIVER SALMON RECOVERY PROJECT, ID, OR, WA .................................................. 18,000,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLUMBIA BASIN PROJECT, WA .................................................................................................................... 13,548,000 The President, Senator Murray Water and Related Resources ........ CROOKED RIVER PROJECT, OR ..................................................................................................................... 851,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ DESCHUTES ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT, OR ................................................................................. 300,000 Senators Wyden, Smith Water and Related Resources ........ DESCHUTES PROJECT, OR ............................................................................................................................. 1,166,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith Water and Related Resources ........ EASTERN NEW MEXICO RURAL WATER SUPPLY ........................................................................................... 500,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ EASTERN OREGON PROJECTS ....................................................................................................................... 828,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ FORT PECK RESERVATION/DRY PRAIRIE RURAL WATER SYSTEM, MT .......................................................... 15,000,000 Senators Baucus, Tester Water and Related Resources ........ FRUITGROWERS DAM PROJECT, CO .............................................................................................................. 229,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ FRYINGPAN-ARKANSAS PROJECT, CO ............................................................................................................ 8,295,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ GRAND VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II, CO ................................................................................................ 1,445,000 The President 
223 

Water and Related Resources ........ HALFWAY WASH PROJECT STUDY, NV ........................................................................................................... 200,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ HUNGRY HORSE PROJECT, MT ...................................................................................................................... 653,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ HUNTLEY PROJECT, MT ................................................................................................................................. 160,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ HYRUM PROJECT, UT .................................................................................................................................... 178,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ IDAHO INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ................................................................................................................ 179,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ INLAND EMPIRE REGIONAL WATER RECYCLING PROJECT, CA ...................................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Feinstein, Boxer Water and Related Resources ........ IRVINE BASIN GROUND AND SURFACE WATER IMPROVEMENT, CA .............................................................. 1,000,000 Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ JICARILLA APACHE RESERVATION RURAL WATER SYSTEM, NM ................................................................... 1,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ KANSAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ............................................................................................................. 73,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts Water and Related Resources ........ KENDRICK PROJECT, WY ............................................................................................................................... 3,333,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ KLAMATH PROJECT, OR, CA .......................................................................................................................... 25,000,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ LAHONTAN BASIN PROJECT, NV .................................................................................................................... 10,205,000 The President, Senator Reid Water and Related Resources ........ LAKE MEAD/LAS VEGAS WASH PROGRAM, NV .............................................................................................. 2,725,000 The President, Senators Reid, Ensign Water and Related Resources ........ LAKE TAHOE REGIONAL WETLANDSCA, NV .................................................................................................... 100,000 The President, Senator Reid Water and Related Resources ........ LEADVILLE/ARKANSAS RIVER RECOVERY, CO ............................................................................................... 3,095,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ LEWIS AND CLARK RURAL WATER SYSTEM, SD, IA, MN .............................................................................. 30,000,000 Senators Johnson; Harkin; Grassley; Coleman, 

Klobuchar; Thune 

Water and Related Resources ........ LEWISTON ORCHARDS PROJECTS .................................................................................................................. 578,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ LONG BEACH AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROJECT, CA ......................................................... 692,000 The President, Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ LONG BEACH DESALINATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, CA ............................................................... 1,000,000 Senator Feinstein Water and Related Resources ........ LOWER COLORADO RIVER INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM, CO .......................................................................... 243,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ LOWER RIO GRANDE VALLEY WATER RESOURCES, TX ................................................................................. 4,050,000 The President, Senator Hutchison Water and Related Resources ........ LOWER YELLOWSTONE PROJECT, MT ............................................................................................................ 46,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MANCOS PROJECT, CO .................................................................................................................................. 146,000 The President, Senators Allard, Salazar Water and Related Resources ........ MCGEE CREEK PROJECT, OK ........................................................................................................................ 676,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MID-DAKOTA RURAL WATER PROJECT, SD .................................................................................................... 15,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MIDDLE RIO GRANDE PROJECT, NM ............................................................................................................. 25,700,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ MILK RIVER PROJECT, MT ............................................................................................................................. 1,648,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MINIDOKA AREA PROJECTS, ID ..................................................................................................................... 5,558,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MIRAGE FLATS PROJECT, NE ......................................................................................................................... 170,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MNI WICONI PROJECT, SD ............................................................................................................................. 37,182,000 The President, Senators Johnson, Thune Water and Related Resources ........ MONTANA INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 134,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MOON LAKE PROJECT, UT ............................................................................................................................. 76,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MOUNTAIN PARK PROJECT, OK ..................................................................................................................... 523,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NAVAJO NATION INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM, NM ......................................................................................... 77,000 The President, Senators Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ NAVAJO-GALLUP WATER SUPPLY, NM, UT, CO .............................................................................................. 1,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ NEBRASKA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ......................................................................................................... 64,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NEWTON PROJECT, UT ................................................................................................................................... 42,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NORMAN PROJECT, OK .................................................................................................................................. 473,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NORTH LAS VEGAS WATER REUSE, NV ......................................................................................................... 3,000,000 Senators Reid, Ensign 
224 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

Water and Related Resources ........ NORTH PLATTE PROJECT, WY ........................................................................................................................ 1,880,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NORTHERN ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ......................................................................................... 320,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NORTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .............................................................................................. 456,000 The President, Senator Bennett Water and Related Resources ........ NUECES RIVER PROJECT, TX ........................................................................................................................ 558,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ ODESSA SUBAREA SPECIAL STUDY, WA ....................................................................................................... 1,000,000 The President, Senator Murray Water and Related Resources ........ OGDEN RIVER PROJECT, UT .......................................................................................................................... 368,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ OKLAHOMA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ........................................................................................................ 128,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL WATER RECLAMATION PROJECT, CA ............................................................... 558,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ OREGON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ............................................................................................................ 444,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith Water and Related Resources ........ ORLAND PROJECT, CA ................................................................................................................................... 703,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ PARADOX VALLEY UNIT, CRBSCP, TITLE II, CO ............................................................................................ 2,416,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ PARK CITY FEASIBILLTY STUDY, UT .............................................................................................................. 500,000 Senator Bennett Water and Related Resources ........ PECOS RIVER BASIN WATER SALVAGE PROJECT, NM ................................................................................... 203,000 The President, Senators Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ PERKINS COUNTY RURAL WATER SYSTEM, SD ............................................................................................. 2,000,000 Senators Johnson, Thune Water and Related Resources ........ PHOENIX METROPOLITAN WATER REUSE PROJECT, AZ ................................................................................ 200,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN—GARRISON DIVERSION, ND ........................................................................ 69,986,000 The President, Senator Dorgan Water and Related Resources ........ PINE RIVER PROJECT, CO ............................................................................................................................. 335,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ PROVO RIVER PROJECT, UT .......................................................................................................................... 1,366,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ RAPID VALLEY PROJECT, DEERFIELD DAM, SD ............................................................................................. 86,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ RIO GRANDE PROJECT, NM ........................................................................................................................... 4,342,000 The President, Senators Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ ROCKY BOYS/NORTH CENTRAL MONTANA RURAL WATER SYSTEM .............................................................. 10,000,000 Senators Baucus, Tester Water and Related Resources ........ ROGUE RIVER BASIN PROJECT, TALENT DIVISION, OR ................................................................................. 902,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SALT RIVER PROJECT, AZ ............................................................................................................................. 600,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SALTON SEA RESEARCH PROJECT, CA .......................................................................................................... 700,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAN ANGELO PROJECT, TX ............................................................................................................................ 402,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAN CARLOS APACHE TRIBE WATER SETTLEMENT ACT, AZ ......................................................................... 325,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAN DIEGO AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM, CA .......................................................... 3,000,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAN GABRIEL BASIN PROJECT, CA ............................................................................................................... 700,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAN JOSE AREA WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM, CA ............................................................. 250,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAN JUAN RIVER BASIN INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM, NM ............................................................................ 59,000 The President, Senators Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ SAN LUIS VALLEY PROJECT, CO .................................................................................................................... 4,637,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAVAGE RAPIDS DAM REMOVAL, OR ............................................................................................................ 3,000,000 The President, Senators Wyden, Smith Water and Related Resources ........ SCOFIELD PROJECT, UT ................................................................................................................................. 133,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SHOSHONE PROJECT, WY .............................................................................................................................. 749,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SOLANO PROJECT, CA ................................................................................................................................... 4,489,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SOUTH/CENTRAL ARIZONA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ................................................................................ 718,000 The President 
225 

Water and Related Resources ........ SOUTHERN ARIZONA WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT PROJECT ................................................................ 2,969,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .................................................................................... 260,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SOUTHERN NEW MEXICO/WEST TEXAS INV. PROGRAM ................................................................................ 57,000 The President, Senators Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ SOUTHERN UTAH INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ............................................................................................... 121,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ STRAWBERRY VALLEY PROJECT, UT ............................................................................................................. 223,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SUN RIVER PROJECT, MT .............................................................................................................................. 350,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ TEXAS INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ................................................................................................................ 146,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ TUALATIN BASIN WATER SUPPLY PROJECT, OR ............................................................................................ 400,000 Senators Wyden, Smith Water and Related Resources ........ TUALATIN PROJECT, OR ................................................................................................................................. 381,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ TUALATIN PROJECT TITLE TRANSFER AND FACILITY ASSESSMENT STUDY, OR ............................................ 106,000 Senators Wyden, Smith Water and Related Resources ........ TUCUMCARI PROJECT, NM ............................................................................................................................ 58,000 The President, Senators Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ UMATILLA PROJECT, OR ................................................................................................................................ 3,932,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ UNCOMPAHGRE PROJECT, CO ....................................................................................................................... 264,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ UPPER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS, CO ................................................................................................. 250,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ UPPER RIO GRANDE BASIN INVESTIGATIONS, NM ........................................................................................ 29,000 The President, Senators Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ VENTURA RIVER PROJECT, CA ...................................................................................................................... 420,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ W.C. AUSTIN PROJECT, OK ............................................................................................................................ 481,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ WASHINGTON AREA PROJECTS ...................................................................................................................... 95,000 The President, Senator Murray Water and Related Resources ........ WASHINGTON INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM ..................................................................................................... 145,000 The President, Senator Murray Water and Related Resources ........ WASHITA BASIN PROJECT, OK ....................................................................................................................... 1,426,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ WEBER BASIN PROJECT, UT .......................................................................................................................... 1,748,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ WEBER RIVER PROJECT, UT .......................................................................................................................... 137,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ WICHITA PROJECT—EQUUS BEDS DIVISION, KS .......................................................................................... 1,050,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts Water and Related Resources ........ WICHITA-CHENEY PROJECT, KS ..................................................................................................................... 385,000 The President, Senators Brownback, Roberts Water and Related Resources ........ WYOMING INVESTIGATIONS PROGRAM .......................................................................................................... 26,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ YAKIMA PROJECT, WA ................................................................................................................................... 8,500,000 The President, Senator Murray Water and Related Resources ........ YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER ENHANCEMENT PROJECT, WA ........................................................................ 8,503,000 The President, Senator Murray Water and Related Resources ........ YAKIMA RIVER BASIN WATER STORAGE PROJECT, WA ................................................................................. 500,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell Water and Related Resources ........ YUMA AREA PROJECTS, AZ ........................................................................................................................... 21,863,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ YUMA EAST WETLANDS, AZ ........................................................................................................................... 1,500,000 Senator Kyl Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL, TITLE I .................................................................................. 9,444,000 The President, Senator Kyl Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO RIVER BASIN SALINITY CONTROL, TITLE II ................................................................................. 5,850,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO RIVER STORAGE, SECTION 5 ...................................................................................................... 5,913,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO RIVER STORAGE, SECTION 8 ...................................................................................................... 710,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ COLORADO RIVER WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ..................................................................... 265,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ DAM SAFETY PROGRAM: ............................................................................................................................... ..............................Water and Related Resources ........ DEPARTMENT DAM SAFETY PROGRAM ................................................................................................. 1,250,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ INITIATE SOD CORRECTIVE ACTION ..................................................................................................... 71,500,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SAFETY OF EVALUATION OF EXISTING DAMS ....................................................................................... 18,500,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ DROUGHT EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE PROGRAM ........................................................................................... 500,000 The President, Senator Inouye 
226 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

Water and Related Resources ........ EMERGENCY PLANNING & DISASTER RESPONSE PROGRAM ........................................................................ 1,422,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ ENDANGERED SPECIES RECOVERY IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................. 21,939,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bennett, 

Salazar, Bingaman, Hatch 

Water and Related Resources ........ ENVIRONMENTAL & INTERAGENCY COORDINATION ACTIVITIES .................................................................... 1,739,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION .............................................................................................. 973,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ EXAMINATION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES ..................................................................................................... 6,254,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ FEDERAL BUILDING SEISMIC SAFETY PROGRAM .......................................................................................... 1,384,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ GENERAL PLANNING STUDIES ....................................................................................................................... 2,163,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ LAND RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PROGRAM ................................................................................................ 7,481,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ LOWER COLORADO RIVER OPERATIONS PROGRAM ...................................................................................... 16,400,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ MISCELLANEOUS FLOOD CONTROL OPERATIONS .......................................................................................... 714,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NATIVE AMERICAN AFFAIRS PROGRAM ......................................................................................................... 7,020,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ NEGOTIATION & ADMINISTRATION OF WATER MARKETING ........................................................................... 1,658,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ OPERATIONS AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................. 1,206,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ PICK-SLOAN MISSOURI BASIN ....................................................................................................................... 40,740,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ POWER PROGRAM SERVICES ........................................................................................................................ 1,097,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ PUBLIC ACCESS AND SAFETY PROGRAM ...................................................................................................... 796,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ RECLAMATION LAW ADMINISTRATION ........................................................................................................... 2,132,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ RECLAMATION RECREATION MANAGEMENT (TITLE XXVII) ............................................................................. 1,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ RECREATION & FISH & WILDLIFE PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION .................................................................... 951,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT .................................................................................................................... ..............................Water and Related Resources ........ DESALINATION AND WATER PURIFICATION PROGRAM .................................................................................. 3,975,000 The President, Senators Domenici, Bingaman Water and Related Resources ........ SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM ........................................................................................................ 9,000,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ RURAL WATER LEGISLATION TITLE I ............................................................................................................. 1,000,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ SITE SECURITY .............................................................................................................................................. 28,950,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ TITLE XVI WATER RECLAMATION AND REUSE PROGRAM .............................................................................. 3,300,000 The President, Senators Reid, Domenici Water and Related Resources ........ UNITED STATES/MEXICO BORDER ISSUES—TECHNICAL SUPPORT .............................................................. 93,000 The President Water and Related Resources ........ WATER FOR AMERICA INITIATIVE .................................................................................................................. 19,000,000 The President, Senators Reid; Domenici, Bingaman California Bay-Delta Restoration ... California Bay-Delta Restoration, CA ........................................................................................................... 42,000,000 The President, Senator Feinstein CUPCA ............................................ Central Utah Project Completion Act, UT ..................................................................................................... 42,000,000 The President CVPRF ............................................. Central Valley Project Restoration Fund, CA ................................................................................................ 56,079,000 The President, Senator Feinstein DOE—EERC .................................... Algal-Base Renewable Energy for Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Reno, NV for the development of 

algal-based energy system.

750,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EERE .................................... Alternative Energy for Higher Education, Creighton University, Omaha, NE, for a solar energy project ... 1,200,000 Senators Nelson (Ben), Hagel 
227 

DOE—EERE .................................... Alternative Energy School of the Future, Clark County, Andre Agassi Charitable Foundation, Las Vegas, 

NV, for a solar fuel cell system.

1,250,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EERE .................................... Alternative Fuel Cell Membranes for National Energy Independence, University of Southern Mississippi, 

USM, MS, for advanced fuel cell membrane research.

1,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

DOE—EERE .................................... Anaerobic Digester and Combined Heat Power Project, Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, 

Montgomery and Prince George’s Counties, MD, for a study on anaerobic power generation.

600,000 Senator Cardin 

DOE—EERE .................................... Bioenergy and Bioproducts Laboratory, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, to conduct research on biofuel 

conversion, biofuel testing, and certification.

1,000,000 Senators Shelby, Sessions 

DOE—EERE .................................... Bioenergy Demonstration Project: Value-Added Products from Renewable Fuels, University of Nebraska, 

Lincoln, NE, for research on the byproducts of biofuel production.

2,000,000 Senators Nelson (Ben), Hagel 

DOE—EERE .................................... Biogas Center of Excellence, Michigan Economic Development Corporation, Flint, MI, for a center for 

the production of biogas.

1,000,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow 

DOE—EERE .................................... Biomass Energy Resources Center, Biomass Energy Resource Center, Montpelier, VT, for the installation of new small scale technology. 1,500,000 Senator Leahy DOE—EERE .................................... Biomass Gasification Research and Development Project, Port of Benton, Richland, WA, for the gasification and research of biomass. 1,000,000 Senator Murray DOE—EERE .................................... Biorefinery for Ethanol, Chemicals, Animal Feed and Biomaterials from Sugarcane Bagasse, Louisiana 

State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA, for a biomass conversion project.

1,000,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter 

DOE—EERE .................................... Bipolar Wafer Cell NiMH Lithium Ion Battery, Electro Energy, Danbury, CT, to advance wafer cell battery technology. 2,000,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman DOE—EERC .................................... Carbon Neutral Green Campus, Nevada State College, Clark County, NV for environmental sustainability. 250,000 Senator Reid DOE—EERE .................................... Center for Biomass Utilization, University of North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research Center, 

Grand Forks, ND, for research on biomass production and its byproducts.

2,000,000 Senator Dorgan 

DOE—EERE .................................... Center for Nanoscale Energy, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, for nanomaterials research ..... 5,000,000 Senator Dorgan DOE—EERE .................................... Central Vermont Recovered Biomass Facility, Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund, Montpelier, VT, for a digester system. 1,000,000 Senator Leahy DOE—EERE .................................... Chariton Valley Densification—Phase II, Chariton Valley RC&D, Inc, Centerville, IA, for research on 

switchgrass.

1,000,000 Senator Harkin 

DOE—EERE .................................... Christmas Valley Renewable Energy Development, Oregon Department of Energy, Salem, OR, for the 

development of a renewable energy-producing facility.

400,000 Senators Wyden, Smith 

DOE—EERE .................................... City of Miami Green Initiative, City of Miami, Miami, FL, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fuel 

consumption in the city.

1,000,000 Senator Nelson (Bill) 

DOE—EERE .................................... Clean Power Energy Research Consortium, Nicholls State University, Louisiana State University, University of New Orleans, Tulane University, Southern University, University of Louisiana, Thibodeaux, LA, 

for a joint venture of Lousiana universities to promote alternative fuels.

2,000,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter 

DOE—EERE .................................... Clean Technology Commercialization Initiative, Ben Franklin Technology Partners, Harrisburg, PA, to 

support clean and alternative energy technologies.

1,000,000 Senators Specter, Casey 

DOE—EERE .................................... Coastal Ohio Wind Project, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH, for wind energy research. 1,000,000 Senators Brown, Voinovich 
228 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

DOE—EERE .................................... Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research, The Consortium for Plant Biotechnology Research, Inc., 

St. Simons Island, N/A, to support university-industry research and technology transfer projects.

1,000,000 Senators Brown, Dorgan, Harkin, Inouye, Johnson, Klobuchar, Landrieu, Levin, Ben Nelson, 

Murray, Stabenow, McConnell, Chambliss 

DOE—EERE .................................... Cooling Heating and Power and Bio-Fuel Application Center, Mississippi State University, Mississippi 

State, MS, to conduct research on increased energy efficiency through the use of electric and thermal delivery systems.

2,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

DOE—EERC .................................... Development of Biofuels Using Ionic Transfer Membranes, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark 

County, NV for biofuels research.

600,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EERE .................................... Development of High Yield Tropical Feedstocks, University of Hawaii, College of Tropical Agriculture 

and Human Resources, Honolulu, HI, for a tropical bioenergy project.

1,500,000 Senator Inouye 

DOE—EERE .................................... Dueco Plug-In Hybrid Engines, Dueco Inc., Waukesha, WI, for new plug-in hybrid electric propulsion 

technology.

2,000,000 Senator Kohl 

DOE—EERE .................................... Energy Production Through Anaerobic Digestion, New Jersey Department of Agriculture, Trenton, NJ, for 

anaerobic digester technology.

500,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez 

DOE—EERE .................................... Fluid Flow Optimization of Aerogel Blanket Manufacturing Process, Aspen Aerogels, Northborough, MA, 

for energy-efficient insulation research.

1,500,000 Senators Kennedy, Kerry 

DOE—EERE .................................... Forestry biofuel statewide Collaboration Center, Michigan Economic Development Corporation, Upper 

Peninsula, MI, to improve the supply chain for woody biomass.

1,500,000 Senators Levin, Stabenow 

DOE—EERE .................................... Genetic Improvements of Switchgrass, University of Rhode Island at Kingston, Kingston, RI, to improve 

switchgrass for use as a biofuel.

1,500,000 Senator Reed 

DOE—EERE .................................... Geothermal Power Generation Plant, Oregon Institute of Technology (OIT), Klamath Falls, OR, for a 

geothermal power plant.

1,600,000 Senators Wyden, Smith 

DOE—EERE .................................... Great Basin Center for Geothermal Energy, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, to continue and expand 

the Center’s activities in promoting geothermal power.

650,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EERE .................................... Great Plains Wind Power Test Facility, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, for the testing, characterization, and improvement of grid-connected wind turbines and wind-driven water desalination systems. 2,000,000 Senator Hutchison DOE—EERE .................................... Hawaii-New Mexico Sustainable Energy Security Partnership, Hawaii Natural Energy Institute, Honolulu, 

HI, to continue the analysis and technology efforts of the Partnership.

3,000,000 Senators Inouye, Domenici, Akaka 

DOE—EERC .................................... Hollow Glass Microspheres, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark County, NV for hydrogen storage 

methods research.

550,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EERE .................................... Hydroelectric Power Generation, Quincy, City of Quincy, Quincy, IL, for Quincy’s efforts to install hydroelectric plants at locks and dams. 500,000 Senator Durbin DOE—EERE .................................... Hydrogen Storage System for Vehicular Propulsion, Delaware State U., Dover, Delaware State University, Dover, DE, to develop a hydrogen storage system. 1,500,000 Senators Biden, Carper 
229 

DOE—EERE .................................... Integrated Solar Energy Windows, PPG Industries, Pittsburgh, PA, for the development of next generation, transparent photovoltaic (PV) solar cells. 1,000,000 Senator Specter DOE—EERE .................................... Integrated Sustainability Initiative, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, to promote campus sustainability. 1,000,000 Senator Reid DOE—EERE .................................... Kansas Biofuels Certification Laboratory, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, for analysis of biofuels, 

measuring emissions of biofuels, and research of biofuel cells.

1,000,000 Senator Brownback 

DOE—EERE .................................... La Samilla Solar Trough Storage Project, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, for solar 

trough storage advancement.

2,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman 

DOE—EERE .................................... Landfill Gas Utilization Plant, County of Chautauqua, Chautauqua County, NY, for landfill-gas power 

generation.

2,000,000 Senator Schumer 

DOE—EERE .................................... Lightweight Composites for Heavy-Duty Vehicles and Hydrogen Storage, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, to advance the use of lightweight composite materials for vehicles. 500,000 Senator Byrd DOE—EERE .................................... Maine Tidal Power Initiative, University of Maine, Orono, ME, to develop protocols that allow locations 

in northern New England to be prioritized for tidal energy development.

1,000,000 Senators Snowe, Collins 

DOE—EERE .................................... MidSouth/Southeast Bioenergy Consortium, MidSouth/Southeast Bioenergy Consortium, Fayetteville, AR, 

for research on the byproducts of biofuel production.

1,500,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor, Chambliss 

DOE—EERE .................................... Multifunctional Solar Energy Systems Research, Utah State University, Logan, UT, for research and development of multifunctional electricity-producing systems. 1,000,000 Senator Bennett DOE—EERE .................................... National Agriculture-Based Industrial Lubricants (NABL), Biomass (IA), University of Northern Iowa, 

Cedar Falls, IA, for the advancement of biobased industrial and automotive lubricants and for biofuels services.

600,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley 

DOE—EERE .................................... National Center for Commercialization of Bioenergy, Kansas State University, Olathe, KS, for the commercialization of near market bioenergy technologies to meet national renewable fuel mandates. 750,000 Senator Roberts DOE—EERE .................................... National Wind Energy Center, University of Houston, Houston, TX, to focus on developing advanced 

offshore wind technology for cost-effective, renewable clean energy production.

2,000,000 Senator Hutchison 

DOE—EERC .................................... Nevada Institute for Renewable Energy Commercialization, Incline Village, NV, for the promotion of renewable energy in business. 500,000 Senator Reid DOE—EERE .................................... New School Green Building, The New School, New York, NY, for an environmentaly-friendly school facility. 2,000,000 Senator Schumer DOE—EERE .................................... North Carolina Center for Automotive Research, North Carolina Center for Automotive Research, Jackson, NC, to equip the Chassis Dynamics Laboratory. 1,000,000 Senator Dole DOE—EERE .................................... Offshore Renewable Energy, Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council, Wakefield, RI, to 

develop an Ocean Special Area Management Plan.

700,000 Senators Reed, Whitehouse 

DOE—EERE .................................... Ohio Advanced Energy Manufacturing Center (OAEMC), Edison Welding Institute, Columbus, OH, for an 

advanced energy manufacturing program.

1,000,000 Senators Brown, Voinovich 

DOE—EERE .................................... Oregon Solar Highway, Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem, OR, to demonstrate the feasibility 

of large-scale deployment of solar photovoltaic technology.

1,000,000 Senators Smith, Wyden 

DOE—EERE .................................... Pecos Valley Biomass Energy Project, NM, Clark County School District, Roswell, NM, for a bio-methane gas system. 2,500,000 Senators Bingaman, Domenici DOE—EERE .................................... Placer County Biomass Utilization Pilot Project, Placer County, Auburn, CA, for a biomass facility ........ 1,500,000 Senator Feinstein 
230 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

DOE—EERE .................................... Pope/Douglas Third Combuster Expansion, Pope/Douglas Solid Waste Management, Alexandria, MN, to 

increase waste to energy capacity.

1,000,000 Senators Coleman, Klobuchar 

DOE—EERE .................................... Power Grid Reliability and Security, Washington State University, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, to create solutions for grid reliability and security enhancements. 1,000,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell DOE—EERE .................................... Renewable Energy Clean Air Project, County of Koochiching, International Falls, MN, for syn-gas energy 

production.

700,000 Senator Klobuchar 

DOE—EERE .................................... Renewable Energy Development Venture, Pacific International Center for High Technology Research, 

Honolulu, HI, to expand potential energy resources in the State of Hawaii.

2,500,000 Senator Inouye 

DOE—EERE .................................... Renewable Energy Feasibility Study, City of Trenton, Trenton, NJ, to examine possible renewable energy 

sources.

500,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez 

DOE—EERE .................................... Renewable Energy Integration and Development, Clark and Washoe Counties, Nevada System of Higher 

Education (NSHE), Las Vegas, NV, for a renewable energy center.

2,000,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EERE .................................... Renewable/Sustainable Biomass Project, Alaska Village Initiatives, Alaska, AK, for use of biomass for 

energy generation in rural Alaska villages.

500,000 Senator Stevens 

DOE—EERE .................................... Sandia National Lab Concentrating Solar, Sandia National Lab, Albuquerque, NM, for concentrating 

solar activities.

3,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman 

DOE—EERE .................................... Solar Panels and Environmental Education, County of Essex, Newark, NJ, for the installation of solar 

panels to further environmental education.

1,000,000 Senators Lautenberg, Menendez 

DOE—EERE .................................... Solar Park Pilot Project, City of St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, FL, to develop a renewable energy plan 

for the City’s parks.

1,000,000 Senator Nelson (Bill) 

DOE—EERE .................................... Solar Power Generation, Township of Cherry Hill, Cherry Hill, NJ, for solar technology ............................. 300,000 Senator Lautenberg DOE—EERE .................................... Solar Thermal Demonstration Project, Clark County School District, Clark County, NV, for solar technology for schools. 1,250,000 Senator Reid DOE—EERE .................................... Southern Regional Center for Lightweight Innovative Design, Mississippi State University, Mississippi 

State, MS, to reduce emissions and posture the US for less reliance on foreign oil.

4,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

DOE—EERE .................................... Southwest Alaska Regional Geothermal Energy Project, Naknek Electrical Association, Naknek, AK, for 

an exploratory well for a 25MW geothermal plant to serve villages in rural Alaska.

3,000,000 Senators Stevens, Murkowski 

DOE—EERE .................................... Stamford Waste-to-Energy Project (CT), City of Stamford, Stamford, CT, to convert dried sludge into 

clean, renewable energy.

2,000,000 Senators Dodd, Lieberman 

DOE—EERE .................................... Strategic Biomass Initiative, Mississippi Technology Alliance, Jackson, MS, to encourage bioenergy industry in the southeast. 500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker DOE—EERE .................................... Sun Grant Initiative, South Dakota State University, Brookings, SD, for regional biomass feedstock research and education. 4,000,000 Senators Johnson, Thune DOE—EERE .................................... Sustainable Energy for Homes and Businesses, Vermont Department of Public Service, Montpelier, VT, 

to support Vermont’s wind and solar program.

750,000 Senator Sanders 
231 

DOE—EERE .................................... Sustainable Energy for Vermont Schools Competition, Vermont Superintendents Association, Montpelier, 

VT, for school-based projects to highlight sustainable energy technologies.

900,000 Senator Sanders 

DOE—EERE .................................... Sustainable Energy Research Center, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, to develop 

new engineering and scientific knowledge and serve as a catalyst to create sustainable energy industries in the southeastern United States.

10,500,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

DOE—EERC .................................... Sustainable Las Vegas, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark County, NV to increase conservation 

and sustainability in Las Vegas.

1,000,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EERE .................................... The Institute for Energy, Environment and Sustainability, Johnson County Community College, Overland 

Park, KS, to serve as a resource for local education, business and civic entities and would include education and training in renewable energy.

750,000 Senator Brownback 

DOE—EERE .................................... Thin Film Photovoltaic Research & Development, Omega Optical, Brattleboro, VT, to research solar 

panel technology.

1,000,000 Senator Leahy 

DOE—EERE .................................... Tidal Energy Study, Snohomish County PUD No. 1, Everett, WA, for environmental studies of possible 

tidal energy pilot plants.

500,000 Senator Murray 

DOE—EERE .................................... Transportable Emissions Testing Lab, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, for mobile labs that 

test bus emissions.

1,000,000 Senator Byrd 

DOE—EERE .................................... USD Catalysis Group for Alternative Energy, South Dakota Catalysis Group, Vermilion, SD, for the development of metal oxide and carbon catalyzed reactions technologies. 1,100,000 Senators Johnson, Thune DOE—EERE .................................... Vermont Biofuels Initiative, Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund, Montpelier, VT, to test the feasibility of 

different uses of biodiesel.

1,500,000 Senator Leahy 

DOE—EERE .................................... Wind Turbine Model and Pilot Project for Alternative Energy, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, for a 

shore-side wind turbine.

1,500,000 Senators Biden, Carper 

DOE—EM DEFENSE ........................ Characteristics and Clean-up of US Nuclear Legacy, Institute for Clean Energy Technology, Mississippi 

State, MS, for renewal of the cooperative agreement with the DOE to help expedite the cleanup of the nuclear defense sites.

4,000,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

DOE—EM DEFENSE ........................ Water Resources Data, Modeling, and Visualization Center, Desert Research Institute, Washoe County, 

NV for water research.

1,000,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—EM DEFENSE ........................ WIPP Records Archive, WIPP, Carlsbad, NM, for records archiving ............................................................ 4,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman DOE—EM NON-DEFENSE ............... Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Initiative, The University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, to provide data management support for research in genomics and metabolomic programs. 1,000,000 Senator McConnell DOE—EM NON-DEFENSE ............... Southwest Experimental Fast Oxide Reactor Decommissioning (SEFOR), University of Arkansas in Fayetteville, Fayetteville, AR, for the decommissioning of SEFOR in Strickler, AR. 2,000,000 Senators Lincoln, Pryor DOE—FE ........................................ Arctic Energy Office, Arctic Energy Office, Fairbanks, AK, for research in fossil energy, natural gas 

technologies, and oil technologies.

6,000,000 Senator Stevens 

DOE—FE ........................................ Center for Zero Emissions Research and Technology, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, for research related to carbon sequestration, greenhouse gas emissions, and clean power generation. 4,500,000 Senators Baucus, Tester DOE—FE ........................................ CO2 Capture/Sequestration Research, Pennsylvania State University, Centre County, PA, to study carbon capture and sequestration. 500,000 Senator Casey DOE—FE ........................................ Fossil Fuel Research & Development, University of North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research 

Center, Grand Forks, ND, to address strategic national energy issues.

4,000,000 Senator Dorgan 
232 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

DOE—FE ........................................ Gulf Of Mexico Hydrates Research Consortium, University of Mississippi, University of Mississippi, MS, 

to develop and deploy an integrated multi-sensor station on the seafloor in the Gulf of Mexico.

1,200,000 Senators Cochran, Wicker 

DOE—FE ........................................ Long Term Environmental and Economic Impacts of the Development of a Coal Liquefaction Sector in 

China, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, for the study of the development of commercial liquefaction plants.

500,000 Senator Byrd 

DOE—FE ........................................ Multi-Year Demonstration of Carbon Sequestration in a Deep Saline Reservoir, Xcel Energy, Denver, 

CO, to determine the feasibility of geologic CO2 sequestration in a deep saline reservoir.

1,500,000 Senators Salazar, Allard 

DOE—FE ........................................ National Center for Hydrogen Technology, University of North Dakota Energy and Environmental Research Center, Grand Forks, ND, for the development of hydrogen technologies. 3,000,000 Senator Dorgan DOE—FE ........................................ Shale Oil Upgrading Utilizing Ionic Conductive Membranes, Ceramatec, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT, to develop processes for upgrading oil shale, making oil extract high quality and affordable. 1,000,000 Senators Hatch, Bennett DOE—FE ........................................ Solid Oxide Fuel Cells, Siemens Power Generation, Pittsburgh, PA, to support development, construction, and testing of the fuel processing systems. 2,000,000 Senator Specter DOE—FE ........................................ The Center for Advanced Separation Technology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, to support efforts to develop new technologies that reduce the cost of separations in coal, metals, and industrial mining operations. 3,000,000 Senators McConnell, Warner, Webb DOE—FE ........................................ University of Kentucky Coal-Derived Low Energy Materials for Sustainable Construction Project, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, to research alternative uses for coal combustion byproducts. 1,000,000 Senators McConnell, Bunning DOE—FE ........................................ Refining Capacity Study, North Dakota Association of Rural Electric Cooperatives, Mandan, ND, to 

study refining capacity.

500,000 Senator Dorgan 

DOE—FE ........................................ Utah Center for Ultra Clean Coal Utilization & Heavy Oil Research, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, 

UT, to continue research on the commercial viability and validity of unconventional and clean energy technologies.

4,000,000 Senator Bennett 

DOE—NE ........................................ Technologies Ventures Corporation, Technologies Ventures Corporation, Albuquerque, NM, for technology transfer activities. 3,000,000 Senator Domenici DOE—Nuclear Waste ..................... Cooperative agreement between the Department of Energy and Inyo County, Inyo County, Independence, CA, to complete studies under the cooperative agreement. 1,600,000 Senator Feinstein DOE—Nuclear Waste ..................... Inyo County Affected Unit of Local Government, County of Inyo, Inyo County, CA, to conduct scientific 

oversight responsibilities and participate in licensing activities.

350,000 Senator Feinstein 

DOE—ODA ...................................... Medical Monitoring at Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN, Paducah, Portsmouth, and 

Oak Ridge Medical Monitoring, Paducah, KY, Portsmouth, OH, and Oak Ridge, TN, to provide for continued conventional medical work-ups and lung scans and re-scans for current and former workers.

1,050,000 Senator McConnell 

DOE—OE ........................................ Alternate Fuel for Cement Processing, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, to focus on the integration of 

the burning process into existing kiln systems in Lafarge plants, maximization of burn efficiency and minimization of waste/discharge.

1,500,000 Senator Shelby 
233 

DOE—OE ........................................ Center of Excellence Lab, Bismarck State College, Bismarck, ND, to develop a state-of-the art lab ...... 1,400,000 Senator Dorgan DOE—OE ........................................ Energy Development and Reliability, Bismarck State College, Bismarck, ND, to promote and advance 

the region’s energy industry.

300,000 Senator Dorgan 

DOE—OE ........................................ Integrated Distribution Management System, Southern Company, Birmingham, AL, to provide 

seamlessly integrated set of information systems providing all of the major functionality needed to operate an electric distribution system.

1,500,000 Senator Shelby 

DOE—OE ........................................ Iowa Stored Energy Plant, Iowa Associations of Municipal Utilities, Ankeny, IA, for compressed air energy storage project. 1,500,000 Senator Harkin, Grassley DOE—OE ........................................ Navajo Electrification Demonstration Program, Navajo Tribal Utility Authority, Fort Defiance, AZ, to provide electric power to homes on the reservation. 2,000,000 Senators Bingaman, Domenici DOE—OE ........................................ North Dakota Energy Workforce Development, Bismarck State College, Bismarck, ND, for a workforce 

development programs.

1,900,000 Senator Dorgan 

DOE—OE ........................................ San Mateo County Solar Genesis Project, County of San Mateo, Redwood City, CA, for a solar power 

electric generation facility.

1,500,000 Senator Boxer 

DOE—OE ........................................ SmartGrid Integration Lab, Colorado State University, Ft Collins, CO, to demonstrate core smart grid 

capabilities.

1,000,000 Senators Allard, Salazar 

DOE—OE ........................................ Technology Development, Red River Valley Research Corridor, Grand Forks, ND, to promote and advance the research, development and commercialization activities occurring in North Dakota’s Red 

River Valley Research Corridor.

300,000 Senator Dorgan 

DOE—SC ........................................ Antibodies Research, University of North Dakota Research Foundation, Grand Forks, ND, to research 

and develop antibodies for disease threats.

2,750,000 Senator Dorgan 

DOE—SC ........................................ Bionanotechnology: Research and Commercialization, Louisiana Tech University, Ruston, LA, for 

bionanotechnology and biofuels research.

1,500,000 Senators Landrieu, Vitter 

DOE—SC ........................................ Center for Advanced Energy Studies, Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls, ID, to conduct a pilot program to demonstrate the Nuclear Science Talent Expansion program. 3,000,000 Senators Craig, Crapo DOE—SC ........................................ Center for Diagnostic Nanosystems, Marshall University, Huntington, WV, for disease detection and diagnosis research. 2,000,000 Senator Byrd DOE—SC ........................................ Center for Nanomedicine and Cellular Delivery, School of Pharmacy, University of MD, Baltimore, MD, 

for research.

750,000 Senator Mikulski 

DOE—SC ........................................ Center of Excellence and Hazardous Materials, Carlsbad, NM, for applied research ................................ 2,000,000 Senator Domenici DOE—SC ........................................ Climate Change Modeling Capability, Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, for climate change 

modeling.

5,000,000 Senator Domenici 

DOE—SC ........................................ Computing Capability, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND, to increase supercomputing power .... 5,000,000 Senator Dorgan DOE—SC ........................................ Contrast Media and Wound Closure Reduction Study, University of Mississippi, University of Mississippi, MS, for efficiency in Iodine-based medical imaging for diagnostic procedures. 650,000 Senator Cochran DOE—SC ........................................ Facilitating blood-brain barrier research, Seattle Science Foundation, Seattle, WA, for cooperative research. 1,500,000 Senators Murray, Cantwell DOE—SC ........................................ Former Workers Medical Surveillance Programs, State University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, for medical 

surveillance, needs assessment and former worker medical screenings.

1,000,000 Senators Harkin, Grassley 
234 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING ITEMS—Continued 

Account Project Funding Member 

DOE—SC ........................................ Functional MRI Research, University of Vermont College of Medicine, Burlington, VT, to support MRI 

research.

1,250,000 Senator Leahy 

DOE—SC ........................................ Intermountain Center for River Restoration and Rehabilitation, Utah State University, Logan, UT, to 

continue researching river restoration and environmental management.

600,000 Senator Bennett 

DOE—SC ........................................ Marine Systems Research, University of Massachusetts at Boston, Boston, MA, for research into 

aquatic ecosystems, marine biology, fisheries and mammal sustainability.

500,000 Senators Kennedy, Kerry 

DOE—SC ........................................ Materials and Energy Research Development, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, for environmental 

and materials research.

1,000,000 Senator Landrieu, Vitter 

DOE—SC ........................................ Matter-Radiation Interactions in Extremes, Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, for advanced 

materials testing.

7,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman 

DOE—SC ........................................ Mind Institute, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, to advance the understanding of mental 

illness through advanced brain imaging.

12,000,000 Senators Domenici, Bingaman 

DOE—SC ........................................ Neuroscience research, Dominican University, River Forest, IL, for research in to memory dysfunctions. 500,000 Senator Durbin DOE—SC ........................................ Pioneer Valley Life Sciences Institute Biomedical Research, Pioneer Valley Life Science Institute, 

Springfield, MA, for research programs.

500,000 Senators Kennedy, Kerry 

DOE—SC ........................................ Regenerative Medicine, Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science, North Chicago, IL, for 

regenerative medicine research.

500,000 Senator Durbin 

DOE—SC ........................................ Research into Proton Beam Thearapy, Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, Seattle, WA, to research new uses 

for proton beam therapy.

1,500,000 Senator Murray 

DOE—SC ........................................ Sandia Nanotechnology Engineering Center, Sandia National Lab, Albuquerque, NM, for nanotechnology 

engineering activities.

5,000,000 Senator Domenici 

DOE—SC ........................................ Supercapacitors, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, for work to be done in Ostego, NY on 

supercapacitors.

1,500,000 Senator Schumer, Bingaman 

DOE—SC ........................................ Sustainable Biofuels Development Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, to support research efforts in alternative energy technologies. 1,500,000 Senator Salazar DOE—Weapons .............................. Arrowhead Center, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, to promote prosperity in New Mexico 

through economic development.

1,000,000 Senator Domenici 

DOE–WEAPONS ............................... Electronic Record for Worker Safety and Health, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Clark County to help 

the Nevada Site Office improve responses to DOE worker claims.

1,500,000 Senator Reid 

DOE—Weapons .............................. Renewable Energy Planning, National Nuclear Security Administration, Nevada Test Site, NV, for planning to maximize renewable energy production at the Site. 500,000 Senator Reid DOE—Weapons .............................. Restore Manhattan Project Sites, Los Alamos National Lab, Los Alamos, NM, for historic preservation. 500,000 Senator Domenici 
235 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

TITLE I—DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE—CIVIL 

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 

Corps of Engineers—Civil 

Investigations ....................................................................................................................................................................... 167,261 91,000 166,000 ¥1,261 ∂75,000 

Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................................. ¥100 .......................... .......................... ∂100 ..........................

Total, Investigations ............................................................................................................................................... 167,161 91,000 166,000 ¥1,161 ∂75,000 

Construction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2,294,029 1,402,000 2,004,500 ¥289,529 ∂602,500 

Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................................. ¥4,688 .......................... .......................... ∂4,688 ..........................Emergency appropriation ............................................................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................

Total, Construction .................................................................................................................................................. 2,289,341 1,402,000 2,004,500 ¥284,841 ∂602,500 

Mississippi River and tributaries ......................................................................................................................................... 387,402 240,000 365,000 ¥22,402 ∂125,000 Operations and Maintenance ............................................................................................................................................... 2,243,637 2,475,000 2,220,000 ¥23,637 ¥255,000 Regulatory program .............................................................................................................................................................. 180,000 180,000 183,000 ∂3,000 ∂3,000 FUSRAP ................................................................................................................................................................................. 140,000 130,000 140,000 .......................... ∂10,000 Flood control and coastal emergencies ............................................................................................................................... .......................... 40,000 40,000 ∂40,000 ..........................General Expenses ................................................................................................................................................................. 175,046 177,000 177,000 ∂1,954 ..........................Office of Assistant Secretary of the Army (Civil Works) ..................................................................................................... 4,500 6,000 4,500 .......................... ¥1,500 

Total, title I, Department of Defense—Civil .......................................................................................................... 5,587,087 4,741,000 5,300,000 ¥287,087 ∂559,000 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (5,591,875 ) (4,741,000 ) (5,300,000 ) (¥291,875 ) (∂559,000 ) Emergency appropriations ............................................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... (¥4,788 ) .......................... .......................... (∂4,788 ) ..........................
236 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

TITLE II—DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Central Utah Project Completion Account 

Central Utah project construction ........................................................................................................................................ 40,404 39,373 39,373 ¥1,031 ..........................Fish, wildlife, and recreation mitigation andconservation .................................................................................................. 976 987 987 ∂11 ..........................

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 41,380 40,360 40,360 ¥1,020 ..........................

Program oversight and administration ................................................................................................................................ 1,620 1,640 1,640 ∂20 ..........................

Total, Central Utah project completion account .................................................................................................... 43,000 42,000 42,000 ¥1,000 ..........................

Bureau of Reclamation 

Water and related resources ................................................................................................................................................ 949,882 779,320 927,320 ¥22,562 ∂148,000 

Rescission .................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥175,000 .......................... .......................... ∂175,000 

Central Valley project restoration fund ................................................................................................................................ 59,122 56,079 56,079 ¥3,043 ..........................California Bay-Delta restoration .......................................................................................................................................... 40,098 32,000 42,000 ∂1,902 ∂10,000 Policy and administration .................................................................................................................................................... 58,811 59,400 59,400 ∂589 ..........................

Total, Bureau of Reclamation ................................................................................................................................. 1,107,913 751,799 1,084,799 ¥23,114 ∂333,000 Total, title II, Department of the Interior ............................................................................................................... 1,150,913 793,799 1,126,799 ¥24,114 ∂333,000 

TITLE III—DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Energy Programs 

Energy efficiency and renewable energy .............................................................................................................................. 1,722,407 1,255,393 1,928,259 ∂205,852 ∂672,866 Electricity delivery and energy reliability ............................................................................................................................. 138,556 134,000 166,900 ∂28,344 ∂32,900 Nuclear energy ...................................................................................................................................................................... 961,665 853,644 803,000 ¥158,665 ¥50,644 

(Reallocation from Energy supply and conservation) ................................................................................................. (682,877 ) .......................... .......................... (¥682,877 ) ..........................
237 

(Reallocation from Nuclear nonproliferation) .............................................................................................................. (278,789 ) .......................... .......................... (¥278,789 ) ..........................

Office of Legacy Management ............................................................................................................................................. 33,872 .......................... .......................... ¥33,872 ..........................Clean coal technology: 

Deferral of unobligated balances, fiscal year 2008 ................................................................................................... 257,000 .......................... .......................... ¥257,000 ..........................Deferral of unobligated balances, fiscal year 2009 ................................................................................................... ¥149,000 149,000 149,000 ∂298,000 ..........................Transfer to Fossil Energy R&D .................................................................................................................................... ¥164,489 ¥149,000 ¥149,000 ∂15,489 ..........................

Total, Clean coal technology .................................................................................................................................. ¥56,489 .......................... .......................... ∂56,489 ..........................

Fossil Energy Research and Development ........................................................................................................................... 578,349 605,030 727,730 ∂149,381 ∂122,700 

Transfer from Clean Coal Technology ......................................................................................................................... 164,489 149,000 149,000 ¥15,489 ..........................

Subtotal, Fossil Energy Research and Development .............................................................................................. 742,838 754,030 876,730 ∂133,892 ∂122,700 

Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves ............................................................................................................................ 20,272 19,099 19,099 ¥1,173 ..........................Strategic petroleum reserve ................................................................................................................................................. 186,757 344,000 205,000 ∂18,243 ¥139,000 Northeast home heating oil reserve ..................................................................................................................................... 12,335 9,800 9,800 ¥2,535 ..........................Energy Information Administration ...................................................................................................................................... 95,460 110,595 110,595 ∂15,135 ..........................Non-defense environmental clean up .................................................................................................................................. 182,263 213,411 269,411 ∂87,148 ∂56,000 Uranium enrichment decontamination and decommissioning fund ................................................................................... 622,162 480,333 515,333 ¥106,829 ∂35,000 Science ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4,017,711 4,721,969 4,640,469 ∂622,758 ¥81,500 Nuclear Waste Disposal ....................................................................................................................................................... 187,269 247,371 195,390 ∂8,121 ¥51,981 Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program ................................................................................................................. 5,450 19,880 19,880 ∂14,430 ..........................

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥991 ¥19,880 ¥19,880 ¥18,889 ..........................Proposed change in subsidy cost ............................................................................................................................... .......................... 355,000 355,000 ∂355,000 ..........................Advance appropriation (Public Law 110–161) ........................................................................................................... 42,000 .......................... .......................... ¥42,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Innovative Technology Guarantee Pgm ................................................................................................... 46,459 355,000 355,000 ∂308,541 ..........................

Departmental administration ............................................................................................................................................... 309,662 272,144 272,144 ¥37,518 ..........................

Miscellaneous revenues ............................................................................................................................................... ¥161,247 ¥117,317 ¥117,317 ∂43,930 ..........................

Net appropriation .................................................................................................................................................... 148,415 154,827 154,827 ∂6,412 ..........................

Office of the Inspector General ............................................................................................................................................ 46,057 51,927 51,927 ∂5,870 ..........................

Atomic Energy Defense Activities 

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

Weapons activities ...................................................................................................................................................... 6,297,466 6,618,079 6,524,579 ∂227,113 ¥93,500 Defense nuclear nonproliferation ................................................................................................................................ 1,657,996 1,247,048 1,909,056 ∂251,060 ∂662,008 
238 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Rescissions ......................................................................................................................................................... ¥322,000 .......................... .......................... ∂322,000 ..........................

Subtotal, Defense nuclear nonproliferation ................................................................................................... 1,335,996 1,247,048 1,909,056 ∂573,060 ∂662,008 

Naval reactors ............................................................................................................................................................. 774,686 828,054 828,054 ∂53,368 ..........................Office of the Administrator ......................................................................................................................................... 402,137 404,081 404,081 ∂1,944 ..........................

Subtotal, National Nuclear Security Administration ............................................................................................... 8,810,285 9,097,262 9,665,770 ∂855,485 ∂568,508 

Defense environmental cleanup ........................................................................................................................................... 5,349,325 5,297,256 5,771,506 ∂422,181 ∂474,250 Other defense activities ....................................................................................................................................................... 754,359 1,313,461 827,503 ∂73,144 ¥485,958 Defense nuclear waste disposal .......................................................................................................................................... 199,171 247,371 193,000 ¥6,171 ¥54,371 

Total, Atomic Energy Defense Activities ................................................................................................................. 15,113,140 15,955,350 16,457,779 ∂1,344,639 ∂502,429 

Power Marketing Administrations 

Operation and maintenance, Southeastern Power Administration ...................................................................................... 54,817 56,940 56,940 ∂2,123 ..........................

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥48,413 ¥49,520 ¥49,520 ¥1,107 ..........................

Subtotal, O&M, Southeastern Power Administration .............................................................................................. 6,404 7,420 7,420 ∂1,016 ..........................

Operation and maintenance, Southwestern Power Administration ..................................................................................... 65,165 63,414 63,414 ¥1,751 ..........................

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥35,000 ¥35,000 ¥35,000 .......................... ..........................

Subtotal, O&M, Southwestern Power Administration ............................................................................................. 30,165 28,414 28,414 ¥1,751 ..........................

Construction, rehabilitation, operation and maintenance, Western Area Power Administration ........................................ 541,546 524,830 624,830 ∂83,284 ∂100,000 

Offsetting collection .................................................................................................................................................... ¥308,702 ¥328,118 ¥403,118 ¥94,416 ¥75,000 Offsetting collection Colorado River Dam Fund ......................................................................................................... ¥3,937 ¥3,366 ¥3,366 ∂571 ..........................

Subtotal, O&M, Western Area Power Administration .............................................................................................. 228,907 193,346 218,346 ¥10,561 ∂25,000 
239 

Falcon and Amistad operating and maintenance fund ...................................................................................................... 2,477 2,959 2,959 ∂482 ..........................

Total, Power Marketing Administrations ................................................................................................................. 267,953 232,139 257,139 ¥10,814 ∂25,000 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Salaries and expenses ......................................................................................................................................................... 260,425 273,400 273,400 ∂12,975 ..........................Revenues applied ................................................................................................................................................................. ¥260,425 ¥273,400 ¥273,400 ¥12,975 ..........................

Total, title III, Department of Energy ..................................................................................................................... 24,489,102 25,892,888 27,016,658 ∂2,527,556 ∂1,123,770 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (24,661,102 ) (25,743,888 ) (26,867,658 ) (∂2,206,556 ) (∂1,123,770 ) Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... (¥322,000 ) .......................... .......................... (∂322,000 ) ..........................Deferrals ......................................................................................................................................................... (108,000 ) (149,000 ) (149,000 ) (∂41,000 ) ..........................Advance appropriations ................................................................................................................................. (42,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥42,000 ) ..........................

TITLE IV—INDEPENDENT AGENCIES 

Appalachian Regional Commission ...................................................................................................................................... 73,032 65,000 85,000 ∂11,968 ∂20,000 Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board .............................................................................................................................. 21,909 25,499 25,499 ∂3,590 ..........................Delta Regional Authority ...................................................................................................................................................... 11,685 6,000 20,000 ∂8,315 ∂14,000 Denali Commission ............................................................................................................................................................... 21,800 1,800 21,800 .......................... ∂20,000 Nuclear Regulatory Commission: 

Salaries and expenses ................................................................................................................................................ 917,334 1,007,956 1,022,956 ∂105,622 ∂15,000 Revenues ..................................................................................................................................................................... ¥771,220 ¥847,357 ¥860,857 ¥89,637 ¥13,500 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 146,114 160,599 162,099 ∂15,985 ∂1,500 

Office of Inspector General ......................................................................................................................................... 8,744 9,044 9,344 ∂600 ∂300 Revenues ..................................................................................................................................................................... ¥7,870 ¥8,140 ¥8,410 ¥540 ¥270 

Subtotal ................................................................................................................................................................... 874 904 934 ∂60 ∂30 Total, Nuclear Regulatory Commission ................................................................................................................... 146,988 161,503 163,033 ∂16,045 ∂1,530 

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board ............................................................................................................................... 3,621 3,811 3,811 ∂190 ..........................Tennessee Valley Authority: Office of Inspector General ..................................................................................................... .......................... 17,000 .......................... .......................... ¥17,000 

Offset ........................................................................................................................................................................... .......................... ¥17,000 .......................... .......................... ∂17,000 

Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska natural gas transportation projects ............................................................ 2,261 4,400 4,400 ∂2,139 ..........................

Total, title IV, Independent agencies ..................................................................................................................... 281,296 268,013 323,543 ∂42,247 ∂55,530 
240 

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009—Continued 

[In thousands of dollars] 

Item 2008 appropriation Budget estimate Committee rec- ommendation 

Senate Committee recommendation 

compared with (∂ or ¥) 

2008 

appropriation Budget estimate 

Grand total .............................................................................................................................................................. 31,508,398 31,695,700 33,767,000 ∂2,258,602 ∂2,071,300 

Appropriations ................................................................................................................................................ (31,685,186 ) (31,721,700 ) (33,618,000 ) (∂1,932,814 ) (∂1,896,300 ) Emergency appropriations ............................................................................................................................. .......................... .......................... .......................... .......................... ..........................Rescissions .................................................................................................................................................... (¥326,788 ) (¥175,000 ) .......................... (∂326,788 ) (∂175,000 ) Deferrals ......................................................................................................................................................... (108,000 ) (149,000 ) (149,000 ) (∂41,000 ) ..........................Advance appropriations ................................................................................................................................. (42,000 ) .......................... .......................... (¥42,000 ) ..........................

Æ